Kyle Rittenhouse’s sister Faith is seeking $3,000 on a crowdfunding website in a bid to prevent the eviction of herself and her mother Wendy from their home, citing her “brother’s unwillingness to provide or contribute to our family.”
Conservative values at work. Make a boatload of cash doing the grift circuit after murdering somebody, then hoard it and refuse to help your family.
Huh. Have any of them considered a job? If the mom was capable of driving her child to another state to murder some people, I bet she could drive for uber or something. Or be a getaway driver for other criminals, idk.
There’s a certain type of person who thinks work is beneath them. That’s who the Rittenhouse family is.
…what? What are you basing this on?
When the children were small, Wendy and Mike worked various jobs, including machine operator, housekeeper, and cashier.
…
Wendy had become a certified nursing assistant, but she continued to struggle financially. The family was repeatedly evicted.
…
In 2018, shortly after another eviction, Wendy filed for bankruptcy. She developed a gastrointestinal bleed that required hospitalization, and Faith was also hospitalized, after an attempted overdose involving over-the-counter painkillers
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2021/07/05/kyle-rittenhouse-american-vigilante
Gotta love a conservative family that votes to undermine all the social services they’d need in situations like this. But they seem to be able to afford guns…
Yeah, exactly. Fuck them all.
In fairness guns are way more affordable than healthcare is America. Sports cars are more affordable than healthcare in America.
See also: schadenfreude
I think it’s an apt term for watching leopards eating the faces of their allies.
Edit: for those unfamiliar with the reference, here’s a rundown of The Leopards Eating Faces Party.
- Leopards Eating People’s Faces Party
“Leopards Eating People’s Faces Party refers to a parody of regretful voters who vote for cruel and unjust policies (and politicians) and are then surprised when their own lives become worse as a result. It has been commonly used to parody regretful Brexit and Trump voters.”
A CNA does not earn money, it’s pretty much a minimum wage job. This person did not have the necessary intelligence or drive to attain their bachelors and become a full nurse–it’s as simple as that.
My sister in law, bless her, is really one of the angriest persons you will ever meet. She hates everything out there and the world is bad, blah blah blah. I asked her why she became a phlebotomist. She told me she wanted to be a nurse but could not pass English 101. Seriously.
Kyle’s mom? She’s the same.
I hate to defend Kyle’s mom, but man, shouldn’t a CNA or a phlebotomist be able to afford to survive in the area they work? In their case, I guess you reap what you sow.
Yea being a cna is tough and underpaid. My ex is one, takes a couple months of study and passing a test. I, with a highschool degree made 6 dollars more than her when her job was 3 times tougher. It’s criminal. She worked harder and longer hours in a dangerous place with people who could and would harras and harm her. The harrasment was mental, verbal, physical and sexual as well. Fuck boomers.
You remember businesses calling everyone who worked a low appreciation job heroes? CNAs got the shittiest end of the stick on that I think.
Giant banners calling you heroes greet you as you drive on the lot of the nursing home, and you look at them knowing you’re going to get physically shit on by the patients, and proverbially shit on by the higher level nurses, the administration that now works remote, the family of the patients, and of course the patients again as well. For $12/hr. And you’re extra short staffed because anyone that could find travel work did. Brutal shit for them.
On the Dollop podcast if you’ve ever heard of it, one of the hosts is named Gareth. Gareth points out in an episode that in American culture we only ever call “heroes” the people we deem ‘expendable’. I have been unable to find a counterexample to that claim ever since I heard it.
Holy hell if you aren’t right. I recall her getting all of those things at her work too and a measly 40 cent raise lul. All those banners and pins and lanyards and little gift bags if tiny hand sanetizers and candy. I think she made like 16 here in cali at the time, I recall hearing there’s a laaw that was gonna be passed or already passed to get them up to like 20 or 21 at the minimum. Crazy to think that’s what mcDonald’s employees earn here now while plenty of cnas in other parts of the state earn less still.
I mean, I’d bet the majority of people on here would say anyone working a legit full time job should be able to afford to survive.
Depends on whether you mean Lemmy or .world
It’s no different than public school teachers, I suppose. It’s not a field you get into unless it calls you for some reason–you’re certainly not in it for the money.
We really need to reprioritize how we fund things around the world.
That very much comes off sounding ableist
My son was making $30/hr as a CNA.
That’s not a well paying job. I’m sorry that you think it is.
That’s $62,000 annually. The median personal income in the US as of 2022 was $40,480, which means that’s about 50% above the median.
Not sure what you’re on that you don’t think that’s a pretty decent individual income.
I never said “well paying”. You said CNA makes minimum wage. $30 > minimum wage.
