At this moment, conservative media figures are crafting a narrative that black people attempting to disarm a white vigilante who was (1) illegally brandishing an assault weapon after (2) shooting someone in the head *deserved to get shot.*
It is racist and it is sickening.
It is racist and it is sickening.
We saw the usual suspects begin developing this narrative yesterday by framing Kyle Rittenhouse’s victims as bloodthirsty assailants rather than rightly frightened civilians trying to stop him from murdering more people with an assault weapon. Now it’s their party line. Vile. 
By this morning, the narrative began firming up: The men trying to disarm Rittenhouse—who crossed state lines with an assault weapon he possessed illegally, then shot someone in the head—were actually just “attacking him,” and Rittenhouse had a right to shoot them, too.
Here’s the new narrative: Using non-lethal force to disarm a vigilante illegally brandishing an assault weapon—who just shot somebody in the head—is *the real crime,* and that vigilante acted in self-defense when he shot the men trying to disarm him.
This is fully delusional.
This is fully delusional.
Now we’re here. The psychopaths have constructed their narrative; it’s time to promote it.
Disarming a vigilante who’s illegally brandishing an assault weapon is the real violence.
Shooting people who are trying to disarm you is self-defense.
That’s how you justify murder.
Disarming a vigilante who’s illegally brandishing an assault weapon is the real violence.
Shooting people who are trying to disarm you is self-defense.
That’s how you justify murder.
Watch the videos and you’ll see what actually happened:
Men were chasing down a dangerous vigilante (who just shot someone in the head) because the police refused to stop him themselves.
As the men tried to disarm the vigilante (using moderate force), he shot them point blank.
Men were chasing down a dangerous vigilante (who just shot someone in the head) because the police refused to stop him themselves.
As the men tried to disarm the vigilante (using moderate force), he shot them point blank.
Read conservative media and you’ll see a different narrative: Violent black men attacked a good-hearted if overzealous young white man, who had no choice but to fight back in self-defense.
Disarming a potential mass shooter while black, it seems, was the real crime here.
Disarming a potential mass shooter while black, it seems, was the real crime here.
We know at least two of Rittenhouse’s victims were white; they were part of a group of black and white protesters trying to stop him from shooting more people. The idea that there’s no racial dynamic here just because the black protesters avoided Rittenhouse’s bullets is absurd.
