Binger : "You lose the right to self-defense when you're the one who brought the gun" 😡

Thomas Binger is still doubling down on his assertion that, if you're the person with the gun, you lose the right to claim self-defense. It was particularly gross when he made that statement in court because, well, it's legally incorrect. I'm unaware of any state in the country in which that claim is legally correct.

The thing is that a lot of leftists echo that sentiment whether or not they watched two minutes of the Rittenhouse trial. Again, it's a factually incorrect statement from a legal standpoint; but, a lot of people think that that should be the law.

Taken to any logical conclusion such a law would be a disaster.

Just as an example, I played football with Richie Incognito for a year. Once you've been hit by a 6'4" 315 pound future NFL player while you're 5'11" 170, you don't forget it. Incognito also had plenty of anger management and mental health problems. So, any law taken to its logical conclusion would say that, if I'm carrying a gun, and Incognito just went nuts one day and decided that he wanted to break me in half with his bare hands, my choice would be to let him kill me or to shoot him and let the state kill me later.

Taken to any logical conclusion, such a law would tell a woman to not carry a gun for self-defense. If an unarmed man tries to rape you, you just gotta take it or you'll spend the rest of your life in prison. You've gotta trust that your attacker won't kill you.

Well, since the left is all for segregation and unequal treatment under the law now, maybe the law could only apply to men. I'm not sure that would be constitutional and I'm sure that it would be morally wrong.

I wonder if people who spout this rhetoric think it through for even a second.

It's already dangerous to exercise your right to self-defense in this country. The Rittenhouse case was the most clear and obvious example of self-defense that I'm aware of and he still had to go to trial. No matter how justified you are in shooting an attacker it only takes an overzealous DA to bring charges against you to put you $200k in debt with legal fees before you even go to trial. This kind of law would tip the power balance 100% toward the bad guys.

To say that you lose the right to self-defense if you're the one with the gun is to say that, if you are attacked, you better hope that you're stronger than your attacker - otherwise, you're fucked.