K
According to the article his sister has been hospitalized and both her and their mother have a hard time getting work because of being associated with Kyle Rittenhouse. BTW the mother did not drive him that’s a fallacy
Ok then I retract the part about driving. But I have a hard time feeling sympathy for her being unable to get a job. She’s repeatedly defended him and said she stands by him, and she allowed her 17 year old to buy a gun he couldn’t legally have and to drive without a license. Being associated with him is her doing. I have a family member who was a teenage white supremacist piece of shit (who was thankfully stopped by the FBI before he killed anyone), and you can bet nobody thinks I’m associated with him because I make it very clear where I stand. If I said he was a good person and I’ll always support him, I wouldn’t be shocked if employers said nah.
Sure, but she’s also his mother, not a random family member. I’m not going to fault a mother for standing by their child, no matter what he did.
She didn’t let him buy anything, but she couldn’t make him get rid of it because it wasn’t in her house. It was locked up at a friend’s house in a different town.
She was also ill, poor, dyslexic, and a single parent dealing with a difficult child. She doesn’t seem to have much in her life but her children, I’m not going to condemn her for not banishing him from her life. It’s not an easy thing for a mother to do.
If that’s the case, it’s sad then that he apparently doesn’t seem willing to return the good will and unconditional support, if he’s refusing to help them with rent. Abandoning the one person who would always have your back…
Sad and entirely predictable; we already knew he was a shitbag
I’m not going to fault a mother for standing by their child, no matter what he did.
You can stand by your child by always having room in your home for them. You can still condemn their action and say they might not know any better or something like that.
Yeah absolutely fuck Kyle Rittenhouse but Kyle lied to his mom that night about what he was up to, and the mom clearly had no intention of being a willing accomplice to murder.
Nah but she was totally down for taking him drinking with the Proud Boys.
This is mental gymnastics
His mom was with him at a bar and he was photographed throwing white power hand signs.
So maybe he drove them there but she was sure was okay with him being a piece of shit then.
Removed by mod
Smear? Just pointing out she raised a piece of shit, encouraged shitty behavior, and she doesn’t deserve sympathy that her piece of shit son isn’t supporting his piece of shit mom.
Parents are responsible for the actions of their children. She’s the reason he owned the gun.
Dude I really, really don’t like or support this dude but that’s not true. He didn’t keep it at her (his) house because he specifically knew she would not permit him to have it. She literally tried to parent, and he snuck around her by keeping it at a friend’s house.
No she literally isn’t. It was bought for him by somebody else in another city, where it was kept.
Fallacy is a fault in logic, not a falsehood.
Post hoc ergo propter hoc (after it therefore because of it) is a fallacy. Or an appeal to authority is a fallacy.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fallacy
a false or mistaken idea
You’re thinking specifically of logical fallacies.
She didn’t drive him there. It’s been factually proven. Dudes a fucking murderer for sure, but his mom didn’t drive him to kill people. He did that shit on his own.
Correct me if I’m wrong but I thought Kyle lied to her about everything he was doing that night.
He did. The gun was never in her home, she couldn’t do anything about it. It was locked up at his friend’s house because his mother wouldn’t have permitted him to have it.
Yeah, but she’s related to him and loves him because he is her son, and we hate him, so obviously she should suffer too. Justice and empathy? Fuck that. We’re outraged and out for some suffering.
No, she should have social supports, education, a safety net, retirement and security. The exact things people like her piece of shit brother actively try to deny others all the time. Society tried to help this person.
Now on an individual level before I would ever help her, I’d want to know if she ever saw a cent of Kyle’s blood money.
Says the person simping for a murderer
I don’t think you read that right tbh
You are spreading misinformation: https://apnews.com/article/fact-checking-255510715179
The spreading of that, along with medical issues, is why they are having troubles.
Did you read the rest of the thread? I already acknowledged that I was wrong about that part, but they’re saying they can’t get work because of him while still refusing to condemn him. The GoFundMe says he was “involved in a tragic shooting incident,” which is a pretty weasely way to say he killed people.
I also question that it really has anything to do with him. He’s certainly not having any issues making money, and there are a concerning number of people who consider him a hero, or at the very least aren’t bothered by what he did (see the comments on this post for a whole lot of evidence). Surely some of them are hiring.
So, here’s the thing.
He shouldn’t have gone there. Being there, being armed, there to protect property, was taken to be provocative by the people that were protesting cops shooting an unarmed man.
But the narrative that we got in the news wasn’t how things actually went down. The first person confronted him and tried to grab his rifle when he wasn’t threatening anyone. The second person that was shot had just chased Rittenhouse down and struck him with a skateboard. The third person was pointing a pistol at Rittenhouse when he was shot in the arm. Source.
