Kyle Rittenhouse was recently acquitted of all the following charges.
1. First Degree reckless homicide
2. First-degree recklessly endangering safety (Counts 2 and 3)
3. First-degree intentional homicide
4. Attempted first-degree intentional homicide
Kyle was a 18 year old who killed two men and wounded a third during a protest in Kenosha in August of 2020.
His argument or stance was based that Kyle was acting in self-defense.
After reading multiple articles, I came to the conclusion that right leaning sources were more empathetic towards Kyle while left leaning sources tended to be more apathetic.
Left leaning sources used statement such as... "Huber's family said in a statement "there is no accountability for the person who murdered our son." "It sends the unacceptable message that armed civilians can show up in any town, incite violence, and then use the danger they have created to justify shooting people in the street," the statement said of the verdict"(CNN).
While right leaning sources used statements such as "I tell everybody there what happened, I said 'I had to do it, I was just attacked, I was dizzy, I was vomiting, I couldn't breathe,'" Rittenhouse said (FOX)
I found the information from both sides fairly adequate but in this case i would agree more with right leaning sources. The reason is for the information they provided on how social media manipulated Kyles altercation Critic blasts Facebook's power after Kyle Rittenhouse verdict (nypost.com) and gave sound information based on the law and the events that transpired with prompted Kyle to use lethal actions.
As for social media, it has greatly been used against Kyle. Facebook has removed content in reference to Kyles news and even banned his GofFundMe. I will give credit to social media as it was a excellent conduit to see altercations first hand by the videos and photos that were taken that day, videos and photos that clearly demonstrate self defense. It is important to note the amount of media and social media attention that Kyle has received vs the convicted criminal that not only was in possession of a weapons but also chased and pointed it at Kyle. His court session and assumed social media attention is not even reality.
What do you guys think? And do you really believe that Kyles actions are racist? This question arose over the present riots in which people are now saying that the criminal and armed rioters were in support of black injustice. So by Kyle shooting them, it's now a racial injustice. In my opinion this is total bogus as the alteration simply involved a white male who was attacked by three other white males, armed criminals to say the least. Think that social media has taken this and used it to their advantage or politcal agenda?
This is a very complex case, and I appreciate the work you put into analysing how it was portrayed by both sides on social media. This is a good example of why we need sensible guns laws. Even if it was self-defense, it's incredibly stupid to put yourself in that position. I hope a lot of people learned a lesson from this. Maybe this will help move the gun debate forward, but I have my doubts.
ReplyDelete-Hunter S
This is a great choice for a top to cover because it is definitely a very current issue that took place. I think this is a good example because the use of mass media really did amplify the case. I believe that no matter what the verdict would have been one group of people would not have been happy
ReplyDelete