2592
Comments (228)
sorted by:
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
27
Basard 27 points ago +28 / -1

There were some pretty detailed photos as well.

11
unclebobinator 11 points ago +13 / -2

And the defense could argue there are pretty detailed replicas out there as well. Which there are. You really expect them to convince a jury beyond a reasonable doubt based off this evidence alone? Even I wouldn't convict him if that charge based on only that evidence. And I'm one of the people that are disappointed that Kyle misses and merely hit him in the arm. From what we know, the evidence just isn't there that would lead to a conviction beyond a reasonable doubt.

27
ontothefuture 27 points ago +28 / -1

If you point a 'replica' at someone with a loaded rifle you are a special kind of stupid.

25
Husky 25 points ago +25 / -0

If you point a replica at someone it's legally no different than pointing a real gun at them.

3
FetchQuestTroll 3 points ago +3 / -0

this is the crux of it -- did Kyle Rittenhouse reasonably believe his life was in immediate danger?

-4
unclebobinator -4 points ago +2 / -6

No shit. But in terms of the law they obviously can't prove it was an actual gun.

No proof of an actual gun means it likely being an acquital, if he even gets charged. Which he hasn't.

5
Finnsforgeotus 5 points ago +5 / -0

lol thats why he should have killed him, the law is much friendlier on fake guns and dead men.

4
PieceOfParchment7 4 points ago +5 / -1

Brandishing a replica is illegal too.

0
OhNoes 0 points ago +2 / -2

He was involved while others died.

Charge him with two murders

4
CuomoisaMassMurderer 4 points ago +5 / -1

Slot machine said he wished he emptied his weapon into Kyle. This removes all doubt. You also see slot machine taking it out of his waistband over the course of a long haul. You wouldn't do that with a replica.