The ongoing case against Kyle Rittenhouse has received some bad reviews. Since the horrifying video footage of Rittenhouse’s shootings on the night of the Kenosha Riots over one year ago, the then-17-year old has become a hot topic. If you’ve been living under a rock, Rittenhouse was in Kenosha that night looking to help administer first aid to anyone who may be injured by the rioting that later did over 50 million dollars in damage. Rittenhouse was also carrying an AR-15 that he had been loaned by another person to patrol the streets. Rittenhouse fled after receiving threats from one individual. Rittenhouse realized that this man was a danger to himself and his gun, so Rittenhouse shot the man to death. As Rittenhouse fled, attempting to reach the police line a few blocks away, he was pursued by several others, including one man who attempted to hit Rittenhouse with a skateboard and then attempting to grab Rittenhouse’s gun which caused Rittenhouse to shoot that man, killing him instantly. Rittenhouse opened fire on another man, who was holding a gun, and hit him in the arm. Rittenhouse made it through to the police and finally to his home. Rittenhouse later surrendered himself to police.
The left vilified Rittenhouse as a white supremacist, who appeared at protests looking for victims, over the next weeks and months. Without any evidence, they believe Rittenhouse killed those he wanted to kill that night. Nevermind the multiple videos from several different angles, including those that showed that Rittenhouse only shot as many shots as were necessary to eliminate the threat; This kid was the personification of everything wrong with America… guns, whiteness, masculinity, and of course, anything that opposes the left’s violence.
The scene is Charlottesville. Imagine white supremacists fighting with counter-protesters. Except that there’s a young black man offering assistance to any person in need. He is carrying a Glock43. Open carry in Virginia is legal if the owner is 18 or older. Gun laws in Virginia are quite different. Our young man, who is now 18 years old, has been licensed to carry the firearm. One white supremacist attacked the child during the night. He was immediately killed. The white supremacist tries to strike the child with his tiki torch, then grabs his gun. This causes the young black man in the scene to fire and kill the other white supremacist. Another white supremacist tries to grab his gun and then the kid flees. The young black man fires again, disarming him.
Now tell me the left wouldn’t be emphatically supporting him. Conservatives also need to support this kid, in truth. If we’re honest, would we believe that conservatives would be as enthusiastic about Rittenhouse in supporting this child? One white supremacist killed and injured many people by running down others with his car. Was it possible for conservatives to reject this? Hardly.
It is clear that we understand why the left would want to unite around an issue which involves a gun. When it comes down to the left, principle is more important than winning over the right or scoring political points. When gun crime in liberal cities is brought up in the gun law debate, they ignore it or deflect from it, not because they aren’t opposed to those killings, but because they have no answer to the fact that gun laws failed to stop any of those shootings. Even with these problems, it is still possible to see where the left might defend a young black boy who takes deadly action using a firearm.
Why is Rittenhouse hated so strongly by the left? Let’s forget about all the white supremacy hyperbole and other such things. Why do they want him to be convicted of murder when the facts of his case clearly show that it was self defense? You know why. It wasn’t the fact that Rittenhouse was white. It wasn’t the fact that he was there, presumably in opposition to the riots.
Rittenhouse carried the same gun. The fact that the gun provided answers was a demonstration of how the left is always asking:
What is the point of an AR-15?
Rittenhouse was able to dispatch three threats in a matter of minutes without causing any harm to anyone around him. Rittenhouse, a 17 year old boy, used an indiscriminate weapons of war. They would love to call it an indiscriminate weapon. Rittenhouse should, based on their understanding of firearms, have been seen shooting all around and striking only innocent victims. But that wasn’t the case. The majority of Rittenhouse’s shots hit their intended targets. He wasn’t being thrown all over the place by the kick of the gun and he was calm and precise using the weapon. There weren’t coke-can-sized holes in people and mass casualties. The trail they believed would leave was actually far less than what it appeared.
The meaning was more important than the image. Why would someone use an AR-15? It’s exactly this situation. You may require that weapon in order to defend yourself or your loved ones if society and the world collapse around you. While you will ultimately decide what firearm to use, an AR-15 or other tactical/sport rifles can be useful in such situations.
That’s what the left absolutely hates about this. They desired carnage. They wanted to be in a position to say that this was exactly why nobody ever uses an AR-15. They didn’t get that though. They were looking for a conversation piece. They were looking for a Sandy Hook club or Pulse nightclub. They were expecting a chainsaw. Instead, we found a scalpel. It was not a scalpel that had been placed in the hand of a skilled surgeon. He was a 17-year-old boy, and the gun wasn’t even his. That… That right there is why they hate Kyle. Because Kyle showed everyone why an AR-15 might be necessary, they hate Kyle.
About Post Author
