Rittenhouse ordered to stand trial

[Canon Shooter]

So, Rittenhouse is guilty of a Class A misdemeanor.

Solely for possessing the weapon, yes.

What will be interesting to see is how the prosecution inapproaches the fact that he killed two people will his illegal firearm. I think he's looking at some rather serious charges and some rather serious jail time if convicted, which I think is far more likely than an acquittal....

 

[Leo123]

Solely for possessing the weapon, yes.

What will be interesting to see is how the prosecution inapproaches the fact that he killed two people will his illegal firearm. I think he's looking at some rather serious charges and some rather serious jail time if convicted, which I think is far more likely than an acquittal....

Yes the prosecution could have a field day with the gun violation especially if the defense can't prove self defense. However, IF the notion of self defense is strong, the underage gun charge might not carry as much weight. Acquittal is less likely because the MSM has already tried and hung Rittenhouse, along with GOOGLE, Twitter, etc. I figure if he gets charged it's Manslaughter rather than Murder because the prosecution has a high bar to prove intent.

 

[Mac-7]

Why else are police killing so many Blacks who legally should not have been killed

The Black Brain Disease that causes those who have it to fight with the police and resist attest instead of going quietly is a killer

 

[Canon Shooter]

Yes the prosecution could have a field day with the gun violation especially if the defense can't prove self defense. However, IF the notion of self defense is strong, the underage gun charge might not carry as much weight. Acquittal is less likely because the MSM has already tried and hung Rittenhouse, along with GOOGLE, Twitter, etc. I figure if he gets charged it's Manslaughter rather than Murder because the prosecution has a high bar to prove intent.

I could definitely see that...

 

[Faun]

Nope, it was not:



Wisconsin Statute 948.60 regulates the possession of a dangerous weapon by persons under 18 years old. In paragraph (2) (a) it states:


Paragraph (3) lists exceptions. (3)(c) excludes most people who are under 18, except those in violation of 941.28 or 29.304 and 29.539.


Statute 948.60 only applies to a person under the age of 18 who are in violation of 941.28 or not in compliance with 29.304 and 29.593.

What does it take to be in violation of 941.28? Here is the statute:


In the statute, short-barreled shotguns or short-barreled rifles are those which require a special license under the National Firearms Act. In general, those are rifles with a barrel less than 16 inches in length or shotguns with a barrel less than 18 inches in length, or either which have an overall length of less than 26 inches.

The rifle carried by Kyle Rittenhouse, as an ordinary AR15 type and does not fall into those categories, so Kyle was not violating 941.28.

Was Kyle in violation of Wisconsin statute 29.304 and statute 29.539? These statutes deal with hunting regulation and with people under the age of 16 carrying rifles and shotguns. First, statute 29.304:


Kyle is reported to be over 16 years old, so he was not violating statute 29.304.

Kyle Rittenhouse: Are People under the age of 18 Forbidden from Open Carry in WI?

Wisconsin law does not forbid the open carry of rifles and shotguns for people under the age of 18, generally. Kyle Rittenhouse was not violating the law by openly carrying an AR15 type rifle.

www.ammoland.com

"Kyle is reported to be over 16 years old, so he was not violating statute 29.304."

Your reading comprehension is quite sub-par.

This section applies only to a person under 18 years of age who possesses or is armed with a rifle or a shotgun if the person is in violation of s. 941.28 or is not in compliance with ss. 29.304 and 29.593.​

29.304 is exceptions for hunting or target practice for 12-16 year olds. He was not in compliance with that.

29.593 is a requirement to be certified for hunting in Wisconsin or in the armed service. There's been no evidence publicized which shows he was in compliance with that.

 

[Turtlesoup]

We know Zimmerman was following someone at night, and then ran around in front of them to cut them off.
That is very intimidating.
But we don't know for sure what happened then.
We don't know who started the brawl, and we do not know if Zimmerman is lying when he said Trayvon was trying to get the gun.
We do know Zimmerman bears the responsibility for it since he made it happen even after police said not to.
But we can't tell is it amounted to murder because we only have Zimmerman's side of the story.

What a crock of ******* lies Rigby.

He spotted the druggy and thief Trayvon casing the neighborhood. Followed shortly as he dialed the police hotline. The Dispatcher said it wasn't necessary to follow the suspect and although not required to, Zimmerman stopped following Trayvon at that point. He instead went about searching for a house number because the dispatch asked him specifically where he was at. All of this can EASILy be heard on the dispatch Tape.

Zimmerman did not run in front in Trayvon....Trayvon was less than a minute or two from his dead beat criminal fathers girlsfriends house meaning that the faster trayvon could easily outwalk zimmerman to the house. Trayvon Circled around and hid in the bushes as Zimmerman talked to dispatch. Once Zimmerman hung up the phone Trayvon attacked him as he done the bus driver just weeks earlier. ...as per the evidence and testimony at trial.

 

[freyasman]

He didn't train with the Military or have any supervision or discipline.

He had excellent discipline; he didn't fire a single unnecessary shot.

 

[Mac-7]

The odds are not in his favor...

Shooting ANTIFA dirtbags is a federal crime?

thats news

 

[Faun]

Shooting ANTIFA dirtbags is a federal crime?

thats news

Oh? Show your proof they were with Antifa?

 

[boedicca]

Okay, well, you're just wrong.

Neither in Illinois where he resided, or in Wisconsin where the incident took place is it legal for a 17 year old to be in possession of a firearm unless a very specific set of circumstances is met, and they were not met in Rittenhouse's case.

