Kyle Rittenhouse abruptly departed the stage during an appearance at the University of Memphis on Wednesday, after he was confronted about comments made by Turning Point USA founder and president Charlie Kirk.

Rittenhouse was invited by the college’s Turning Point USA chapter to speak at the campus. However, the event was met with backlash from a number of students who objected to Rittenhouse’s presence.

The 21-year-old gained notoriety in August 2020 when, at the age of 17, he shot and killed two men—Joseph Rosenbaum, 36, and Anthony Huber, 26, as well as injuring 26-year-old Gaige Grosskreutz—at a protest in Kenosha, Wisconsin.

He said the three shootings, carried out with a semi-automatic AR-15-style firearm, were in self-defense. The Black Lives Matter (BLM) protest where the shootings took place was held after Jacob Blake, a Black man, was left paralyzed from the waist down after he was shot by a white police officer.

  • Flax
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    17
    ·
    8 months ago

    He was being beaten with a skateboard, wasn’t he?

      • Flax
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        10
        ·
        8 months ago

        Yeah, but the shots were in self defence, even though he shouldn’t have been there

        • CileTheSane@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          14
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          8 months ago

          So back to my comment:
          He can go there, with his gun, to potentially take lives to protect property.
          This is because the protestors are not allowed to damage property to protect lives.

          • Flax
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            8 months ago

            That’s America for you

            • CileTheSane@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              8 months ago

              What live are people protecting

              From the article:

              The Black Lives Matter (BLM) protest where the shootings took place was held after Jacob Blake, a Black man, was left paralyzed from the waist down after he was shot by a white police officer.

              When the state treats a group of people’s lives as less important than property, people are going to react to that.

              Or by punching an old man in the face that had a fire extinguisher

              I watched the video, the man was using the fire extinguisher on people, how would you respond if someone was using a fire extinguisher on you?

              • Samueru@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                edit-2
                8 months ago

                The Black Lives Matter (BLM) protest where the shootings took place was held after Jacob Blake, a Black man, was left paralyzed from the waist down after he was shot by a white police officer.

                You really think those people were BLM protester?! Do you think this guy is also a BLM protester?

                https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N70fok1R2Kg

                When the state treats a group of people’s lives as less important than property, people are going to react to that.

                Nvm that they were “protesting” the shooting of Jacob Blake which was 100% justified as it turned out the dude was abusing his girlfriend and pulled a knife on the police when they tried to arrest him.

                how would you respond if someone was using a fire extinguisher on you?

                The guy that hit him was some random person on shorts, they weren’t even being sprayed on by the fire extinguisher lmao

                But if you still want the answer no, I would not hit an old person because they used a fire extinguisher on me, I wouldn’t even fucking be looting and burning a random store to begin with.

                • CileTheSane@lemmy.ca
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  8 months ago

                  the shooting of Jacob Blake which was 100% justified as it turned out the dude was abusing his girlfriend and pulled a knife on the police when they tried to arrest him.

                  And the legal punishment for that is losing your legs? Cops in the UK take down assailants with knives all the time without paralyzing them for life. If they then had a jury sentence them to have their legs cut off people would call it barbaric, but again, put them in front of an American cop and “they had it coming.”

                  I would not hit an old person because they used a fire extinguisher on me

                  Old man or no, he was assaulting people with a fire extinguisher and got assaulted in return. Why didn’t he “have it coming”?

                  I wouldn’t even fucking be looting and burning a random store to begin with.

                  Oh right, because property is the most important thing and the property was in danger. “Won’t somebody please think of the property?!”

                  • Samueru@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    8 months ago

                    And the legal punishment for that is losing your legs? Cops in the UK take down assailants with knives all the time without paralyzing them for life. If they then had a jury sentence them to have their legs cut off people would call it barbaric, but again, put them in front of an American cop and “they had it coming.”

