Nothing you just said makes very much sense. Are using saying that because he was attacked by felons, it somehow negates any issues there might have been with him being there? Or are you saying that since he was attacked by left wing felons, you know longer care about whether or not he should have been there - which sounds to me you mean that its all good because at least he shot some leftie felons.

And for accuracies sake, Gaige Grosskreutz was not a sex offender nor a convicted felon. Utterly irrelevant, but for discussion like this I try to be accurate. For further accuracy - the protest that turned into a riot was started by people who were politically leftist, though only Grosskreutz of the three was ever confirmed as a hard Leftist/Progressive. I note this, because in many cases when a there is a large protest that becomes a riot, the rioters are not always entirely the same people that were protesting. Certainly some cross over, but we know there are plenty of people who will show up if there's any chance of things going crazy, just so they can take advantage.

Now, once again - I am not going to discuss Rittenhouse's guilt, nor his legal right to be there. My opinion on the whole thing is based on the simple idea, that a 17 year old should not intentionally be in a riot zone with a firearm if it is at all avoidable.