Can you explain why you believe as you do? Is it based on actual facts or more on emotion?

I posted the analysis which supports what I believe.

Do you believe he's guilty because your Prog Masters and the Media Propaganda Ministry have decided Kyle's life needs to be destroyed because he protected himself against their Antifa-BLM shock troops?

 

[Mac-7]

Oh? Show your proof they were with Antifa?

Whatever

ANTIFA or Black Lies Matter

or the North American Man Boy Love Association

who cares which subversive group they were rioting in the name of?

 

[Faun]

Whatever

ANTIFA or Black Lies Matter

or the North American Man Boy Love Association

who cares which subversive group they were rioting in the name of?

So you made that up too. Figures.

So to which group do you now maintain they belonged?

 

[Faun]

I posted the analysis which supports what I believe.

Do you believe he's guilty because your Prog Masters and the Media Propaganda Ministry have decided Kyle's life needs to be destroyed because he protected himself against their Antifa-BLM shock troops?

No, he's guilty based on what the law actually says -- not what you think it says.

 

[Canon Shooter]

I posted the analysis which supports what I believe.

Your analysis is meaningless, and it doesn't displace the law.

Rittenhouse was armed, and it was not legal for him to be so. Period...

Do you believe he's guilty because your Prog Masters and the Media Propaganda Ministry have decided Kyle's life needs to be destroyed because he protected himself against their Antifa-BLM shock troops?

I love idiotic comments like that. I don't see the kid as a hero so, obviously, I'm some left-wing progressive who supports Antifa and BLM.

Nothing could be further from the truth, dummy.

I'm a registered Independent, but definitely lean towards conservatism. I own 49 firearms; handguns, rifles, shotguns. I'm as strong a proponent of the 2nd Amendment as you'll ever encounter. And as much as I support the 2nd Amendment, I also hold a deep respect for the law, and the law is clear that Kyle Rittenhouse should not have been where he was with the gun that he had. Period. I couldn't give a **** about BLM types, and I've been pretty clear about that since joining this forum. I have no problem, whatsoever, with riotous vermin being gunned down in the street but, if it's going to happen, it needs to be someone who can legally hold a firearm doing the shooting.

Your emotional reach about my "Prog masters" is, at it's very best, ridiculously ignorant, and it demonstrates that you have no idea who the **** you're conversing with. You just read one thing and decide you know anything about me. Well, you don't, and you've proven that you're simply too stupid to want to be educated about it...

 

[JohnDB]

The Wisconsin laws concerning Kyle's class A misdemeanor might not hold up in court...just saying that just because a law was written doesn't mean that it is enforceable or have an ability to prosecute someone for it. (The Law is always an ass)

And IF the prosecutor happens to win that still leaves tons of room for an appeal.
(Probably not SCOTUS level but definitely Federal level)

I would think that with the political nature of this case and the constitutional questions raised that in the end Kyle has an above excellent chance of not being convicted.

That doesn't mean that he and his whole family is not and will not continue to pay for what he has done. His life is still over...I really don't believe that he has what it takes to overcome this international spotlight and create an opportunity to advance himself. (Of course I can be wrong)
Up to this point he has made poor choices for lawyers and advisors. I don't see that trend changing anytime soon.

He, like so many, will end up in backwoods Idaho to hide from the American people in obscurity.... hope he likes cold weather.

 

[Mac-7]

So to which group do you now maintain they belonged?

I dont know or care

As anarchists they might belong to all three

 

[Turtlesoup]

So you made that up too. Figures.

So to which group do you now maintain they belonged?

The law says right to self defense-----Kyle had every right to shoot the child molestor and other two criminals attacking him.

 

[Canon Shooter]

I would think that with the political nature of this case and the constitutional questions raised that in the end Kyle has an above excellent chance of not being convicted.

Seriously?

We live in an age when the names of professional sports teams are being changed because someone's diaper got all twisted about them. We live in an age when a music group, Lady Antebellum, changed their name because the word "antebellum" supposedly has connotations with the American south. All that despite the fact that "antebellum" simply means "before war". There's nothing at all specific to the Civil War.

I was shooting an event in South Carolina a couple of weeks ago and, my hand to God, someone actually complained that my camera lens was white when the camera body was black. I shit you not.

Now we have a kid who was 17 and shot and killed two people who were associated with groups which are very much in support of anything which might be perceived as being "pro black". In their eyes, anything which does not promote and celebrate the black man is something which must be eradicated. These are the people who will could end up on Rittenhouse's jury...

 

[Faun]

The Wisconsin laws concerning Kyle's class A misdemeanor might not hold up in court...just saying that just because a law was written doesn't mean that it is enforceable or have an ability to prosecute someone for it. (The Law is always an ass)

And IF the prosecutor happens to win that still leaves tons of room for an appeal.
(Probably not SCOTUS level but definitely Federal level)

I would think that with the political nature of this case and the constitutional questions raised that in the end Kyle has an above excellent chance of not being convicted.

That doesn't mean that he and his whole family is not and will not continue to pay for what he has done. His life is still over...I really don't believe that he has what it takes to overcome this international spotlight and create an opportunity to advance himself. (Of course I can be wrong)
Up to this point he has made poor choices for lawyers and advisors. I don't see that trend changing anytime soon.

He, like so many, will end up in backwoods Idaho to hide from the American people in obscurity.... hope he likes cold weather.

Why would that not hold up in court?

 

[Faun]

I dont know or care

As anarchists they might belong to all three

LOL

So you're caught lying yet again.

Not to mention, anarchists are rightwing.