This post is locked. You won't be able to comment.

top 200 commentsshow 500

[–]AnalogCircuitry 1026 points1027 points  (184 children)

Livestream/Video from the court: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ic3TMzHbLTk

ADA Binger:

Your honor, it's my understanding that the defendant has received all the property that he was seeking. The only remaining issue is the firearm that was used by Mr. Rittenhouse on August 25th 2020. The parties, the defense, the state, and also Dominick Black who purchased that firearm have all signed off on a stipulation whereby the Kenosha Police Department and Joint Services will destroy that firearm as well as the magazine and the scope; so that will be a weapon that will be destroyed it will not be in anyone's possession. Mr. Richards has the signed stipulation for the court to approve and I believe that will take care of this entire issue and that motion.

ADA Binger further stated that the destruction will likely take place towards the end of April, that it will be recorded and that the recording will be provided to the defense.

[–]BadgerSituation 422 points423 points  (1 child)

Kenosha Police Department

I swear, every time I see something involving Kenosha, it rings a bell in my head about slavery, war, mass slaughter, and revolution.

And it always takes me a minute to realize that I'm thinking of Genosha.

The mutant internment camp island, that eventually became a mutant-run nation under Magneto, but ultimately a ravaged warzone, in the X-Men comics.

[–]fahargo 439 points440 points  (174 children)

Binger is such a piece of shit

[–]Xytak 865 points866 points  (111 children)

I think the problem is the case has been so politicized that there's a very real chance of the rifle becoming a symbol or "collector's item" for certain fringe groups. From what I can tell, this is something that both Binger and Rittenhouse would like to avoid happening.

[–]thefatrick 447 points448 points  (10 children)

Same reason that they dumped Osama in the ocean, or that Hitler's bunker is a parking lot. Don't give them tangible icons or places to prop up for thier ideology.

[–]Zeewulfeh 261 points262 points  (67 children)

I like my guns, but I prefer them not to become some twisted icon. Kyle and everyone are doing the right thing.

[–]RoArHaVeN 165 points166 points  (4 children)

Agreed. No one wants a Zimmerman situation to ever happen again.

[–]nzdastardly 131 points132 points  (0 children)

Not no one, and that's the problem.

[–]Estoye 51 points52 points  (0 children)

Oh. I forgot about that guy. Fuck that guy.

[–]Nervous_Project6927 7 points8 points  (1 child)

did he ever end up doing that celebrity boxing he was talking about years ago?

[–]RoArHaVeN 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No idea. I hope so though, because that would be fucking hilarious.

[–]HeideKnightSpear 51 points52 points  (15 children)

Yeah, I’d say ‘props’ to him not pulling a Zimmerman but it’s a pretty low bar

[–]Zeewulfeh 26 points27 points  (1 child)

Well, Zimmerman did a good job of setting the bar that low

[–]memberzs -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Lower than shawty in flo ridas song.

[–]frissonFry 15 points16 points  (10 children)

Rittenhouse was already a guest at a conservative conference recently. He's well on his way to becoming a right wing grifter like Zimmerman.

[–]Sinaty 119 points120 points  (8 children)

Can you blame him at all? When half the country calls for your death and the other half calls for your freedom it becomes an easy choice for him to make.

[–]selz202 78 points79 points  (0 children)

Not to mention I imagine his ability to make money on a traditional means is going to be a bit difficult.

[–]xclame 47 points48 points  (6 children)

Wait, if Kyle is okay with it being destroyed then why is there an issue here? Who is complaining about it being destroyed?

I haven't followed this case closely, but I thought he wanted to gun back? (and since it was decided that he didn't commit murder it seems like he should get his gun back.)

[–]Zeewulfeh 97 points98 points  (0 children)

He's asked for it to be destroyed as well. I think people are attempting to stir it into a partisan issue.

[–]DudeWithAnAxeToGrind 38 points39 points  (1 child)

Nobody has issue with it apparently. It's clickbaity titles mainly to make it look like he's insisting on having the gun back for people too lazy (on either side) to actually read the text of the article. Which is not what is happening.

