Rittenhouse situation



Costa Rican Gopher

Mind of a Scientist
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
24,785
Reaction score
2,877
Points
113
The statute applies EXCEPT when hunting.

Your claim is that KR broke the following statute correct?

"948.60 Possession of a dangerous weapon by a person under 18."

Where does it state the statute applies EXCEPT when hunting?
 

Costa Rican Gopher

Mind of a Scientist
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
24,785
Reaction score
2,877
Points
113
Ok, I'm done. I've already done that. Perhaps others can try, this is pointless.

Cut 'n' paste the language that says it applies EXCEPT when hunting! This should be so simple. Post the damn stature number. Then cut 'n' paste the text backing your claim. You've spent post, fter post, refusing to do so. Just point to us where it says a 17 y/o can not be in possession of a a long barreled rifle.
 

saintpaulguy

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 21, 2009
Messages
11,381
Reaction score
5,724
Points
113
Cut 'n' paste the language that says it applies EXCEPT when hunting! This should be so simple. Post the damn stature number. Then cut 'n' paste the text backing your claim. You've spent post, fter post, refusing to do so. Just point to us where it says a 17 y/o can not be in possession of a a long barreled rifle.
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

Is he in compliance with 29.304 and 29.503? If not, the prohibition applies.
 


howeda7

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
61,210
Reaction score
16,615
Points
113
Ok, but they aren’t even prosecuted and the cops have taken a hands off approach. So while your idea is valid, it’s not what happened. So now what?

you have no opinion? What other crimes?
There were no cops anywhere that night doing anything about the rioting? Doubtful.

What other crimes? Illegal possession of a firearm, etc.
 

saintpaulguy

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 21, 2009
Messages
11,381
Reaction score
5,724
Points
113
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

Is he in compliance with 29.304 and 29.503? If not, the prohibition applies.
I see where you want to go, and that's Ok. If you think that the hunting cases are meant to be MORE restrictive, I'd say you have a good court fight. As far as I can tell, even his own attorney hasn't tried this, unless I missed it.
 

howeda7

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
61,210
Reaction score
16,615
Points
113
And the very same people think an unarmed woman in the capitol building, who threatened no one on J6 deserved to be killed....
She was trying to forcefully break into the chamber where Congress and the VP were along with a hoard screaming to hang Pence and kill Pelosi. Yet you defend her as innocent. Pathetic.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MRJ

howeda7

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
61,210
Reaction score
16,615
Points
113
Because wanting to lock up and throw the way the key for someone who was using self defense when they were still a child totally fits the end mass incarceration narrative...
Yeah...those are totally facts and not your opinion.
 




GopherBlood666

Well-known member
Joined
May 17, 2019
Messages
2,000
Reaction score
1,470
Points
113
She was trying to forcefully break into the chamber where Congress and the VP were along with a hoard screaming to hang Pence and kill Pelosi. Yet you defend her as innocent. Pathetic.
If you watch the video of the event, someone else actually broke the window. She attempted to climb through after it was broken and was shot. It is also known that the police response in Kenosha was lacking to say the least. There were definitely cops there, just not nearly enough to handle what was going on.
 


saintpaulguy

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 21, 2009
Messages
11,381
Reaction score
5,724
Points
113
A smoking hot cop just testified about ammo (I'm about an hour behind). I guess all those TV shows with hot female cops are true.
There is always one in the magazines they hand out on Las Vegas Blvd. Next to the nurse and the nun.
 



LesBolstad

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
6,037
Reaction score
1,978
Points
113
Kyle Rittenhouse has a stronger claim of self-defense than Ashli Babbitt’s murderer does.

Fact check = true.
 


Section2

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
51,330
Reaction score
5,061
Points
113
So he decided he needed to pump four shots into the guy? Including one in the back?

Again.....the owner states that he didn't ask for assistance. And he never asked inexperienced 17 year old from out of state to help.

Why would I watch the trial. I am not a triggered MAGA like you that needs to convince themselves that a women punching proud boy is actually an upstanding citizen.