                    Poor guy. Also you’re starting in a very bad place if you are comparing US cops to UK cops, US cops constantly shoot people armed with knives and no one goes around “protesting” because of it, this case was because a very short video of only the shooting were the knife could barely even be seen was posted on twitter and misinformation about it spreaded instantly.

                    Old man or no, he was assaulting people with a fire extinguisher and got assaulted in return. Why didn’t he “have it coming”?

                    Oh right, because property is the most important thing and the property was in danger. “Won’t somebody please think of the property?!”

                    Insane that you would defend such person that would sucker punched an old guy. While at the same fucking time having a problem that kyle defended themselves from being attacked. amazing.

                    Also I don’t know what drama you have with property when the people that were killed were killed because they attacked someone that was armed. So yeah stop whining about that.

            • meowMix2525@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              8 months ago

              What business is this guy protecting by chasing people around outside of it with a fire extinguisher as they’re leaving the business? The damage was already done at that point, there was no reason to continue escalating things further. When you put yourself in dangerous situations and personally decide to escalate them, you really can’t be surprised if you get hurt when things escalate. Mess with the bull, get the horns.

                • CileTheSane@lemmy.ca
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  8 months ago

                  get mad when they attacked rittenhouse and found out.

                  So people attack Rittenhouse and he shoots them in retaliation - perfectly acceptable
                  This guy attacks people with a fire extinguisher and gets punched in retaliation - Completely unacceptable

                  • Samueru@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    8 months ago

                    So people attack Rittenhouse and he shoots them in retaliation - perfectly acceptable

                    Yeah, if some psycho comes running to grab my weapon, you have every right to defend yourself, people willing to attack you even when you are armed are willing to do a lot of harm to you.

                    And in the second case they already began beating him up, including a jump kick to the head which is miracle they didn’t pass out from that. And the other person pointed their gun at them (yeah turns out also those people were armed).

                    This guy attacks people with a fire extinguisher and gets punched in retaliation - Completely unacceptable

                    Yes, because they worked at that place and it fucking sucks that people would come to it to burn it, and more importantly the person that sucker punched them wasn’t even being sprayed by the fire extinguisher, they were just mad that an old guy ruined his looting/arson fun.

                    Also if the old guy had had a weapon and shot and killed the person that sucker punched them they would have walked away in any state, no fucking jury ever would convict such person and for a very good reason lmao.

          • ZK686@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            25
            ·
            8 months ago

            WTF are you smoking? The dudes ATTACKED HIM FIRST… damn man…seems like you guys just insist on ignoring the facts.

            • CileTheSane@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              8
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              8 months ago

              Reading comprehension dude: WHY DID HE GO THERE WITH HIS GUN? What did he think he was going to do with it? He thought to himself “Some stranger’s property might be damaged” and went there, with his gun, to protect property he had no actual connection with. Because the property of strangers is more important than the lives of strangers.

    • ZK686@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      22
      ·
      8 months ago

      Yea, but you’re on Redd…I mean, Lemmy… so, the looters, arsonists and burglars get a pass…

      • CileTheSane@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        Right, because property is more important than people.

        Your only way of disparaging these people is “they were damaging property!” Which last I checked did not carry the death sentence.
        Put them in front of a jury and a death sentence would be monstrous, put them in front of a vigilante and “they had it coming for stealing!”

        • ZK686@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          9
          ·
          8 months ago

          “Property is more important than people” is a phrase being thrown around by the Left to try and make the Rittenhouse situation into something it isn’t. He didn’t go there to kill anyone. He went there to help defend stores, like 1000’s of others did throughout the country (remember during the LA riots, Koreans sitting on top of their stores with guns? Were they horrible because they cared about their belongings?). He was attacked by some low lives who fucked around and found out.

          • CileTheSane@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            8 months ago

            He went there to help defend stores

            And how was he going to defend the stores? With a gun. Anyone who knows anything about guns will tell you: you do not point a gun at a target you don’t intend to kill.

            So he went there to shoot people in order to protect property that wasn’t even his and he had no connection to.