Kyle Rittenhouse Starts Up a New Gun Rights Org Focused on Supporting Individuals Who Have Defended Themselves

Joined
Feb 6, 2012
Messages
14,519
Likes
29,608
Location
Plymouth
Feedback: 1 / 0 / 0

Literally nothing Kyle Rittenhouse does escapes notice. All of the usual suspects do literally everything they can to paint anything he’s involved in as somehow dark, nefarious, and deeply, deeply concerning. An easy tipoff is the apparent self-imposed minimum quota editors place on the use of terms like “far right” in any article they publish about him.

The latest spate of news of note is that Rittenhouse has founded a new gun rights org here in Texas. The left-leaning Texas Tribune made sure to use all of the requisite tropes in their report.

Kyle Rittenhouse, the right-wing activist who was famously acquitted of killing two Black Lives Matter protesters in 2020, is stepping up his involvement in Texas politics.



Already this year, he’s rallied with a Texas secessionist movement leader, endorsed ultraconservative midterm candidates, and railed against Texas gun control legislation and the impeachment of Attorney General Ken Paxton.

Now, Rittenhouse is creating a nonprofit in the state — with help from well-connected, far-right political actors.
 
All these endorsements, 2A projects and whatever, does that sound like the idea of a 19 year old kid? Nope, it doesn’t. Someone is talking him into it. He’s a pawn, just like David Hogg on the other side of the spectrum. And just like any other teenager, he enjoys the attention and the possible financiAl gain that comes with it. I kinda feel bad for the kid. Every time someone’s approaching him, they want something from him. And it’ll take him years to figure it out.
 
All these endorsements, 2A projects and whatever, does that sound like the idea of a 19 year old kid? Nope, it doesn’t. Someone is talking him into it. He’s a pawn, just like David Hogg on the other side of the spectrum. And just like any other teenager, he enjoys the attention and the possible financiAl gain that comes with it. I kinda feel bad for the kid. Every time someone’s approaching him, they want something from him. And it’ll take him years to figure it out.
He literally has the same date of birth as Greta, and he’s being used just as badly as she is it seems.
 
I'm all in favor of advancing ( or reclaiming ) our 2A rights, but there are a couple of people that IMHO should not be the face of a 2A organization, George Zimmerman would be #1 on my list, and in second place would be Rittenhouse.

Both men used deadly force to protect themselves, both men were cleared of any charges because they were technically within the law, but both of them showed incredibly bad judgement that got them into the situations that necessitated the use of deadly force.

Even the guy that dropped the fine young urbanite that tried to rob a restaurant while holding a firearm is on my list because although the first volley of shots was justified, emptying the rest of the magazine into a guy who is no longer a threat is not a good look for gun owners.

Unfortunately, most of the people who have had to use a handgun in self defense are trying to escape any further notoriety after being dragged thru the press, the court of public opinion and the legal system. They are not going to want to be in the public eye again.

So we get the clowns
 
sad what became of his life. Coulda stayed home that night and been a normal kid. Instead his gonna be part of grifts run by conmen his whole life.
David Hogg coulda stayed home too that day the Cruz guy shot up Parkland but he realized it was a chance in a lifetime to get rich and famous and look at him now.
 
I'm all in favor of advancing ( or reclaiming ) our 2A rights, but there are a couple of people that IMHO should not be the face of a 2A organization, George Zimmerman would be #1 on my list, and in second place would be Rittenhouse.

Both men used deadly force to protect themselves, both men were cleared of any charges because they were technically within the law, but both of them showed incredibly bad judgement that got them into the situations that necessitated the use of deadly force.

Even the guy that dropped the fine young urbanite that tried to rob a restaurant while holding a firearm is on my list because although the first volley of shots was justified, emptying the rest of the magazine into a guy who is no longer a threat is not a good look for gun owners.

Unfortunately, most of the people who have had to use a handgun in self defense are trying to escape any further notoriety after being dragged thru the press, the court of public opinion and the legal system. They are not going to want to be in the public eye again.

So we get the clowns
I think both of them should be front and center.

Bad judgement or not....."within the law" is within the law, and that's what counts in the courtroom.

If you allow all the deliberate bad press to seep into your psyche, it is having the exact effect it was intended to.

Nobody should be forced to "disappear" from life, either public or private for having defended their own life with a gun. That is exactly what the anti gun/anti rights propagandists want. Don't be their sucker.

Do you think that any prominent commie democrat would be treated the same way if they killed someone in self defense?

Do you think they would be ridiculed, mocked, degraded, persecuted? I seriously doubt it. They'd be praised for weeks in the press, then forgotten about, even if they continued on with a very public life.
 
