My response has a direct correlation to my frustration regarding the state of gun control, which is becoming non-control, the ridiculous, nonsensical, and new selfish perception of what self defense is about. What used to be a fist fight or a mugging is now elevated to killings based on a untenable standard, the individual perception or abuse of the words I was fearful...so me killing you is justified, enabled by the convenient trigger of a weapon.Yes, that's the history I'm familiar with too. (Based on wikipedia diving few years back)
Here's the major issue. What are the drivers of 2A mania? Prehistoric human behavior and gun lobby capitalizing on it. Throwing your money at the gun lobby will not make things better. One issue in America is that people have a very poor understanding of the safety of their environment. I lived in numerous "murder capitals" in the USA, never had a gun. Hardly witnessed a crime, let alone got mugged or murdered.
Do you remember all of those situations capture on film where police officers yell “GUN!”, it is because guns are rightfully viewed as threats to safety. The Rittenhouse verdict amply displays this phenomena, that the law as viewed in some parts of the country, where guns used to be perceived as a threat, now gives preference to the armed individual and his right to summarily execute anyone who rightfully regards him as the threat. For a case like this it seems to take individuals with guns to counter the individuals with guns.
In this case what if the three individuals killed or wounded by him had also had guns and there was a gun fight? My understanding is that his victims were white, and I’m trying to imagine how this jury would have dealt with the verdict if all participants had been armed? All 4 people could claim fear for their lives especially those who ended up dead. Then what standard would be used to determine guilt? It might fall back on individual juror’s like or dislike of protests To decide guilt or innocence.
The real problem here is that typical private citizens are not trained for conflict, they have no self restraint or they overreact, and do we really want to turn over law enforcement to the judgement of any individual who shows up at a protest ready to shoot?
The Rittenhouse jury decided that it did not matter that he was a stranger to the community, showing up with a gun which in itself is a threat of violence,, that he was not a provocateur, his right to carry a gun and use it in any kind of conflict he deemed appropriate, trumped every other legal consideration, and ignored established tenants of public safety.