Given that he was not directly threatening anyone there, it was a clear-cut case of self-defense. Yeah, I don’t like it that a shitty person walks away, but he walked because he wasn’t guilty of a crime in defending himself. Is he still a right-wing shitstain that’s supposedly too dumb to get into the military? Yeah. But self-defense is a right for everyone.
If Kyle has money (he does, from dumbass rubes), he should help his family. Fuck this shitty little selfish murderer.
If the mom was capable of driving her child to another state
She didn’t do that.
It’s really sad how many people are still so completely ignorant of even the simplest facts of that case. Whatever your ideology declared was the truth, you just swallowed, facts and truth be damned.
Pitiful.
P.S. Self-defense isn’t murder.
P.S. Self-defense isn’t murder.
What Kyle did wasn’t self defense. I don’t give a damn what the court said, he went looking for trouble with a gun in his hand.
If a black guy knowingly strolled through a KKK meeting, without saying or doing anything other than walking, and defended himself if one of them attacked him, would you argue he gave up the right to defend himself?
That’s not how it works, goofball.
If the guy went armed into a KKK meeting, it’s pretty obvious what he’s doing. I wouldn’t have a lot of sympathy for the KKK guys, because fuck them, but it’s pretty obvious at that point that the guy is playing vigilante.
It’s also worth noting that the first two people he shot were unarmed, and everyone who was in the vicinity thought he was an active shooter.
If the guy went armed into a KKK meeting, it’s pretty obvious what he’s doing.
Nope, this analogy fails, by implying that Rittenhouse was armed in a place where being armed is an unusual thing (ironically, one of his attackers was in possession of an illegal handgun, while Rittenhouse was perfectly allowed to be in possession of the rifle he had).
Kenosha is in an open carry state. There is a reason that although Rittenhouse was obviously and visibly armed with a long rifle, nobody reacted negatively to him arriving at the protest ‘area’. He walked around with that big rifle on his person for literal hours with nobody giving a shit.
It’s obvious you either don’t live in an open carry state, and/nor do you have the empathy to understand why it was no big deal for him to be there while visibly armed. His mere presence there while armed means nothing.
Again, the first person to react negatively to him at all was a psycho who literally screamed death threats and then tried to make good on them, in response to Rittenhouse extinguishing the flaming dumpster he was trying to wheel into a gas station (wanna take a few guesses why Rosenbaum was trying to move a large flaming object to such a specific place?).
You wanna argue that putting out a fire is provocation? lmao
It’s not bear season, and a hunter doesn’t have a hunting license. He takes his gun and drives out to bear country, and starts walking around bear dens waiting for a mother bear to attack him, then he shoots her and claims self defense.
Was he justified, or did he intentionally set up a scenario where the bear was likely to feel threatened and attack him, so he’d have an excuse to shoot her?
The fact that no one gave the slightest shit about Rittenhouse’s arrival or presence (regardless of the fact that he was visibly and obviously armed) until Rosenbaum freaked out on him for putting out Rosenbaum’s dumpster fire, makes that not really the best analogy, lol.
He did literally nothing that merited the aggression upon him. Your argument is literally identical, logically, to “she was asking for it by being dressed so provocatively”.
Your argument is literally identical, logically, to “she was asking for it by being dressed so provocatively”.
It’s literally identical, logically, to “She dressed provocatively, but was carrying a revolver, and walked into a bad part of town waiting for someone to come onto her so she could shoot them.” In which case I’d be making the same argument.
Look, I want to be clear: I’m not saying he deserved to get attacked. But I also don’t believe for a second that he traveled that far, to a protest where any logical person could have guessed they’d be seen as an aggressor, and walked around for as long as he did, and wasn’t hoping he’d draw some aggression so he could “defend himself”. It’s unfortunate that it happened, and I do believe he was defending himself, but I also fully believe that it went down exactly like he was hoping it would.
The fact that he’s been riding out his celebrity status among the far right since then, I feel, supports that theory.
He can be “not guilty” and still be a piece of shit.
“She dressed provocatively, but was carrying a revolver, and walked into a bad part of town waiting for someone to come onto her so she could shoot them.” In which case I’d be making the same argument.
I like how you subtly modified the obviously implied rape attempt to “come onto her”, lol.
You also left out running away at the first sign of aggression, and then only shooting after she’s chased down and has nowhere else to go, and the attacker, who screamed “I’m going to kill you” moments before, is now trying to wrestle the gun out of her hands.
Zero chance you’d be making the same argument in an actually equivalent situation, lmao, who do you think you’re kidding?
