Kyle Rittenhouse to go free!!!

[Lily]

There are so many armed people in America that it does seem prudent to arm yourself when going into a potentially volatile situation.

just asking for trouble

I disagree.

I trained in fighting techniques so I could defend myself.

When I went out, even to an event where fighting was highly probable, I was not asking for trouble. I was prepared for it if it came to me.

you were honorable, gun zealots have no honor only cowardice

I think honour is a good word to describe it.

But expecting everyone else to be honourable might be a little naive.

I remember when I was a teenager and I got into a few scraps. My dad sat me down and had a talk. He was known to be a bit of a scrapper when he was younger. He told me that when he was young, it was less dangerous. He said that very rarely did someone "put the boots" to someone. So if you lost, it was over. If you said "I've had enough." it was over. He told me that it was much more dangerous for me (this was int he 1980s) because people would continue and beat the shit out of someone even after they could no longer defend themselves.

40 years later, I think honour is even rarer.

you're right
but what your entering is a realm of owning a gun for the reason it is intended, a GUN not an automatic rifle in civilian hands, I mean if I lived in 'Merica I would have a gun, I would HAVE TO HAVE ONE ..I would be in the 2 percent that needs protection from the other 98 percent of gun zealots

When you leave home carrying a weapon as he was, you're looking for trouble, otherwise why have one?

To defend yourself if someone else brings trouble to you, even if you avoid it.

If I carry a can of bear spray when I go hiking in bear country, do you really think I am looking for a confrontation with a bear?

I hope this helps you understand.

pepper spray mentality Vs. the Gun zealot ... two very diff things .. he prays for circumstances in which he may caress his trusty gun, may even invent reasons ..

You are over-generalizing. But even if that were true in this case, the fact is that the circumstances presented the opportunity to smoke a couple of douchebags in legal self-defense.

That's exactly what it was, legally, Kylie is still a pussy that would get smoked if not for his trusty lifeline...as is the case with 98 percent of the gun zealot population

I think I mistook your "may even invent reasons .." as an implication that this was the case with Rittenhouse.

You might be right about the "gun zealots". I am not sure.

There are so many armed people in America that it does seem prudent to arm yourself when going into a potentially volatile situation.

Where I grew up, there was very little gun crime. If you needed to defend yourself, you needed to fight unarmed. So learning and training in different fighting techniques gave you a real-life advantage in self-defense. But in the USA, there is not the same incentive to train in different fighting techniques. You just get a gun.

I doubt I could fight off a few men who were bent on attacking me.

The country is more dangerous for women if we lose our 2A. Lord knows it's already vastly more dangerous because of the "equality act" and how a girl can be raped in school and these dumb fuckers ignore it or deny it.

Yeah, it is complicated.

Even with dudes, and even in a one-on-one fight, there are situations where you are severely outmatched.

I understand that carrying a weapon is desirable. Shit, I carry a knife with me a lot of the time when walking my dog late at night. This one usually:

We had a problem in Vancouver this summer where a growing coyote population was attacking people in the city & even gobbling up their pets while they were taking them out for walks.

So perhaps one of those could act as a last line of defens against them (?).

I always carry a knife but I only carry a sheath knife when out in the woods and in areas where there are Mountain Lion. I don't feel I need it at the supermarket. I never carry a gun - guns are for pussies. The one exception is in wilderness areas where Brown bear, cougar, wolf and the wild conservatives may be. Then I could see carrying a gun. Not in a city - not at a demonstration where emotions are running high and the sight of a rifle would put people on edge.
The question is - if Kryin Killer Kyle hadn't been carrying the rifle, would people have seen him as a threat and defended themselves? Most certainly not - and no one would have been shot.

Taking a weapon to a demonstration is provocative in the very least.

 

[Lily]

So, why did the defense lie about the apple Zoom software. Anybody?

 

[Oerdin]

You really have jumped the shark. I dump ripped a few posts where you said dumb things then you went into you melted down with this sad song and dance. Take your medication because clearly you are losing it.

