• AnyOldName3@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    It’s not self-defence to shoot people if the only reason they’re approaching you is that you pointed a gun at them or someone else and they’re attempting to disarm you because it appears that you’re about to shoot someone or just shot someone. Otherwise anyone with a firearm can just point it at whoever and if they react at all, have free reign to shoot them. In fact, it’s illegal to point a gun at someone else in the first place unless they’re already attacking you (or in some states have entered your property), and Rittenhouse pointing a gun at someone else was the trigger for the whole incident. If he’d been charged for pointing a gun at people, then the second-degree murder charge would have stuck, as self defence isn’t a defence against second-degree murder (otherwise a home invader could claim self defence if they shot the homeowner when confronted).

    • ryathal@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      The only time he pointed his gun at them was after they pursued him. One of them also had a gun pointed at him. He attempted to retreat which means the attackers were in the wrong.

      • AnyOldName3@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        4 months ago

        He had already shot someone before the other person with a gun drew it and pointed it at him. You have not seen the unedited video from the beginning, or have forgotten what it showed.