Who were you referring to in this post?

Ah, I see the confusion. I didnt realize I said that. Yes he crossed state lines. Yes, he had a gun. Yes he lied about that in court and said it was at a friends house. (Black maybe?)..I believe the "proof" that it was in Kenosha was the receipts to buy it. I dont trust his word. Sorry

It was at Black’s address because it was Black’s gun. There was no evidence that Rittenhouse ever owned it, nor any that he had ever taken it to Illinois or possessed it there. There was no evidence that he had even seen or handled it after the weekend that it was purchased in May until August 25th.

Sure thing bud.

You are free to believe what you like. All I am saying is that there was no evidence. That is just a fact.

There was evidence, just none youd accept. Ill agree he got away with it. But hes EXTREMELY lucky to be alive.

And, with respect, if there is evidence, then why not present it? It is a really old debating deflection tactic when people make a claim of evidence, but decline to present it with the caveat of "You would only dismiss my evidence". How do you know if I haven't seen what you propose?

Because its anecdotal and Im not evsn sure. I accept it. I just dont care.

Then, let’s be fair, in the absence of any evidence, he gets the benefit of the doubt, particularly in court. Agreed?

That being said, he won the case and is walking around a free man. Its the moral argument Im making. I certainly would not want my son doing this, nor would I allow it.

This entire time ive conceded he "won" the court case, I just dont agree with 2 things. 1. The original statute WAS intended for hunting. What sense would it make otherwise? 2. The cops in the community clearly had a bias and Kyles posts prior to the shooting show ill intent at best.

There was no evidence that Rittenhouse had ever owned the rifle or had ever kept it. Black testified that he bought the rifle in his name on May 1st and that it was kept at his address in Kenosha. He still owned that gun when it was destroyed in 2022, and had to sign off on its destruction.

All the evidence of the shootings was exculpatory. There was nothing to suggest that he acted unlawfully. There was nothing in the videos or witness testimony that hurt his case for self-defense under WI s.939.48. Why do you think critics ignore this and focus on "He never should have been there" ?

Because he never should have been there. You know this. I know this. If that were yoyr lid, would you say you did a good job parenting?? Would you advise your child to go to a riot with weapon of war?

No, but I would support his right to defend himself if he did.

You're not accepting evidence. -You discounted Officer Moretti's testimony. -Inserted your own statistic. "99.9% of the people weren't armed." -You insist that Kyle crossed state lines with a firearm. Despite evidence to the contrary. You lack integrity.

Cool story bro

Those are the facts.

You're free to prove otherwise. Oddly, you're making claims that the prosecution didn't even make. 🤔

Why are you making claims that the prosecution didn't even make? That's odd. Perhaps you can explain this.

Funny he didn't respond to this. I wonder if he thinks the Lake County prosecutor or DA Binger was lying about the gun always being in WI. I wonder if he realizes they would have interviewed many people, like Black's stepfather who kept it in his gun safe.

@entus.bsky.social dismisses any & all proof that doesn't align with his narrative. That's his debate strategy.

I addressed this and i said ill take their word for it. Didnt even mean to bring it up and disnt realize i did. Lets focus on the only thing I got wrong while not addressing the 37 things you got wrong.