He was not the provoker, it was the guy with his shirt wrapped around his head that was initiating this. Even if it WAS, him that initially initiated this, it doesn't matter because he was running away and attempting to disengage. Even if he was the initial aggressor, deadly force is allowed if all means to escape injury or death have been exhausted. What do we see him doing in every video? Running away. Every time he was RUNNING AWAY. Even if he was the initial aggressor, every person that got shot would be trying to reengage which puts the onus on them.Wisconsin state law. You're allowed self defense, but
(2) Provocation affects the privilege of self-defense as follows:
(c) A person who provokes an attack, whether by lawful or unlawful conduct, with intent to use such an attack as an excuse to cause death or great bodily harm to his or her assailant is not entitled to claim the privilege of self-defense.
And it's going to be quite hard to argue that intentionally going to a protest armed, out of his way to get there, and then killing 2 people and shooting a third when his defense was "he was asked to and illegally armed to do so" is self defense. He doesn't qualify.
If a protester had shot him first, they'd be up on murder charges and there'd be no claim of self defense either, even if the kid was illegally armed.
You got video evidence of him shooting everyone? Cause all I see, and have been shown, over and over and over again from all the videos and testimony is that he ONLY shot people attacking him. If he wanted to just kill people then why are only two people dead when there were hundreds of people out there that night? What about all the people that ran up to him when he fell and he didn't shoot because they backed away from him? For someone that went there looking to kill as many people as he could he sure did a shitty job of that with only two people dead despite numerous opportunities to increase that number.Except when it is non white "thugs" or " gangs" doing it in the hood. Then they should all just be shot on sight and forgotten/s. It is the pretending that this kid was any different than the other " hoodlums" that take the law into their own hands that is the issue.
The same people defending this kid are perfectly fine with kids doing the same thing in the hood getting the death penalty, or even save the time and money, just let the cops shoot them as soon as they see them right?
You are being completely partisan on this. You refuse to admit the obvious difference here that you see with your own eyes because that's "a win" for the right. "If I let this go then that's something the right wing can hold over my team". That kind of thinking is only going to lead to one place and that's everyone we know and love dying in a pointless civil war. Screw this "team" bullshit.