Gaige Grosskreutz -- The Felon Shot By Kyle Rittenhouse. No Charges?

[titsonritz]

What if Gague killed Rittenhouse with his pistol and was charged with similar charges? Would self defense apply? To make it cleaner lets assume Gauge (Gage?)

FYI, the loser's name is spelled Gaige.

 

[SonicBlue03]

How about this for a thought experiment: What if Gague killed Rittenhouse with his pistol and was charged with similar charges? Would self defense apply? To make it cleaner lets assume Gauge (Gage?) didn't witness Rittenhouse shooting someone else so couldn't have made any real judgments about Rittenhouse's intent. What result? I'm not a criminal lawyer, but this scenario raises the question in my mind of whether self-defense applies if someone shoots another in a situation where two people who have no prior intent to harm each other are armed and encounter each other and both reasonably fear the other may use deadly force on them under the circumstances? I legitimately don't know the answer but I suspect it depends on nuances in the scenario that are hard to determine without eyewitness testimony.

I suppose a positive in a world of negatives is that darn near everything is captured on camera. So in this scenario from the videos out there, Rittenhouse was on his truckus and Gaige moved in toward him when Rittenhouse was unable to flee. If he killed Rittenhouse, he might potentially claim that he saw the rifle, felt in fear of his life, and took action to stop being a victim of violence. But the defense would have to explain 1) why he moved toward his downed victim who did not appear to be targeting and/or pursuing him, and 2) with that in mind, why didn't he vacate and run away? Wisconsin does not have a stand-your-ground law, and Castle wouldn't apply.

So in this case, he could possibly argue that he was out of his mind with fear, but I suspect a jury would be skeptical and throw him in prison to get his corn hole stretched out a bit.

 

[Flopsweat]

Agree, he might be a scumbag depending on what he's been convicted of. Yet this post started with the query of why this particular guy hasn't been charged with a crime because he too had a weapon. I didn't read all prior posts but there seemed to be no mention that this guy claims he was legally in possession of a firearm and apparently didn't fire it that night. If true (I suspect it'd be news if not) then we're comparing the rights of two individuals to use firearms to "protect themselves" and more dubiously "protect others [property]" Then shouldn't we be arguing about BOTH of their rights, 1st and 2nd Amendment? If we really view these folks differently then aren't those views really a political discussion about whose First and Second Amendment rights matter more: "racial justice" protesters or "law and order" or "Blue Lives Matter" counter-protesters? That then seems to be a polirical debate and not a debate about firearms or self-defense when using firearms.

How about this for a thought experiment: What if Gague killed Rittenhouse with his pistol and was charged with similar charges? Would self defense apply? To make it cleaner lets assume Gauge (Gage?) didn't witness Rittenhouse shooting someone else so couldn't have made any real judgments about Rittenhouse's intent. What result? I'm not a criminal lawyer, but this scenario raises the question in my mind of whether self-defense applies if someone shoots another in a situation where two people who have no prior intent to harm each other are armed and encounter each other and both reasonably fear the other may use deadly force on them under the circumstances? I legitimately don't know the answer but I suspect it depends on nuances in the scenario that are hard to determine without eyewitness testimony.

I'll agree that political views are not a valid disqualification to own a gun. My stance has always been that it you're not safe to own a gun you're not safe to be in society.

 

[RedRover]

 

[RVTECH]

My stance has always been that it you're not safe to own a gun you're not safe to be in society.

Just playing 'devils advocate' but how is 'not safe' with a gun to be determined?

I agree there are probably some pretty good examples of those who should NOT own a gun but take the case of the FBI agent who was in the club dancing, drops his gun and when picking it up shoots a guy in the leg.

My point being here is a guy supposedly trained and experienced in gun handling yet violates how many rules of gun safety ? He has PROVEN he is NOT safe with a gun as well as not safe in society as he shot someone due to his negligence, yet he seemed to get a 'free pass' because of his status yet is still armed and dangerous and free in society.

