The Duty of a Citizen with a Gun
I did not authorize Rittenhouse to protect me or my community. However, we did pass a law that said if Rittenhouse chooses to arm himself, he must take extra precautions to ensure no one is shot. In other words, if he packs the gun, he is responsible for making sure no one gets hurt. When a person without authorization brings a gun to a protest, their primary duty is to prevent any shots from being fired. Therefore, Rittenhouse had a duty to walk away when things started to get out of hand.
The fact that he did not adhere to this duty and ended up shooting someone means he should be held accountable. According to the law, he could be held responsible for manslaughter, regardless of the actions of the shooting victim within reason. Bringing a gun to a protest is a heavy responsibility, and the law is designed to prevent individuals like Rittenhouse from mishandling guns in dangerous situations and accidentally harming others.
The Law and the Broken Justice System
“Going to walk” is often interpreted as ‘he’s guilty but will get away with it.’ This phrase reflects a scepticism about the fairness and integrity of the legal system. Even though it is very clear that Rittenhouse is innocent on all charges, there is a risk that he may be ruled guilty by the court. This raises questions about the ability of the justice system to correctly assess and determine guilt based on the evidence presented.
The phrase 'God help us' expresses a deep concern about the reliability of the justice system. This shows the fear of a miscarriage of justice and the potential for even clear cases of innocence to end in criminal convictions. It highlights the belief that the legal system might not be able to distinguish clearly between the guilty and the innocent, making it a point of serious concern for many.
Deserving a Harsher Sentence
Good chance he walks but he deserves life in Club Fed married to the biker with the most smokes.
This statement indicates that there is a high likelihood that Rittenhouse will be acquitted, meaning he may not face any significant legal consequences. However, it also implies a strong belief that he deserves a much harsher punishment, suggesting that the crime he committed is considered severe and his actions were deeply irresponsible and potentially dangerous.
At his core, Rittenhouse should serve time in a strict environment where he is held accountable for his actions. This would not only serve as a deterrent to future individuals who might consider bringing guns to protests but also ensure that justice is served and the public can have faith in the safety and order of their communities. Allowing Rittenhouse to go free would only encourage others to think the same way and potentially put more lives at risk.
The Call for More Responsibility and Gun Control
The incident with Rittenhouse underscores the urgent need for stricter gun control laws and greater public education on the responsibilities of gun ownership, especially in the context of public protests. While it is understandable that citizens may feel a sense of fear and want to protect themselves, it is crucial that they understand the legal and moral implications of such actions.
There is a pressing need for more comprehensive training and awareness programs that educate the public about the responsibilities that come with firearms ownership. Additionally, legal measures can be put in place to ensure that anyone bringing a gun to a protest is fully aware of the potential consequences and risks.
Ultimately, the outcome of Rittenhouse’s case will serve as a critical test for the justice system and the public’s trust in its ability to handle such cases impartially. It also highlights the broader need for responsible gun ownership and the imperative to ensure that individuals understand the importance of public safety and the law.