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

[Rambunctious]

He had no friend with a store there.
Rittenhouse had intended to defend a car dealership, but they told him to move on.

Thanks for the clarification but just whom told him to move on?...
He has a right to defend his friends property... especially when the cops are ordered to stand down to the rioting....

 

[Deplorable Yankee]

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?