 

[Ura-Ki]

I suppose a positive in a world of negatives is that darn near everything is captured on camera. So in this scenario from the videos out there, Rittenhouse was on his truckus and Gaige moved in toward him when Rittenhouse was unable to flee. If he killed Rittenhouse, he might potentially claim that he saw the rifle, felt in fear of his life, and took action to stop being a victim of violence. But the defense would have to explain 1) why he moved toward his downed victim who did not appear to be targeting and/or pursuing him, and 2) with that in mind, why didn't he vacate and run away? Wisconsin does not have a stand-your-ground law, and Castle wouldn't apply.

So in this case, he could possibly argue that he was out of his mind with fear, but I suspect a jury would be skeptical and throw him in prison to get his corn hole stretched out a bit.

Don't forget, each of Kyle's shots went into dudes actively pursuing him with intent to harm or kill! Nobody chases after someone armed with an AR unless you intend to kill that person!

 

[Diamondback]

How does a FELON get a CPL?

FYI, the loser's name is spelled Gaige.

Actually, I'm pretty sure his name is now "Lefty"...

 

[SonicBlue03]

How does a FELON get a CPL?

Actually, I'm pretty sure his name is now "Lefty"...

He wasn't a felon, the crime he was convicted of was a misdemeanor. Not enough to trigger a review, I guess.

 

[MichaelH]

It sounds like you watched the wrong video. And your language suggests personal animosity toward the defendant. It seems a pretty big stretch that you could think a skateboard isn't a deadly weapon.

I've hit folks with a skareboard and been hit with a skateboard: city teenage boy right of passage. If a dude with a rifle popped up in my group of skater friends with what looked like intent to use it and there was no cover, I can imagine a similar result.

What I can't imagine is standing on a crowded city street at 17 holding a loaded rifle. Do I look like a baby soldier or a mass shooter?

 

[3MTA3]

He wasn't a felon, the crime he was convicted of was a misdemeanor. Not enough to trigger a review, I guess.

http://www.kenoshacountyeye.com/gaige.pdf

The felony burglary was later expunged though after he was found DUI
felon in possession of a firearm. As you can see a truly model grandma slapping citizen.

 

[RedRover]

I've hit folks with a skareboard and been hit with a skateboard: city teenage boy right of passage. If a dude with a rifle popped up in my group of skater friends with what looked like intent to use it and there was no cover, I can imagine a similar result.

What I can't imagine is standing on a crowded city street at 17 holding a loaded rifle. Do I look like a baby soldier or a mass shooter?

Man dies after being hit in head with skateboard during fight in Santa Ana Starbucks

A man was killed after being hit in the head with a skateboard in an act of self-defense during a fight in a Santa Ana Starbucks.

abc7.com

It's now become perfectly clear as to why your logic is so flawed. Too many hits to the head with a set of Indys.

 

[3MTA3]

I've hit folks with a skareboard and been hit with a skateboard: city teenage boy right of passage. If a dude with a rifle popped up in my group of skater friends with what looked like intent to use it and there was no cover, I can imagine a similar result.

What I can't imagine is standing on a crowded city street at 17 holding a loaded rifle. Do I look like a baby soldier or a mass shooter?

Watch the videos. He was chased and run down by a mob. Several shots were fired by the crowd before Rittenhouse was forced to defend himself.

I can see how things would have been very confusing on the ground and that Grosskreutz may have thought he was protecting others. Regardless, Rittenhouse had every right to shoot Grosskreuts to keep his head from getting bashed in.

 

[Flopsweat]

Just playing 'devils advocate' but how is 'not safe' with a gun to be determined?

I agree there are probably some pretty good examples of those who should NOT own a gun but take the case of the FBI agent who was in the club dancing, drops his gun and when picking it up shoots a guy in the leg.

My point being here is a guy supposedly trained and experienced in gun handling yet violates how many rules of gun safety ? He has PROVEN he is NOT safe with a gun as well as not safe in society as he shot someone due to his negligence, yet he seemed to get a 'free pass' because of his status yet is still armed and dangerous and free in society.

