Rittenhouse had shot one person, who had chased him and lunged for his gun, at the time the mob chased after him. He was not aiming his gun at anybody else nor did he fire his gun at anybody else until he was being attacked.

Grosskreutz had chased after him after he had shot Rosenbaum, but Grosskreutz did not witness the shooting himself - none of Rittenhouse's pursuers had. He got close enough to Rittenhouse to ask Rittenhouse where he was running. Rittenhouse doesn't turn around and shoot Grosskreutz, but instead tells Grosskreutz he's going to the police, to which Grosskreutz yells 'stop him'.[0] The fact is, Rittenhouse's pursuers didn't think he was an 'active shooter', they saw that he was running away, and didn't want to let him get away, and were trying to take justice into their own hands. And in fact, if Grosskreutz actually had thought that Rittenhouse were an 'active shooter', why didn't he shoot him right then?

[0]: https://twitter.com/AntifaWatch2/status/1299853616757583872

Did you watch the video? In what world did none of his pursuers not know he had just killed someone? And to be a pedant, he was only drawn on after the second murder, even though they were in close succession.

[0]Mr. Rittenhouse seems to make a phone call and then flees the scene. Several people chase him, some shouting, “That’s the shooter!”

As Mr. Rittenhouse is running, he trips and falls to the ground. He fires four shots as three people rush toward him. One person appears to be hit in the chest and falls to the ground. Another, who is carrying a handgun, is hit in the arm and runs away.

Mr. Rittenhouse’s gunfire is mixed in with the sound of at least 16 other gunshots that ring out during this time.

[0] https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/27/us/kyle-rittenhouse-kenos...

> In what world did none of his pursuers not know he had just killed someone?

Didn't say that, I said the pursuers were not a witness to the shooting themselves. That is, they didn't see it happen for themselves. For example, Grosskreutz's story:

> Gaige Grosskreutz testified that he was filming the protest as a legal observer for the American Civil Liberties Union on a Facebook livestream. Shortly before midnight Grosskreutz said he heard gunshots to the south and observed Rittenhouse running in his direction[86] on Sheridan Road.[87] Grosskreutz said he ran alongside Rittenhouse and asked "Hey, what are you doing. You shot somebody?"[86]

> And to be a pedant, he was only drawn on after the second murder, even though they were in close succession.

It wasn't a murder, and it as for 'close succession', that's subjective; Rittenhouse had ran for two blocks after he shot Rosenbaum, and Grosskreutz had already been pursuing Rittenhouse (that's when he recorded the video in the tweet). Grosskreutz would have witnessed Rittenhouse shoot Huber, but he would have also seen Huber slam a skateboard into Rittenhouse's head and attempt to grab his rifle before Rittenhouse had shot Huber since Grosskreutz had been pursuing Rittenhouse prior to this. So 1) Grosskreutz didn't witness Rosenbaum's shooting, 2) Grosskreutz would have witnessed Huber attacking Rittenhouse before Rittenhouse shot Huber. I.e., he would have known nothing about the first shooting, and the second shooting he would have witnessed the entire self-defence case as it happened, giving zero reasonable indication that Rittenhouse was an 'active shooter'.

Cool. I’m not going to convince you, especially not with video you won’t watch, and I guess that’s fine.

Please just try to limit the amount of time you spend encouraging people to show up armed to protests, or even riots if you want to call them that.

Who am I kidding? Never mind.

> especially not with video you won’t watch

Dumb, baseless assumption from you not reading what I wrote correctly. Grosskreutz and the other pursuers didn't personally witness Rittenhouse shoot Rosenbaum. If he had, why did Grosskreutz ask Rittenhouse if he had just shot somebody?

> Please just try to limit the amount of time you spend encouraging people to show up armed to protests, or even riots if you want to call them that.

You're obviously not arguing in good faith.

The argument is that he was going to turn himself in. That might be what you meant by passive.

Sure, but we take teenagers (who just shot someone and are RUNNING away) at their word now?

And if you don't, you're justified in being shot while pursuing him?

You're justified in being shot if you try to physically attack them by repeatedly hitting them in the head and then trying to grab their gun, yes.

As far as everyone knew, Rittenhouse was a shooter (that’s a risk you run carrying a rifle)

What were they supposed to do, let him flee?

Ah yes, the only two options here were to let Rittenhouse flee and to repeatedly bash in his head.

I only wanted to let you know what the argument was.

>Rittenhouse had just actively shot two people.

No he didn't. He had just defended himself against two assailants, while trying to flee. He was never, at any point in time, an "active shooter".

An "active shooter" is "an individual actively engaged in killing or attempting to kill people in a confined and populated area; in most cases, active shooters use firearms and there is no pattern or method to their selection of victims."[0]

He had a pattern of selection. Kyle shot and neutralized those who were trying to kill him (or cause grievious bodily harm). That is, by definition, self-defense, not an "active shooter" event.

[0] https://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/active_shooter_booklet.p...

QED.

Trying to flee a crowd that attempted to detain him for shooting someone.

Let's play hypothetical here. School shooter is bullied and hit in a fight. He shoots bully dead and starts running. He then shoots two people tackling him.

Is he not an active shooter?

Why are you doing such mental gymnastics to lionize this kid? You can debate over whether he should go to jail or not, but the reality is he extra-judicially killed 2 people. Doesn't that make you feel weird to defend that, even if you disagree politically with his victims?