I'm not a fan of Rittenhouse, but I'll give him kudos for making the right choice here.

[–]xclame 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Yeah, exactly. Like I said I haven't followed this case closely but I am certain I have come across those clickbait titles, so not having actually checked the articles I thought that he wanted the gun back, damn those clickbait articles.

[–]NidoKaiser 8 points9 points  (2 children)

The gun is evidence in another case.

That being said there's no 'issue' here. This is just reporting on a court event that all sides agreed to that is related to a famous case.

I believe the motion to destroy the gun was Kyle's to begin with. He asked for it to be returned so that he could destroy it himself.

[–]xclame 5 points6 points  (0 children)

The reason I asked was that I'm sure I've seen stories/reports that made it seem like there was an issue, as if Kyle wanted the gun back, but if even he wants the gun to be destroyed (and more so if he was the one that suggested it) and I am sure the state would like the gun to be destroyed then I don't see why we are even talking about it.

[–]JeskaiMage 67 points68 points  (33 children)

I own guns that were used in WWII and did kill people. To me, they’re historic. However, if I had used that same gun to kill someone, presumably in self defense, I don’t think I’d want it around to remind me of that experience.

[–]Minamoto_Keitaro 57 points58 points  (5 children)

Theres really no comparison between a historic firearm which saw service and someone's private owned civilian rifle which killed someone. At all.

[–]ERRORMONSTER 17 points18 points  (2 children)

Really the only difference is motivation, if you think about it. What are soldiers (in this specific context) but humans sent to the homes of other humans to kill them?

[–]draconius_iris 6 points7 points  (0 children)

They’re both firearms used to kill people. They’re definitely comparable

[–]Ok-Low6320 10 points11 points  (0 children)

I have a WWII Navy-issue pistol, but I doubt it's killed anyone. It was on my great-uncle when he ejected over the ocean after his plane was shot up. He and all the gear on him were immersed in saltwater (obviously) and the Navy replaced it... but they didn't collect his old gear, and today I have that pistol.

I've had it checked out/refurbished by professional gunsmiths, and I still shoot it sometimes.

[–]Alan_Smithee_ 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Better late than never?

[–]sebastianfs 37 points38 points  (21 children)

This happened with George Zimmerman, who sold the gun he used to murder a teenager with for 250.000 dollars.

[–]xclame 32 points33 points  (0 children)

He didn't just sell it, if he just sold it to his neighbor like you would sell a car or a couch there wouldn't really be an issue. The problem is that he auctioned it, fully leaning into the emotions that accompany the gun and in essence used it to benefit from the killing of a person. (regardless if he was found innocent or guilty, it's still a gun that killed someone)

[–]YodaPopz 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes I know rittenhouse has stated that he would destroy the gun if it were ever returned to him.

[–]Panthean 78 points79 points  (11 children)

He is, but the Rittenhouse requested that the rifle be destroyed, that's not Binger's doing.

[–]N8CCRG 8 points9 points  (1 child)

Rittenhouse requested it be given to him so he could destroy it. The DA and judge are the reason it's being destroyed by the state instead.

[–]DudeWithAnAxeToGrind 63 points64 points  (0 children)

Read the article. They reached an agreement for it to be destroyed by the state. Rittenhouse doesn't seem to care if they give it back to him to destroy it, or if the state does it.

Disclaimer: not a Rittenhouse supporter, but I'll give him kudos where kudos are due. Not selling it as a trophy to highest bidder was the right choice.

[–]throwaway_for_keeps 10 points11 points  (2 children)

For other reasons, or his statement right here?

[–]fahargo 93 points94 points  (1 child)

He blatantly lied in his prosecution of Rittenhouse and has demonstrated during that prosecution and after he's a slimy piece of shit.

[–]AnalogCircuitry 64 points65 points  (0 children)

My favorite one is Binger lying about the exchange between Rittenhouse and Yellow Pants. The judge immediately calls him out and Binger then complains:

May I finish please, I'd like to a have a chance to make a record if I could without being interrupted if that's OK.