Putting yourself in harms way hardly justifies “self defense”.
If a black guy knowingly strolled through a KKK meeting, without saying or doing anything other than walking, and defended himself if one of them attacked him, would you argue he gave up the right to defend himself?
That’s not how it works, goofball.
If a black guy went to a KKK meeting with a rifle and sat there provoking the KKK members, I’d argue he probably went there to stir up a fight. Not that I have any sympathy for KKK members or their actions.
If a black guy went to a KKK meeting with a rifle
I didn’t say he was armed, but fine, let’s have this hypothetical happen in an open carry state, same as the state where the Rittenhouse stuff happened. Meaning that, just like in Rittenhouse’s case, the fact that someone is openly armed is mundane and not a cause for concern in and of itself, at all.
and sat there provoking the KKK members
Rittenhouse provoked no one (the irony of implying he did is that he literally spent a good amount of time walking around shouting “medic! friendly!” while he was offering basic first aid to whoever wanted it, lol…pretty much the literal opposite of provocation), so your analogy becomes a false analogy, here.
I didn’t say he was armed
Rittenhouse was, so that’s what my analogy is using too.
Meaning that, just like in Rittenhouse’s case, the fact that someone is openly armed is mundane and not a cause for concern in and of itself, at all.
Someone walking around openly armed is absolutely not mundane at all. If it’s police it’s a minor cause for concern, if it’s an untrained civilian who looks underage, it’s much greater cause for concern. If he’s walking around at a protest to supposedly “protect businesses”, he’s a clear and direct danger. What the law says doesn’t change what he can do with a weapon like that, and thus what threat he poses.
Rittenhouse provoked no one
You’re unaware of the basic facts of the case. Drone video clearly showed Rittenhouse pointing his weapon at people, repeatedly. This direct threat to others is what eventually provoked Rosenbaum into trying to take his gun off him. After Rittenhouse neutralised him by shooting his pelvis, he then decided to execute him on the spot, which was well beyond self-defense. He then shot two others who believed him to be an active shooter (and he demonstrated he was by killing one of them).
You can’t expect to go to a protest, heavily armed, pointing your gun at people and expect people to be all okiedokie about that. It’s a clear provocation.
Someone walking around openly armed is absolutely not mundane at all.
In Wisconsin (because it’s legal), and particularly on that day, in that area, it is demonstrably/provably so that it was considered mundane, evidenced by the fact that although Rittenhouse was openly and visibly armed with that long rifle the entire time he was there, he received nary a second glance from anyone, much less an overtly negative response, neither when he showed up, nor when he was walking around the crowd offering water and medical assistance, for hours.
Nobody gave a shit. You can’t look at all that video and act like he was this intimidating scary presence because he was armed, when it’s obvious ZERO people freaked out over it that day.
Ironically, even his ATTACKERS didn’t give a shit, and charged at and chased him despite being, literally, SEVERELY outgunned.
Drone video clearly showed Rittenhouse pointing his weapon at people, repeatedly.
Link the full video (so fullest possible context can be seen), with timestamp(s)
This direct threat to others is what eventually provoked Rosenbaum into trying to take his gun off him.
Oh, please, this is nonsense (and frankly digusting that you’re trying to turn Rosenbaum of all people, into this heroic figure, considering all we know about him both on that day, and prior to it):
"Ryan Balch, one of the armed men patrolling the streets of downtown Kenosha along with Rittenhouse, told the court that 36-year-old Joseph Rosenbaum had appeared “aggravated” that evening and had been seen shouting “fuck you” to various protesters in the crowd.
“Every time I encountered Joseph Rosenbaum, he was hyper-aggressive and acting out in a violent manner,” Balch testified. “He was always having to be restrained by someone.”
Another witness, Richie McGinniss, testified Thursday that Rosenbaum had chased Rittenhouse into the parking lot of a car dealership and lunged for Rittenhouse’s AR-15 rifle before the teenager opened fire.
Though both Balch and McGinniss had been called to testify by the prosecution, they each emphasized that Rosenbaum had appeared to pose a threat to Rittenhouse.
But Balch said that at one point that evening, prior to the shooting, Rosenbaum had clearly grown enraged with Balch, Rittenhouse, and a third armed member of their group.
Balch testified that the other member of his group had at one point prevented Rosenbaum from lighting something on fire. Rosenbaum then began shouting at Balch and Rittenhouse when Balch tried to calm him down, according to Balch.
“When I turned around, Rosenbaum was right there in front of my face, yelling and screaming,” Balch said. “I said, ‘Back up, chill, I don’t know what your problem is.’ He goes, ‘I catch any of you guys alone tonight, I’m going to fucking kill you.’”
