As irresponsible politicians, activists, celebrities and “journalists” continue trying to gin up riots over the Kyle Rittenhouse verdict while repeating debunked lies about the case, one of the more aggravating clichés to me is their claim that in our “racist system,” a young black man who shot someone would never be acquitted on grounds of self-defense.

https://www.westernjournal.com/black-man-acquitted-self-defense-day-rittenhouse-busts-myth-unjust-justice-system/

I guess they were so preoccupied ranting angrily and ignorantly that they failed to notice that on the exact same day that Rittenhouse was acquitted by a jury of his peers, a verdict came in on the case of Andrew Coffee IV in Gifford, Florida (note: a red state.) Coffee was charged with the murder of his girlfriend Alteria Woods and the attempted murder of four sheriff’s deputies after they staged a raid of his home in the middle of the night. Police claim they announced their presence, but Coffee claimed he was asleep, he thought a flash-bang set off by deputies was gunfire by home invaders, and he grabbed his gun and fired. Deputies returned fire.

Coffee’s attorneys argued that he believed he was acting in self-defense, and the jury agreed, acquitting him on five of the six charges. He was found guilty of being a felon in possession of a gun, but that was hard to argue with. Unlike Rittenhouse, who, despite the many false claims of his critics, did have a legal right to carry the gun and didn’t take it across state lines (Jesse Watters made the good point that liberals don’t seem to care at all about our national borders, but they seem obsessed with the sanctity of the Wisconsin state line.)

https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/486902/

So there’s an example of how the legal system in America really operates, when it operates fairly and isn’t tainted by politics and mob threats. Anyone, regardless of race, can assert their right to fire a gun in self-defense (in this case, even at police officers), and if a jury of his fellow citizens who examine all the testimony and evidence agrees, then he’s acquitted. You can agree or disagree with any particular trial outcome, but don’t attack the system unless you can come up with a better one.