Yes, they were rioting, burning things, and looting.
None of Rittenhouseâs victims were charged with rioting, arson, or looting. So no, they werenât ârioting, burning things, and lootingâ as you claim.
On top of that, none of those crimes are punishable with the death penalty in the USA, so âthey committed rioting/arson/looting, therefore they deserved to dieâ is not a valid legal argument. Do you know where it was considered to be a valid legal argument, though? Stalinâs URSS.
They also were rapists and pedophiles.
Incorrect - only Rosenbaum sexually abused minors. The other two had no sex-related charges.
Rosenbaum had already been punished for his crime, with a sentence of 15 years. Unlike what Durkin thinks, you cannot punish the same person twice for the same crime. Again: Durkin thinks that he lives in the URSS instead of the USA.
On top of that, the victimsâ past crimes can be used as evidence only if they are related to the case. Since they arenât, in ANY way or form, this is just the same as when the cops dug up Tony Timpaâs crime sheet to justify suffocating him to death. Itâs an attempt to smear the victim and paint it as violent, therefore implying that itâs alright to ârough them upâ. Itâs a tactic similar to the âbut black-on-black crimeâ that the KKK and Durkin love so much to use against black people.
But letâs pretend, for a second, that âthe victims already committed crimes prior to this, therefore using violence on them is okayâ IS a valid argument. Unlike Durkin, however, weâll apply this across the board. Wisconsin law says that you cannot go out with a firearm if youâre under 17yo; Rittenhouse DID, therefore heâs guilty of a misdemeanor. âBut the 2nd Amend-â - the Supreme Court is currently majority conservative and pro-gun, and they STILL sided in favor of Wisconsin, so shut up.
Additionally, thereâs the issue of where Rittenhouse got that rifle. The evidence available indicates two possible scenarios:
Rittenhouse got the rifle in Illinois (his home state), and then brought it with him in Kenosha, Wisconsin. Illinois law states that firearms owners must have a Firearm Owners Identification card - but Rittenhouse didnât have one, so heâs guilty of a misdemeanor. Additionally, he crossed state lines with an illegally-owned rifle, which upgrades his crime to a felony.
Rittenhouse got the rifle in Wisconsin, from a friend. So not only Rittenhouse is guilty of carrying a firearm despite not being legally allowed to do so (misdemeanor), but the friend is also guilty of giving a rifle to a kid who wasnât legally allowed to carry a firearm.
I bet that the âfriendâ will deny having given Rittenhouse his weapon. Which leaves only Scenario 1.
They also tried to murder a child.
Rosenbaum threw an empty plastic bag in his direction. And you claim thatâs âtrying to murder a childâ?
This is like that time where you tried to claim that, if YOU pick a fight with cops and gets yourself killed, then somehow I murdered you through the fascist state.
