The Kyle Rittenhouse story
34 responses | 0 likes
Started by GunterK - Aug. 29, 2020, 9:07 p.m.

The BLM people are up in arms, because a 17-year old "white supremacist" shot 3 of their own.

Many BLM people seem to be unaware that the victims were all white.

Yet, there are some early videos (before the shooting started) where Kyle identified himself as a volunteer EMT person. And indeed, he was filmed giving medical assistance to injured protesters. When asked, why the rifle, he said, in case I have to defend myself

Other videos showed that he was shat at and attacked, before he defended himself.

The article beli0w confirms all this

By metmike - Aug. 29, 2020, 11:14 p.m.
Like Reply

Interesting how we are getting different descriptions of him.

“Fix your damn headlines,” the progressive “Squad” member added. Her tweet garnered more than 66,000 retweets and 235,000 likes on Twitter by Thursday morning.

Senator Chris Murphy (D., Conn.) on Wednesday called the shooter a “deranged white nationalist Trump supporter” in response to a tweet by Representative Matt Gaetz (R., Fla.) that called on patriots to defend the country.

metmike: It was really dumb for this kid to drive out of town to, apparently protect property of people that he doesn't even know.  He was looking for trouble and it came to him.

If the cops are not or cannot do their jobs in a particular city/local and innocent people are being hurt(their property being destroyed)....  It's absolutely NOT the job of vigilante, private citizens to take on the role of cops. 

If it's YOUR property or the owner asked you to help them protect it, that's another thing. Otherwise, we would just have anybody from anywhere showing up with guns to confront people doing things that they think are wrong, with no training or authorization and events like this happening frequently. 

Of course it needs to be repeated as often as possible, that he was a Trump supporter because this is what White Supremacist, Trump supporters do..............they go around looking to shoot innocent/nice people that are minding their own business and just peacefully protesting....NOT!

This is Trumps fault (-:

Trump has, absolutely the best position on law and order. However, when somebody  gets carried away with that position and breaks the law, justifying it with a law and order mentality applied improperly/totally inappropritately............that does not negate the LEGIT,  law enforcing/legal  position and Trump still being correct.

By TimNew - Aug. 30, 2020, 7:08 a.m.
Like Reply

I disagree..   I think the kid may have been a bit young for what he got himself into, but I see absolutely nothing wrong with citizens arming themselves to protect themselves and property.  This country was founded on that, and with the government repeatedly demonstrating that they are unwilling or incapable or providing that service, I think citizens should. And if they do,  you'll see a quick end to these "non-violent protests". 

By metmike - Aug. 30, 2020, 1:17 p.m.
Like Reply

"I see absolutely nothing wrong with citizens arming themselves to protect themselves and property."

Protection of Property

Defense of Property:
The right of a person to protect one's property with reasonable force against another person who is threatening to infringe on one's possessory interest in such property.

"Please note that since this rule requires that the defendant either own the property or be in lawful possession of it in order to be able to use force to protect it, a defendant is not allowed to use force to protect the property that is in lawful possession of someone else under the common law rule, even if the defendant owns the property. However, the Model Penal Code does allow the defendant to use non-deadly force to protect property even if it is in someone else’s lawful possession."

"Please note also that force to protect property must be used either at the moment of the wrongful intrusion or near the time of the wrongful intrusion. Thus, one who has been wrongfully deprived of his property cannot use force to regain it or, if it is real property, to re-enter it, if any significant period of time has gone by between the deprivation of the property right and the use of force. However, if the owner uses non-deadly force to regain property immediately after it’s taken or while in "hot pursuit" of the person who took the property, such non-deadly force is justified. See State v. Dooley, 121 Mo. 591 (1894)."

We have laws for a reason Tim. This kid did NOT own the property(s) and was not in possession of it. It looks like he was not even authorized to protect it. People can't just patrol other peoples properties with guns based on THEM deciding the law needs to be enforced using their own deadly force.........which is what this kid was doing. It doesn't matter if the cops were not doing their jobs. He can't turn himself into a self appointed deputy. 

With regards to self defense. The specifics of the circumstances will matter and might cause the charge(s) that he gets convicted of to be less. If he was being attacked and was trying to defend himself, he has a self defense case. 

