Inside a courtroom in Kenosha, Wisconsin, the 18-year-old stood visibly trembling when he heard the jury's decision to acquit him of all five charges, including premeditated murder.

17-year-old Kyle Rittenhouse killed two men and wounded a third in the midst of racial unrest in Wisconsin, which erupted after the murder of Jacob Blake, a black man, after he was shot seven times by a white police officer in the city last year, and this shooting was the torch that The violent protests were sparked in the first place.

The issue was deeply intertwined, and the political polarization around it between the Republicans supporting Rittenhouse and the Democrats hostile to him added great complexity, even though Rittenhouse was a young white man and all of his victims were white men.

After deliberations by 12 people representing the jury, which lasted for 4 days, the panel accepted Rittenhouse and his attorney's explanation that the killing was simply in self-defense and fear for his life.

The outcome of the trial may prompt a serious reconsideration of self-defense laws across the United States, and whether they adequately weigh the totality of circumstances involving the use of lethal force, particularly in a society where possession of firearms is permitted.

After the ruling was delivered live on November 19 on all major news networks in the United States, many American circles were astonished, and many commentators repeated the statement that “if Mr. Rittenhouse was a black man, and carried a weapon in this way in the streets of The civilian would have been shot dead on the spot by the police, who were often a few meters away from him.”

The Rittenhouse case included several overlapping dimensions, whether with regard to the principle of "self-defense", the constitutional right to "carry a firearm", or the "unstoppable racist incidents" that the United States is witnessing, and among all of the above, an "exceptional case of polarization" sharp political and media.

Rittenhouse's acquittal was based on the principle of a right to self-defense in Wisconsin, considering his state of mind the moment the first shot was fired, when Joseph Rosenbaum attempted to seize the Rittenhouse rifle.

The same principle was relied upon to justify his shooting again minutes later when Rittenhouse confronted two men who tried to kill him, one of whom was armed with a pistol.

The jury (citizens of the state randomly selected to judge the juvenile with legal assistance from the judge and his assistants) was convinced that Rittenhouse believed he was in imminent danger to his life, especially given the chaos and violence that the city had witnessed in the preceding hours and days.

The outcome of the trial may prompt a serious review of self-defense laws across the United States, and whether they adequately weigh the totality of circumstances involving the use of lethal force, particularly in a society where possession of firearms is permitted.

Prior to this incident, there was a general trend to expand the right of self-defense in many states through laws giving individuals the right to use lethal force to protect their homes, themselves, and their families, rather than backing away from confrontation.

The results of the Rittenhouse trial have fueled debate about whether these laws go too far as to encourage murder, or are not far enough.

The Rittenhouse case did not deal directly with the issue of racism in the United States, where the perpetrator and victims are all white men, and black commentators say that Rittenhouse has been given a "white privilege" that has allowed him freedom during the trial and not being detained in recent months.

Mark Richards, Rittenhouse's attorney, referred to the shooting of Blake (the black man), saying: "Other people in this community have shot Blake 7 times and it turned out fine, and my client did it 4 times in 3 quarters of a second to protect his life."

On the other hand, the trial once again highlighted the laws regulating the possession and use of weapons in the United States, and witnessed great variation in the laws of the 50 states in terms of facilities for purchasing different types of firearms, and the conditions to which the laws apply.

Some commentators have accused Judge Bruce Schroeder of sympathy for Rittenhouse for dropping one of the charges, which is that Rittenhouse violated state law that prohibits anyone under 18 from possessing a dangerous weapon, because the semi-automatic rifle he used was a centimeter shorter than the rifles prohibited for minors .

Firearms control activists have cited this case as another example of the kind of loophole that could be remedied by more consistent national firearms laws.

While Wisconsin's 30-year-old law contains a provision allowing 16 to 17-year-olds to go hunting, Rittenhouse's gun was clearly "dangerous" in the circumstances in which he used it.

On the other hand, gun rights activists celebrated Rittenhouse's right to own and use these guns for his own defense.

"If it weren't for 17-year-olds with guns, we'd still be British subjects," Ohio Senate Republican candidate Josh Mandel wrote on Twitter.

No one argued in court sessions the fact that Rittenhouse killed two men and wounded a third, and instead the jury had to look into his motives for the murder, was he acting in self-defence?

Or was he dangerously reckless to show up armed in a city he did not even belong to?

Many Americans glorified Rittenhouse, some saw him as an unfortunate hero who had to kill in self-defense, others saw him as a reckless, violent young man who armed himself with a semi-automatic rifle he shouldn't have, and ended up causing irreparable damage.

The trial drew attention to deep American societal issues, from racial injustice to the right to own guns.

Rittenhouse, with his childish appearance crying, aroused the sympathy of many, and at the same time there is widespread sadness and anger over the outcome of this trial, some of which are expected to reach the Supreme Constitutional Court.

In the end, Rittenhouse was presumed innocent in the eyes of the law, but the fact remains that had he not gone to Kenosha City, the two people he killed would be alive today.