One is a video of Rittenhouse punching a women. A video that hasn't been denied. The other is Rittenhouse shooting someone dead. A regular person realizes the stakes involved. Not you. You cling to your first instinct and claim and go down with ship in embarrassing fashion because that's who you are.
He did what most are trained to do, shoot until the threat stops. From chasing and lunging to on the ground in .75 seconds doesn’t equal the narrative you’re pushing of “shot in the back”. Technically true but misleading.
Witnesses testified that he did ask for help and actually assisted them in helping as I stated.
Its fine if you don’t want to watch the trial. But recognize that it makes you ignorant to the facts.
hasn’t been denied? Lol.
 

Section2

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
51,330
Reaction score
5,061
Points
113
This is an example of upside down world. Vigilantes shooting rioters= good. Police shooting rioters=bad.
Kyle was not a vigilante shooting rioters. That’s a ridiculous characterization. He shot people only who were actively attacking him. Ashley Babbitt was climbing thru a window unarmed. The two aren’t remotely comparable. But the point i take is, lefties rioting good and protected protesting, righties protesting - fair game.
 

saintpaulguy

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 21, 2009
Messages
11,381
Reaction score
5,724
Points
113
Kyle was not a vigilante shooting rioters. That’s a ridiculous characterization. He shot people only who were actively attacking him. Ashley Babbitt was climbing thru a window unarmed. The two aren’t remotely comparable. But the point i take is, lefties rioting good and protected protesting, righties protesting - fair game.
Not at all what I said. Les seems to think that police officers and randos have the same rules of engagement. People protesting by breaking stuff of any stripe are bad, in my opinion. It would be best if we had decently trained professionals dealing with them, and officials willing to deploy them. I hope you find this clear enough.
 

Section2

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
51,330
Reaction score
5,061
Points
113
Not at all what I said. Les seems to think that police officers and randos have the same rules of engagement. People protesting by breaking stuff of any stripe are bad, in my opinion. It would be best if we had decently trained professionals dealing with them, and officials willing to deploy them. I hope you find this clear enough.
You didn’t insinuate that KR was a vigilante shooting rioters? Yes you did.
Both police officers and randos have the right to self defense.
 

Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
13,971
Reaction score
6,174
Points
113
And the very same people think an unarmed woman in the capitol building, who threatened no one on J6 deserved to be killed....
Should have shot the first few that climbed in the windows and doors.

Same applied to other rioters breaking into places.
 


short ornery norwegian

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 9, 2011
Messages
12,494
Reaction score
4,621
Points
113
based on what I've read and seen, I expect an acquittal. The prosecution's own witnesses undermined their case - that's just bad prep work by the prosecution. You have to know what your own witnesses are going to say before you put them on the stand.

Having said that:
KR chose to drive to Kenosha and insert himself into a chaotic and potentially dangerous situation.
He chose to take along a rifle - which he was not legally allowed to possess in Wisconsin.

Rittenhouse bears at least some responsibility for what happened. bottom line - if he did not drive to Kenosha, or if he did not bring along a rifle, he would not be on trial right now. at the very least, he set a chain of events in motion which resulted in two people dying.
 

PeoplesFront

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 4, 2020
Messages
581
Reaction score
614
Points
93
100% pure self defense.

If you don't believe this, then you don't. believe what your own eyes see.

Why don't people believe what their own eyes see?
We can clearly see and hear what is being done, but the MSM tells us something different and we go with it because the MSM is the absolute truth. Kyle Rittenhouse did nothing wrong.
 

stocker08

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 2, 2009
Messages
28,158
Reaction score
9,639
Points
113
He did what most are trained to do, shoot until the threat stops. From chasing and lunging to on the ground in .75 seconds doesn’t equal the narrative you’re pushing of “shot in the back”. Technically true but misleading.
Witnesses testified that he did ask for help and actually assisted them in helping as I stated.
Its fine if you don’t want to watch the trial. But recognize that it makes you ignorant to the facts.
hasn’t been denied? Lol.

