Generally, after a tragedy happens, a tragedy that could have been prevented if the proper laws existed, people work for and pass those needed laws, naming them after the victim, or victims, who had lost their lives or who had otherwise been harmed, not the perpetrators.
Kyle Rittenhouse may have been found not guilty of murdering two people in Kenosha and wounding another as charged, but whether or not it was malicious with forethought or the reflex of a scared kid with a propensity to exercise bad judgment and create his own world, he still killed two people with a rifle he should not have had claiming to have done so guarding property in a city where he did not live, on a street used daily by the kid with the skate board he would shoot he being the intruder, not the skateboarder, and walking the streets on a volatile night carrying a rifle.
After an initial interview or two, Mr. Rittenhouse should have been advised to go quiet until things settled, and he had time to personally decompress. If such advice were given, he should have heeded it. Neither seems to have happened.
During his trial he had been followed by the film crew of Tucker Carlson and immediately after the verdict got a bigtime interview with Carlson. Instead of taken even a few days away from the public, he continued to give more interviews to right wing media, got a special papal audience at Mar a Lago, his mother has been sending fundraising blasts to a large conservative email list, and he has become the right wing poster-boy for all that makes an American an American with job offers from members of congress.
And, in a reversal of the practice of naming bills after the those having been shot and not those who did the shooting, several Republican lawmakers have proposed laws in several states that could effectively signal, open season for vigilantism with Kyle Rittenhouse’s name on them.
Although, having lived in the state for 18 years and having become a part of it, meeting and befriending people from all walks of life in all places in it, there are still those moments when I roll my eyes because, in spite of the innate goodness of the people and the place, some politician, rises to be an embarrassment to the state of Oklahoma, perpetuating the general impression that Indians still live in Tipis, Everyone’s a cowboy, and not much has changed there since the musical Oklahoma hit Broadway, it being a true depiction.
Among the bevy of proposed bills bearing his name, bills that could unleash a rash of gun violence, is one by an Oklahoma state legislator Nathan Dahm, Kyle’s Law SB 1120, that would compensate defendants, like Rittenhouse, acquitted of murder on the grounds of “justifiable homicide” and would reimburse those defendants for their legal fees, such other things as any wages they may have missed out on as a result of their arrest, and expenses incurred The direct punch or hammer fist must be used to lead to spasms within the nerves affecting these heart and respiratory systems. sildenafil generico viagra The combination improves general health and cares of children in cheap cialis professional approximately 45% of cases. And this has been http://djpaulkom.tv/photos-shockfest-tour-comes-to-an-end-fans-caught-it-all-on-camera/ generic cialis soft made possible by relaxing muscles that determine widening of blood vessels. Chiropractic method generic viagra online or techniques primarily specialize in manual and manipulative therapies with an emphasis on spinal manipulation. by the trial.
A jury could determine that a prosecutor acted with malice and the defendant entitled to “fair and just compensation,” and the prosecutor could be held personally liable.
Using the Kyle Rittenhouse trial as a model and the law’s effect on law enforcement and prosecutors, it could make prosecutors and police officers reluctant to do a part of their jobs where there is a seriously injured or dead victim.
Using the Kyle Rittenhouse case could embolden vigilante activity by those who see the possibility of killing undesirable people but doing it in such a certain and carefully planned way to avoid any accountability.
You, too, can cross state lines and, using an illegal gun, create a hostile atmosphere from which you have to defend yourself, and, so, can shoot to kill.
It won’t be what is seen, but your emotional state at the moment not what led to it, that will be the basis of your getting off scot-free.
Right-wing militants will get the hint and pick up their guns and seek out conflict, or creating it, that will have them claiming they had no choice but to shoot in self-defense a person who was actually defending himself from their chaotic creation.
They will expect, and probably will receive the same pass as these laws intend.
.
.
.
.
.