 

[DDT]

I actually found a rechargeable animal taser lying on the ground 1 day so I picked it up and took it home. I think it's intended for animals like coyotes.

Then 1 day I pressed the button & it emitted a large electrical lightning bolt. Kinda scary if someone is on the receiving end of it.

They could get burned with it.

Be careful carrying a hot stick in public. While legal to own, you'd have a hard time explaining to a cop why you're in possession of a cattle prod in a large city. At the least they'd probably seize it from you. Dog spray is no problem though...

 

[Oerdin]

There are so many armed people in America that it does seem prudent to arm yourself when going into a potentially volatile situation.

just asking for trouble

I disagree.

I trained in fighting techniques so I could defend myself.

When I went out, even to an event where fighting was highly probable, I was not asking for trouble. I was prepared for it if it came to me.

you were honorable, gun zealots have no honor only cowardice

I think honour is a good word to describe it.

But expecting everyone else to be honourable might be a little naive.

I remember when I was a teenager and I got into a few scraps. My dad sat me down and had a talk. He was known to be a bit of a scrapper when he was younger. He told me that when he was young, it was less dangerous. He said that very rarely did someone "put the boots" to someone. So if you lost, it was over. If you said "I've had enough." it was over. He told me that it was much more dangerous for me (this was int he 1980s) because people would continue and beat the shit out of someone even after they could no longer defend themselves.

40 years later, I think honour is even rarer.

you're right
but what your entering is a realm of owning a gun for the reason it is intended, a GUN not an automatic rifle in civilian hands, I mean if I lived in 'Merica I would have a gun, I would HAVE TO HAVE ONE ..I would be in the 2 percent that needs protection from the other 98 percent of gun zealots

When you leave home carrying a weapon as he was, you're looking for trouble, otherwise why have one?

To defend yourself if someone else brings trouble to you, even if you avoid it.

If I carry a can of bear spray when I go hiking in bear country, do you really think I am looking for a confrontation with a bear?

I hope this helps you understand.

pepper spray mentality Vs. the Gun zealot ... two very diff things .. he prays for circumstances in which he may caress his trusty gun, may even invent reasons ..

You are over-generalizing. But even if that were true in this case, the fact is that the circumstances presented the opportunity to smoke a couple of douchebags in legal self-defense.

That's exactly what it was, legally, Kylie is still a pussy that would get smoked if not for his trusty lifeline...as is the case with 98 percent of the gun zealot population

I think I mistook your "may even invent reasons .." as an implication that this was the case with Rittenhouse.

You might be right about the "gun zealots". I am not sure.

There are so many armed people in America that it does seem prudent to arm yourself when going into a potentially volatile situation.

Where I grew up, there was very little gun crime. If you needed to defend yourself, you needed to fight unarmed. So learning and training in different fighting techniques gave you a real-life advantage in self-defense. But in the USA, there is not the same incentive to train in different fighting techniques. You just get a gun.

I doubt I could fight off a few men who were bent on attacking me.

The country is more dangerous for women if we lose our 2A. Lord knows it's already vastly more dangerous because of the "equality act" and how a girl can be raped in school and these dumb fuckers ignore it or deny it.

Yeah, it is complicated.

Even with dudes, and even in a one-on-one fight, there are situations where you are severely outmatched.

I understand that carrying a weapon is desirable. Shit, I carry a knife with me a lot of the time when walking my dog late at night. This one usually:

We had a problem in Vancouver this summer where a growing coyote population was attacking people in the city & even gobbling up their pets while they were taking them out for walks.

So perhaps one of those could act as a last line of defens against them (?).

I always carry a knife but I only carry a sheath knife when out in the woods and in areas where there are Mountain Lion. I don't feel I need it at the supermarket. I never carry a gun - guns are for pussies. The one exception is in wilderness areas where Brown bear, cougar, wolf and the wild conservatives may be. Then I could see carrying a gun. Not in a city - not at a demonstration where emotions are running high and the sight of a rifle would put people on edge.
The question is - if Kryin Killer Kyle hadn't been carrying the rifle, would people have seen him as a threat and defended themselves? Most certainly not - and no one would have been shot.

