Posted on 12/01/2021 8:00:37 AM PST by ChicagoConservative27
Kyle Rittenhouse said he is destroying the rifle he used to shoot three protestors in Kenosha, Wis., last year during an appearance on the conservative podcast program, "The Charlie Kirk Show" on Tuesday.
Speaking as a guest on the program, Rittenhouse said, "We're having [the rifle] destroyed right now. We don't want anything to do with that," while discussing how the lead prosecutor in his case, Assistant District Attorney Thomas Binger, brought the AR-15-style weapon into court.
Rittenhouse expressed that he was shocked when Binger pointed Rittenhouse's rifle "at the gallery."
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...
“In an interview LAST YEAR, “
But then later in that sentence it says “...on Tuesday”. I’m guessing it should read last week. Editors - who needs ‘em.
Even worse, they were trying to say the shootings took place last year.
Or people like me with poor reading skills. The sentence refers to when the rioters were shot! (last year).
Shooting or killing anyone goes against what our humanity is all about. To have to do it and not feel any remorse or guilt takes a very hard individual.
I have a close high school friend who lives alone out in the country in northern Michigan with lots of backwoods properties. We used to hunt together in high school and went our separate ways after graduation.
He saw lots of hard times in Vietnam (two Purple Hearts) and even tho he sees deer in the valley behind his house and grouse out in the woods today, he refuses to pick up a gun and hunt anymore.
What Kyle does with his rifle is his business. If Kyle is the compassionate kid that I think he is, he's going to have guilt feelings about that day for the rest of his life. I know I would..........
On further thought, you are most likely correct...
Wouldn’t that be a crime, if he destroys it? It was loaned to him, it’s not his property. If you lend someone some of your property, you don’t expect them to destroy it.
After his defamation settlements, he should visit the Wilson Combat site for some really great choices.
“It’s of no concern about them it’s about him letting go of the past and move ahead many do and win.”
If he has any compassion in him, “they” included him. But I guess many have missed the boat on this action. You can’t toss the gun away and not be held responsible for what the gun did unless you don’t care. Guns don’t kill people, people do. If you don’t care that you are responsible for what happened, and go public with this action to render yourself no longer part of the transaction, then you either were evil, stupid. or a heartless fool that never should have been there to begin with, and especially armed, doing what he did. And now the action should just go away and will be forgotten? Take it from one who was in those shoes, it is never forgotten if you care. He obviously doesn’t. So if he doesn’t why should anyone else be concerned for him?
wy69
Well, do believe I read the rifle jammed on him, so I would not trust it unless I rebuilt it from scratch.
I agree with you if that’s the case. But if it isn’t his, how does he get a say in whether or not it gets destroyed?
They let him keep those when he went home?
Lol, that’s one way to look at it.
Beats me.
I just thought his buddy who was a WI dude lent him a rifle so he could participate. But I heard that in the news 6 months ago or so.
+1000!!
Some of the things that came back on the B17 he was in on the way home, would amaze you. There were quite a few “lost” firearms in combat.
I guess it’s preferable to leaving them in-theater and skulking off with your tail between your legs, like some were recently forced to do.
I think I’ve heard that too. Guess I will “let the situation develop” as they say.
Vets do neither. We don’t destroy our weapons and few, if any of us forget.
Destroying the firearm is a foolish decision.
But it may make it easier for me to ignore his mother’s begging emails.
Because that would make him out to be profiting off the killing of people.
That is not exactly the “image” they want. Especially if he is going to go on the book/movie/lawsuit circuit to make millions.
Those are the only acceptable ways to make money these days.
And here we have the answer:
Although Ive heard other idiot reporters try to sell the bogus claim the rifle was purchased ‘for’ Kyle. Seems FAR more likely Black bought the rifle well before lending it to Kyle during the riots.
So, it is not Kyle’s to destroy.
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.