Three years ago, then-17-year-old Kyle Rittenhouse was in Kenosha, Wisconsin, during the George Floyd/BLM riots that plagued the nation that summer. While there, he was chased and threatened by leftists in the crowd; Kyle shot and killed two men and injured a third. In November 2021, he was acquitted after arguing he acted in self-defense.
To this day, the Left is still very, very mad about Rittenhouse. They still insist, for example, that he shot Black people (he didn't) and that it was illegal for him to possess the gun (it wasn't, and that charge was dropped by the judge).
Reason and logic have never been the Left's strong suit, and here's another fine example of that:
So according to US law, you could buy a gun and travel to wherever to find Kyle Rittenhouse, watch him until you see him with a gun, then shoot him in the head because you felt threatened by him holding a gun.
— 🄵 🄸 🅇 🄽 🄴 🅆 🅂 🍁⛵☮️ (@FixNewsPlease) December 7, 2023
That's how it works. That's legal. pic.twitter.com/xXnqd3Xgua
That's not how US law works.
At all.
Guns are not the problem.
— 🄵 🄸 🅇 🄽 🄴 🅆 🅂 🍁⛵☮️ (@FixNewsPlease) December 7, 2023
The Constitution and the laws are the problem.
Keep being wrong, bro.
Except that’s not what happened, friend. Kyle was threatened with deadly force, as you can clearly see in the picture on the left.
— 𝐆𝐫𝐞𝐠 (@HarmfulOpinion) December 8, 2023
Cute strawman though. pic.twitter.com/9Sz05fXUC7
We all saw the video evidence.
As did the jury.
He would have to point the gun in your face to justify shooting.
— Sandy 〽️ (@RightGlockMom) December 8, 2023
That fact was presented in trial. And get this - the best part - the guy testifying was one of guys shot by Kyle. 😂https://t.co/y7FNzqSPRB
He glosses over that little fact.
He has to attack you like his attackers attacked him. The fact you say the Constitution is a problem, speaks to your lack of intellect. I’m not surprised you don’t understand self defense.
— Bleu Cheque (@VERBAL_CHANCLA) December 8, 2023
There are a lot of things he doesn't understand, it seems.
— Donut Operator 🍩 (@DonutOperator) December 9, 2023
Pretty accurate.
I have never met a single person who both hates Kyle Rittenhouse and can accurately describe the sequence of events that took place the night of the shooting. https://t.co/gMjx56xQ78
— VITO (@VitoComedy) December 9, 2023
You won't. Because they hate Rittenhouse for defending himself, therefore they have to lie about the circumstances of that night.
ANTIFA showing that they haven’t passed their GED yet. https://t.co/MTSasHKV2l pic.twitter.com/WyM1wtA3fj
— j maguire III (@maguireIII) December 8, 2023
And probably never will.
Did you wake up as an insufferable moron this morning, or did you have to work at it?
— Quintus Septimius Florens Tertullianus (@mwilliams433) December 8, 2023
According to US Law as well as EVERY state law, what you described is murder in the first degree.
The level of ignorance needed to post this tweet is astounding.
Please get help. https://t.co/0JmY0RYQHT
He works hard at being an idiot.
This is absolutely NOT legal. https://t.co/la4rk6GNyf
— Helena Handbasket 🇮🇱 (@BumpstockBarbie) December 8, 2023
No, it's not.
This statement is absent several KEY facts.
— Shuck (@LaBeardGuy) December 8, 2023
Not that I'd expect honesty from the gun control gestapo. https://t.co/zOzaV5qnj6
He's also mad about self-defense laws.
That’s not how it works. That is not legal https://t.co/YujR9W6zki
— (((Aaron Walker))) (@AaronWorthing) December 9, 2023
As several people have pointed out, this is not legal and will land you in prison in any state in the nation.
And, in glorious fashion, the original tweet has gotten the Community Notes treatment:
Yes, it is against the law to 'buy a gun and travel to wherever to find Kyle Rittenhouse, watch him until you see him with a gun, then shoot him in the head because you felt threatened by him holding a gun.'
Very illegal.
Cornell Law lays it out pretty clearly:
First degree murder is the intentional killing of another person by someone who has acted willfully, deliberately, or with planning. Generally, there are two types of first-degree murder: premeditated intent to kill and felony murder. This definition will focus on first-degree murder involving premeditated intent to kill.
It is important to note that the exact definition of first-degree murder depends on each state’s statute, and its definition will vary by jurisdiction. Most jurisdictions define first-degree murder as cases involving premeditation and deliberation; all other intentional murders are defined as second-degree.
A premeditated intent to kill requires that the defendant had intent to kill and some willful deliberation (the defendant spent some time to reflect, deliberate, reason, or weigh their decision) to kill, rather than killing on a sudden impulse.
Prior planning and deliberation are often closely intertwined. Courts focus on the “pre” in premeditation, and generally look for evidence that the defendant deliberated and subsequently formed the intent to kill prior to the act of killing. This is justified because the defendant must have thought about the murder for a period of time and did not change their mind.
We feel for Kyle Rittenhouse, because his entire life hinges on one night in Kenosha, and -- for the rest of his life -- he will have lunatics like this spouting nonsense on the Internet.
The rage and hatred he gets is mind-boggling and we hope that no one ever acts on this; but we're confident Kyle has shown he can keep himself safe.
***
Editor's Note: Do you enjoy Twitchy's conservative reporting taking on the radical left and woke media? Support our work so that we can continue to bring you the truth. Join Twitchy VIP and use the promo code SAVEAMERICA to get 40% off your VIP membership!
Join the conversation as a VIP Member