Taking a weapon to a demonstration is provocative in the very least.

Legally and factually wrong. In Wisconsin you have an absolute right to open carry as long as you are not a felon. It is noticeable that it was the Antifa and BLM rioters who were all illegally carrying firearms.

 

[Lily]

You really have jumped the shark. I dump ripped a few posts where you said dumb things then you went into you melted down with this sad song and dance. Take your medication because clearly you are losing it.

Who are you talking to?

 

[Oerdin]

You really have jumped the shark. I dump ripped a few posts where you said dumb things then you went into you melted down with this sad song and dance. Take your medication because clearly you are losing it.

Who are you talking to?

X who is apparently hallucinating again. He needs to take his meds.

 

[Holliday1881]

So, why did the defense lie about the apple Zoom software. Anybody?

The worse part is the judge is such a tool, when the prosecution objected to the very idea, he said it was their task to disprove the bullshit claim.

Who fuckin doesn't know that it was a bullshit claim?

 

[Lily]

There are so many armed people in America that it does seem prudent to arm yourself when going into a potentially volatile situation.

just asking for trouble

I disagree.

I trained in fighting techniques so I could defend myself.

When I went out, even to an event where fighting was highly probable, I was not asking for trouble. I was prepared for it if it came to me.

you were honorable, gun zealots have no honor only cowardice

I think honour is a good word to describe it.

But expecting everyone else to be honourable might be a little naive.

I remember when I was a teenager and I got into a few scraps. My dad sat me down and had a talk. He was known to be a bit of a scrapper when he was younger. He told me that when he was young, it was less dangerous. He said that very rarely did someone "put the boots" to someone. So if you lost, it was over. If you said "I've had enough." it was over. He told me that it was much more dangerous for me (this was int he 1980s) because people would continue and beat the shit out of someone even after they could no longer defend themselves.

40 years later, I think honour is even rarer.

you're right
but what your entering is a realm of owning a gun for the reason it is intended, a GUN not an automatic rifle in civilian hands, I mean if I lived in 'Merica I would have a gun, I would HAVE TO HAVE ONE ..I would be in the 2 percent that needs protection from the other 98 percent of gun zealots

When you leave home carrying a weapon as he was, you're looking for trouble, otherwise why have one?

To defend yourself if someone else brings trouble to you, even if you avoid it.

If I carry a can of bear spray when I go hiking in bear country, do you really think I am looking for a confrontation with a bear?

I hope this helps you understand.

pepper spray mentality Vs. the Gun zealot ... two very diff things .. he prays for circumstances in which he may caress his trusty gun, may even invent reasons ..

You are over-generalizing. But even if that were true in this case, the fact is that the circumstances presented the opportunity to smoke a couple of douchebags in legal self-defense.

That's exactly what it was, legally, Kylie is still a pussy that would get smoked if not for his trusty lifeline...as is the case with 98 percent of the gun zealot population

I think I mistook your "may even invent reasons .." as an implication that this was the case with Rittenhouse.

You might be right about the "gun zealots". I am not sure.

There are so many armed people in America that it does seem prudent to arm yourself when going into a potentially volatile situation.

Where I grew up, there was very little gun crime. If you needed to defend yourself, you needed to fight unarmed. So learning and training in different fighting techniques gave you a real-life advantage in self-defense. But in the USA, there is not the same incentive to train in different fighting techniques. You just get a gun.

I doubt I could fight off a few men who were bent on attacking me.

The country is more dangerous for women if we lose our 2A. Lord knows it's already vastly more dangerous because of the "equality act" and how a girl can be raped in school and these dumb fuckers ignore it or deny it.

Yeah, it is complicated.

Even with dudes, and even in a one-on-one fight, there are situations where you are severely outmatched.