When Binger asked Balch to clarify that Rosenbaum’s remarks were directed at both Balch and Rittenhouse, Balch responded, “The defendant was there, so yes.”
After Rittenhouse neutralised him by shooting his pelvis, he then decided to execute him on the spot, which was well beyond self-defense.
Oh, he decided that, did he? You know that forensics confirmed Rosenbaum had his hand on the barrel when these shots were fired, don’t you? As if Rittenhouse shot once, hit Rosenbaum in the groin, and Rosenbaum INSTANTLY stopped attacking him and backed off, and then enough time passes such that it would even be possible for Rittenhouse to think ‘hm, he’s not a threat anymore, but you know what, I’ve decided I want to kill him’ and THEN shot him dead.
What a pathetic straw grasp. Laughably absurd.
He then shot two others who believed him to be an active shooter (and he demonstrated he was by killing one of them).
I like how you left out that the first of the two only got shot AFTER nailing Rittenhouse in the head with a full swing of his skateboard, and that the third only got shot after HE tried to shoot Rittenhouse with his illegally-possessed (unlike Kyle’s rifle, ironic considering how many people still accuse him of having possessed it illegally) handgun, which was literally pointed at Rittenhouse’s head when Kyle pulled the trigger and shot his arm. The fact that Kyle’s reaction time was faster is the only reason Grosskreutz didn’t succeed in his attempted murder.
Very interesting that you happened to omit every single fact that contradicts the narrative you’re trying so desperately to construct.
Unfortunately for you and your precious narrative, I’m familiar with the facts, and see right through you.
Why did you just bring in race? That was unnecessary.
It was to steelman the other person’s argument, actually. My analogy involved a situation where it was MUCH more clear that the victim was deliberately entering known ‘hostile territory’ (black guy into a KKK meeting), than the Kenosha situation was (fact is, if it wasn’t for Rosenbaum going nuts and starting the domino effect, Rittenhouse would have gone home that day conflict-free–after all, he was there for hours BEFORE Rosenbaum freaked on him, with no incident at all). Race itself is not really a factor–‘person existing in a dangerous place’ is all I’m conveying. I didn’t “bring in race”.
He showed up to a riot with a gun, he knew what was going to happen. He put himself in a situation where deadly force would just be on be on the line of justifed.
Duty to retreat includes duty to not show up. It says so much that had the people he murdered not died and instead killed him they would be able to use the same defense he did. We are creating a last man standing justice system.
A provokes B. They fight. B is murdered. A claims self-defense
provokes B. They fight. A is murdered. B claims self-defense
What does it say that the argument works both ways? No other crime operates this way.
It says so much that had the people he murdered not died and instead killed him they would be able to use the same defense he did.
LMAO no they wouldn’t! They chased Rittenhouse down as he fled! No jury on Earth would consider what they did self-defense, you’re completely out of your mind.
He showed up to a riot with a gun, he knew what was going to happen.
‘She was walking around with a skimpy outfit, she knew what was going to happen.’
Victim blaming. Wisconsin is an open carry state.
What does it say that the argument works both ways?
Loaded question; it DOESN’T work both ways, especially not when there is only one aggressor.
it should be noted that afaik, nobody has died from BLM protestors so a “fear of dying” in the encounter should indicate a deeply troubled mind. So a competent prosecuter could probably have convinced a jury that Kyle’s fears were largely irrational and could have probably stuck manslaughter charges on him.
After all, if you start marching around with a gun in front of your neighbor’s house then shoot him when he approaches you yelling to get off his sidewalk or whatever, its a bit insane, if not premeditated.
LMAO no they wouldn’t! They chased Rittenhouse down as he fled! No jury on Earth would consider what they did self-defense, you’re completely out of your mind.
Personal attacks. And of course they chased down the guy waving a gun around.
She was walking around with a skimpy outfit, she knew what was going to happen.’
False analogy. Rape is never justified, stopping a gunman is.
Wisconsin is an open carry state.
What might technically be lawful is not always sensible.
Loaded question; it DOESN’T work both ways, especially not when there is only one aggressor.
Showing up to a riot with a gun is aggressive by its nature. Just like if I stood with a gun in front of your house at all hours.
- He didn’t “wave a gun around”
- attacking someone unprovoked just because they are armed, especially when legally so, is ALSO never justified
- existing while armed is not intrinsically aggressive/provocative, no matter how much you insist it is. Rittenhouse did literally nothing that even remotely merited the murder attempted on him thrice that day.
I saw the video. He waved a gun around.
Waving a gun around is always provoking.
