The Rittenhouse case has gone to the jury. Basically, it’s up to the jury to decide who gets to be the victim(s) — Kyle Rittenhouse, or the people he killed and maimed.
The closing arguments of defense attorney Mark Richards were just plain creepy. For example, he said of the first man killed by Rittenhouse, “Kyle shot Joseph Rosenbaum to stop a threat to this person. And I`m glad he shot him, because if Joseph Rosenbaum had got that gun, I don`t for a minute believe he wouldn`t have used it against somebody else. He was irrational and crazy. Every person who was shot was attacking Kyle.”
There was conflicting testimony about how much of a threat the unarmed Rosenbaum really was to Rittenhouse. I haven’t found any testimony about how far apart Rittenhouse and Rosenbaum were when Rosenbaum was killed. Rittenhouse said that Rosenbaum was reaching for his AR-15. That might have been because Rittenhouse had pointed it at Rosenbaum. The prosecutor, Thomas Binger, said,
Binger repeatedly showed the jury drone video that he said depicted Rittenhouse pointing the AR-style weapon at demonstrators.
“This is the provocation. This is what starts this incident,” the prosecutor declared.
He told the jury: “You lose the right to self-defense when you’re the one who brought the gun, when you are the one creating the danger, when you’re the one provoking other people.”
Defense attorney Richards denied that pointing a gun at people was provocative.
The two other men who were shot by Rittenhouse were “attacking” Kyle because they knew he had killed a man and considered the teenager to be an active shooter and dangerous to others, the prosecutor said. Which he pretty much was. But Mark Richards said that Rittenhouse couldn’t have been an “active shooter” because he killed only two people.
Further, the defense lawyer said of the shooting of Rosenbaum, “Ladies and gentlemen, other people in this community have shot somebody seven times — and it’s been found to be OK. My client did it four times.” The “seven times” was a reference to Jacob Blake, who was shot seven times in the back by a Kenosha police officer. That act of violence was what people in Kenosha were protesting. As Charles Pierce said, “This was a Holy God moment to end all Holy God moments.”
Yet there’s more. Another famous pair of self-proclaimed victims, Mark and Patricia McCloskey, turned up at the Rittenhouse trial. They told reporters at the Kenosha County Courthouse on Monday that Rittenhouse is a victim of “cancel culture.” Seriously, that term was always stupid, but what the bleep?
Victims abound. Yesterday Alex Jones was held liable by default in a suit brought against him by families of children massacred at Sandy Hook. Naturally, Jones sees himself as a victim now. I am not going to link to it, but he’s over at InfoWars screaming about tyranny and how he’s been deprived of his right to free speech.
You might remember that Jones called the December 2012 massacre of 20 small children and 6 adults a hoax. This set his thuggish followers on a mission to harass the grieving families of the victims. One father of a slaughtered six-year-old who was singled out by Jones is still in hiding. Families eventually sued Jones to get him to back off.
Two years ago, a judge ordered Jones to turn over financial, business, and marketing documents related to InfoWars’ operations. As I understand it, one reason for this was to determine how much money Jones was making from his “Sandy Hook was a hoax” crusade. Jones failed to provide these documents, and after two years of waiting the judge declared that Jones is “liable by default.” The families will be allowed to tell a jury how much harm Alex Jones has done to them, and I assume the jury will then decide how much Jones owes them for their suffering.
I hope he’s cleaned out. I am sure Jones’s fans will believe Jones is the victim. Note that among the things Jones is claiming now is that he was denied a right to trial by jury.
Steve Bannon turned himself in yesterday after being indicted for contempt of Congress. Bannon was so thrilled to be victimized that he live-streamed his own surrender. He may be blasting right past victim and claiming martyrdom, in fact.
There’s no end to the victims, according to wingnuts. Critical Race Theory is bad because it victimizes white people, for example. The Kingpin of all victims is, of course, Donald Trump, still whining like a spoiled toddler because he lost the 2020 election. Not fair! They should have let him have another term! He wanted it a lot!
I’m so tired of these people.
Which reminds me; the Rittenhouse trial judge would not allow Rittenhouse’s victims to be referred to as, you know, victims. Lest we forget, here they are. Rosenbaum and Huber died that night; Grosskreutz was permanently disabled in one arm.