Both men used deadly force to protect themselves, both men were cleared of any charges because they were technically within the law, but both of them showed incredibly bad judgement that got them into the situations that necessitated the use of deadly force.
Bad judgement or living like free men with no f***s to give?
Even the guy that dropped the fine young urbanite that tried to rob a restaurant while holding a firearm is on my list because although the first volley of shots was justified, emptying the rest of the magazine into a guy who is no longer a threat is not a good look for gun owners.
This sounds like “I think I’m ok to shoot him as long as I do it nicely so I don’t offend some commie liberal soccer mom on Twitter.”
 
What I want to know is what's going on with the reset of the law suits. KR had a laundry list of people in the media that slandered him. To my knowledge he hasn't filed any additional law suits since winning the first one. I'd rather see him focusing on punishing more people then getting involved in any non-profit nonsense. He's got his whole life to do that other stuff if he chooses. We may not have a legal system much longer the way things are going. Strike while the iron is hot, he may not get another chance down the road.
 
David Hogg coulda stayed home too that day the Cruz guy shot up Parkland but he realized it was a chance in a lifetime to get rich and famous and look at him now.
David Hogg is a tool, but there's a difference between showing up for school and grabbing a firearm and voluntarily inserting yourself into a dangerous situation.
 
I think many forget that there are reasons you don't use a person who has dramatically used force to defend themselves as the face of any organization, and even more so if that person is young and unlikely to understand the full scope of what/who he is promoting. The fist would be that you are supporting a cause not a person, and he takes the focus away from that. And while using him may make you feel good, that is not the intent or what will create more support for the cause. Remember, the target is NOT the hard core a2 supporter, its the moderate and on the fence antis. They are not going to react well to this controversial face of the organization.

What using him will do is quickly raise money from the hard core 2a, which will be diverted to those actually running the organization. After that initial jump in funds the organization will slowly fade, leaving Kyle behind.
 
I think many forget that there are reasons you don't use a person who has dramatically used force to defend themselves as the face of any organization, and even more so if that person is young and unlikely to understand the full scope of what/who he is promoting. The fist would be that you are supporting a cause not a person, and he takes the focus away from that. And while using him may make you feel good, that is not the intent or what will create more support for the cause. Remember, the target is NOT the hard core a2 supporter, its the moderate and on the fence antis. They are not going to react well to this controversial face of the organization.

What using him will do is quickly raise money from the hard core 2a, which will be diverted to those actually running the organization. After that initial jump in funds the organization will slowly fade, leaving Kyle behind.
Gee, I wish my crystal ball was that calibrated at seeing the future.

If those "moderates" aren't smart enough (which most are not) to realize that any one of them could be in any number of similar situations at some point in their lives, then they should probably just refrain from any contact with firearms all together.

If they are too stupid to realize that "the cause" is the bigger picture and not to shoot the messenger, then they should just remain on the fence where they belong. If they've not taken a stance for the rights of all by this point in their lives, then they're unlikely to be swayed either way.
 
Recall about a year ago Kyle went on Tucker and said he was going to start a foundation that would sue media outlets that misreported, disparaged, and libeled 2A people. Is that what this is? Of did he change the focus.

And he was suing CNN in that vein yes? Where did that go?
 
Gee, I wish my crystal ball was that calibrated at seeing the future.

If those "moderates" aren't smart enough (which most are not) to realize that any one of them could be in any number of similar situations at some point in their lives, then they should probably just refrain from any contact with firearms all together.

If they are too stupid to realize that "the cause" is the bigger picture and not to shoot the messenger, then they should just remain on the fence where they belong. If they've not taken a stance for the rights of all by this point in their lives, then they're unlikely to be swayed either way.
What I said applies to all causes and their promoting organizations, it's not just 2a, it's how humans work. Try to see beyond your own skin and look at the bigger world. If you're trying to change minds you don't pick a "face" that takes focus away from what you say you are trying to do. And you don't pick a "face" that is so controversial that those you want to convert won't even listen.

Your approach of shouting your position and pushing it in their faces (figuratively) might make YOU feel better but it's preaching to the choir and does nothing to further the cause. To further a cause, any cause, you have to bring in new blood, not scream in an echo chamber.
 
I may be wrong, but I don't think that was his neighborhood. He traveled from Illinois to Kenosha.
If I remember correctly, he lived (lives?) on a border town less than a mile away, worked and/or went to school in Kenosha, and his father also lives in Kenosha, so to him it was basically his back yard where he grew up.
 
Back
Top Bottom