Gaga Tweets About Rittenhouse Trials

[ALGAYDO 32,671]

9 minutes ago, Queen Bitch said:

Then charge him for owning an illegally obtained gun. That's totally fine by me. Besides a 17 year old shouldn't have access to a gun. But that still doesn't make him a murderer. I know he crossed state lines but I honestly don't know why, did we get a reason from him? I didn't know that he shot at the air. Do you mean a warning shot? Because as far I know he didn't do that. The prosecutor even asked him why didn't do a warning shot. And yes I know that this case would have been very different if Kyle Rittenhouse had been a black man, which is horrible to think about. Even if Kyle Rittenhouse was black I still would support him in this case, which I understand can be hard to believe because as you said, you don't know me personally, so you don't know my values. But it honestly wouldn't make a difference to me. And I swear I'm not one of those stupid Trumpsters trying to make Kyle Rittenhouse out to be some kind of saint. Like I said in a previous comment I don't believe he is a hero for what he did. But I believe he defended himself, which the jury agrees with. 

I didn’t think you were a trumpanzee, seeing as you’re a somewhat popular member here, it would have been a HUGE shock to everyone. BUT the stuff you’ve been posting relating to this topic did raise some red flags for me, simply because it’s similar to those who are right-wingers, so I apologize for assuming you’d be one. But I still don’t understand how, given all the public info about this incident, anyone could conclude that he was 100% innocent. Because he wasn’t. But I’m going too off topic now. 

[Queen Bitch 10,513]

5 minutes ago, ALGAYDO said:

I didn’t think you were a trumpanzee, seeing as you’re a somewhat popular member here, it would have been a HUGE shock to everyone. BUT the stuff you’ve been posting relating to this topic did raise some red flags for me, simply because it’s similar to those who are right-wingers, so I apologize for assuming you’d be one. But I still don’t understand how, given all the public info about this incident, anyone could conclude that he was 100% innocent. Because he wasn’t. But I’m going too off topic now. 

Yeah I don't want to be associated with right-wingers (I'm sure you can understand why lol) but I understand it - my position on this case isn't particularly normal among people who aren't right-wingers. But I'm open to the fact that I could be wrong on this case (because I'm generally trying to keep an open mind) and there are things that I agree Kyle Rittenhouse should have been charged for like illegally obtaining a firearm and breaking curfew so I don't necessarily think he's 100% innocent although I understand why my comments could make it seem that way

[ALGAYDO 32,671]

22 minutes ago, Queen Bitch said:

Yeah I don't want to be associated with right-wingers (I'm sure you can understand why lol) but I understand it - my position on this case isn't particularly normal among people who aren't right-wingers. But I'm open to the fact that I could be wrong on this case (because I'm generally trying to keep an open mind) and there are things that I agree Kyle Rittenhouse should have been charged for like illegally obtaining a firearm and breaking curfew so I don't necessarily think he's 100% innocent although I understand why my comments could make it seem that way

Well, both of us see this case somewhat differently. And it’s totally cool, we just have two different POVs on the matter. But I’m glad you’re not a “trumpet” and just really trying to be objective. But I hope that you can tell why so many of us are extremely upset and rage-fueled by this outcome. 

[Queen Bitch 10,513]

13 minutes ago, ALGAYDO said:

Well, both of us see this case somewhat differently. And it’s totally cool, we just have two different POVs on the matter. But I’m glad you’re not a “trumpet” and just trying to be objective. But I hope that you can tell why so many of us are extremely upset and rage-fueled by this outcome. 

I can totally tell why many are angry by this outcome. From the comments I have seen both on here and on Twitter and other sites I have seen a lot of reasons why people are angry. I understand it, I just have a different view on the case, I guess. But as I said I'm trying to keep an open mind. I'm not dead set that my view on the case is correct. Maybe it will change. 

[Monster Voices 1,024]

So you are a white male and you see there is a BLM protest so you decide to travel there to protect businesses that are not even in your community ... and you strap a loaded AR 15 of all guns to your chest and run around with it .... what the actual **** do you expect to happen? (I come from a country where I have only seen a gun once in years and it was on a friend who is a special forces cop.) So to me all of this sh¡t is the definition of asking for a reason to shoot somebody.

[hELXIG 43,047]

On 11/20/2021 at 7:51 PM, thatfoxyfeeling said:

I don't live in America so it kinda baffles me that he had a gun at 17 years old in the first place but I just know if he wasn't white he would have received a sentence. 

