Found myself intrigued by your "story", though it read more like an article. Reads like you were in a hurry. There's a long run-on sentence at the beginning. Several times a sentence isn't capitalized. And twice you call Kyle "Karl", which kind of gives the impression that you didn't care enough about the topic to be clear on details.
I also got confused when I started reading about the Salem Witch Trial part. Thought it was part of your story before I caught on it was the Writer's Cramp prompt. If you haven't learned yet how to make a dropnote, I highly suggest it. They're very helpful to add details without detracting from your writing. You could even have a second dropnote for all the details about Kyle and the trial. Shows how to create one in Writing.com Tools.
Honestly, I can't imagine Rittenhouse ever being in office for anything, ever. I think it would cause too much controversy. I wouldn't call him a heroic figure, and I'm conservative myself. However, it is a relief how this trial showed that if, say, I'm being attacked (whether for engaging in my second amendment rights or not), I can defend myself. Or maybe I can't, since I'm white? So hard to understand the rules these days.
Very true that this piece in history caused a lot of controversy. Seems many details got lost along the way to this trial.
For example, Kyle wasn't carrying an AK47 but an AR15 (and yes, there IS a difference). As an aside, have you ever wondered why they assign AR to certain guns but not others? Technically they're all "assault" weapons.
Or like how one of the men who got shot, Joseph Rosenbaum, was a pedophile, who confronted Rittenhouse and started the chase. Or that Anthony Huber slammed Kyle in the head with his skateboard after Kyle fell to the ground, after Kyle was trying to run toward the police to get help. I don't know about you, but if someone used their skateboard to try to crush my head, I'd feel more than "threatened", I'd feel like my very life was on the line.
And then, of course, Gaige Grosskreutz, who lied on stand about about pointing his own gun at Kyle. He eventually admitted on the stand that Kyle didn't try to shoot any of the men until he, Grosskreutz, aimed a gun at Kyle. A gun Grosskreutz illegally carried, as he did not have a conceal carry permit.
I know there was some controversy that Grosskreutz was also a felon. If that was true, him carrying a gun would have been all the more illegal. Though we know bad guys don't follow gun laws so, what can you do? It is odd that Grosskreutz's criminal charges from a previous event were completely dropped 6 days before the Rittenhouse trial. Guess you're right...those that have the gold make the rules. Especially when an anti-gun agenda is potentially at stake.
Many other details are out there, swirling in the interwebz. I would have liked to have seen an unbiased back and forth in your article, even if it made the liberal/democrats look bad. More on the men that were shot.
As an aside, although the men who were shot and killed were bad guys, I don't agree they deserved a death sentence. However Kyle, just like any American no matter their color, has the right to defend themselves from a mob. And their background kind of shows the intent of these particular men vs, say, if Kyle had shot a youth pastor or a police officer or an actual innocent bystander.
I find it sad that so many, including the President of the USA, condemned Kyle before he ever went to trial. Whatever happened to innocent until proven guilty? Sad that photo and audio evidence were clearly ignored by many (and still is), in order to push a certain narrative. It's awful how we judge based off of color or political party instead of looking at all the details and coming to the Truth.
Your article does a good job firing up folks, though. Also a good way to lead people to look up ALL the facts instead of just trusting the word of one person or source, y'know? Anyway, appreciate you tackling the controversial stuff. |
|