Waving a gun around is intrinsically aggressive and provocative, no matter how much you insist that it isn’t. Rittenhouse did literally everything wrong that merited the disarming attempt on him thrice that day.
I saw the video. He waved a gun around.
Timestamped link, please.
It’s amazing how you can convince some people that you aren’t responsible for your actions when you totally were.
Kyle Rittenhouse learning that his family is struggling.
That’s actually him learning that one of the people he shot at survived. Just a reminder, this shithead crossed state lines to dump gas on the fire of a protest and riot caused by disgusting, racially motivated circumstances.
He wanted to kill some people that night, so he brought a big gun. His success resulted in a lot of free money from the folks that want everyone else struggling to survive without violating a ten commandment to go hungry.
Just a reminder, this shithead crossed state lines to dump gas on the fire of a protest
The “crossed state lines” thing really irks me because does nobody know that maps exist? I’m thinking about crossing state lines today because I need to get more baby wipes. Shithead went to the next town over, which just so happened to be in a different state.
But let’s also not forget he went and partied with KKK members immediately after posting his crowdfunded bail, just in case there’s any questions on how much of a shithead he is
The straw purchase of the murder weapon the judge shrugged and tossed on a whim is something that can land you in jail for 10 years.
There was a parallel case to Rittenhouse: Andrew Coffee IV. He was acquitted in his case but the charge of his weapon possession is what got him 10 years.
But Rittenhouse’s judge figured hey, NBD, and everybody clapped.
I’ve lived in the edge of a state before. It’s really hard to miss what side of the populated area is one state or another, and the fact that there are laws about crossing. I knew if I went shooting in CA I needed to keep my ammunition and firearm in seperate compartments, unloaded, and that I couldn’t have friends buy me a gun to take across if I couldn’t legally buy it myself. And I was just shooting clay pigeons, not my racially hated neighbors.
I sure as hell know which side of the state border my town is on is the one where I don’t want to be caught with weed in my car.
He’s a prick but everyone he shot was the same race as him.
I’m sure that disappointed him deeply, the blatant racism isn’t erased by this. He’s publicly linked himself to well known racists, he’s not shy about it, also he clearly went in the hopes of killing black people, pretty sure he said as much before he left.
I’m not arguing that he isn’t racist. Just wanted to make sure you understood the situation properly so as not to spread misinformation.
Also I don’t know if you know this, but most white supremacist would be more inclined to kill ‘‘race traitors’’ before killing other races in many situations.
I’m not saying he killed who he intended to kill. I’m saying my plan was to shoot clay pigeons. His plan was to shoot BLM protestors.
you think they don’t covet their neighbors wives, take the lord’s name in vain, worship false idols/put other gods before “him” and don’t steal?
But who actually cares? Stop talking about this useless waste of life.
Is it possible that maybe he’s a piece of shit?
I mean, maybe? But other than wild speculation, is there any evidence?
Fucking /s because those of you that don’t get it are dumb enough to think The Boys got all anti-you all of a sudden too.
Dude, you absolutely need the /s on this one. There are people who authentically say this. And they read your comment thinking you and the upvoters all support that same belief too
Done.
Ty
Personally I can’t believe he’s crying about 4 downvotes. lol
No evidence whatsoever. None.
But other than wild speculation, is there any evidence?
He did drive up to Ohio to shoot people.
those of you that don’t get it are dumb
I wish I didn’t know people who would say that shit entirely unironically.
Not defending him, but it was Wisconsin, in a city less than 30 minutes from where he lived, barely across state lines.
This case is fucked in so many ways, and it’s even worse because nobody remembers any of the details right.
lmao you don’t even have the state right.
He went there to shoot people
Yeah, that’s why he showed up and did zero non-benevolent things for hours, and then when a maniac literally screamed a death threat at him (in response to Rittenhouse putting out a dumpster fire he started), his immediate reaction was to run away.
Literally the only people shot by Rittenhouse that day were people who tried to kill him, and then DIDN’T LET HIM run away when he tried to flee, which was his consistent first reaction to all aggression directed at him. Everyone who got shot CHASED him when he fled, cornered him, and then tried to murder him, forcing him to use his weapon to save his own life.
Those are the facts.
I’m glad I don’t know anyone dumb enough to unironically claim he intended to shoot people. There is so much publicly available evidence, it’s frankly secondhand embarrassing to see, even online.
Unless everyone after the first shooting had all that context, they were just standing their ground against a murdering fuck stick
Yes they would have been justified if their impression was right, but it wasn’t
According to you and Kyle anyway.
and the jury
they were just standing their ground
Literally the opposite of the truth, lmao. They didn’t “stand their ground”, they CHASED Kyle as he ran away! And that was after they accosted him while he was running TOWARD the police line, to report what happened with the first attacker.
