Now imagine you're an Antifa loser telling QRV how much we should love this retard despite the fact the above is illegal just because he killed some people we don't like. This is a non-violent movement, Kyle is a retard for crossing state lines to go to a riot with a weapon.
High IQ Version
Stickied because fuck you, I can see what you retards are doing. All these comments about how shooting his aggressors was justified. You are right, he would be dead if he did not shoot, but the problem you are happily overlooking is the fact he did not belong there in the first place. The fact he showed up with a group that was denied being deputized by the sheriff and then had to defend himself is not helping his case not look like this outcome was premeditated by him or the influence of the group he was with. Speaking of the group he was with, who the fuck encourages a 17 year old to bring a rifle to a riot zone?
view the rest of the comments →
25355825? ago
If a reasonable person under attack believes that he is in danger of death or grave bodily harm, then the use of lethal force for self defense is justified.
25355859? ago
Not if that person knowingly puts themselves in a dangerous situation. Not if that person traveled across state lines with intent to be deputized with a group of armed people. Doesn't look like self defense at all, it looks like this outcome was the intent all along.
25356339? ago
I've heard/read this narrative about knowing his "intent" all over the internet, but have yet to see the source of this knowledge of his intentions. Do you have information that backs up this rather important detail?
The transport of the gun across state lines appears to be legally questionable, but let's not pretend that implies anything other than what it is.
It is entirely plausible that he went there to help business owners protect their property, as earlier interviews indicate, got attacked by what sure seems to look like a violent mob, and defended himself quite capably.
The law doesn't care so much about why he was there, and I don't think it would take much of a lawyer to prove self-defense from what the videos show.
What legal precedent do you cite that makes it illegal for someone to defend themselves no matter the circumstances? The right to defend oneself is the primary natural right of all people in America. It is absolute and doesn't come with a caveat that says "unless you made a possibly bad choice that put you in harm's way".
I don't consider him a hero or a villain at this point, but the mental gymnastics needed to try to take away the right to self-defense is....... interesting.