search

close

SHARE

• send
• print

August 29th, 2020

Violence Spirals As Both Sides Escalate

For citizens to take up arms to police the streets both undermines the rule of law that they claim to be upholding as well as inviting escalation and retaliation.

by David ThorntonRead Profilearrow_right_alt

Gage Grosskreutz holds a pistol immediately after being shot by Kyle Rittenhouse in Kenosha, Wisc. in this screen shot from @MrAndyNgo's Twitter feed 8/27/20

One of the most disturbing things about the Kyle Rittenhouse saga is the evidence it provides that both sides are escalating the battle in the streets. Often lost among the discussion of Rittenhouse’s actions is the simple fact that at least two people among the rioters were armed. If right-wing vigilantes and militia members are going to open fire on demonstrators then it is very likely that the demonstrators are going to start shooting back. Without some sort of de-escalation, we may be very close to literal war on the streets of some cities.

To be strictly correct, the rioters may already be shooting. As I noted a few days ago in my article about the Kenosha shootings, the video shows muzzle flashes before Rittenhouse opened fire. It isn’t clear who fired these shots, which apparently were not aimed and may have been directed into the air, but it is likely that they came from someone in the crowd of protesters. The bottom line is that there were multiple gunshots in addition to the shots fired by Rittenhouse.

It is also possible that the shots were fired by some other group such as the Boogaloo Bois. Back in June, several Boogaloo members were arrested at a BLM protest in Las Vegas with full gas cans and Molotov cocktails. In May, another Boogaloo member was arrested for the shooting murder of a security guard in Oakland during a protest. A second security guard was wounded in the attack. The Boogaloo, which is a far-right anti-government movement, was also present in Kenosha and could have acted as a provocateur.

It isn’t difficult to see where things are headed. Guns have been present and now pandora’s box has been opened with an incident that left two protesters dead and a third wounded. Rightly or wrongly, the demonstrators will believe that the right-wing counter-demonstrators are out for blood and respond accordingly.

Guns will become more common among the violent demonstrators. Long before the Kenosha shootings, I had already seen many social media posts that allege that Antifa members have been training with guns. Whether that was real in the past or not, it is likely to become a self-fulfilling prophecy for the future.

In opposition to the rioters, we have right-wing vigilantes and militia groups, who themselves are often breaking the law. Although laws vary by state and locality, Wisconsin’s self-defense law allows the third-person defense of property only in certain circumstances. Among those is the requirement that the “3rd person whose property the person is protecting is a member of his or her immediate family or household or a person whose property the person has a legal duty to protect, or is a merchant and the actor is the merchant’s employee or agent.” It is not legal for militia members or concerned citizens to unilaterally decide to defend property without any legal authority to do so.

Wisconsin also stipulates that “person who engages in unlawful conduct of a type likely to provoke others to attack him or her and thereby does provoke an attack is not entitled to claim the privilege of self-defense.” An exception to this rule is when the person “reasonably believe[s] that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm,” but even then the person must not use deadly force until he “reasonably believes he or she has exhausted every other reasonable means to escape from or otherwise avoid death or great bodily harm at the hands of his or her assailant.”

These self-appointed protectors of neighborhoods in which they may not even live have also disobeyed orders from the police to disperse. The Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel references a post by Kevin Mathewson, “commander” of the Kenosha Guard, which seems to exist primarily on Facebook. Mathewson admits that officers have told his men “go home under threat of arrest… in the past.” When asked about deputizing civilians to assist police, Kenosha County Sheriff David Beth told the Wisconsin Examiner it would represent an “immense” liability to have untrained and deputized civilians working alongside officers.

Yet Mathewson and others reject the law enforcement requests that they stand down, saying, “But by definition, we don’t need the government’s permission. We don’t need to be told — we can do it. In fact, the Constitution tells us we can do it. And the Second Amendment was put in there for instances like this — when we’re at war and under siege.”

As we have seen, state law indicates that Mathewson is wrong. Resisting lawful orders to disperse and illegally acting to defend property that doesn’t belong to them is just as much a violation of the law as what the the violent mob is doing. Rationalizing the situation does not change the law.