I would want the test to be more objective than subjective. If you commit more than two violent felonies we should be done trying to reform you. You can prove to us that you've reformed but otherwise you rot. If you rape or murder you don't get back out, ever. But I also believe that way too many crimes are now felonies because someone thought making the latest hot button issue more illegal would score them political points, so in my imaginary world, we'd fix that too.

 

[MichaelH]

I suppose a positive in a world of negatives is that darn near everything is captured on camera. So in this scenario from the videos out there, Rittenhouse was on his truckus and Gaige moved in toward him when Rittenhouse was unable to flee. If he killed Rittenhouse, he might potentially claim that he saw the rifle, felt in fear of his life, and took action to stop being a victim of violence. But the defense would have to explain 1) why he moved toward his downed victim who did not appear to be targeting and/or pursuing him, and 2) with that in mind, why didn't he vacate and run away? Wisconsin does not have a stand-your-ground law, and Castle wouldn't apply.

So in this case, he could possibly argue that he was out of his mind with fear, but I suspect a jury would be skeptical and throw him in prison to get his corn hole stretched out a bit.

Why charge the guy with the AR? Young people heroics. I suppose the perspective of whether charging and trying to beat up a non-LEO with an AR is heroic or thug behavior is completely subjective depending on who you like. Remember not all folks exercising their first amendment rights in Kenosha were destroying property or fighting with others. Are the guys charging Rittenhouse violent rioters about to kick an innocent's bubblegum OR are they peaceful protesters trying to disarm a white supremacist shooter? Yes, maybe.

The day this happened I felt just as sorry for Rittenouse as the folks he shot. The entire situation was f$%ked.

 

[RedRover]

I would want the test to be more objective than subjective. If you commit more than two violent felonies we should be done trying to reform you. You can prove to us that you've reformed but otherwise you rot. If you rape or murder you don't get back out, ever. But I also believe that way too many crimes are now felonies because someone thought making the latest hot button issue more illegal would score them political points, so in my imaginary world, we'd fix that too.

I agree here. If a person is habitually criminally violent, they permanently lose their rights in a free society.

Non-violent felonies (IE.) -- Theft, Property Damage, Fraud etc. -- After proper and complete restitution, rights may be restored.

 

[MichaelH]

Man dies after being hit in head with skateboard during fight in Santa Ana Starbucks

A man was killed after being hit in the head with a skateboard in an act of self-defense during a fight in a Santa Ana Starbucks.

abc7.com

It's now become perfectly clear as to why your logic is so flawed. Too many hits to the head with a set of Indys.

That's funny. Just the forearms. Hurts. A lot.

 

[Flopsweat]

I've hit folks with a skareboard and been hit with a skateboard: city teenage boy right of passage. If a dude with a rifle popped up in my group of skater friends with what looked like intent to use it and there was no cover, I can imagine a similar result.

What I can't imagine is standing on a crowded city street at 17 holding a loaded rifle. Do I look like a baby soldier or a mass shooter?

People have been killed with skateboards in Portland and Seattle. There was a pretty famous case in Seattle a couple of years ago. They are deadly weapons whether you choose to believe it or not. You swing a skateboard at an armed person you should expect to be shot. Kyle didn't "pop up" in their group. They were chasing him. I think you know that though.

 

[titsonritz]

are they peaceful protesters trying to disarm a white supremacist shooter?

Mostly peaceful...









Yeah OK right.

 

[MichaelH]

Separate opinion: anyone not paid to chase active shooters who unnecessarily chase active shooters are stupid. The philosophy of MYOB would've saved everyone a whole lot of heartbreak.

 

[MichaelH]

Mostly peaceful...

View attachment 1054645

View attachment 1054646

View attachment 1054647

View attachment 1054648

Yeah OK right.

Mostly peaceful...

View attachment 1054645

View attachment 1054646

View attachment 1054647

View attachment 1054648

Yeah OK right.

I said: "Remember not all folks exercising their first amendment rights in Kenosha were destroying property or fighting with others."

Mostly peaceful is NOT what I said.

On this note, I bid you all adieu.