Police brutality in another state doesn't give you the right to burn down my livelihoood, burn down my home, or kill me. Unfortunately, NPR and the Washington Post led many to believe otherwise last summer [0][1].
Many rioters openly brandished rifles and handguns. One such rioter fired the first shot of the Rittenhouse incident [2], contributing to Rittenhouse's (true) belief that he was under attack. Rioters sent a 70-year-old man to the ER on the first night of riots in Kenosha, breaking his jaw and knocking him out when he tried to stop them burning down a business. Rittenhouse saw all this on TV before he went to Kenosha next day to help clean up riot damage. Incidentally, the parts of Kenosha that burned were mainly minority-owned small businesses and apartment buildings [3].
If you threaten to kill someone, chase them down a dark street and then attempt to kill them at a riot that you started, the fact that they're armed and you're not means squat. Don't try to kill kids and burn down their towns. You'll live longer.
"Rittenhouse is the one who is armed. People might not have attacked him if he's not brandishing a firearm."
Interesting argument, especially given the video clearly shows Jacob Blake, whom the police shot, was threatening said police with a knife. And he was the "reason" for the protests & riots.
The riots were not glorified. It was the outcome of the unjustified violence against African Americans.
"threaten to kill a kid defending local homes and businesses"
Rittenhouse is the one who is armed. People might not have attacked him if he's not brandishing a firearm.