I will never ever understand the logic of the left in a million years.
The kid volunteers to protect a car park from being destroyed - which in fact happens that night to other car parks. A pedophile threatens to kill Rittenhouse. Rittenhouse runs away, the pedo chases after him until Rittenhouse has no choice but to defend himself. After he does, a mob threatens to kill Rittenhouse, one smashes him over the head with a skateboard, one tries to shoot him all caught on video. Rittenhouse again defends himself.
So what exactly are they against here? Are they saying he should have allowed himself to be killed? Is this the logic they are standing by?
That was petty much what the persecutor argued at trial.
Here is their viewpoint:
First, he was protecting property. In their view, property is evil, so that made him wrong to start with.
Second, he carried an AR15. Evil, evil, evil. Only the government and socialist revolutionaries are allowed AR15 rifles.
Third, he dared to defend himself with a rifle, and succeed, at a anti-police, anti-property, anti-USA riot. Evil tripled again. He has shown himself to be an enemy of the people, and should be killed outright.
Fourth, he showed a determined man with a rifle can defend himself against a leftist mob. That can never be tolerated or allowed to stand. Enemies of the people are to give up easily and subject themselves to abuse and humiliation before they are killed.
For the Left, the facts of any particular situation are unimportant; all that matters is what position to take in order to further their political agenda. In this case, Leftists want law-abiding citizens disarmed so that they cannot defend themselves against the coming Marxist revolution, so they are automatically opposed to someone using a legal weapon to defend himself against leftist thugs engaged in a riot. It’s that simple.
They can’t let the vast majority of people who are not rabid insane Leftists get the notion that it’s OK to use force if necessary to defend themselves from rabid insane Leftists.