Pointing an AR15 around, and at, people will always "provoke a response. How can it not? It's a gun! When a gun enters the picture, all focus is on that gun. Whoever else is in the picture, they automatically recede into the background of this scene.
Pointing a gun near me will certainly provoke a response from me. Hell! From anyone! And really, if you think about it, there are only a certain number of responses even possible.
One response from me that it'd provoke, is that I'd like to think I'd try to disarm him, like two of the “VICTIMS" tried to do. To be a hero. Or a helper to the hero.
But the other response from his provication, is that I'd be just as likely to wet my pants as I dive for the floor, begging and shrieking for mercy.
I'd like to think I'd try the first, first. But I won't swear to it.
My response would be to back off as quickly as possible. Not because I fear the gun, but because I fear the sick mind behind that gun.
It's a mix of good and bad. I deliberately stayed away from the Rittenhouse "trial" because for me that stupid kid had no business traveling out of state looking for trouble. That's not what's on trial, but should be. The farce is presided over by a wingnut judge, arguing about irrelevant and subjective issues of "self-defense". Who needs to tune into this nonsense?
Jones is going to get cleaned out, one way or another. IMO it's over for that hater.
Bannon wants to be a martyr. Fascists need martyrs, early in their movement's trajectory, like Ashli Babbit, and this situation is tailor-made for an unabashed kook like Steve-o.
Elsewhere, I read that James O'Keefe is living in a messy dump on Long Island – the backstory to the FBI coming by over Biden's daughter's diary. I sure hope this is because he's having trouble making ends meet.
I hope censuring Gosar comes to pass.
Three rules of gun safety:
1) It's loaded – unless you have checked the load state, and it has not left your control. You still treat it as loaded, except in rare circumstances (dry fire drills are an example). (Not all guns can be dry fired without artificial cartridges to protect the firing pin.)
2) never point a gun muzzle at something you're not willing to put a bullet in
3) finger is outside the trigger guard, unless you have a target sighted in, ready to fire.
Now: if someone is pointing the gun in your direction, and they are trained in gun safety, they are threatening to shoot you – they are willing to put a bullet in you.
If someone is pointing the gun in your direction, and they're not trained, or don't care, they're potentially *more* dangerous than someone merely assaulting you. (Someone deliberately assaulting you might be doing so just to get your wallet, for example – a person waving a gun around might shoot you without intending to.)
In *both* cases, it's inherently reasonable to allow a person endangered by that act to use appropriate force to defuse the situation. To say that the assailant now get to fear for their lives, and murder them, is to make a mockery of justice and common sense.
Which explains why the Republicans are in favor. Liberals are in favor of justice and common sense, so Republican have to be agin 'em.
I wingnut once declared, falsely, "We got all the guns." It was in the context of a declaration that, "Might makes right." We're looking at a belief system that guns equal power, power equals authority, authority equals justice. So many Hollywood "heroes" from Dirty Harry to John Wick prove their virtue through their prowess with a gun.
Obviously, the guy who is faster with a gun is more likely to survive, but that says nothing about his virtue. But the 'good guy with a gun' meme is beyond question in the minds of those who buy into it.
Righties will riot if/when the boy wonder, Kyle, gets jail time. He's been raised up as the poster child of the "good guy with a gun." (He's a poor choice in reality because he killed two people who did not have guns.) But this is about immunity for white males with guns who are not using the weapon to commit rape, robbery, or arson. The assumption of innocence for a white person who kills is as automatic as the assumption of guilt if a person of a dark complexion kills.
I'm convinced that people who are truly of the mindset I suggest, are not only unaware of the bigotry, they are in complete denial of it. The complex resembles the spell of an evil wizard more than a mental quirk. No matter what happens with Kyle, it will not end well.
If somebody reputable sets up a fund to arm people of color with AR-15s and train them in the use in self defense in their own neighborhoods, I'll likely contribute. The only thing that brings the gun nuts down is the terror of black people with the capability to return fire.
"The two other men who were shot by Rittenhouse were “attacking” Kyle because they knew he had killed a man and considered the teenager to be an active shooter and dangerous to others, the prosecutor said. "
So if they had been armed and shot and killed Rittenhouse, they'd have been "good guys with a gun" and heroes?