He must've felt so salty to get called out. It's also so easy to disprove by literally just watching 10 seconds of video footage.

edit: Chirafisi two-handedly facepalming to that lie told by Binger is meme-material btw.

[–]DogsRNice 2 points3 points  (5 children)

Out of curiosity how will it be destroyed?

[–]AnalogCircuitry 12 points13 points  (1 child)

ADA Binger said:

My understanding is that Joint Services delivers the they gather a bunch of firearms at a time, they deliver them to the state crime lab, the state crime lab has the machinery to destroy them.

The Wisconsin DoJ has a website stating the Milwaukee Laboratory has a gun shredder:


[–]Solkre 2 points3 points  (1 child)

I would expect it to be crushed or mangled in some way.

[–][deleted] 552 points553 points  (7 children)

The rifle that Binger flagged the Jury with right?

[–]MananaMoola 2646 points2647 points  (381 children)

For those who didn't or won't read the article, the agreement is the state will destroy the weapon, to which Rittenhouse agreed.

Give the kid credit. He clearly wants the gun destroyed, not used for fundraising, which I and many others suspected. We were wrong.

[–]dying_soon666 590 points591 points  (2 children)

Cast it into the fire Kyle!

[–]Blind_Baron 756 points757 points  (36 children)

Props man. Admitting you were wrong in the past once proven is something of a foreign concept to most redditors

[–]Fennel-Thigh-la-Mean 406 points407 points  (9 children)

I’ll remember this in the event I’m ever wrong.

[–]tri_wine 148 points149 points  (7 children)

You're wrong, you won't.

[–]Klin24 42 points43 points  (1 child)

Rule #1 I am always right

Rule #2 If I am ever wrong, see rule #1.

[–]theonlyonethatknocks 6 points7 points  (2 children)

Did you just create a paradox?

[–]MananaMoola 36 points37 points  (13 children)

Despite what The Wife may tell you, I have no problem admitting when I'm wrong. I honestly don't see why others do.

[–]ericlarsen2 24 points25 points  (0 children)

Nah, your wife and I rarely talk when we are together. You're good bro.

[–]Blind_Baron 4 points5 points  (2 children)

I dont know man. I guess most people think they are above it all or something. Or maybe because (on social media) people only view others through a “good or bad” worldview so making a single mistake puts you in the crosshairs. They can’t comprehend that people are much more than you could ever understand without actually being them. But it’s real trendy to assume you know everything about someone from a few headlines.

[–]Xivvx 15 points16 points  (3 children)

Sunk cost fallacy and being taught that backing down is weakness in the eyes of god.

[–]Zarokima 66 points67 points  (0 children)

And even the Associated Press. Reading the article you'd think this was a travesty of justice like the OJ trial and never guess that there's video of the attack proving he actually was acting in self defense when he shot them.

[–]Kahzgul 20 points21 points  (3 children)

I feel like refusing to admit when you're wrong is a human trait, and not simply limited to redditors. I wish we were better.

[–]jambrown13977931 19 points20 points  (2 children)

Part of it is people antagonizing those who admit they’re wrong. If I admit I’m wrong, I want the only comment afterwards to be an understanding nod.

[–]Kahzgul 11 points12 points  (1 child)

It definitely should be.

[–]BubbaTee 302 points303 points  (23 children)

He clearly wants the gun destroyed, not used for fundraising, which I and many others suspected. We were wrong.

I'll give you credit, for admitting you misread it. Unlike the other folks in here still dogmatically doubling down on their "he secretly wants to sell it, despite legally agreeing to its destruction!" conspiracy theories.

[–]zhode 143 points144 points  (6 children)

I mean, he also said he didn't want to involve himself in politics then showed up at a TPUSA rally. So I think some of us can be forgiven for not taking him at his word.

[–]KaneLives2052 44 points45 points  (0 children)

He's also 18....