However, the other side is going to show that he was illegally defending a property with deadly force and came from out of town to do it. This goes towards intent. He wasn't some innocent bystander in his own town that always carries a gun for protection and got attacked by surprise and needed to defend himself. He brought deadly force with him and in fact, would never have come without his deadly force..........using it to illegally defend somebody else's property.

This will make it much harder for him to justify self defense, especially using deadly force on people that, almost none of which had guns(1 did).

By metmike - Aug. 30, 2020, 1:24 p.m.
Like Reply

 "This country was founded on that, and with the government repeatedly demonstrating that they are unwilling or incapable or providing that service, I think citizens should. And if they do,  you'll see a quick end to these "non-violent protests"

So, if we see somebody going over the speed limit (or driving wrecklessly) and decide they are endangering the lives of everybody else on the road, we can take the law into our own hands and force them to pull over. Then at gunpoint warn them that they should never speed again and even attempt a citizens arrest.....not!

Society/government has designated well trained law enforcement to legally do that job. 200 years ago, we didn't have that.  If society/law enforcement is not doing its job like we want, we don't have the right to use self interpretation and pretend its 200 years ago, before these current laws were passed. 

Taking that ever farther. What if, after you pulled over a speeder and tried to do a citizens arrest using your gun...........then, the speeder, with a gun pointed at them, pulled out their own gun...........and you shot the self defense.

..........but you were just enforcing the law and trying to protect innocent lives from the speeder/dangerous driver and they pulled the gun on you, which makes it self defense. 

I would say that the speeder would be much more justified in shooting YOU than the other way around.

This is why we have well trained/armed cops enforcing the laws, not self appointed vigilante's.

Again, if it's YOUR property and they threaten deadly force, you have every right to defend. 

By mcfarm - Aug. 30, 2020, 3:39 p.m.
Like Reply

law abiding citizens hardly need laws. Meanwhile burn, rob, rape and loot and get a free pass. Sorry MM, things have gone way too wrong to ignore for the law abiders   and the dems have played this all year to create chaos,,,,they are going to reap what they sowed

By metmike - Aug. 30, 2020, 5:31 p.m.
Like Reply

law abiding citizens hardly need laws."

This is true mcfarm. As I showed you with the actual laws, this kid was not a law abiding citizen.

2 wrongs don't make a right!

You think this is chaos(and it is) but your answer is to fight it with unorganized vigilantes or groups of self appointed, completely untrained law enforcers just makes it worse.  

You are mistaken to think that this will scare the rioters. It's just as likely to have the opposite affect.......... with the MSM using the lawlessness of the side that thinks they represent law and order to motivate them.

We absolutely can't let it go on but the solution is to arrest everyone doing this, identify them and put them in jail..............with a high bail. On a first charge, if not serious, they get a slap on the wrist and stern warning.

If they repeat...........then, charge them with terrorism with no bail. If convicted.....  a lengthy time in prision. 

Since the liberal leaders in these communities are not allowing such effective measures or accepting Trump's offering assistance to take steps similar to what I suggested, many innocent people that live in these communities are screwed. 

That's sad and I feel bad for them but thats why we have elections in this democracy. These failed leaders should be voted out of office. If they are voted back in, then the majority of people have spoken............this is what they want.

If it means us progressing with the current cultural revolution...........destroying statues and landmarks that represent the past because our past featured slavery/discrimination and embracing socialism/Marxism to replace capitalism and passing massive carbon taxes, while making up a climate crisis to kill developed economies because they don't support the "sustainable development" model of the United Nations, AOC, Bernie, Greta and others............but that's what the people vote for........than that's what we get mcfarm.

It may be entirely based on propaganda and false promises brainwashed into the heads of a rapidly increasing number of people.........that are rapidly gaining power and taking control..............but it's the reality. 

I can show people the truth about the fake climate crisis here but the train has left the station.

If Trump somehow pulls off a miracle and wins, the opposition to him will be ramped up even more so that any sort of progress for our country the next 4 years will be difficult. 

If/when he loses, Biden immediately signs us back up with the Paris Climate Accord and the march towards global and US socialism/Marxism accelerates.

You can't bring back enough conservatives from the dead to stop this in the long run.

There's a small chance of getting in the way again, temporarily for the next 4 years but that's about it.

By metmike - Aug. 30, 2020, 5:49 p.m.
Like Reply

Look for the electoral college to be abolished also.

Once that happens, it will be extremely tough for republicans to win presidential elections as the number of democrats in this country continues to increase, especially the liberal dems.