Finally, it is a failure of government that has allowed the situation to escalate in the first place. Too many governors and mayors have looked away from the violence and destruction of property. One of the most important functions of government is to protect its citizens. In too many cities, that has not been happening, which leaves a vacuum for militia groups to fill.

Too often, local police are overwhelmed by brawlers on both sides and just step back, as they did in Portland last week as Proud Boys and other right-wingers battled leftist demonstrators. Many on both sides are looking for trouble and increasingly they are finding it.

To me, the best solution seems to be the riot-control trucks from “Soylent Green.” Scoop up the demonstrators indiscriminately and cart them off to the hoosegow. The rowdies on both sides need to be removed from the streets.

Failing that, if local police departments cannot control the situation, mayors and governors need to call out the National Guard to pacify their cities. If mass arrests need to be made and water cannons need to be used to bring things under control then so be it. Americans should not be brawling in the streets like brownshirts and communists in Weimar Germany.

But the riot-control must come from state and local governments. For citizens to take up arms to police the streets both undermines the rule of law that they claim to be upholding as well as inviting escalation and retaliation. For the federal government to step in undermines the Constitution and federalism.

What we really need is for our elected officials to rise above the partisan calculations about the election and work together for the good of the country. Our leaders should be calling for peace and calmness rather than stirring up emotions and justifying criminal behavior. Both sides need to tamp down the rhetoric and denounce the violence on the part of their own supporters, not just that of the opposition.

But what are the odds of that?

Originally published on The Resurgent

Is Kyle Rittenhouse A Hero, A Villain, Or Something In Between?

 Kyle Rittenhouse, the 17-year-old, who shot and killed two protesters in Kenosha, Wisconsin on Tuesday night and wounded a third, has been arrested by police and charged with murder. Some are calling Rittenhouse a hero while others say that he is a vigilante. As usual, facts can be muddled and internet claims can be exaggerated or fictional, so here is what we know so far.

CBS News reported that numerous cellphone videos showed a man identified as Rittenhouse in the aftermath of the shootings. Rittenhouse, who is not from Kenosha, was arrested at his mother’s house in Antioch, Illinois, about 20 miles away, per the Chicago Tribune. He is reportedly being held without bond pending extradition to Wisconsin.

The Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel reports that Rittenhouse was with armed older men on the night of the shooting. He also appears in photos on Fox News of a group cleaning graffiti earlier on Tuesday. He is not armed in the photos but is seen again later that night, wearing the same clothes but carrying an AR-15, in a video interview posted to Twitter with Richie McGinniss of the Daily Caller.

In the video, Rittenhouse says, “People are getting injured and our job is to protect this business. And my job also is to protect people. If someone is hurt, I’m running into harm’s way. That’s why I have my rifle; I’ve gotta’ protect myself, obviously. But I also have my med kit.”

It is also unclear whether the militia members were asked to defend the property or where they were there on their own initiative. It seems unlikely that Rittenhouse was being paid to do the “job” of protecting the property.

The Journal-Sentinel reports that the Kenosha Guard, a militia group that has organized an “Armed Citizens to Protect our Lives and Property” event on Facebook, has fielded members in response to the demonstrations. However, Justin Mishler, a self-identified member of the Kenosha Guard, said that Rittenhouse is “not one of us.”

Mishler speculated that Rittenhouse may have been a member of the boogaloo, a loosely affiliated militia group that has also been present in Kenosha. However, boogaloo members are often anti-police, unlike the Kenosha Guard, which offered to help local authorities maintain order.

Another Twitter video shows the armed Rittenhouse and other apparent militia members walking around the streets in close proximity to vehicles belonging to the Sheriff’s Department. A voice on the loudspeaker can be heard telling protesters that they are trespassing and to disperse, but the officers offer water to the militia members and tell them, “We appreciate you guys, we really do.”

There are numerous reports that Rittenhouse’s social media accounts showed “Blue Lives Matter” material and photos of himself with a gun similar to the one in the videos from Kenosha. His Facebook page, which has since been taken down, also showed that he belonged to the Grayslake, Lindenhurst, Hainesville Public Safety Cadet program, per the Chicago Tribune. Despite some claims to the contrary, there seems to be no evidence of racist or misogynistic material on Rittenhouse’s social media. Buzzfeed reported on a video that Rittenhouse posted to TikTok showing himself on the front row of a Trump rally in January.