I understand that carrying a weapon is desirable. Shit, I carry a knife with me a lot of the time when walking my dog late at night. This one usually:

We had a problem in Vancouver this summer where a growing coyote population was attacking people in the city & even gobbling up their pets while they were taking them out for walks.

So perhaps one of those could act as a last line of defens against them (?).

I always carry a knife but I only carry a sheath knife when out in the woods and in areas where there are Mountain Lion. I don't feel I need it at the supermarket. I never carry a gun - guns are for pussies. The one exception is in wilderness areas where Brown bear, cougar, wolf and the wild conservatives may be. Then I could see carrying a gun. Not in a city - not at a demonstration where emotions are running high and the sight of a rifle would put people on edge.
The question is - if Kryin Killer Kyle hadn't been carrying the rifle, would people have seen him as a threat and defended themselves? Most certainly not - and no one would have been shot.

Taking a weapon to a demonstration is provocative in the very least.

Legally and factually wrong. In Wisconsin you have an absolute right to open carry as long as you are not a felon. It is noticeable that it was the Antifa and BLM rioters who were all illegally carrying firearms.

I stated an opinion. I find it provocative to take a weapon to a powder keg. It is not a matter of legality, Overdone.

 

[Oerdin]

So, why did the defense lie about the apple Zoom software. Anybody?

No. It is a fact. A well known fact. The AI of the software creates new pixels when you zoom because it has space to fill so it tries to fill it. That makes it an altered imagine which cannot be presented to a jury as genuine.

 

[Lily]

So, why did the defense lie about the apple Zoom software. Anybody?

The worse part is the judge is such a tool, when the prosecution objected to the very idea, he said it was their task to disprove the bullshit claim.

Who fuckin doesn't know that it was a bullshit claim?

Yeah, the judge is prejudicial. He gave them 20 minutes or so to find an expert to discuss the software. Yeah, like Kenosha has experts in the field...

 

[Lily]

So, why did the defense lie about the apple Zoom software. Anybody?

No. It is a fact. A well known fact. The AI of the software creates new pixels when you zoom because it has space to fill so it tries to fill it. That makes it an altered imagine which cannot be presented to a jury as genuine.

*cough, cough* bullshit *cough, cough*

 

[Joe]

There are so many armed people in America that it does seem prudent to arm yourself when going into a potentially volatile situation.

just asking for trouble

I disagree.

I trained in fighting techniques so I could defend myself.

When I went out, even to an event where fighting was highly probable, I was not asking for trouble. I was prepared for it if it came to me.

you were honorable, gun zealots have no honor only cowardice

I think honour is a good word to describe it.

But expecting everyone else to be honourable might be a little naive.

I remember when I was a teenager and I got into a few scraps. My dad sat me down and had a talk. He was known to be a bit of a scrapper when he was younger. He told me that when he was young, it was less dangerous. He said that very rarely did someone "put the boots" to someone. So if you lost, it was over. If you said "I've had enough." it was over. He told me that it was much more dangerous for me (this was int he 1980s) because people would continue and beat the shit out of someone even after they could no longer defend themselves.

40 years later, I think honour is even rarer.

you're right
but what your entering is a realm of owning a gun for the reason it is intended, a GUN not an automatic rifle in civilian hands, I mean if I lived in 'Merica I would have a gun, I would HAVE TO HAVE ONE ..I would be in the 2 percent that needs protection from the other 98 percent of gun zealots

When you leave home carrying a weapon as he was, you're looking for trouble, otherwise why have one?

To defend yourself if someone else brings trouble to you, even if you avoid it.

If I carry a can of bear spray when I go hiking in bear country, do you really think I am looking for a confrontation with a bear?

I hope this helps you understand.

pepper spray mentality Vs. the Gun zealot ... two very diff things .. he prays for circumstances in which he may caress his trusty gun, may even invent reasons ..

You are over-generalizing. But even if that were true in this case, the fact is that the circumstances presented the opportunity to smoke a couple of douchebags in legal self-defense.