How the Electoral College Was Nearly Abolished in 1970

By GunterK - Aug. 30, 2020, 5:53 p.m.
Like Reply

In Portland, 95 days of non-stop rioting.

The mayor of Seattle put it best...."relax, it's just a summer of love"

By metmike - Aug. 30, 2020, 6:09 p.m.
Like Reply

August 30, 2020 /  12:17 AM / Updated 18 minutes ago

One shot dead in Portland as rival protesters clash

The New York Times and the Oregonian newspapers reported that a large group of supporters of President Donald Trump had traveled in a caravan through downtown Portland, with a pro-Trump gathering drawing hundreds of trucks full of supporters into the city.     

The Times cited two unidentified witnesses as saying a small group of people got into an argument with other people in a vehicle and someone opened fire. 

The man who was shot and killed was wearing a hat with the insignia of Patriot Prayer, a far-right group based in Portland that has clashed with protesters in the past, according to the New York Times. Reuters could not independently verify this. 

Portland police earlier said in a tweet that a “political rally is caravanning throughout downtown Portland” and that there had been “some instances of violence between demonstrators and counter-demonstrators.” 

Police had intervened and made some arrests, they said in the tweet. 

The New York Times reported that Trump supporters and counter-protesters clashed on the streets, with people shooting paint ball guns from the beds of pickup trucks and protesters throwing objects back at them. 

By TimNew - Aug. 30, 2020, 7:54 p.m.
Like Reply

I'm sorry MM,  but I honestly don't know how to respond to your comparison of speeding to rioting, pillaging, looting, assault, etc..  

This country is in crisis,  by design, IMO, and the government, for whatever reason appears to be complicit in some locations.  

Working, responsible property owners are getting sick and tired of it and I can promise you that we'll see more citizens taking action if the government does not.

BTW,  the kid was running away until cornered and forced to defend himself.  

I am far more concerned about people crossing state lines to riot and loot than I am about people crossing state lines to protect property. 

By GunterK - Aug. 30, 2020, 8:03 p.m.
Like Reply

" owners are getting sick and tired of it and I can promise you that we'll see more citizens taking action if the government does not. ..."

during the Rodney King riots in Los Angeles, there was burning and looting going on. The looting spread North from the black community into mixed communities. However, nothing happened in Korea Town, because there, the store owners were sitting on the roofs of their (one-story) shops with assault rifles. 

By mcfarm - Aug. 30, 2020, 8:17 p.m.
Like Reply

Tim, not only running away but there is a video of him treating wounded protesters. 

MM, did you happen to hear any of that very offensive press conference today by the Portland children who are in charge of this chaos? What an affront to all Americans to hear those lost souls blame this mess on Trump and then pretend to ask those idiots out there to stop the violence that they have allowed for 91 straight days

By mcfarm - Aug. 31, 2020, 4:43 p.m.
Like Reply

MM, defending one's self or another against bodily harm. Seems he was there defending property and giving first aid. Got slammed in the head with a skateboard and threatened with a pistol in his face. And when the media gets done making crap up this will end up much like Nick Sandman.

By metmike - Aug. 31, 2020, 11:15 p.m.
Like Reply

Trump defends Kenosha suspect as acting in self-defense

"President Trump on Monday defended the actions of Kyle Rittenhouse, a teenager accused of killing two protesters in Kenosha, Wis.

"We’re looking at all of it. That was an interesting situation. You saw the same tape as I saw," the president told reporters during a news conference at the White House.

Trump described Rittenhouse as acting in self-defense, saying he was "very violently attacked" by demonstrators.

"And it was something that we’re looking at right now, and it’s under investigation," Trump said. "But I guess he was in very big trouble. He probably would have been killed, but it’s under investigation."

Asked if he backs his supporters taking matters into their own hands with weapons, Trump said he'd "like to see law enforcement take care of everything."

Rittenhouse, 17, faces homicide charges after he allegedly shot and killed two people during protests Tuesday in Kenosha. The demonstrations came in response to the police shooting of Jacob Blake but have grown violent at times.

The president has faced calls to condemn Rittenhouse, who attended a Trump rally and had posted support on social media for Trump and Blue Lives Matter.

Press secretary Kayleigh McEnany was asked earlier in the day if Trump condemned Rittenhouse's actions, but she would not say.

