Most of the hot takes from the Kyle Rittenhouse trial have come from the prosecutor, but the media is helping things along. The prosecution’s job was to prove that Rittenhouse didn’t fire in self-defense, and The Intercept’s Ryan Grim has a suggestion that might help out in future riots. Consider this: You lose grounds for self-defense if you bring a weapon into a public place where violence is basically guaranteed — like a firey but mostly peaceful Black Lives Matter protest.
We don’t get it … where violence is basically guaranteed … against you? Against random people? Who was guaranteeing there’d be violence?
What people could do with anger about the Rittenhouse trial is advocate for a law that says that if you bring a weapon to a public place where you know violence is basically guaranteed, you lose any self defense grounds
— Ryan Grim (@ryangrim) November 10, 2021
https://twitter.com/Mellecon/status/1458586091183910916
"Violence is basically guaranteed…"
At mostly peaceful BLM protests?
— Yancy (@yancypart2) November 11, 2021
Attention: We are planning violence here, so you must leave your weapons at home while we burn and loot, or face the legal consequences!
— Rex Ratio (@vermontaigne) November 11, 2021
"public place where you know violence is basically guaranteed" So, what exactly are you saying about his attackers and the crowd?
— TheRealMirCat (@TRMirCat) November 11, 2021
That's a terrible rule.
— JD (@PickenChews) November 10, 2021
That’s a terrible idea for a law
— Shane Giberson (@ShaneGiberson) November 10, 2021
Alexa, what could be lumped into @BadLegalTakes?
— アーケットシスターズ (@ArquetteSisters) November 11, 2021
I was assured the protests were mostly peaceful.
— Mike VB (@Mike__VB) November 11, 2021
Recommended
how can you prove that violence “is basically guaranteed”?
— Marcus Baram (@mbaram) November 10, 2021
especially when scenarios that *everyone* knew were violent and out of control were called 'mostly peaceful protests' by members of the media
— Leverkühn (@Herr_Leverkuhn) November 10, 2021
What on earth are you talking about today man
— Kilgore Trout (@KilgoreCl0ut) November 10, 2021
lol cmon man….think about this for more than a second.
— 🐬⏫Tremendo Sabor🐯🐯🐯 (@MiamiMoleMan) November 10, 2021
This makes no sense.
— Adele (@MadriverMind) November 10, 2021
This is a stunningly bad tweet — and that's really saying something.
— Curtis Johnson (@cjohnson999) November 11, 2021
Read this slowly to yourself.
— Mark Schuth (@MarkSchuth) November 11, 2021
You’re joking, right?
— Zac (@foo1ishfoo1) November 10, 2021
Because self defense is the problem
— Civil Roar (@Civil_Roar_) November 11, 2021
I don't think you've thought this through, chief.
— Garrett Hall (@HallG_Love) November 11, 2021
Why was violence basically guaranteed? Were the BLM protests not mostly peaceful?
— ERIE (@ErieAeronautics) November 10, 2021
If the place has violence guaranteed, there is MORE reason to bring a weapon, not less.
— Charles Sneedleton (@sneedleton) November 10, 2021
This is literally one of the most idiotic takes I've seen regarding this trial.
— not_cyr (@nocyr1) November 10, 2021
Yes, by all means let's pass a law whereby you're rightfully entitled to defend yourself via the best means feasible, EXCEPT in a dangerous situation where you might be harmed. pic.twitter.com/JDcNk8Y449
— James ✝️🇺🇸 (@wjamesawill) November 10, 2021
This is a horrible take.
— Rutil Augustus (@RutiliaAugusta) November 11, 2021
@SirajAHashmi really needs to get in here
— Clear Water Face (@Clearwaterface) November 11, 2021
Weird, I was reliably informed that the protests last summer were mostly peaceful. Why would violence be "basically guaranteed" there?
— Dracones — No Soupian Brigand CPhT (@Dracones24601) November 11, 2021
How about we aggressively arrest and prosecute arsonists and rioters? Then there's no need for people to ask friends to defend their business as police feign helplessness.
— 𝓢𝓶𝓮𝓵𝓵𝓼 𝓵𝓲𝓴𝓮 𝓽𝓮𝓮𝓷 𝓼𝓽𝓪𝓽𝓲𝓼𝓶 (@TheSuppressed86) November 11, 2021
Did you read that tweet before you hit send?
— Bleu Cheque (@VERBAL_CHANCLA) November 11, 2021
Are you serious with this?
Why in the world would the criminality of others somehow LIMIT my right to self defense?
— varyar (@varyarpol) November 11, 2021
You know what we could do? Have the police enforce the laws so that there are not areas where violence is basically guaranteed.
— Greg Bed (@gregbed) November 10, 2021
Thanks for admitting you hate civil rights
— Pudge (@pudgenet) November 11, 2021
How about enforcing the laws so there aren’t places where violence is basically guaranteed?
Related:
ADA Thomas Binger demands that Kyle Rittenhouse explain ‘what was so urgent’ about the fire he ran toward when ‘there’s fires all over the place’ https://t.co/0k6TPEroWA
— Twitchy Team (@TwitchyTeam) November 10, 2021
Join the conversation as a VIP Member