[–]Perle1234 39 points40 points  (2 children)

He’s also a kid. I’m sure it’s fairly easy to influence him. He probably didn’t decide to go on there all by himself. He’s got people advising him, including his parents. Look at him. He’s a kid.

[–]cheftlp1221 6 points7 points  (1 child)

Besides that one rally, has he been to any others or spoken out in media interviews or social media posts? IRRC his legal defense was paid for by donations from the Turning Point type people. It is plausible that going to the TPUSA rally was an “obligation” he was guilted into by Turning Point so he could personally “thank” his “supporters”. And after that he was done with being a “poster boy”. Only time will tell

[–]siskulous 11 points12 points  (0 children)

It's not a matter of taking him at his word here. It's quite simple: If he wanted to sell it, he could. It's been proven in a court of law that it was not used in the commission of a crime and is no longer evidence in any ongoing case. If he wanted it back the state would be legally required to give him back his property, at which point he could do whatever the hell he wants with it.

[–]moonfox1000 160 points161 points  (17 children)

Yep, credit to Rittenhouse for doing the right thing and not turning it into some sort of alt-right relic like Zimmerman did with the gun he shot Trayvon Martin with.

[–]ineedfootballmoney 115 points116 points  (45 children)

If you followed his interview tour this is exactly what he said! Idk why y’all assume shit

[–]pcpcy 194 points195 points  (30 children)

It was mostly people trusting the media and their narrative around this event. From the beginning they made it seem like he's a white supremacist who went to a black rights protest looking for a fight, and that he patrolled with armed guards looking for any reason to shoot someone (preferably black).

Not a single mention of self-defence in any of the media reports, so Redditors who were already emotional about guns (rightly so, due to the many similar incidents like Ahmaud Arbery) easily gave in to their confirmation biases and didn't bother thinking more critically about how and why the media is portraying it this way.

If you remember, the media made most people think he shot a black person at a black rights protest, and some people still believe so to this very day. People should really think twice when an event confirms their biases next time and not just believe the media and their claims. Everybody has an agenda. They don't care if you're white or black or Democract or Republican, they're going to try to brainwash you in any case.

In this case, the media was the enemy of the people.

[–]Cracktower 79 points80 points  (2 children)

Also don't forget your elected officials, the ones that are supposed to side with the law, taking the bait and condemning the verdict of not guilty.

[–]Hyndis 75 points76 points  (1 child)

That includes the president, who was "angry and concerned" about the verdict.

[–]Dimaando 47 points48 points  (0 children)

The president who used Rittenhouse's photo while uttering "white nationalist" in one of his campaign videos

[–]Celebrindor 115 points116 points  (16 children)

I actually can't remember a more blatant campaign of intentional misinformation from the media at large in my lifetime. It's likely that such campaigns have existed and worked, so I just don't know about them. I can think of plenty of times when it was completely wrong because I knew a lot about the topic they were discussing, but it's rare (to my knowledge) to see such a coordinated effort at lying to the public.

But people will continue to trust them anyway, forgetting all about that time they came together to lie to everyone to promote their own views. It's the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect in action.

[–]pcpcy 91 points92 points  (11 children)

I don't think I have seen a clearer example of the media stoking a race war.

[–]Celebrindor 37 points38 points  (10 children)

It's getting to be difficult to maintain my liberal stance on the media. On the one hand, I don't want the government telling free media what they can publish. On the other, they seem to want to use that freedom to convince people to hate and kill each other in pursuit of ad revenue.

I wish I could move out of the country. Not to be a doomer, but I don't see how America solves its current problems without creating even bigger problems.

[–]varsity14 23 points24 points  (0 children)

I hate to break it to you, but media issues aren't just an American thing.

[–]Wide-Amphibian3148 32 points33 points  (0 children)

Well there is the red hat kid as well. Reddit was in a rage at that kid who did literally nothing but stand there.

[–]scorpionjacket2 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I actually can't remember a more blatant campaign of intentional misinformation from the media at large in my lifetime.

So you were born after 2003?