Only alternative facts
No no, see he shot a registered sex offender (which he couldn’t have possibly known at the time)!
And even if he did know it, vigilante justice is not a route society should go down.
Well you see, that guy was trying to kill him
Or was he trying to keep the kid pointing the rifle at the peaceful protesters from shooting them?
The problem is, we will never know now.
the kid pointing the rifle at the peaceful protesters
Literally a lie, lol.
There is video, you cretins, stop making claims directly contradicted by the evidence.
How do you know it is “literally a lie?” Because all the footage I’ve seen starts with him already being chased.
Let’s see this video of what he was doing directly before the chase started.
all the footage I’ve seen starts with him already being chased.
Look harder.
Sorry, I’m not here to prove you right. That’s your job.
“That guy” being Rittenhouse who specifically went there with a firearm with the intention to stir up shit? He was absolutely hoping he’d get to murder someone, and surprise surpise – he did exactly that
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
The little fascist went to a counter protest with a rifle as an agitator. He was looking for a reason to use that gun, and definitely manufactured the exact thing he was looking for. Don’t be such an utter dipshit.
Removed by mod
You do know that going to a protest with a rifle is a provocation, right?
Dude READ THIS and delete your dumb shit.
But he wasn’t.
I think you might be onto something there.
Kyle Rittenhouse’s sister Faith is seeking $3,000 on a crowdfunding website in a bid to prevent the eviction of herself and her mother Wendy from their home, citing her “brother’s unwillingness to provide or contribute to our family.”
The piece of shit is being a total piece of shit? shocked pikachu
While shitty, what does him helping them financially have to do with anything? He shouldn’t be responsible for them. There are many people in the US in worse situations, and they don’t get special treatment because, I guess, they aren’t family with a famous murderer.
well yeah, but like, if you get free money from people for shooting some guy at a protest, the least you could do is share some of that money with your family.
What makes you think this bastard comprehends the concept of empathy?
Aaaaand now we’re back at the piece of shit acting like a piece of shit.
Bro djd you not see how torn up he was at the trial? He’s , like, the most empathetic person on earth.
Share it wider: “it takes a village to raise a vigilante” or at least to look the other way.
It takes a vigilante to raze a village? That other way?
I’m imagining the family from Million Dollar Baby walking in from Disney World going “What do you mean you ain’t got any more of that shootin’ people money??”
Most of us struggle month to month, most of us dont attempt to leech blood money to unburden our struggle. Most of us don’t run to the media to cry about how our murderthing fascist familial connection isn’t letting us leech their blood money.
If I was Kyle Rittenhouse, I wouldn’t give a single dime to the people who created Kyle Rittenhouse. They created an unlovable twerp, they shouldn’t profit from that.
In this case (according to the donation page), he is part of the reason they are in this mess, as his mom is unable to find employment since everyone thinks she drove him to the protest where he shot those people.
Although that sucks, I can’t blame people for naturally putting some fault on her even for the wrong reasons.
I don’t think she should struggle but she did raise him. The punishment doesn’t fit the crime but imo parents should take responsibility of raising shitty kids.
Sounds like the town knows something we don’t or are they just punking this woman on a trust me bro.
Funny how society will act like this here but then we have Cathlic pedos living in the community and nothing happens.
People as a community have some weird sense of morals
I don’t think I would want anything to do with her either. It’s not fully rational or fair but it’s the way it is. Her position as his mom means she pretty much has to defend her son’s multiple murder and there are 8 billion people on earth, I don’t have to spend a minute with someone who would do that.
Plus if I was going to hire her I would wonder how much crap this is going to cost me. It’s not a heavily populated area and the name is rare enough. At best she is going to be neutral at worst she is going to attract the kind of people I don’t want around or infuriate other people.
I am a parent myself. If you don’t like my kids I don’t like you.
How do you feel about people who feel neutral about your kids?
Umm what does that even mean? How can anyone feel neutral to another human being? All I am picturing is you know someone exists but any amount of pain or pleasure they feel doesn’t impact you. Like if you could push a magic button to make them happy you wouldn’t bother since that would require effort and you are neutral.
I don’t know any people who are wired this way.
Umm what does that even mean? How can anyone feel neutral to another human being?
I just meant indifferent really.
All I am picturing is you know someone exists but any amount of pain or pleasure they feel doesn’t impact you.
There are a lot of people that currently exist and are in pain but it has little to no impact on me even though providing help would require nothing more than some more time and manpower.