"The president is not going to, again, weigh in on that," she said."

metmike: I read and listened to Trumps words. They don't justify headlines of "Trump defends Kenosha suspect"  Once again, the MSM likes to mischaracterize him. 

He actually stated the opposite with this comment, when asked directly about people acting like this kid "I'd like to see law enforcement take care of everything"

The headlines, could have accurately stated "Trump  prefers law enforcement, not vigilante's"

While he failed to condemn this person/vigilante, he only repeated what was on the tape that everybody else saw too about the ending  scene that we all saw. Not once did he utter one word of defending.   He only stated that "Rittenhouse was very violently attacked and probably would have been killed but its under investigation" This is not defending, especially in tandem with him clearly stating he "prefers law enforcement taking care of everything"

A defending statement would have taken this form: "he had a right to be there because he was protecting property from rioters"  or "he did nothing wrong and was just defending himself"

and instead of  saying"I prefer law enforcement taking care of everything" he would have said "these people are helping law enforcement because the cops are overwhelmed"

Note the operative word "EVERYTHING" in his statement. That means there is NO room for people like Rittenhouse to do what they were doing. Zero, natta, nothing outside of law enforcement. 

By mcfarm - Sept. 1, 2020, 7:32 a.m.
Like Reply

don't know what to be surprised about here MM...1; the press mis stakes what the President never saw that coming and 2] the press takes an anitifa stance and plainly states if you don't bend a knee with us you are to be murdered....they will never convict this guy {he is innocent} and so they are trying to kill him in custody. He lawyer was on Tucker last nite. He calmly explained every step that was taken during the riot and is much more honest {even though a lawyer} than most any press at this point.

By wglassfo - Sept. 1, 2020, 6:47 p.m.
Like Reply


You are dead wrong about this shooting

It is true he was defending property, that was not his own, but only after the owner asked for anybody to help defend what was left of his dealership

Now if I asked for help and the other side had guns [which they did] I  would be dang happy to see some body step up and help me. A gun would be welcome considering the mob had guns. What are you goona use against mob guns, sticks and stones??

The kid did not start the trouble

He was defending himself when faced with a mob, doing exactly what the police told him [which was very little]  a gun pointed at him, a mob trying to take his rifle away from him and other projectiles which struck him including a skate board. He got the gun from a friend, which means he did not come with a gun looking for trouble, especially when he was cleaning up after the mess left by the mob, at an earlier time. He was also seen helping injured people.

So this was clearly an act of self defense which I will bet he is deemed innocent in a court of law 

1st: Helping somebody whose property was already partly destroyed, takes courage in the event he could be out numbered by a mob, clearly intent on doing unlawful actions. This was not a peaceful mob.

2nd: An act of self defense from a mob who clearly intended to do him harm

There will be push back from citizens who are sick and tired of seeing there property destroyed, cities destroyed, burning and looting and mobs intending to do physical harm  re: the best example I can think of was Paul Rand and the police not able to protect him and the women from a mob

Now don't tell me the push back would have happened any way. There would be no push back until the mob has clearly looted, burned,  and done bodily harm, among other things

When the people who are supposed to make decisions that wil ldefend your property, but instead defund the police, what do you expect will finally happen

This is not a citizen's arrest. That car senerio had no relevance to this event. Not even close.

This is push back when there is no other alternative that the mob understands, and the public sick and tired of seeing what is happening to their cities

I would certainly hope somebody would come to my place of business to help me if the mob had already destroyed part of my business, and I wanted help to save what was left

Sorry mike but you are in the minority on this one, and I don't mind saying so

There is a time to turn the other check and a time to destroy the walls of Jerico.

By GunterK - Sept. 1, 2020, 8:25 p.m.
Like Reply

this is what Congresswomen A Pressley had to say

"   A 17 year old white supremacist domestic terrorist drove across state lines, armed with an AR 15. He shot and killed 2 people who had assembled to affirm the value, dignity, and worth of Black lives.."

affirm the value and dignity of black lives ?????

what a load of cr*p

By GunterK - Sept. 1, 2020, 8:25 p.m.
Like Reply


By metmike - Sept. 1, 2020, 8:53 p.m.
Like Reply

"Sorry mike but you are in the minority on this one, and I don't mind saying so"

Thanks Wayne,

I am used to being in the minority with my authentic position on climate change.

Elections are based on majorities in voters Wayne. Jury verdicts are based on votes too.