That's exactly what it was, legally, Kylie is still a pussy that would get smoked if not for his trusty lifeline...as is the case with 98 percent of the gun zealot population

I think I mistook your "may even invent reasons .." as an implication that this was the case with Rittenhouse.

You might be right about the "gun zealots". I am not sure.

There are so many armed people in America that it does seem prudent to arm yourself when going into a potentially volatile situation.

Where I grew up, there was very little gun crime. If you needed to defend yourself, you needed to fight unarmed. So learning and training in different fighting techniques gave you a real-life advantage in self-defense. But in the USA, there is not the same incentive to train in different fighting techniques. You just get a gun.

I doubt I could fight off a few men who were bent on attacking me.

The country is more dangerous for women if we lose our 2A. Lord knows it's already vastly more dangerous because of the "equality act" and how a girl can be raped in school and these dumb fuckers ignore it or deny it.

Yeah, it is complicated.

Even with dudes, and even in a one-on-one fight, there are situations where you are severely outmatched.

I understand that carrying a weapon is desirable. Shit, I carry a knife with me a lot of the time when walking my dog late at night. This one usually:

We had a problem in Vancouver this summer where a growing coyote population was attacking people in the city & even gobbling up their pets while they were taking them out for walks.

So perhaps one of those could act as a last line of defens against them (?).

I always carry a knife but I only carry a sheath knife when out in the woods and in areas where there are Mountain Lion. I don't feel I need it at the supermarket. I never carry a gun - guns are for pussies. The one exception is in wilderness areas where Brown bear, cougar, wolf and the wild conservatives may be. Then I could see carrying a gun. Not in a city - not at a demonstration where emotions are running high and the sight of a rifle would put people on edge.
The question is - if Kryin Killer Kyle hadn't been carrying the rifle, would people have seen him as a threat and defended themselves? Most certainly not - and no one would have been shot.

Taking a weapon to a demonstration is provocative in the very least.

Legally and factually wrong. In Wisconsin you have an absolute right to open carry as long as you are not a felon. It is noticeable that it was the Antifa and BLM rioters who were all illegally carrying firearms.

But Kyle was under age & did not have the legal right to carry a gun like that.

 

[Holliday1881]

So, why did the defense lie about the apple Zoom software. Anybody?

The worse part is the judge is such a tool, when the prosecution objected to the very idea, he said it was their task to disprove the bullshit claim.

Who fuckin doesn't know that it was a bullshit claim?

Yeah, the judge is prejudicial. He gave them 20 minutes or so to find an expert to discuss the software. Yeah, like Kenosha has experts in the field...

Yes - 15 minutes I think.

The jackass isn't fit to hear a parking ticket case much less this.

 

[DDT]

But Kyle was under age & did not have the legal right to carry a gun like that.

Yes, but that's a misdemeanor offense. Not a huge deal...

 

[LotusBud]

No contest between Gret

Foretells of a sad future for all, Blazor.

Who's gonna take care of us?! ;-)

No contest between Gretta and Kyle. He's an angry murderer, she's someone who truly cares about the planet and everyone on it.

Shes an exploited autistic child who is being used as a political prop and Kyle is just a regular kid who got attacked by leftwing violent psychopaths who were committing acts of domestic terror.

You have magical thinking.

They're both sad statements about our future world.

I pity your daughters for the world they'll inherit.

I'm not sure why Gretta is a sad statement. She's a powerhouse. It's tragic how much idiotic cons hate her, but in spite of them, she's certainly done more for the environment than the vast majority of adults on the planet have done.

We're not going to solve the global crisis Greta is fighting unless we bring our population growth & levels down, LB.

To this end the cons who don't want birth control or family planning are in no small way to blame if they want the 3rd world to be fruitful & multiply with nowhere for them to go.

That is definitely an issue, as well as all the other stupid shit humans do.

 

[Oerdin]

There are so many armed people in America that it does seem prudent to arm yourself when going into a potentially volatile situation.

just asking for trouble

I disagree.