If he wasn't white he would've been shot dead on the road by a swat team minutes after he fired his gun... no actually, he would've been shot dead on the road for just having a gun

[YUJIfushiguro 224]

3 hours ago, huttont said:

If he wasn’t white, he would have been shot on site by police. It’s horrifying how people don’t see systematic racism 

Maybe he wouldve been shot on site if he was black and thats an extremely ****ed up thing. However Injustices happening to one race doesnt justify not being just to another. Racism and systamatic oppression exist in america but that is not why this kid has been found not guilty and he shouldnt be charged just for the fact that a person of colour would be. The way to fix oppression isnt to dish it out equally.

[YUJIfushiguro 224]

1 hour ago, Monster Voices said:

So you are a white male and you see there is a BLM protest so you decide to travel there to protect businesses that are not even in your community ... and you strap a loaded AR 15 of all guns to your chest and run around with it .... what the actual **** do you expect to happen? (I come from a country where I have only seen a gun once in years and it was on a friend who is a special forces cop.) So to me all of this sh¡t is the definition of asking for a reason to shoot somebody.

His family lived in the area and there was loads of looting when the blm protests where happening so "protecting your business" isnt all that crazy. You cant charge someone based on what you assume there intentions are. Its ridiculous that 17yr old even had a gun in the first place . America is a genuinely frighting place and im blessed not to live there.

[Ziggy 11,865]

5 hours ago, FameMonster01 said:

I just saw a video and there are literally 4 people attacking him, It feels to me like self defense. (Don't get me wrong, after reading the headline I really thought that the system is again, being unfair.) But this just looks like a self defense, seeing as there were 4 other people on him, and he was completely alone.

Now of course 17 years old SHOULDN't have a gun anyways, it's all so sick and twisted

Self defense implies he wasn’t being a threat to the community. I think stalking through the streets with a gun and shooting it into the air to scare people off constitutes a direct threat and nonverbal statement of intent. He came there to threaten people with violence. So self defense feels like a real stretch in this case. It wasn’t like he had a concealed gun that he pulled after being attacked wantonly. He had the assault weapon out and was trying to threaten people, a gun he had illegally, it’s especially worth noting.

[Ziggy 11,865]

10 minutes ago, YUJIfushiguro said:

His family lived in the area and there was loads of looting when the blm protests where happening so "protecting your business" isnt all that crazy. You cant charge someone based on what you assume there intentions are. Its ridiculous that 17yr old even had a gun in the first place . America is a genuinely frighting place and im blessed not to live there.

He lived aways away. I live fairly nearby. If you need to drive there then I wouldn’t call it his area lol plus, the intent was shooting an illegal gun into the air. That is a pretty direct threat especially with an assault weapon. Self defense is a bit flimsy when you’re the one with an assault weapon and deliberately drove and were dropped off at the scene of known danger you had no sense being in in the first place except to threaten protesters. Again, a self defense claim is a bit weak when you look at each component of his story pulled together.

[SEANGT 5,296]

On 11/20/2021 at 2:13 AM, Agunimon said:

This is the takeaway a lot of people were expressing to me in the other thread and I honestly didn't realize that was the point they were making.

I misinterpreted a lot of replies in the thread that was closed, figuring that people just didn't realize that his victims were white. But I realize now the point that some of them were making was essentially what Gaga tweeted about.

In America, it's innocent until proven guilty... unless you're black. Then it's the reverse. 

I'm posting this here because I didn't get a chance to in the original thread before it was locked, and it does relate to the topic. I hope that is okay. I just want the people who let me know what the point some were trying to make that I misinturpted and people explained was read and I understand.

However, in this case in particular, even one of the victims of Kyle admitted they were chasing him (there's video of this, as well as videos leading up to this when they began to chase him) and wanted to hurt him (there's video of the prime witness testifying this was the case).

But in the judicial system in America, generally a jury will only declare a verdict regarding the charges brought upon the defendant.

I do realize now that the majority of people were expressing that to me, if he was black, he would have been charged regardless.

But that still leaves me feeling a certain way, because that same night, a black man was shot for no real reason by the police and the police held a press conference regarding the shooting announcing that no charges would be placed upon the officer who did that. Many people don't know about that, though. They just know about what happened with Kyle. And because I saw the videos, I feel the anger is misplaced - although I realize that sounds like I feel like it's okay for him to have shot and killed people, when that isn't the case.

The larger context really, really matters here. The videos show the moment. However, this boy decided he needed to bring a rifle into this protest zone as an opportunity to "defend a car lot" he had a VERY loose association with. We can't have 17 year old vigilantes going into protests. He used the protests as an excuse to use his gun. I'm really not surprised these protesters tried to neutralize a threat. He was there to be threatening. And he did not have a badge. What he did should be highly illegal. 