You can vote on this topic if you want to here and I am ok with losing the vote by a landslide..........but I already showed you the law on this at the top.

The law is the law. Not MY law but THE law.

It doesn't matter how outraged you are at the rioters and how much you admire the courage of this kid............emotions that I completely share with you. 

The law is the law and he broke it.  2 wrongs don't make a right.

I won't predict what will happen in this politically and emotionally charged environment but I am right about the law because its defined with crystal clarity. 

If I was his defense attorney, I would  go to a jury trial. Out of 12 jurors, there are bound to be at least a couple that don't want to convict him and he gets off.

I remember my time as a juror though. We were told over and over it doesn't matter what YOU/WE think, its what the law says and you MUST FOLLOW THE LAW.

Despite that, he may be able to get off with lesser charges or maybe a hung jury because of the circumstances.

By wglassfo - Sept. 1, 2020, 10:18 p.m.
Like Reply


What am I missing here

The young man did not respond with violence until he was attacked by a vicious mob

In my country that is called self defense and is the law in Canada, as I understand it

What law are you talking about

For heavens sake he had a gun pointed at him, the mob tried to take the gun from him by force before he responded, if the story of actions I read is correct

Self defense pure and simple

Burning part of a car dealership is not a peaceful demonstration

I would like to know if you have ever been in the center of an angry mob of people

I have, more than twice, three, four times at least, was serious

I did not go looking for trouble but my family doesn't back down either 

I am not talking about hockey sport scuffles which don't count, amongst testorone spiked teen agers.. Nobody get's hurt in those altercations, although Toronto defence man Salami did get cut up very badly one time.

I defended myself as best I could, a couple of times. Lost one time when the other side had us outnumbered and much older and stronger. I wasn't hurt, just embarrassed. I resolved to never let that happen again, and it hasn't. I learned to defend myself with just my bare hands and courage

Most mobs have one or two ring leaders, at least in my circumstances

You take care of them and the rest suddenly don't have any fight in them

Trust me, an angry circle of people can  be very intimidating unless you know what to do

I had another instance but the instigators wanted my son and myself to do some thing 1st

We refused and just listened to angry words

Eventually they went away

So: Don't preach to me about angry people

Every instance is different. The flight urge is very strong or in some the fight urge dominates. You will never know until it happens to you.

By wglassfo - Sept. 2, 2020, 2:40 a.m.
Like Reply


Roseville Michigan, maybe you know the area in question Mike

A customer was at a car wash vacuming his car when 2 people accosted him. One of the men had a gun. So did the owner of the car. Shots were exchanged and one of the two men was dead on arrival at hospital. The customer was not harmed by gun fire

Now what does your law say about that Mike??

Should the customer  have taken the time to call the police??

By TimNew - Sept. 2, 2020, 4:21 a.m.
Like Reply

MM,  you are using the premise that the kid used deadly force to protect property that did not belong to him when in fact the kid used deadly force to protect himself.  He did not shoot people for vandalizing property, he shot people that were assaulting him. Had he walked up to one of the people that was lighting cars on fire and shot him,  you would have a point.

By cutworm - Sept. 2, 2020, 11:21 a.m.
Like Reply

To add to Tim's comment.

The kid was running away from them when hit with a skateboard, which was used as a deadly weapon. 

By metmike - Sept. 2, 2020, 4:31 p.m.
Like Reply

Been tied up the last day or I would have responded earlier.

I understand your outrage at the rioting. You are letting this, with the hatred of rioters, political affiliation and MSM cloud your views on the laws.

1. Again, I showed at the top that a person does not have the right to use deadly force to defend property, except under unique circumstances UNDER THE LAW and this did not qualify. Scroll up to see the law. This relates to 2 of the felony charges. 

2. Individuals in the state of WI must be at least 18 to possess a firearm and tote it with them to a place like this because of their open carry laws. There is special permission granted for the use/possession of long guns/ rifles used specifically for hunting in youth Kyle's age. This is a cut and dry minor violation that he should be convicted of. That's the law but its just a misdemeanor. 

3. He did not bring the weapon with him from IL and cross state lines as some are claiming. He worked as a life guard in Kenosha, WI and somebody from that city let him use their gun but he still broke the law having it at 17.