I trained in fighting techniques so I could defend myself.

When I went out, even to an event where fighting was highly probable, I was not asking for trouble. I was prepared for it if it came to me.

you were honorable, gun zealots have no honor only cowardice

I think honour is a good word to describe it.

But expecting everyone else to be honourable might be a little naive.

I remember when I was a teenager and I got into a few scraps. My dad sat me down and had a talk. He was known to be a bit of a scrapper when he was younger. He told me that when he was young, it was less dangerous. He said that very rarely did someone "put the boots" to someone. So if you lost, it was over. If you said "I've had enough." it was over. He told me that it was much more dangerous for me (this was int he 1980s) because people would continue and beat the shit out of someone even after they could no longer defend themselves.

40 years later, I think honour is even rarer.

you're right
but what your entering is a realm of owning a gun for the reason it is intended, a GUN not an automatic rifle in civilian hands, I mean if I lived in 'Merica I would have a gun, I would HAVE TO HAVE ONE ..I would be in the 2 percent that needs protection from the other 98 percent of gun zealots

When you leave home carrying a weapon as he was, you're looking for trouble, otherwise why have one?

To defend yourself if someone else brings trouble to you, even if you avoid it.

If I carry a can of bear spray when I go hiking in bear country, do you really think I am looking for a confrontation with a bear?

I hope this helps you understand.

pepper spray mentality Vs. the Gun zealot ... two very diff things .. he prays for circumstances in which he may caress his trusty gun, may even invent reasons ..

You are over-generalizing. But even if that were true in this case, the fact is that the circumstances presented the opportunity to smoke a couple of douchebags in legal self-defense.

That's exactly what it was, legally, Kylie is still a pussy that would get smoked if not for his trusty lifeline...as is the case with 98 percent of the gun zealot population

I think I mistook your "may even invent reasons .." as an implication that this was the case with Rittenhouse.

You might be right about the "gun zealots". I am not sure.

There are so many armed people in America that it does seem prudent to arm yourself when going into a potentially volatile situation.

Where I grew up, there was very little gun crime. If you needed to defend yourself, you needed to fight unarmed. So learning and training in different fighting techniques gave you a real-life advantage in self-defense. But in the USA, there is not the same incentive to train in different fighting techniques. You just get a gun.

I doubt I could fight off a few men who were bent on attacking me.

The country is more dangerous for women if we lose our 2A. Lord knows it's already vastly more dangerous because of the "equality act" and how a girl can be raped in school and these dumb fuckers ignore it or deny it.

Yeah, it is complicated.

Even with dudes, and even in a one-on-one fight, there are situations where you are severely outmatched.

I understand that carrying a weapon is desirable. Shit, I carry a knife with me a lot of the time when walking my dog late at night. This one usually:

We had a problem in Vancouver this summer where a growing coyote population was attacking people in the city & even gobbling up their pets while they were taking them out for walks.

So perhaps one of those could act as a last line of defens against them (?).

I always carry a knife but I only carry a sheath knife when out in the woods and in areas where there are Mountain Lion. I don't feel I need it at the supermarket. I never carry a gun - guns are for pussies. The one exception is in wilderness areas where Brown bear, cougar, wolf and the wild conservatives may be. Then I could see carrying a gun. Not in a city - not at a demonstration where emotions are running high and the sight of a rifle would put people on edge.
The question is - if Kryin Killer Kyle hadn't been carrying the rifle, would people have seen him as a threat and defended themselves? Most certainly not - and no one would have been shot.

Taking a weapon to a demonstration is provocative in the very least.

Legally and factually wrong. In Wisconsin you have an absolute right to open carry as long as you are not a felon. It is noticeable that it was the Antifa and BLM rioters who were all illegally carrying firearms.

But Kyle was under age & did not have the legal right to carry a gun like that.

Even the judge said that was extremely unclear as there are two laws which could traditionally each other. One says anyone over the age of 16 may legally possess and carry a long rifle (but not a pistol) while another says they may not. In my book, ties go to defendant and the state needs to write clear laws.

