Kyle Rittenhouse’s recent social media statement has reignited a fierce national debate about self-defense, race, and media bias, drawing parallels between his high-profile case and that of Karmelo Anthony, a Black teenager from Texas.
On April 16, 2025, Rittenhouse posted on X:
“So, the left thinks what Karmelo Anthony did was self-defense, but what I did wasn’t? Can someone please help this make sense?”
His words have fueled intense public discourse, highlighting two cases involving teenagers, deadly force, and claims of self-defense—cases that, while sharing similarities, differ significantly in context and perception.
During their respective incidents, Rittenhouse and Anthony were 17, claiming they acted to protect themselves. Yet, the circumstances, weapons involved, racial dynamics, and legal frameworks have made their comparison a lightning rod for controversy.
In August 2020, Kyle Rittenhouse, a 17-year-old from Illinois, traveled to Kenosha, Wisconsin, amid civil unrest following the police shooting of Jacob Blake. The protests had turned chaotic, with reports estimating up to $50 million in property damage. Armed with an AR-15 rifle, Rittenhouse said he was there to protect businesses and offer medical aid. During the night, he fatally shot two men—Joseph Rosenbaum and Anthony Huber—and wounded a third, Gaige Grosskreutz.
Rittenhouse’s defense centered on self-defense. He testified that Rosenbaum, who was unarmed, chased him and threw a plastic bag, prompting Rittenhouse to fear for his life.
“If I would have let Mr. Rosenbaum take my firearm from me, he would have used it and killed me with it and probably killed more people,”
Rittenhouse told the court.
Although Rosenbaum never touched him, Rittenhouse argued the pursuit justified his actions. After a widely watched trial, he was acquitted of all charges in November 2021, polarizing the nation.
Karmelo Anthony, a 17-year-old Black high school student from Texas, faces accusations of murdering his white classmate, Austin Metcalf, by stabbing him in the chest during a confrontation at a school track event. According to some accounts, Anthony was sheltering from the rain when Metcalf approached, questioned him, and demanded that he leave. Anthony allegedly warned Metcalf twice before stabbing him when Metcalf grabbed him.
Supporters highlight the physical disparity: Metcalf reportedly outweighed Anthony by 95 pounds and stood four inches taller, while Anthony was seated. The case has taken on racial overtones, with Anthony’s family and advocates arguing that his race has influenced perceptions and legal treatment.
Recently released on reduced bond, Anthony’s family has raised funds via crowdfunding and relocated to a large home in a gated community as his case awaits trial.
Rittenhouse’s April 16, 2025, post explicitly questions what he sees as inconsistent standards:
“So, the left thinks what Karmelo Anthony did was self-defense, but what I did wasn’t? Can someone please help this make sense?”
KARMELO ANTHONY via- youtube
Social media users seized on the comparison, often focusing on race and weaponry. One X user wrote, “Kyle Rittenhouse can be 17 with an AR-15, Karmelo Anthony CAN’T be 17 with a knife. Make it make sense.” Another commenter on a blog sighed, “Remember back when equal treatment under the law was really a thing in the United States?”
Critics of Rittenhouse continue to brand him a “racist” or “right-wing terrorist,” while his supporters champion his acquittal as a victory for self-defense rights. Similarly, Anthony’s case has polarized observers—some rally behind his self-defense claim, citing racial bias against him, while others question why he carried a knife and escalated the encounter.
The incidents differ starkly in setting and tools of violence. Rittenhouse wielded an AR-15 during widespread unrest, claiming he faced multiple threats. Anthony allegedly used a knife in a one-on-one schoolyard dispute. These distinctions shape their legal contexts. Wisconsin’s self-defense laws, applied in Rittenhouse’s case, differ from Texas’s “stand your ground” statutes, which may bolster Anthony’s claim if he reasonably feared bodily harm.
Texas law permits lethal force when someone believes they’re at risk, and knives under 5.5 inches are legal to carry. Yet, interpretations vary. A Reddit user argued, “Stand your ground doesn’t give you the right to immediately escalate to lethal force; it just says you don’t have a duty to retreat when using force.” The legal nuances will be critical as Anthony’s case unfolds.
Media narratives have amplified the divide. Some argue Rittenhouse, a white teenager, benefited from sympathetic coverage in certain circles, while Anthony, a Black teenager, faces harsher scrutiny. Others note Rittenhouse was vilified by mainstream outlets, contrasting with growing support for Anthony among some advocates.
The controversy has a clear political edge. Conservative writer Nathanael Blake, of the Ethics & Public Policy Center, framed Rittenhouse’s prosecution as a leftist attempt to “deter Americans from standing against the left’s routine use of mob violence.” He added, “Left-wing politicians and their media supporters hate effective self-defense,” pointing to criticism of gun rights post-Rittenhouse.
Amid the noise, calls for due process stand out. Rittenhouse had his trial and was acquitted by a jury. Anthony’s case, still pre-trial, lacks a full airing of evidence. As a Reddit commenter put it,
“He is entitled to have evidence brought forth during a trial in front of a jury composed of his peers, and that is the procedure that should be followed.”
Kyle Rittenhouse’s comparison of his case to Karmelo Anthony’s lays bare America’s deep fractures over race, law, and self-defense. Both involve teenagers thrust into life-or-death moments, yet their stories diverge in weapons, settings, and societal reactions. The debate reveals more about political tribalism than legal clarity, with race and ideology shaping narratives as much as facts.
It is very different. Rittenhouse was attacked by adult men with criminal histories (one guilty if child rape) and defended himself. Anthony was the aggressor and has no case for self defense.
Rittenhouse didn’t know the history of the men at the time he killed/ injured them.
Anothiny was seated, in an area he had permission to be in, when he was approached by others who were the aggressors.