It seems unlikely that Rittenhouse, who greatly admired the police, would have been a part of the boogaloo movement. Even if he was not a part of the Kenosha Guard, he may have been a member of a similar group or simply responded to the open call for assistance on social media.

The events leading up to the shooting are also uncertain at this point. The New York Times has put together a timeline of sorts that places Rittenhouse in the vicinity of a Kenosha car dealership with other self-proclaimed militia members for several hours prior to the shootings. The interview with the Daily Caller reporter and another Facebook live stream broadcast occurred at this point. The video with the police vehicles reportedly was recorded about 15 minutes before the first of two shootings.

Yet another video shows Rittenhouse walking the streets with this rifle about six minutes prior to the shooting. The Twitter thread by a New York Times reporter states that the shooting took place shortly before midnight about four blocks from the car dealership that Rittenhouse had said he was protecting. It is not clear why he was in this area.

The dozens of videos present confused images, but Rittenhouse appears to return fire after a muzzle flashes from the crowd. A protester goes down and then Rittenhouse takes out his phone. As he runs past the camera, he can be heard to say, “I just killed somebody.”

A video showing a different angle on the Twitter thread appears to show Rittenhouse being chased by demonstrators, some of whom are armed. It isn’t known what preceded this video or why Rittenhouse was being chased.

Another video shows a second shooting in which the crowd chases Rittenhouse after identifying him as the person in the original shooting. Rittenhouse is knocked to the ground. He turns and fires at his pursuers. One falls to the pavement while another appears to be hit in the arm and runs away.

A third scene shows Rittenhouse walking up the street with his hands up but still carrying his rifle as police respond to the shooting. A voice yells, “He just shot [unintelligible]. Hey, the dude right here just shot [unintelligible]. The dude right here just shot all of them down there.”

The police vehicles roll by to the scene of the shooting without stopping. This is likely because they were on their way to render aid and did not know that Rittenhouse was the killer. The officers inside the armored vehicles may not have been able to hear the people on the street accusing him. What is certain is that Rittenhouse was not detained but went home.

The Journal-Sentinel identifies the three victims of the shootings. The two dead men were residents of the area while the man wounded in the arm is a member of the Milwaukee-based People’s Revolution Movement and had volunteered as a medic at Black Lives Matter demonstrations in Wisconsin over the past few months. Media sources do not mention any other criminal records on the part of the victims, but Andy Ngo claimed on Twitter that the three all had criminal histories.

The first victim was Joseph Rosenbaum, 36. Rosenbaum was originally from Texas but had moved to the Kenosha area. Anthony Huber, 26, was the second fatality. Photos in The Sun show Huber’s skateboard laying beside him as he falls to the pavement. Another photo posted by Ngo shows Huber hitting Rittenhouse with the skateboard. A GoFundMe page description says that Huber died “while peacefully protesting” as he “selflessly tried to aid in taking down an attacker.”

Whether Rittenhouse was a formal member of a militia or not, the vigilante label does fit. His group had no legal authority to enforce the law and their right to be on the car lot itself was questionable. The fact that police were tacitly encouraging the group’s participation in containing the riots seems to have been poor judgment on the part of Kenosha’s official law enforcement officers.

It is also questionable whether Rittenhouse was legally justified in either shooting. Wisconsin does allow open carry and the Badger State’s laws allow for self-defense without a duty to retreat when a person “reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm.” Subsequent videos and witness testimony will probably shed more light on how the altercation started.

Self-defense could be claimed more reasonably in the second shooting when Rittenhouse was defending himself from pursuing demonstrators, but that justification may hinge on whether the first shooting was justified. Killing to protect yourself after committing a crime is not self-defense and is specifically excluded in the law.

The Kenosha shootings seem to be a tragic instance in which, like the original shooting of Jacob Blake that prompted the demonstrations, both sides were in the wrong. The demonstrations had turned violent and included property destruction but the actions of the rioters did not provide justification for Rittenhouse and the other militia members to insert themselves into a situation where they had no legal authority to intervene.