 

[Oerdin]

Fact.

 

[Holliday1881]

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

The charging document says Rittenhouse was carrying a

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

with 30-bullet clip that night, and the argument from his supporters saying that was perfectly fine relies on the tangled legalese and footnotes deep in the lawbook that I will attempt here to put into layman’s terms:
Wisconsin’s ban on minors having rifles or shotguns applies only to those carrying short-barreled weapons, like sawed-off shotguns, or to those who aren’t properly licensed to hunt.
Rittenhouse “wasn’t in violation of hunting regulations,” said John Monroe, a Dawsonville, Georgia, lawyer who specializes in gun-rights cases and has studied the Wisconsin statute. “He wasn’t hunting, and if you’re not hunting you can’t be in violation of hunting regulations.”
Wisconsin is a gun-friendly state, yes. But surely its legislators didn’t mean to write an exemption to allow 17-year-olds to carry the weapon of choice for mass shooters through the streets just so long as they weren’t hunting game at the same time.
“It’s awkwardly worded,” said Monroe of the statute. “But many states treat long guns more leniently than they treat guns that are easy to conceal.”
“The legal language is very difficult to parse,” said Allison Anderman, senior counsel for the Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence in Washington, D.C. She said she began researching this particular subsection when she became aware of the conservative media buzz saying it fully exonerated Rittenhouse, and she concluded that, awkward wording notwithstanding, the purpose of the exemption is to allow minors to hunt animals, not play junior militia.
Anderman pointed to

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

stating that “with certain exceptions for hunting, military service and target practice, a person under age 18 is generally prohibited from possessing or going armed with a firearm,” and to

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

that offer the reminder that “persons under age 18 may not possess firearms for non-hunting purposes.”

 

[LotusBud]

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

The charging document says Rittenhouse was carrying a

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

with 30-bullet clip that night, and the argument from his supporters saying that was perfectly fine relies on the tangled legalese and footnotes deep in the lawbook that I will attempt here to put into layman’s terms:
Wisconsin’s ban on minors having rifles or shotguns applies only to those carrying short-barreled weapons, like sawed-off shotguns, or to those who aren’t properly licensed to hunt.
Rittenhouse “wasn’t in violation of hunting regulations,” said John Monroe, a Dawsonville, Georgia, lawyer who specializes in gun-rights cases and has studied the Wisconsin statute. “He wasn’t hunting, and if you’re not hunting you can’t be in violation of hunting regulations.”
Wisconsin is a gun-friendly state, yes. But surely its legislators didn’t mean to write an exemption to allow 17-year-olds to carry the weapon of choice for mass shooters through the streets just so long as they weren’t hunting game at the same time.
“It’s awkwardly worded,” said Monroe of the statute. “But many states treat long guns more leniently than they treat guns that are easy to conceal.”
“The legal language is very difficult to parse,” said Allison Anderman, senior counsel for the Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence in Washington, D.C. She said she began researching this particular subsection when she became aware of the conservative media buzz saying it fully exonerated Rittenhouse, and she concluded that, awkward wording notwithstanding, the purpose of the exemption is to allow minors to hunt animals, not play junior militia.
Anderman pointed to

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

stating that “with certain exceptions for hunting, military service and target practice, a person under age 18 is generally prohibited from possessing or going armed with a firearm,” and to

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

that offer the reminder that “persons under age 18 may not possess firearms for non-hunting purposes.”

The problem is, cons will twist the shit out of every legal document that exists until they can find a way to make it suit their agenda of aggression, hatred, and revenge.

 

[Lokmar]

WoW - Killer Kyle fired the kill shots when Rosey was on the ground - in the back.
. What a brave fellow he is. That's murder.

PS: Bear spray - LoLz, what kind of pussy carries bear spray?