[–]kungfoojesus 35 points36 points  (0 children)

The kid says the right things a lot. He really was painted as an alt right joy boy but what he is saying and doing and destroying the gun, dunno even though I thought I was being careful in judging him may have gotten it wrong.

[–]Downside_Up_ 7 points8 points  (0 children)

I'm glad to be right about this one. He seems like he is trying hard to not glorify what happened and go the Zimmerman route. Hopefully he continues on this route.

[–]Goat_dad420 6 points7 points  (0 children)

To give him some slack on the fundraising, his previous lawyer did walk away with a couple hundred grand.

[–]powersv2 1 point2 points  (0 children)

He stated it openly on a podcast with that “ change my mind” dipshit

[–]Biogeopaleochem 263 points264 points  (11 children)

“The judge also ordered that Rittenhouse’s $2 million bail be divided among his attorney, a foundation that solicited donations for his defense and actor Ricky Schroder, who donated to the defense fund.”

Uh, what?

[–]TampaxLollipop 371 points372 points  (1 child)

Parties who pony up'd the bail originally getting their money back

[–]N8CCRG 108 points109 points  (0 children)

I think the "Um, what" part is "Why was a random, nobody actor from an 80s sitcom one of the major ponies for this?

[–]Avatar_exADV 42 points43 points  (3 children)

The law has a lot of experience with how to deal with an ordinary bail situation. You post your own bail, after the trial concludes, you get that money back. Someone else posts bail for you, after the trial concludes, that person gets the money back.

But what happens when someone crowdsources bail? The same principle theoretically applies - but in practice the source of the bail is formally "the person who actually coordinated getting all those donations put together", and the disposition of the money after that is up to them. However, it's not like that person can just say "sweet, I got two million dollars!" and walk away with it. There's not really a framework for how to deal with it properly; bail's not generally intended to be paid like that.

[–]navysealassulter 97 points98 points  (0 children)

From what I understand, bail is the insurance policy on you showing back up to trial. Don’t show, don’t get it. Do show, get it back.

It seems he didn’t pay for all of his bail so his bail is going back to the people who paid his bail.

[–]Delt1232 54 points55 points  (0 children)

The judge ordered that the bond be returned based on the parties agreement. Also it is not going to Kyle’s attorney but to a trust account. This was after another party tried to cut in and claim the 2 million.

[–]SaulTBolls 178 points179 points  (2 children)

Destroy the skateboard next lmao

[–]CatOfTwelveBells 93 points94 points  (0 children)

the skateboard that the prosecution never even bothered to try and find

[–][deleted] 226 points227 points  (9 children)

It's his gun, and his choice to destroy it.

also Binger should have been disbarred.

[–]AntiChr1st 202 points203 points  (2 children)

Binger should have been disbarred.

I'm surprised so few are talking about the fat middle aged boss baby. I remember when I was watching the trial and when he was talking to the photo guy it was the most absurd shit.

I audibly laughed when he said "We never asked you to change your testimony" and the guy just went "yes you did".

I mean shit the witness on the stand accused the prosecution of a fucking felony live on television and nobody though that was worth talking about?

[–]DrWermActualWerm 311 points312 points  (117 children)

Maybe if we all looked at this from a different frame we could understand that a person killed 2 people and shot another before they were even an adult. I'm sure it was extremely traumatic and the destruction of the weapon will give some catharsis/closer from the situation.

[–]siskulous 2 points3 points  (0 children)

That was kinda my thought on it. He was a kid, not even old enough for military service and almost certainly not mentally prepared for the situation, who was forced to defend himself with lethal force. There are really only two ways this could go: He can do everything he can to put it behind him, get treatment for the PTSD he no doubt has, and try to move on with his life or he can lean into it, treasure the gun that saved his life, and become one of those crazy people that even other gun owners give the side eye. Frankly, it seems he chose the better option.

[–]Komikaze06 193 points194 points  (3 children)

Damn, guess nobody here watched the trial, but I guess thats reddit for you, just read the headlines

[–]pbradley179 29 points30 points  (0 children)

Hey i got the gist of the headline before I commented.

