Posted on 08/30/2020 5:10:51 AM PDT by Kaslin
Wisconsin recently charged Kyle Rittenhouse with first degree murder for killing two people who were, from what I can see from the videos, attacking him with weapons. Whether Rittenhouse should have been in Kenosha in the first place, and with a weapon a 17-year old cannot legally carry in public, is a separate issue for courts of law to decide. The question at hand is however why he was charged with murder while his surviving alleged assailants were, as far as I know, not charged with anything.
This leads to the need to educate potential jurors (i.e. all citizens who are eligible to serve on juries) proactively about important self-defense principles. This must happen before they are called for jury duty because it is illegal to do so afterward. Jurors need to understand the simple concept of din rodef, "the law of the pursuer." This gives defense attorneys a single word – rodef -- to explain the concept if jurors are not already familiar with it.
Rodef = One Who Pursues
A rodef (plural rodfim) is somebody who pursues somebody else with the objective of causing death or serious physical injury. Din rodef entitles the one pursued, or a bystander, to use reasonable force, up to and including deadly force, to stop the rodef from completing the intended violent crime. The principle is actually very similar to most modern laws. Deadly force cannot be used if lesser force will suffice, and the rodef ceases to be a rodef the instant he desists from his violent actions. Din rodef is also reflected by the modern adages (in the context of a fight or argument) such as "Never follow anybody into the parking lot" and "Never follow the other guy home" because these are prima facie evidence of malicious and violent intent.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
Rodef = One Who Pursues
A rodef (plural rodfim) is somebody who pursues somebody else with the objective of causing death or serious physical injury. Din rodef entitles the one pursued, or a bystander, to use reasonable force, up to and including deadly force, to stop the rodef from completing the intended violent crime. The principle is actually very similar to most modern laws.
Deadly force cannot be used if lesser force will suffice, and the rodef ceases to be a rodef the instant he desists from his violent actions. Din rodef is also reflected by the modern adages (in the context of a fight or argument) such as “Never follow anybody into the parking lot” and “Never follow the other guy home” because these are prima facie evidence of malicious and violent intent. It's hard for a rodef to claim innocence or self-defense when things go bad.
Do we have video evidence that he was attacked prior to the first shooting? He clearly is chased and attacked by the skateboard guy. But he had shot someone in the head before that, correct? Is there a video of the first shooting? I’ve only seen the aftermath.
Similar, if not the same, of the Castle Doctrine.
Thought you might appreciate this. Ping!
Sounds like the Kenosha district attorney is ALSO guilty of being a rodef, considering what can happen to Kyle in custody...
Do we have video evidence that he was attacked prior to the first shooting? He clearly is chased and attacked by the skateboard guy. But he had shot someone in the head before that, correct? Is there a video of the first shooting? I’ve only seen the aftermath.
Again he tried to flee and they chased him down. While on the ground they continued the attack and it is here when he shot the other two.
There is a photo of one of his assailants with a pistol.
The prosecutor did not investigate before charging him with murder.
I predict that most of the charges will be tossed.
As for someone underage with a weapon, I think it will make an interesting court case. The whole purpose of the 2nd amendment is to allow individual to be armed to defend themselves. There is no age limit on the 2nd amendment.
Actually until recent history it was perfectly normal for young men to own guns and even take them to school or scout meetings.
If a young person is not allowed to be armed during a violent riot then our laws are insane and should be overturned.
Self-defence therefore as it is justly called the primary law of nature, for it is not, neither can it be in fact, taken away be the law of society.
Agreed.
Kyle’s age shouldn’t be an issue.
If someone says it is, I would argue, “So because there was no law enforcement presence and because Kyle was seventeen, he deserved to be murdered for defending his life?”
I have a friend who was on the rifle team at Bishop Dubois High School in Manhattan in the 1950's. They carried their rifles at sling arms on the subway going from school to Knightsbridge Armory in the Bronx. He says he was questioned one time by a transit policeman, who didn't make an issue out of it. IIRC, even back in those halcyon days it was illegal to carry firearms on the subway
Can you imagine the reaction if a bunch of high school kids was carrying rifles on the NYC subway today? Five boroughs would be in lockdown. CNN would go into meltdown. They would be characterized as smirking little snots on every news network save one or two.
It's spotty. And, the first shot is not Kyle's.
The spot vids and pics we can piece together show a confrontation between BLM'ers and folks not really opposed to BLM objectives. The latter well-armed and protecting businesses. Their motto: pillage and riot as you will, but not at the business I'm here to protect. The BLM'ers started a dumpster fire and intended to ram it into a biz (gas station?). Kyle guys used a fire extinguisher to put it out. Then, shorty bald guy gets angry and leads to him chasing Kyle. THe rest is then well-videoed.
“Whether Rittenhouse should have been in Kenosha in the first place, and with a weapon a 17-year old cannot legally carry in public, is a separate issue for courts of law to decide.”
Is it a fact that a 17-year old cannot legally carry such a weapon in public there? Can an adult do so?
If the DA wasn’t such a traitor, the Wisconsin governor, the Kenosha mayor, the surviving attacker of Kyle, along with as many of the Antifa/BLM terrorists as can be arrested, should be been charged with murder, just as a getaway driver is charge with murder if one of his fellow bankrobbers is killed by a bank guard.
Kyle was within his legal rights to carry a long rifle in Wis.
Yes there is video of him being attacked before the first person was shot. In fact he shot the person attacking him.
Since Rittenhouse went into a riot area, armed in violation of the law and in violation of the curfew, then can the prosecution say he can't claim innocent intent when things turned bad? I'm not saying he's guilty or innocent but wondering if that's why they charged him with murder?
I might be showing my age, but we used to take guns to school all the time. When dove season started, I used to take my shotgun to school on the school bus and keep it in my locker so I could go hunting after school. When I became old enough to drive to school and owned a truck, I used to keep guns in the truck in the school parking lot.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.