In the second shooting, it is very possible that the victims thought that they were doing the right thing in attempting to subdue an active shooter who had already killed a member of the crowd. Both Rittenhouse and Huber may have believed they were legally in the right.

In aviation, we speak of accident chains. It is usually a series of events that leads to an accident, rather than one specific action. In this case, the chain starts with the shooting of Jacob Blake and the decision to take to the streets in protest, the turn toward violence, Rittenhouse’s decision to play soldier, the acceptance of the militia presence by the police, and Rittenhouse’s ultimate decision to pull the trigger make up additional links. If any of these links in the chain had been broken, the two demonstrators would still be alive and Rittenhouse would not be in jail.

The Kenosha shootings show what can happen when untrained and unprepared civilians attempt to do the job of law enforcement. Controlling demonstrations and stopping mobs is difficult and dangerous even for trained professionals. When the militias insert themselves into the mix, the situation becomes even more tense and unstable.

While it seems that Rittenhouse likely went to Kenosha with good intentions, he and the other militia members, especially those from out of town and out of state, had no business being there in the first place. These people, some of who were undoubtedly looking for trouble as much as the rioters were, were probably drawn to Kenosha by a power vacuum as law enforcement failed to protect property and quell the riots. The inadequate police response was another link in the chain.

It is too early to say for certain whether the evidence will ultimately support a claim of self-defense in the shootings, but it is certain that the killings have intensified tensions on both sides. There are fringe members of both sides of the political spectrum who favor violence. With every incident, these people become more convinced that violence is the only answer and the situation spirals further out of control.

There is plenty of blame to go around. Rittenhouse and his colleagues should not have been carrying their guns on the streets of Kenosha, but the demonstrators also should not have rioting and destroying property. State and local law enforcement need to stand up and control the unrest before the situation devolves to one in which vigilante militias feel it necessary to patrol the streets themselves. Police should be better trained and work to avoid questionable shootings. Citizens should cooperate with police so that they don’t get shot. Politicians on both sides should stop stoking the fires under the assumption that unrest will help them politically.

Both sides are showing poor judgment in a situation that is escalating and spiraling out of control. Cooler heads need to prevail before a larger national tinderbox ignites.

Originally published on The Resurgent

Brian Kemp Strikes Back

After a string of violence in Atlanta over Independence Day weekend in which an eight-year-old girl was murdered, Gov. Brian Kemp has called out the National Guard to assist in restoring order. Kemp issued an emergency order on Monday that authorized the deployment of 1,000 soldiers to protect state buildings.

Over the holiday weekend, four people were killed and rioters attacked the Department of Public Safety building which houses the headquarters for the Georgia State Patrol with rocks, spray paint, fireworks, and a “homemade grenade.” Among the dead in the city was eight-year-old Secoriea Turner, who was shot and killed when a “group of armed individuals” attacked her mother’s car near the burned-out Wendy’s where Rayshard Brooks was killed by police last month.

“Peaceful protests were hijacked by criminals with a dangerous, destructive agenda. Now, innocent Georgians are being targeted, shot, and left for dead,” Kemp told the Atlanta Journal-Constitution. “This lawlessness must be stopped and order restored in our capital city.”

The National Guard will be deployed to three locations around Atlanta: The State Capitol, the Governor’s mansion, and the Department of Public Safety building. The capitol and its grounds are home to many relics and statues of Georgia’s Confederate era, which have attracted the attention of vandals and protesters.

Kemp issued another Executive Order in late May at the height of the riots that allowed 1,500 Guardsmen to help Atlanta police patrol the city. The governor’s office said that the deployment was at the request of Mayor Keisha Lance Bottoms. Bottoms, who recently tested positive for Coronavirus, denied that such a request was ever made.

“The irony of that is I asked Governor Kemp to allow us to mandate masks in Atlanta and he said no,” Bottoms said Tuesday. “But he has called in the National Guard without asking if we need the National Guard.”

Other Democrats criticized Kemp for not going far enough in deploying the troops to protect a limited number of state buildings. State Sen. Nikema Williams, head of the state Democratic Party, said, “His choice to deploy National Guard troops for today’s selfish purpose is outrageous and will endanger lives.”

The AJC reports that at least 93 people have been shot in Atlanta between May 31 and June 27, a time period that roughly spans the first month of the George Floyd protests. That number is approximately double the same time period from 2019.

