Kyle Rittenhouse defense again tries, fails to get gun possession charge dropped

[Otis Mayfield]

KENOSHA — Kyle Rittenhouse's defense team has tried again to get a charge for possession of a dangerous weapon by a minor dropped. Again, Kenosha County Circuit Judge Bruce Schroeder denied the motion, and the charge remains.

The charge in question on Tuesday was possession of a dangerous weapon by a person under 18, connected to Rittenhouse's possession of an AR-15 semiautomatic rifle during the shootings. Rittenhouse, who is now 18, was 17 at the time.

According to Wisconsin Statute 948.60(2)(a): "These restrictions only apply to a person under age 18 who possesses or is armed with a rifle or a shotgun if the firearm is a short-barreled rifle or short-barreled shotgun, or if the person is not in compliance with the hunting regulations."

An AR-15 is classified as a rifle.



The defense has disputed this charge since early in the case, including right out of the gate when nationally recognized and controversial attorney John Pierce made himself available to defend Rittenhouse. A Second Amendment argument was raised, arguing that the law itself banning minors from carrying rifles is unconstitutional, but that argument has thus far been unsuccessful.

Kyle Rittenhouse defense again tries, fails to get gun possession charge dropped

Kyle Rittenhouse's defense team has tried again, unsuccessfully, to get a charge for possession of a dangerous weapon by a minor dropped.

www.kenoshanews.com

Do you think the law banning minors from carrying weapons violates the Second Amendment?

6 year olds with AR15s?

 

[Auld Phart]

KENOSHA — Kyle Rittenhouse's defense team has tried again to get a charge for possession of a dangerous weapon by a minor dropped. Again, Kenosha County Circuit Judge Bruce Schroeder denied the motion, and the charge remains.

The charge in question on Tuesday was possession of a dangerous weapon by a person under 18, connected to Rittenhouse's possession of an AR-15 semiautomatic rifle during the shootings. Rittenhouse, who is now 18, was 17 at the time.

According to Wisconsin Statute 948.60(2)(a): "These restrictions only apply to a person under age 18 who possesses or is armed with a rifle or a shotgun if the firearm is a short-barreled rifle or short-barreled shotgun, or if the person is not in compliance with the hunting regulations."

An AR-15 is classified as a rifle.



The defense has disputed this charge since early in the case, including right out of the gate when nationally recognized and controversial attorney John Pierce made himself available to defend Rittenhouse. A Second Amendment argument was raised, arguing that the law itself banning minors from carrying rifles is unconstitutional, but that argument has thus far been unsuccessful.

Kyle Rittenhouse defense again tries, fails to get gun possession charge dropped

Kyle Rittenhouse's defense team has tried again, unsuccessfully, to get a charge for possession of a dangerous weapon by a minor dropped.

www.kenoshanews.com

Do you think the law banning minors from carrying weapons violates the Second Amendment?

6 year olds with AR15s?

Do you think the law banning minors from carrying weapons violates the Second Amendment?

No

Considering I've owned firearms since the age of 12.


Tho I usually used them in fields or forests.

6 year olds with AR15s?

Childish

 

[TNHarley]

I dont remember seeing an age restriction in the constitution.

 

[Rambunctious]

He may have been wrong to bring his rifle to that area...but it saved his life in the end....

 

[Damaged Eagle]

Are the rioters who had firearms being charged for possession and were they checked to see if they even had a carry permit?

Assault and battery?

Were the rioters charged with arson?

*****SMILE*****

 

[JGalt]

I bet he gets off with 6 months in Juvenile Hall.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

According to Wisconsin Statute 948.60(2)(a): "These restrictions only apply to a person under age 18 who possesses or is armed with a rifle or a shotgun if the firearm is a short-barreled rifle or short-barreled shotgun, or if the person is not in compliance with the hunting regulations."

So:
1. Under 18
AND
2. Possesses a rifle or shotgun, IF the firearm is a short-barreled rifle or short-barreled shot gun
OR
3. the person is not in compliance with hunting regulations (whatever they might be, not the case here)

Did I read that correctly?


Rittenhouse did not possess a short-barreled rifle as defined by either the NFA or Wisconsin Law, so why is the charge still standing?

 

[M14 Shooter]

Do you think the law banning minors from carrying weapons violates the Second Amendment?

WI does not ban minors from carrying weapons, as it is legal to do so under certain circumstances.

 

[TNHarley]

10 year olds fought in the revolutionary war.

 

[Meathead]

KENOSHA — Kyle Rittenhouse's defense team has tried again to get a charge for possession of a dangerous weapon by a minor dropped. Again, Kenosha County Circuit Judge Bruce Schroeder denied the motion, and the charge remains.

The charge in question on Tuesday was possession of a dangerous weapon by a person under 18, connected to Rittenhouse's possession of an AR-15 semiautomatic rifle during the shootings. Rittenhouse, who is now 18, was 17 at the time.

According to Wisconsin Statute 948.60(2)(a): "These restrictions only apply to a person under age 18 who possesses or is armed with a rifle or a shotgun if the firearm is a short-barreled rifle or short-barreled shotgun, or if the person is not in compliance with the hunting regulations."

An AR-15 is classified as a rifle.



The defense has disputed this charge since early in the case, including right out of the gate when nationally recognized and controversial attorney John Pierce made himself available to defend Rittenhouse. A Second Amendment argument was raised, arguing that the law itself banning minors from carrying rifles is unconstitutional, but that argument has thus far been unsuccessful.

