Sure, but the goofball got attacked in a dangerous environment, initially by a very aggressive bad guy (Rosenbaum). He might have been chosen for attack by the bully precisely because he seemed weak and inexperienced. If no one had attacked him, there wouldn't have been any loss of life.raison de arizona wrote: ↑Thu Feb 02, 2023 3:52 pmA goofball with an assault weapon that killed two people and permanently maimed another?andersweinstein wrote: ↑Thu Feb 02, 2023 3:49 pm Yeah I think it's a mistake to think of Rittenhouse as a racist or white supremacist. He was just a goofball. Very often, when you look a little more deeply into the facts, you discover that cases are full of idiosyncratic quirks and oddities and contingencies and don't conform to facile stereotypes.
Doesn't seem so goofy to me.
Stripped of all the irrelevance, what you had in this case started with a vicious bad guy attacking a decent kid without any provocation. When criminal bastards like Rosenbaum attack decent folk without provocation, I don't blame the victim, I blame the criminal. It was reasonable for him to use his gun in self-defense.
After that you had a bad, confused situation, sure. But it all derives from Rosenbaum's unprovoked aggression. He wasn't even there out of any concern for Black lives.