Even Mayor Bottoms admits that the situation is out of control, saying earlier this week, “This random wild, Wild West shoot-‘em-up because you can, has gotta stop. It has to stop.”

The most basic duty of a city government is to protect its citizens from criminals and violent predators. Mayor Bottoms and the City of Atlanta have failed to do that. The mayor received high marks for her speech on May 31 condemning the rioting, but, more than a month later, violent crime is still high and police morale is very low due to both the anti-police movement and the pandemic.

Kemp is justified in calling out the National Guard. The situation in Atlanta is clearly out of control. I would tend to agree with those who argue that the deployment does not go far enough. If the Atlanta Police Department is unable or unwilling to restore order and protect both state buildings and Georgia’s citizens then the governor has a duty to take action to protect the citizens of his state.

Peaceful protests should be protected but the government needs to crack down on those who are committing violence against innocent Georgians or their property.

Originally published on The Resurgent

The Public Health Hypocrites

There is a rumor going around on social media that the pandemic is over. That isn’t the case, but you’d never know it from public health officials around the country who seem to have tossed social distancing restrictions out in favor of the right to protest.

“A case in point is a recent article in Slate that details an open letter from infectious disease experts at the University of Washington, who write that “protests against systemic racism, which fosters the disproportionate burden of COVID-19 on Black communities and also perpetuates police violence, must be supported.” The letter has been signed by more than 1,000 medical experts from around the country.

Wait. Isn’t there a pandemic on?

While pictures of the protests and riots show some demonstrators wearing masks, many are not, and few are maintaining social distancing. Crowded conditions with a lot of physical activity and yelling would seem to be ripe for transmission of a very communicable disease that travels through the air on aerosol droplets of saliva.

Yet many doctors, such as Jennifer Nuzzo, an associate professor of environmental health and epidemiology at Johns Hopkins, argue that the risk of spreading the virus is worth it.

Jennifer Nuzzo, DrPH

✔@JenniferNuzzo

We should always evaluate the risks and benefits of efforts to control the virus. In this moment the public health risks of not protesting to demand an end to systemic racism greatly exceed the harms of the virus. https://twitter.com/jeremykonyndyk/status/1267805646348484609 …

Jeremy BLACK LIVES MATTER Konyndyk

✔@JeremyKonyndyk

For folks wondering why public health experts aren’t calling out the protests as violations of social distancing, take it from the former head of the CDC: https://twitter.com/drtomfrieden/status/1267796218496901121 …

416

2:25 PM - Jun 2, 2020

Twitter Ads info and privacy

3,018 people are talking about this

Similarly, Dr. Abraar Karan of Boston’s Brigham and Women’s Hospital and Harvard Medical School tweeted that he had concerns about the protests but “the status quo wasn’t going to stop COVID-19 either.”

Abraar Karan

✔@AbraarKaran

 · May 31, 2020

Replying to @AbraarKaran

2/ ...#covid19 will not go away.

Failing to treat every person w/ justice, respect, fairness, & humanity is a part of a *failed* epidemic response.

Epidemics like #covid19 are not solved in vacuums.

Abraar Karan

✔@AbraarKaran

3/ And while I have voiced concerns that protests risk creating more outbreaks, the status quo wasn’t going to stop #covid19 either

As much as this is a chapter in American racism, so too is it in the #covid19 response

It’s beyond time for us in public health to step up.

132

6:19 PM - May 31, 2020 · Boston, MA

Twitter Ads info and privacy

37 people are talking about this

The logic is explained in the open letter which states the doctors’ belief that “white supremacy is a lethal public health issue that predates and contributes to COVID-19.” The letter goes on to claim that “Black people” are endangered from Coronavirus because of the effect of “long-standing systems of oppression and bias which have subjected people of color to discrimination in the healthcare setting, decreased access to
medical care and healthy food, unsafe working conditions, mass incarceration, exposure to pollution and noise,
and the toxic effects of stress.”

The letter notes that “Black people are also more likely to develop COVID-19” and that they “are diagnosed later in the disease course and have a higher rate of hospitalization, mechanical ventilation, and death.” The signers consider this difference “yet another lethal manifestation of white supremacy.”

