The Ironies of Kyle Rittenhouse’s Acquittal

Everyone of us who treasure “due process” of law, must now stop and ask ourselves… “What just happened in the Rittenhouse case ???”
Emotional impression.
How does an immature, 17-year-old kid like Kyle Rittenhouse get to bring a weapon of mass destruction to a 1st Amendment protest, and make himself a self-appointed Judge, Jury and executioner. Assume there were some criminal acts at the 1st Amendment protest, and that Rittenhouse shot the right guys, still those criminals would not have received the death penalty… even if they were convicted. The great irony. The Rittenhouse “Avenger of One” used his “due process of law” to avoid all criminal responsibility by using extrajudicial Capitol Punishment to take away everybody else’s “due process of law.”
Intellectual honesty impression.
The Prosecutor’s burden is to prove the case against Kyle Rittenhouse beyond all reasonable doubt…
(1) By establishing all of the elements of a murder charge beyond all reasonable doubt, and
(2) By establishing there was no self defense (again) beyond all reasonable doubt.
The Defendant Rittenhouse raised the affirmative defense of “self defense.” Even though an affirmative defense, the Prosecutor must prove there was no self defense beyond all reasonable doubt. Translated (under American Jurisprudence), the Jury must acquit even if they feel Rittenhouse was probably guilty… if they have a “reason to doubt” (based upon the evidence) that the Prosector didn’t disproved Rittenhouse’s self defense claim (beyond all reasonable doubt).
The testimony of witnesses and the videos showed some elements of “arguable” self defense, and the Jury, obviously, (after numerous days of deliberation) felt that they had to acquit Rittenhouse because the Jury shared a collective reasonable doubt on the issue of self defense. I don’t like 17-year-old, immature lightweights like Rittenhouse going around the streets of America as vigilantes, but I accept the Jury’s verdict and I go on… though I fear for the future of a 1st Amendment protests that now must deal with a Rittenhouse-inspired vigilantism, and a further breakdown of both 1st Amendment freedoms and law and order.
If the same thing were to happen in the Ahmaud Arbery verdict, I would definitely cry foul, because there is only a bs, “pretend” self defense in the Ahmaud Arbrey case (one not based upon the evidence)… one just made up after the fact by some White Supremacists Defendants trying to cover their asses, after the fact. I remain hopeful the Ahmaud Arbery Jury will see through the dense, bs fog of self defense in the Ahmaud Arbrey case… as the only one involved in self defense was Ahmaud Arbery.
2nd Amendment impression. 
The major problem with the Rittenhouse case is that the State of Wisconsin (and many others) allow immature, young lightweights like 17-year-old Kyle Rittenhouse to buy/and or run around the streets of civilization with weapons of mass destruction encouraging those young lightweights to be political vigilantes. This problem is now exacerbated into a firestorm by Rittenhouse’s acquittal. I fear… “we ain’t seen nothing yet.”
As I have previously written about (and as the 2nd Amendment law now stands in 2021), legislative bodies cannot ban handguns (Heller 1… US Supreme Court case), but they can ban assault rifles like Rittenhouse was carrying around and using (Heller II… D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals). But America’s legislative bodies (at the urging of our friends in the NRA) choose not to ban assault rifles. See my previous essay The Second Amendment in 2021
As usual. there are two camps in America…
(1) One who realize the 2nd Amendment is not a carte blanche authority to “Make America Great Again” and
(2) Those with a wild west mentality who think the rest of us are coming after their Bibles and Guns.
TRIAL LAWYER
AUTHOR
Children of the Greatest Generation… 2011
Wealth Power Politics Jesus… 2012
Fightin’ Irish of Detroit, Fightin’ in the Streets, Fightin’ in the Courts… 2017