Like if you could push a magic button to make them happy you wouldn’t bother since that would require effort and you are neutral.
This, I think provides for an interesting thought-experiment. Do we know how long it takes to press a button? Is the button-press speed limited by the latency of the circuitry it’s connected to? Exactly how many people are currently in pain? It’s obviously lots but can we come up with a relatively specific number? With what frequency does the number of suffering people change?
Then there are also some questions with more relative ethical implications that might also be: How many hours a week should a person spend pressing this button? How many people should press this button? If all previously suffering people are getting their buttons pressed then how will we know when someone is happy and flourishing? Isn’t suffering an implied opposite of flourishing? What other implications of the anti-suffering button are there?
I don’t know the answer to these questions, but you have certainly given me lot’s to ponder.
[edit][post] On further research I guess this sounds kind of like Negative Ultilitarianism which appears to be a subset of Utilitarianism.
Most people who aren’t conservative psychopaths actually like their families and want to help them when they can.
they’re trying to get libs who hate kyle to help
Agreed.
We know that we are not the only family struggling to rebuild after that fateful night
And look at the struggles his sister is going through. Profound tone-deafness is a real wipepo problem, a syndrome second only to affluenza in terms of collateral damage and suffering.
She needs help! Hit up your friends; especially the strong ones who like pizza and beer. Dig deep for those truck keys and clear the calendars for next weekend so you can help … move.
It’s his mom, Jesus dude.
Yeah, and we shouldn’t pity them because they have an asshole son. Sure, it’d be the right thing for him to do if he were a good person, but him not taking financial responsibility for them doesn’t mean anyone else should be either. I’d much rather them help someone else.
It’s his mom. What is wrong with you people? Me and my mom have a shit relationship but if I crippled her ability to work or she was going to be out on the street I would send her cash. Me and my wife send her parents money each month. It is a very small price to pay for giving me my partner.
They’re asking for money from other people. Yes, he should give them money. He is profiting off of murder. He’s an asshole. Why should anyone else give them money though? I don’t pity them. The mom raised an asshole murderer. Maybe it’s not her fault, but she has to have some responsibility in it.
Tbf, maybe we shouldn’t vilify them because of the actions of their son/brother so bad that they can’t be employed. I don’t hire people but the only reason not to would be the negative publicity from hiring them from people like those in this thread, I doubt if you gave his mom a job she’ll show up and shoot someone every morning.
Another “family values” type doesn’t seem to give a shit about his own family. Bet he has strong opinions on abortion though.
I don’t think he ever said anything about family values
Isn’t the right all about “family values?” Being “good” christians and whatnot? It goes with the territory.
You’re just mindlessly pigeonholing. You may be right, but it’s childish black and white thinking.
There are plenty of right wing atheists…
what? there are plenty of right-wing atheists, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, etc
So, you a bot? You replied twice and neither make sense if you read my comment…
Yeah you a bot.
So much down votes but zero rebuttal…
It seems facts hurt some people around here. Really wouldn’t want them getting in the way of a good circle jerk.
Kyle Murderhouse is a far right pos. The far right constantly cries about family values.
reply said, “I don’t think” as in they don’t actually know. Something like a cited source might help and receive actual conversation or else it’s just fluff much like your conjecture. It’s easy to assume his “family values” from the rightwing conservative aspect and being a member of the “Proud boys” and all. But please, continue the inner circle jerk you’ve started.
It’s easy to assume his “family values”
Thanks, champ!
This summarized the entire thread lol
Something like a cited source might help and receive actual conversation
what. you’re asking me to give a source for a negative. do you expect me to chronicle every word he’s ever said to show he never said the words family values. will you do the same to confirm what I said?
being a member of the “Proud boys”
this statement is untrue and I do have a source for it, or as best as you can get for proving a negative.
Everyone’s favorite game show: Child, Senior, or Foreign Agent?
You really posted a nexstar/Mission Media article as a source to defend a right wing ignoramus. It’s like poetry. Get a shred of media literacy, please.
The author of the article really doesn’t matter when the quote is true…
The author of the article really doesn’t matter when the quote is true…
why does this kid look like a toilet seat
Huh. It’s almost like he’s a really shitty person or something. They can’t possibly be surprised.
What does the lesbian chick in the photo have to do with this Kyle guy or his family?
Haha. You’re my people. For real.
Wow it’s almost like Kyle Rittenhouse might be a piece of shit.
Welfare republicans.
That’s redundant
Tabloid News. Who gives a damn about this guys family?
Supply Side Jesus says they should just lift themselves up by their bootstraps.
Don’t they know if he gives them a handout it will create a dependency /s.