4. The most serious, felony charges relate to separate incidents where he shot 2 people and killed them. We will see how the law defines this because it will be based on the circumstances of the incidents. During the 2nd incident, one can make the case that he is trying to defend himself. There are problems with the first one but I am just telling you the facts. One of them is that he shot 2 different people in 2 separate places.......this is a big problem for the defense. After he shot the first one, while apparently not having his life seriously threatened, the protesters could have seen him a lethal threat, not the other way around. Their actions may have been to disable the killer. The video of him getting clobbered by the skateboard, by itself could be construed as evidence to support him defending himself(but he just killed somebody so its likely the skateboarder was stopping the killer). Again, just telling the facts.

5. The gun that he had was an AR-15. This has been made to be a big deal but apparently, many hunters prefer this kind of rifle so, if they miss or don't kill the animal on the first shot, they can get off several shots before it gets away. 

6. His attorney is going to try to use a creative defense and claim that he represented a militia, like the US had  200 years ago. Since then, we have passed many laws and had many rule setting precedents that make that long ago situation no longer relevant. This is not 1800, when they allowed men under 18 to be part of the militia. 

7. Related to this, Kyle was not trained in law enforcement and  did not have any authority or certification to qualify him to act, with the implied powers of law enforcement. He would need to be 18 to acquire any law enforcement powers. 

8. This is my opinion.  I am vehemently against the rioting as much as anybody. However, think about all the confrontations, similar to what Kyle perceived might be coming his way(before he killed the first guy-they followed him after he killed that guy)........that take place hundreds of times, even in peaceful protesting. 

People screaming in the faces of other people. Threatening to beat them up or harm them.  Pushing them. A very tiny minority actually ever end up being seriously hurt or killed. What if we just gave everybody on both sides a gun and told them that if they feel threatened by somebody, they can kill them..............and it would be ok. 

I'm sure some people(not thinking it thru) actually think that would stop the violence because people would not make the threats or riot anymore if they might get killed over it.  I say, knowing human nature, that  if you armed everybody with a gun and these new rules, it would scare most people away but the crazies would still come and you would have mass killings. 

It's very sad because Kyle meant well, but this is what  can happen when you give a gun to an untrained, under aged kid(this is exactly why the law has age restrictions and we have trained law enforcement). 

Kyle got scared and probably panicked/over reacted when he killed the first guy(unless some video comes out showing the first guy was beating on him). At 17, his judgment was not developed to the point of being responsible enough to show restraint in a very emotional, threatening situation like this. Cops, the National Guard and other law enforcement ARE trained. Some of them make bad decisions too(that we see played on tv repeatedly, killing young black men) . But the men/women in blue are almost universally dedicated to making our communities safe and have the skills to accomplish that if we just give them enough support.(instead of crippling them, like we are in some situations).

By metmike - Sept. 2, 2020, 4:39 p.m.
Like Reply

Here are some links with more on this topic:

New details in Kenosha shootings: Jacob Blake tasered twice; Rittenhouse attorney says he did not transport gun

What to know about Wisconsin's open-carry laws, self defense and more in Kenosha protest shootings

Kenosha timeline: Court docs detail shooter Kyle Rittenhouse’s actions on night of protesters’ killings

Kenosha shooting suspect called a friend to say he 'killed somebody,' police say, and then shot two others

An AR-15 style rifle is a lightweight semi-automatic rifle based on the ArmaLite AR-15 design, which is itself a scaled-down derivative of Eugene Stoner's AR-10 design. ArmaLite sold the patent and trademarks to Colt's Manufacturing Company in 1959.

Many hunters prefer using AR-15 style rifles because of their versatility, accuracy, wide variety of available features, and wide variety of calibers (see below).[65] Collapsible stocks are convenient for hunters who pack their rifles into remote hunting locations or for length of pull adjustments to fit any sized hunter.[66] Construction with lightweight polymers and corrosion-resistant alloys makes these rifles preferred for hunting in moist environments with less concern about rusting or warping wood stocks. Positioning of the AR-15 safety is an improvement over traditional bolt action hunting rifles. Many states require hunters to use reduced-capacity magazines.[67] If a hunter misses with a first shot, the self-loading feature enables rapid follow-up shots against dangerous animals like feral pigs or rapidly moving animals like jackrabbits.[65] Hunters shooting larger game animals often use upper receivers and barrels adapted for larger cartridges or heavier bullets. Several states consider .22 caliber cartridges like the .223 Remington inadequate to ensure a clean kill.[

By metmike - Sept. 2, 2020, 4:46 p.m.
Like Reply

I saved this one for a separate page because its NPR making up something about Trump to try make him look bad and that he is trying to promote violence.