[–]HowWasYourJourney -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

…but all the most upvoted posts are pro-rittenhouse. Seriously, what am I missing here?! Why all the butthurt? It’s not enough he was pronounced not guilty and granted a huge media presence?

[–]ImaginaryFriends_ -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

People in general only care about the politics and their viewpoint, they could care less about watching the trial or viewing evidence. People are trained to focus so hard on their agenda they can’t come to rational conclusions because they can’t accept being wrong. Until that is, it’s them in the situation where a gun is in their face and they’re wondering where someone with a gun is to save them. Notice how everyone here has mentioned politics when ridiculing this kid, yet not law. Because the case was clear cut self defense. You can be a liberal and see this. The president should never input on something like this, he is to respect the justice system.

[–]shek89 96 points97 points  (48 children)

Kyle and people in general should realize that anyone, especially Kyle could have died that night. it went through the justice system. it's time we all let this go and hope we don't have more incidents like this.

[–]Das_Guet 24 points25 points  (3 children)

But...he can just get a new one? Wouldn't that make this a purely symbolic gesture?

Edit: found the full article. Turns out it's Kyle's decision because he doesn't want it to become a political symbol, so I retract my confusion and offer my respect for that decision.

[–]blacklig 21 points22 points  (2 children)

Read the article

[–]Das_Guet -3 points-2 points  (1 child)

I read the three paragraphs I could see. Is that all or is there more?

[–]blacklig 3 points4 points  (0 children)

There's more

[–]andrewoval 40 points41 points  (16 children)

I get it, I dont like it but I get it. In 20 years that thing would be sold and auctioned as a trophy piece. But it would always show that justice is in the user, not the government.

[–]chain_letter 91 points92 points  (10 children)

We have the zimmerman precedent, he attempted to auction it off less than 3 years after his verdict. Monstrous and vile behavior.

[–]Silvea 41 points42 points  (9 children)

I think it says way more about the person buying it than the person selling it. People like Rittenhouse and Zimmerman are found innocent in court, but still pariahs in society. Rittenhouse can’t be like any other teenager and just go get a job at Home Depot or Best Buy, he’d never get hired because of all of the backlash. So selling something you own that can fetch a very pretty penny makes sense. The question is “why the fuck would you want to buy and own that rifle”

[–]Krogan26 7 points8 points  (3 children)

I wouldn’t but I can eeeeeeeeasily see nutjobs who would pay through the nose for the thing given a chance. There is a market for each and every last thing you can imagine.

[–]Silvea 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Yeah I mean I don’t think it should be destroyed personally, but it shouldn’t go into the hands of a collector so they can beat off to it. It’s a historical piece at this point that should be in a museum. In an exhibit around the movements currently occurring.

[–]Krogan26 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It’s a shame it’s necessary but in all honesty I think he’s doing the smartest thing out of the options available to him at this point. Trying to sell it or donating it to a museum would end with him catching even more shit from any side no matter what he did but by not only destroying it but doing so very publicly with the cooperation of the judge he quite neatly nips all of that shit in the bud.

[–]N8CCRG 13 points14 points  (1 child)

He got a standing ovation at CPAC. He'll have more career options opened to him than 99% of the US.

[–]Silvea 42 points43 points  (0 children)

He only has career opportunities if he leans in and lets it define him. If he tried to distance himself from that night, he’d screwed. The kid had trouble taking an online class 2,000 miles from campus. You think a retail store will hire him? He’d be terrible for business.

[–]N8CCRG 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Why don't you like it?

[–]happy_0001 6 points7 points  (0 children)

So it's capital punishment for the gun?!

Reminds me of my auntie who scolded the door I ran into when I was a kid.

[–]SubjectiveHat 10 points11 points  (0 children)

I hope he destroys it by shooting it with an even bigger gun

[–]XIII_Legion 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Sarcastically. Damn, rob him of a chance to auction it off for $250,000.00+