Hacker News Reader

Comment by hbn | Hacker News Reader

Ask around and be horrified as to how many people confidently think Kyle Rittenhouse shot one or more people who were

1. unarmed 2. black

(edit: I see now someone made the above point a few minutes before i finished typing my message, but I suppose that goes to show how widespread this myth is)

Conservatives get the brunt of blame for "conspiracy theories" and "disinformation" these days, and while I won't deny it doesn't happen (like it has for years), the left has just as much, if not more that I hear every day, but they never realize or take accountability for it because they have the popular narrative that runs all major corporations and the greater internet.

View on HN

What's really horrifying is how many people seem unaware that the people he shot were under the impression that they were trying to stop an active shooter. You know, do that good-guy-with-a-gun thing, while acting on initially (but not eventually) incorrect information.

It's quite likely that if he were the one gunned down, and not the other way around, the people who did so would have walked, too.

I've seen the video, there was an angry mob of like 20 guys chasing him down and assaulting him

That’s what you’re supposed to do when a gunman is trying to kill you

> the people he shot were under the impression that they were trying to stop an active shooter.

I'm still unaware of that. Do you have a reference?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kenosha_unrest_shooting#Second...

At this point in time, shots had been fired, Rittenhouse shot and killed a man, and was identified by the crowd as an active shooter. Huber was trying to disarm Rittenhouse, when he was shot and killed. This happened in front of Grosskreutz, who at this point had every reason to believe that Rittenhouse was an active shooter (And was then shot and injured by Rittenhouse).

Since in an active shooter situation, both the 'good guy with a gun' and 'the good guy without a gun' can't sit around and wait for eight months for a jury trial to find the active shooter to actually be innocent, both Huber and Grosskreutz reacted rather reasonably.

It seems to me that legally, nobody, except maybe Rosenbaum (Who was dead by the time of the events of the second confrontation) was in the wrong in that whole situation. It's all 'good guys with a gun' shooting at eachother because sweet fuckin' Jesus, nobody ever has all the facts about who was justified about killing whom when there's a public gunfight happening.

I thought you were saying that he was initially chased and attacked because the (first) person he shot thought he was an active shooter.

You're saying that after he was an active shooter, people were chasing him because they thought he was an active shooter? If so, I don't think that no one knows this, I think no one cares.

-----

edit: The statement you made was "the people [Rittenhouse] shot were under the impression that they were trying to stop an active shooter." I asked for a reference. You begin and end the reply to that request by saying that the first person he shot wasn't under the impression he was an active shooter.

My problem is the deception. I am a proud left-winger, and I think Quillette is trash. I'm disturbed that people are intentionally trying to cloud the facts about issues to score political points. When you say that the people Rittenhouse shot were under the impression that he was an active shooter, and somebody looks that up and finds out that it is untrue, they'll think that people who hold the same opinions as you are liars. That affects me, and the things that I believe in.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com