A) What did his training entail
B) Someone's back isn't a threat

Nope....what you are describing is someone who panicked and kept shooting. Not once or twice. Four shots. With the final one or two at the guys back.

Wisconsin statute states the following:

The actor may not intentionally use force which is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm unless the actor reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself.

Did Rosenhouse have a weapon? A gun? Was his back a major threat? Seems like you think so.
 

stocker08

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 2, 2009
Messages
28,158
Reaction score
9,639
Points
113
This is an example of upside down world. Vigilantes shooting rioters= good. Police shooting rioters=bad.

Depends on who is rioting. MAGA rioters deserve protection from police. MAGA vigilantes deserve protection from the law.

The right wants to condone and celebrate these vigilantes. They think the new normal should be people walking up and down streets armed with ARs. This is of course.....if they are white and subscribe to Q/Trumpism.
 

stocker08

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 2, 2009
Messages
28,158
Reaction score
9,639
Points
113
Having said that:
KR chose to drive to Kenosha and insert himself into a chaotic and potentially dangerous situation.
He chose to take along a rifle - which he was not legally allowed to possess in Wisconsin.

Rittenhouse bears at least some responsibility for what happened. bottom line - if he did not drive to Kenosha, or if he did not bring along a rifle, he would not be on trial right now. at the very least, he set a chain of events in motion which resulted in two people dying.

Bingo. Rittenhouse created a deadly situation that he bears some responsibility with. The others were killed or badly injured. Letting Rittenhouse walk is to disregard the fact that he was entirely irresponsible....and to promote unlawful vigilante justice.

Manslaughter seems like the correct verdict here.
 

FormerFatOL

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 21, 2009
Messages
1,292
Reaction score
1,308
Points
113
Depends on who is rioting. MAGA rioters deserve protection from police. MAGA vigilantes deserve protection from the law.

The right wants to condone and celebrate these vigilantes. They think the new normal should be people walking up and down streets armed with ARs. This is of course.....if they are white and subscribe to Q/Trumpism.

If the cops won't enforce the law (hamstrung by BLM and progressive wokesters in this case) then, yes, armed people will fill the void. Go to any gun range in the Twin Cities and look around to see who's arming themselves. It's not just whitey as you claim.
 

bga1

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
46,198
Reaction score
6,927
Points
113
If the cops won't enforce the law (hamstrung by BLM and progressive wokesters in this case) then, yes, armed people will fill the void. Go to any gun range in the Twin Cities and look around to see who's arming themselves. It's not just whitey as you claim.
stocker frequents the Antifa gun ranges
 

stocker08

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 2, 2009
Messages
28,158
Reaction score
9,639
Points
113
If the cops won't enforce the law (hamstrung by BLM and progressive wokesters in this case) then, yes, armed people will fill the void. Go to any gun range in the Twin Cities and look around to see who's arming themselves. It's not just whitey as you claim.

Regardless of cops enforcing the law....it doesn't permit average citizens to legally take up arms and go patrolling. Vigilante justice is against the law despite what you want to believe. Both Wisconsin and Minnesota have castle doctrines. People are free to protect their own property. They are not allowed to act like fake police around town.

stocker frequents the Antifa gun ranges

Say hello to everyone at the Qanon meet and greet.
 

MarxMaoStalin

Member
Joined
Nov 10, 2021
Messages
44
Reaction score
33
Points
18
Was recently surfing YouTube and saw a video, it all makes sense now.

Grosskreutz was paid handsomely by a shadow MAGA organization to change his testimony and attempt to scuttle the case.

Rittenhouse will be acquitted and be looked at as a hero for the next 3 years. He will be put in charge of building an anti Antifa youth militia immediately, used to combat rioters mainly but also to hunt immigrants.

If the GOP takes back the White House in 2024, Rittenhouse will be installed in a high ranking position, most likely in the ATF.

Bookmark this and come back to it in 2024. It all makes sense now.
 




Top Bottom