• null
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    handing out water bottles, giving first aid, and putting out fires

    I wonder who he was giving water bottles and first aid to…

    Was it other people who hurt themselves while cleaning up graffiti?

    So weird that there were fires to put out and injuries to tend to at a graffiti clean-up, and then suddenly these maniacs showed up out of thin air!

    • ObjectivityIncarnate@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      I wonder who he was giving water bottles and first aid to…

      Literally whoever asked. He spent a lot of time walking around yelling “medic” and “friendly”, so that people nearby knew they could flag him down if they needed help.

      He wasn’t anti-protesting at any point. I believe during the trial it was confirmed that he administered first aid to a minimum of 8 people.

      • null
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        Why were so many people hurting themselves cleaning up graffiti? That’s wild

        • ObjectivityIncarnate@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          Not sure what point you’re trying to make. Most of the injured were rioters rioting and causing destruction and havoc to the town.

          • null
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            Sounds like the perfect place for a 17 year old kid.

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

              It was courageous of him to go to a potentially dangerous place like that just to try and undo some of the rioters’ damage. I’d rather a thousand of him be there, than any amount of the thugs who did things like burn down local businesses, and assault and injure people trying to stop them from doing so, even if it’s an elderly employee in his 70s holding nothing but a fire extinguisher.

              Also, given that friends and half his family lived there, he had more of a connection to the area than any of the violent, destructive scumbags rioting there. I can’t blame him for wanting to protect his community, especially one that the police abandoned when rioting began.

              • null
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                3 months ago

                It’s not courageous to allow and encourage a 17 year old kid to be put in a dangerous situation where he may be killed to protect some property.

                That’s a garbage take.

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

                  It is literally courageous to do good when so means putting yourself at risk. And that’s what he did. Since the moment he arrived at the area where rioting was going on, all of the evidence available shows him doing only good and altruistic things. He cleaned graffiti, he handed out water bottles, he gave first aid, he put out fires. He didn’t attack anyone, or threaten anyone, or even counter-protest. This is why nobody reacted negatively to his presence, obviously/visibly armed and all. There’s a reason no one freaked out when he showed up: because he was causing no trouble.

                  But after he’d been doing his thing for a while, he put out one particularly crazy individual’s dumpster fire. In response, he had his life verbally threatened, and soon after, literally/physically threatened, by said crazy individual.

                  Did Rittenhouse escalate or push back against that aggression? No. He fled. But the maniac did not let him run away. He chases him, and eventually cornered him. Then he lunged for Rittenhouse’s weapon. Three guesses what this man, who had literally screamed “I’m going to kill you” to Rittenhouse moments before, was planning on doing with that weapon, had he gotten a hold of it. Luckily, he was able to protect his own life from that maniac.

                  Then, he headed toward the police line to report what had happened. He said literally that when he was confronted and asked where he was going. In response, maniac 2 tried to kill him with his skateboard. He successfully struck him in the head, knocking Rittenhouse to the ground, but luckily was stopped before he could follow through with his second swing. Also luckily, the first strike didn’t kill him; a skateboard is plenty hard and heavy enough to kill someone with a fool force swing to the head.

                  Then, a third maniac pointed his illegally-possessed handgun at Rittenhouse. Rittenhouse reacted quickly and pointed his weapon at him also. In response, the maniac lowered his weapon. But it was a fake surrender, and when he thought he’d caught Rittenhouse unaware, he brought the gun back up and pointed it at his head. Luckily, Rittenhouse’s reaction time was fast enough to notice and fire first, injuring the maniac’s arm and eliminating the threat to his life. Then he immediately removed his finger from the trigger and returned to his feet, and resumed going to the police line. He reached it, and told authorities what had happened.

                  None of the above is a “take” or my opinion, it’s all established fact, in correct chronological order.

                  The only people remaining who think Rittenhouse did anything immoral or criminal on that day in Kenosha, are liars or the willfully ignorant. There is SO much evidence, up to and including video, that no other conclusion can be reasonably reached about said people.

                  • null
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    3 months ago

                    Say it with me now: 17 year old kids should not attend deadly riots.