Trump Defends Kenosha Shooting Suspect

The headlines are FAKE NEWS.  Trump intentionally didn't condemn the suspect but he clearly stated that he thought that trained law enforcement should always handle everything....that was his main point. Why was this not even mentioned when it should have been the headlines?

By metmike - Sept. 2, 2020, 5:04 p.m.
Like Reply

metmike: After watching these interviews, how could you not support these wonderful cops???

'The most horrific displays of hate I've ever seen' | Portland police describe protests (full video)

Police officer gives his take on Portland Protests | Full interview

"I want people to know the truth"

By metmike - Sept. 2, 2020, 5:09 p.m.
Like Reply

                Using statistics to lie and smear cops            

                           19 responses |           

                Started by metmike - June 12, 2020, 7:48 p.m.     

By mcfarm - Sept. 2, 2020, 5:53 p.m.
Like Reply

MM, did I miss it or did you mention getting beaten over the head with a skateboard?

By metmike - Sept. 2, 2020, 6:47 p.m.
Like Reply

It's part of #4 above mcfarm.

By TimNew - Sept. 3, 2020, 3:38 a.m.
Like Reply

In the video of the 1st shooting,  he was being chased,  the pursuer was throwing things at him,  they turned a corner and shots were fired.  Kyle was not the aggressor but self defense is questionable since we are not sure what happened..

MM,  you keep saying he used deadly force to protect property.  This Is Not The Case.    He used deadly force to protect himself.

By metmike - Sept. 3, 2020, 12:16 p.m.
Like Reply

Thanks for correcting me Tim. 

The charge related to this is probably "first degree, recklessly endangering safety, use of a dangerous weapon"

Here's another link that provides some good video of the incidents:

By metmike - Sept. 3, 2020, 1:01 p.m.
Like Reply

With a hand from Trump, the right makes Rittenhouse a cause célèbre

The rush to embrace Kyle Rittenhouse shows how far apart the pro- and anti-Trump sides are — even when it comes to outright violence.

metmike: This is what Trump actually stated, when asked directly about people acting like this kid "I'd like to see law enforcement take care of everything"

If the MSM truly wanted to calm things down, they would have headlines that featured that statement/position but they INTENTIONALLY are trying  to add as much fuel to the fire as possible to stoke the divisiveness..............trying to rile up the pro Trump people and give them the impression that Trump is for this behavior(ala "there were good people on both sides being twisted into him supporting the KKK and White Nationalists. even after he condemned them-he hasn't condemned this kid but just said that we need to look at the evidence which shows him being attacked during the 2nd shooting).

Instead of  telling us the truth, that Trump, all Summer long has been  trying to stop the rioting every legal way possible and not once saying that vigilantes should be used and the dems/MSM, all Summer long encouraging the protests and not condemning the rioting/violence.............we now have another of their fake narratives.

Now, we are told that its been Trump intentionally causing the violence to get votes and fire up his supporters and the MSM/Dems, all along have been against the violence.........the complete opposite of the truth/facts from late May, June, July and August................until, suddenly, Americans finally got fed up with the violence and they had to flip it completely using the anti Trump playbook.

Rule 101: If something  is bad, Trump has to be for it/is causing it,  the Dems/MSM against it/trying to stop it.

Rule 102: If something is good, Trump has to be against it, the Dems/MSM for it.

Rule 103: Being imposed here. If something changes from being perceived as good to bad.....  it means redefining Trumps position 180 degrees by making shist up about him/it so that it creates a new position for Trump that lines up with being whatever is the new bad and flipping their own position completely to the opposite of what it was before to whatever is the new good.

Rule 104: There are rare exceptions to the rules above. Trump can never be doing something good......unless its to get votes ............not to do something for the American people.  This is imposed when its impossible to spin the positive affects of his actions as being they spin his intentions as being conniving and self serving/bad. 

Even if you hate President Trump, you know this is true.......... but because you hate support these rules. 

By metmike - Sept. 4, 2020, 5:24 p.m.
Like Reply

Column: Here’s why Kyle Rittenhouse, the teen shooting suspect in Kenosha killings, is likely to get off