[YUJIfushiguro 224]

7 minutes ago, Ziggy said:

He lived aways away. I live fairly nearby. If you need to drive there then I wouldn’t call it his area lol plus, the intent was shooting an illegal gun into the air. That is a pretty direct threat especially with an assault weapon. Self defense is a bit flimsy when you’re the one with an assault weapon and deliberately drove and were dropped off at the scene of known danger you had no sense being in in the first place except to threaten protesters. Again, a self defense claim is a bit weak when you look at each component of his story pulled together.

If his dad, his best friend and his work was there i think its pretty reasonable to call it around his area. Blm protests regardless of there intent inspired alot of looters. the idea of defending your business still isnt that outlandish. The method of how he did it i cant agree with at all. he chose to try and scare them off and use violence as a means of doing that and ended provoking violence on himself.  What he did was ridiculous and stupid but the point remains he didnt shoot at anyone until he had a gun aimed at him.

[Fresco 1,688]

16 hours ago, YUJIfushiguro said:

What he did was ridiculous and stupid but the point remains he didnt shoot at anyone until he had a gun aimed at him.

The first man he killed was unarmed, no gun. The second man he killed saw the first shooting and hit him with a skateboard, no gun. The third man was a paramedic and identified him as an active shooter and pointed a gun at him, but could not pull the trigger. Rittenhouse shot the third guy but let him live.

[YUJIfushiguro 224]

12 hours ago, Fresco said:

The first man he killed was unarmed, no gun. The second man he killed saw the first shooting and hit him with a skateboard, no gun. The third man was a paramedic and identified him as an active shooter and pointed a gun at him, but could not pull the trigger. Rittenhouse shot the third guy but let him live.

After looking into it abit more over the past day and abit I have to admit my opinion has changed and am embarrassed about lowkey defending his verdict in this thread. Id avoided watching the video cuz I don't like watching stuff like this and was just gaining alot of my info just from other peoples recounts of the events rather then actually getting the full picture for myself which i eventually did. I don't know if I think he should've  been jailed for life as he is still quite young however walking away from this without even a slap on a wrist is just crazy he deserves to spend a his fair share of time for this.

 

[Ziggy 11,865]

On 11/21/2021 at 2:05 AM, YUJIfushiguro said:

If his dad, his best friend and his work was there i think its pretty reasonable to call it around his area. Blm protests regardless of there intent inspired alot of looters. the idea of defending your business still isnt that outlandish. The method of how he did it i cant agree with at all. he chose to try and scare them off and use violence as a means of doing that and ended provoking violence on himself.  What he did was ridiculous and stupid but the point remains he didnt shoot at anyone until he had a gun aimed at him.

Well, again, it doesn't sound like you live around here so it isn't much worth arguing the point as you don't really get the "context" of the area, but going into the streets with an assault rifle looks pretty f*cking menacing. We can pretend and choose to believe so many things, but let's be real here: He knew exactly wtf he was doing going into the streets with that weapon and knew what that image was going to attract his way. That is someone seeking violence and who is now claiming self-defense. It wasn't even his business. He was just in the streets. It isn't like a mob came to his business and tried to nab him or something. He was out and about with an assault weapon trying to scare people. Defense does not include actively antagonizing others like this did. He knew he might be shooting people and was prepared to, in fact, sought to do it. Anti-establishment, armed and militarized young men are essentially out trying to LARP their masochistic fantasies. This isn't a little boy defending a business with a gun, this is a young man with fantasies of war and bloodshed, like so many others in the US right now, feeling inspired to live them out. It's a current of male culture and that chord needs to be understood if we're going to have a conversation about this. It's a lot bigger than the particulars of this case, as it always is.

This person and so many like him see their country slipping from the hands that preference white maleness and are scared. So they're tightening a vice grip on that. In this case, Rittenhouse clearly had every intention to use that weapon to threaten people and got just that. His response *now* is clear indicator that he was in over his head and didn't understand the full weight and chaos of what being in that spot entailed. Again, this is a fantasy scenario of so many in these circles right now, but very few are actually equipped to handle the stress of being in it once they are (take a watch of the video and that is clear imo). So the question becomes, how do you punish someone who was quite obviously delusional to the umpteenth degree, but still went into a space with the specific intent to threaten people with horrible violence? Is that murder? Manslaughter? It could be many things, but I don't believe for a moment that it was anything even relatively close to self-defense as the only thing he defended was a bad decision after knowing very well what he was getting into bringing that weapon there. Sure, Wisconsin is open carry, but Rittenhouse is from Illinois and also underage and also it wasn't his weapon lol Ask yourself if he'd have been in that situation if he hadn't been walking around with the assault rifle and I think that can answer much of the issues surrounding this case.

I personally don't think you can claim self-defense when there was clear intent you were courting violence. That shows either a terrifyingly level of naivete, privileged delusion, or both.