Kyle Rittenhouse defense again tries, fails to get gun possession charge dropped

Kyle Rittenhouse's defense team has tried again, unsuccessfully, to get a charge for possession of a dangerous weapon by a minor dropped.

www.kenoshanews.com

Do you think the law banning minors from carrying weapons violates the Second Amendment?

6 year olds with AR15s?

That will probably be the only thing that sticks.

I suggest community service, preferably teaching inner-city kids how to shoot to kill. He seems to be very good at it, and they pretty bad.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

WI does not ban minors from carrying weapons, as it is legal to do so under certain circumstances.

Did I misread that law?

The ban is for SBRs, not regular rifles, am I wrong?

 

[M14 Shooter]

Did I misread that law?
The ban is for SBRs, not regular rifles, am I wrong?

I responded in another topic.

*LIVE* Rittenhouse trial, the Communist testifies

More examples of the shill media, they cover for the lying communist: This is the media setting up the excuses for the riots sure to follow from the acquittal.

www.usmessageboard.com

 

[Otis Mayfield]

He may have been wrong to bring his rifle to that area...but it saved his life in the end....

He probably wouldn't have ran down the road to stop those looters if he was unarmed.

2 people would still be alive.

 

[Rambunctious]

He probably wouldn't have ran down the road to stop those looters if he was unarmed.

2 people would still be alive.

And he would not of been there at all if there wasn't a riot that threatened his friends store....while cops were told to stand down....

 

[Meathead]

He probably wouldn't have ran down the road to stop those looters if he was unarmed.

2 people would still be alive.

Not sure that either one of them should be, and the past particle of run is run, not ran.

Ebonics perhaps?

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

He probably wouldn't have ran down the road to stop those looters if he was unarmed.

2 people would still be alive.

He was running away from them ya dumbfuck.

 

[Otis Mayfield]

Not sure that either one of them should be, and the past particle of run is run, not ran.

Ebonics perhaps?

Your mom's ebonics.

 

[Wild Bill Kelsoe]

KENOSHA — Kyle Rittenhouse's defense team has tried again to get a charge for possession of a dangerous weapon by a minor dropped. Again, Kenosha County Circuit Judge Bruce Schroeder denied the motion, and the charge remains.

The charge in question on Tuesday was possession of a dangerous weapon by a person under 18, connected to Rittenhouse's possession of an AR-15 semiautomatic rifle during the shootings. Rittenhouse, who is now 18, was 17 at the time.

According to Wisconsin Statute 948.60(2)(a): "These restrictions only apply to a person under age 18 who possesses or is armed with a rifle or a shotgun if the firearm is a short-barreled rifle or short-barreled shotgun, or if the person is not in compliance with the hunting regulations."

An AR-15 is classified as a rifle.



The defense has disputed this charge since early in the case, including right out of the gate when nationally recognized and controversial attorney John Pierce made himself available to defend Rittenhouse. A Second Amendment argument was raised, arguing that the law itself banning minors from carrying rifles is unconstitutional, but that argument has thus far been unsuccessful.

Kyle Rittenhouse defense again tries, fails to get gun possession charge dropped

Kyle Rittenhouse's defense team has tried again, unsuccessfully, to get a charge for possession of a dangerous weapon by a minor dropped.

www.kenoshanews.com

Do you think the law banning minors from carrying weapons violates the Second Amendment?

6 year olds with AR15s?

This is a great opportunity for the 21 y/o age limit to be ruled unconstitutional.

 

[jbander]

KENOSHA — Kyle Rittenhouse's defense team has tried again to get a charge for possession of a dangerous weapon by a minor dropped. Again, Kenosha County Circuit Judge Bruce Schroeder denied the motion, and the charge remains.

The charge in question on Tuesday was possession of a dangerous weapon by a person under 18, connected to Rittenhouse's possession of an AR-15 semiautomatic rifle during the shootings. Rittenhouse, who is now 18, was 17 at the time.

According to Wisconsin Statute 948.60(2)(a): "These restrictions only apply to a person under age 18 who possesses or is armed with a rifle or a shotgun if the firearm is a short-barreled rifle or short-barreled shotgun, or if the person is not in compliance with the hunting regulations."

An AR-15 is classified as a rifle.



The defense has disputed this charge since early in the case, including right out of the gate when nationally recognized and controversial attorney John Pierce made himself available to defend Rittenhouse. A Second Amendment argument was raised, arguing that the law itself banning minors from carrying rifles is unconstitutional, but that argument has thus far been unsuccessful.

Kyle Rittenhouse defense again tries, fails to get gun possession charge dropped

Kyle Rittenhouse's defense team has tried again, unsuccessfully, to get a charge for possession of a dangerous weapon by a minor dropped.

www.kenoshanews.com

Do you think the law banning minors from carrying weapons violates the Second Amendment?

6 year olds with AR15s?

I believe the judge will do what he is told to do. It will be not Guilty. You will see that in a lot of right leaning courts, so unless it is in front of a progressive judge , be leery.

 

[Meathead]

I believe the judge will do what he is told to do. It will be not Guilty. You will see that in a lot of right leaning courts, so unless it is in front of a progressive judge , be leery.

Doubtless, you and Rosebaum are "brothers. (Mods: note how I avoided a unmentionables less obvious issue?).