The signatories go on to say, “Staying at home, social distancing, and public masking are effective at minimizing the spread of COVID-19.”

Why, then, are the public health experts arguing that people should take it to the streets?

“To the extent possible,” the doctors write, “We support the application of these public health best practices during demonstrations that call attention to the pervasive lethal force of white supremacy. However, as public health
advocates, we do not condemn these gatherings as risky for COVID-19 transmission. We support them as vital to the national public health and to the threatened health specifically of Black people in the United States.”

So, these doctors argue that protesting is “vital” in this case. But don’t worry, they don’t support all protests. The letter clarifies, “This should not be confused with a permissive stance on all gatherings, particularly protests against stay-home orders. Those actions not only oppose public health interventions, but are also rooted in white nationalism and run contrary to respect for Black lives.”

So these doctors only support protesting in a pandemic if it is a cause that they feel good about. Unfortunately, as Ben Shapiro is fond of saying, “Facts don’t care about your feelings.”

And COVID-19 is a fact of life. It is a virus, which also does not care about your feelings.

These doctors are doing the public in general – and the many many Black people involved in the protests in particular – a disservice by pretending that the demonstrations will resolve the issue of police brutality and the specter of racism. Protests are more about feeling like you are doing something than actually accomplishing anything. (And I say this as someone who demonstrated with the Tea Party during the Obama era and who has taken part in pro-life demonstrations.)

The letter does suggest that demonstrators maintain a six-foot distance, wear masks, and take other precautions, but these mitigation strategies seem to have been used at few, if any, protests in the US (unlike this protest in Israel back in April). By encouraging people to engage in protests where social distancing is not practiced, the doctors are contributing to the higher rate of COVID-19 among the Black population that they profess to abhor.

In doing so, these doctors put hypocrisy on display and undermine their credibility. Why should people who want to open businesses, schools, or churches listen to the doctors’ recommendations to stay closed or social distance if they are telling people to protest in the street? Businesses can use the same social distancing restrictions that they recommend for protesters and can probably do so more effectively.

Admittedly, there are a few additional factors to consider. There has long been speculation that COVID-19 will be a seasonal bug that could be less dangerous in the summer months. Likewise, many parts of the country are experiencing a flattened curve that could mean that there fewer infected people to be out protesting and spreading the disease. Finally, outside activities in fresh air are probably generally safer than being in a crowded indoor space.

On the other hand, many of those possibilities are just theories at this point. If the curve has been flattened, we may still see a spike after the protests. Densely populated urban areas like those where most protests are occurring are more susceptible to transmission of the virus than rural areas.

It should also be noted that not all public health experts are signing off on demonstrations. One of the most prominent doctors to stand firm on the need for social distancing is none other than Anthony Fauci.

In an interview on Friday with the Washington, DC radio station WTOP, Fauci said, “Every time I hear about or see the congregation of large crowds at a time and geographic area where there is active infection transmission, it is a perfect set-up for the spread of the virus in the sense of creating these blips that might turn into some surges. So I get very concerned.” 

“There certainly is a risk, I would say that with confidence, when you see the congregation of crowds,” Fauci continued, “particularly in a situation where you have a lot of confusion and a little bit of chaos, people running back and forth, taking their masks off, being close in proximity, that does pose a risk.”  

It is too early to tell whether the demonstrations will spark a new wave of COVID-19 infections, but there is a significant risk of a new outbreak. For doctors, that should be the primary focus. As Dr. Fauci warns, even if medical experts are sympathetic to the aims of the protesters, their role as health professionals is to fight disease not advocate for social justice. While racism may be a public health threat in one sense, the Coronavirus is a public health threat in an even more real and urgent sense.

“It is a difficult situation,” Fauci said. “We have the right to peaceably demonstrate, and the demonstrators are exercising that right…it’s important to exercise your constitutional rights to be able to demonstrate, but it’s a delicate balance because the reasons for demonstrating are valid. And yet, the demonstration itself puts one at an additional risk.”

Racism and police brutality aren’t going away. Neither is COVID-19. As a nation, we need to fight all three. That means not jettisoning social distancing for political correctness.

Originally published on The Resurgent