The Kenosha Chaos Our Guns Have Wrought

Folks are sharing this NY Time timeline as evidence that Kyle Rittenhouse was acting in self-defense. It will be up to the courts to sort that out, but it appears obvious that his possession of a gun is the source of his situation today. And the possession of guns by others did nothing to make a tense and tragic situation better. They only served to turn chaos into tragedy.

According to photos and video in the accompanying story, a gun was fired and Kyle Rittenhouse turned towards the sound. Joseph Rosenbaum, a 36 year-old father then apparently moved toward Rittenhouse. It is certainly just speculation, but it is quite likely that in the confusion he believed Rittenhouse was the shooter because he had a rifle in his hands. Thus, Rosenbaum was possibly trying to disarm what he thought was an active shooter. He was shot in the head and killed by Rittenhouse.

Rittenhouse then flees. One would expect he would be agitated and anxious, having just shot and killed someone (there is video elsewhere where he seems to be heard saying he had just shot someone). In any event, his adrenaline and fight or flight response are almost certainly high at this point, not a circumstance that is going to make for what we might call "good choices."

Meanwhile, the nearby crowd, having heard at least two gunshots and seeing one person with fatal injuries, is also certain to be in a highly agitated state. Others exercising their Second Amendment rights apparently pull out their guns, as multiple gunshots can then be heard. Whether they were in response to Rittenhouse's act, the first gunahot that had drawn Rittenhouse's and Rosenbaum's attention or just the general chaos is impossible to discern at this point, but those folks firing can be viewed no more, nor less justified than Rittenhouse at this point. In fact, it could be possible that they, too, were the subject of attacks from others who might have thought THEY were the source of the original gunshot and thus, active shooters in need of takedown, the only difference being their gunshots hit no one.

Amid all this chaos, Anthony Huber, a 26 year-old skateboarder, runs towards Rittenhouse, who bystanders are identifying as an active shooter. Rittenhouse trips and falls, at which point Huber appears to try to hit or tackle him. Rittenhouse, understandably agitated turns and begins firing blindly, killing Huber. He also shot Gaige Grosskreutz, who was holding a hand gun.  Grosskreutz was shot in the arm and ran off.

It is important to keep in mind that by this point, Rittenhouse has fired his gun repeatedly and killed two people. This is precisely the type of situation where the argument for concealed carry is often made - when the so-called good guy with a gun is needed to take out the bad guy with a gun. But in a chaotic scene like this, who is to decide who is good and who is bad? Herein lies the entire problem with our misplaced faith in guns to deliver peace, safety and freedom. They do not. They only deliver what we witnessed here, and apparently witnessed in Portland overnight as well - chaos and death.

Kyle Rittenhouse is no hero. He shot three people, killing two. If he was acting in self defense,  it was only because his gun appears to have made him the subject of suspicion when another gun went off. And we have no idea why that other gun went off (perhaps they were acting in self-defense as well). It is a simple case of armed insanity. This is what our fascination with firearms has wrought. And we can expect more of it. The cycle of insanity must stop. It is hard to see how it can.

Guns, The Constitution and Tyranny of the Strong

Comments by Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe, claiming that militia members “had better equipment than our State Police”—and that their weapons prevented law enforcement from imposing order and protecting peaceful protesters, go to the heart of why Second Amendment proponents arguing gun rights in the name of liberty miss the danger of their argument. 

It's been said countless times that total freedom leads to anarchy, and anarchy leads to tyranny of the strong. We saw that principle at work in Charlottesville last week, where there was no law, only anger and emotion, rendered unstoppable because many involved were invoking their Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms - and someone died because of the lawlessness that ensued. I fear we've not seen the last of such episodes. 

Sadly, too many view the lamentation of the Virginia governor as precisely how the Second Amendment is meant to work, as a protection against an overbearing government. That government forces were outmatched in armaments is viewed as a good thing. 

It is not. Our forefathers wisely stated that a well-regulated militia is necessary to secure a free state. They did not state that a well-armed, unruly mob is necessary to secure a free state. Every loosening of limits on guns increases the odds that events like that which took place in Charlottesville will become armed conflict. It may be those on the right who are most adamant about the Second Amendment guaranteeing unfettered access to firearms, but that right is not exclusive to them. It extends to all. We should not be surprised, therefore, when members of an undefined, anarchic group like Antifa exercises their Constitutionally protected right to arm themselves in anticipation of their next confrontation with the hate groups of Charlottesville. What transpires then will not be classified as terrorism, but civil war. 

God help us then.