So why didn't Killer Kyle just carry pepper spray? People aren't as tough as bears. LoLz @ theGrowler

I would have sprayed all those libs with 223's and then pissed on em. First motherfucker that yelled "get him" woulda got one to the center of the forehead.

 

[Oerdin]

I told you the racist left would lie and try to claim the judge was "racist" because they ordered Asian Fusion food for the jury. These idiots are so predictable.

 

[Lokmar]

When you leave home carrying a weapon as he was, you're looking for trouble, otherwise why have one?

To defend yourself if someone else brings trouble to you, even if you avoid it.

If I carry a can of bear spray when I go hiking in bear country, do you really think I am looking for a confrontation with a bear?

I hope this helps you understand.

pepper spray mentality Vs. the Gun zealot ... two very diff things .. he prays for circumstances in which he may caress his trusty gun, may even invent reasons ..

You are over-generalizing. But even if that were true in this case, the fact is that the circumstances presented the opportunity to smoke a couple of douchebags in legal self-defense.

That's exactly what it was, legally, Kylie is still a pussy that would get smoked if not for his trusty lifeline...as is the case with 98 percent of the gun zealot population

My AR's make me more badass than Rambo, faggit ass! PWN3D!

 

[X]

When you leave home carrying a weapon as he was, you're looking for trouble, otherwise why have one?

To defend yourself if someone else brings trouble to you, even if you avoid it.

If I carry a can of bear spray when I go hiking in bear country, do you really think I am looking for a confrontation with a bear?

I hope this helps you understand.

pepper spray mentality Vs. the Gun zealot ... two very diff things .. he prays for circumstances in which he may caress his trusty gun, may even invent reasons ..

You are over-generalizing. But even if that were true in this case, the fact is that the circumstances presented the opportunity to smoke a couple of douchebags in legal self-defense.

That's exactly what it was, legally, Kylie is still a pussy that would get smoked if not for his trusty lifeline...as is the case with 98 percent of the gun zealot population

My AR's make me more badass than Rambo, faggit ass! PWN3D!

you're a pussy

and I know that from here, imagine that

KA PWN3D !!!!!!!

 

[Lokmar]

After reading accounts of the events that night and hearing some testimony, this case really proves that everyone having a gun leads to debacle scenarios.

I don't think anyone, even Kyle Rittenhouse, went there to actively kill anyone. I see where the people shot in this case thought he could be an active shooter, he certainly fits the profile and was walking around with a weapon in a chaotic situation. I believe it's possible that most of those chasing him wanted to actually disarm him and not kill him. I wouldn't trust the average teen male with a weapon. I can see why the EMT guy that survived the shooting might have, in one instant, pointed his gun at Rittenhouse. I'm guessing he also didn't want to die that night.

In his mind, I can see how he thought those chasing him were dangerous to him.

However, at the end of the day, no one shot at him, no matter what he believed. I don't think he should be found guilty.

I do think Americans should remember what peaceful demonstrations are, on all sides. No one needs to be armed to voice their concerns, anger or distrust about an issue.

The cops need to do their jobs regardless of whether they're being appreciated or not. The work for money, not for praise or appreciation. Their mottos often say "to serve and protect", they don't say "we're here to be appreciated".


Too many guns around situations that are full of emotion is a terrible idea.

I will begin by thanking you for being the most reasonable left leaning person on this topic. That is a good thing. Now a few points:

1) Rosenbaum and Ziminski definitely came there looking for trouble. Ziminski even told cops "I came to cause chaos and fuck shit up." Those are also the two people who ambushed and attacked Kyle so all blame falls on them. Oh, Ziminski also incited the mob to chase and attack Kyle after the first incident where Ziminski fired the first shoots. (No proof that it was to find attack Rittenhouse)

2) Even ADA Binger showed video of someone, "the unknown shooter" as they called him at trial, fired three rounds at Kyle during the first incident. This is inaddition to Ziminski firing at least one round. (Even if shots were fired, with the proximity of all these individuals, if they meant to harm him, they could have shot him dead)

3) Grosskreutz is not an EMT. He is an Antifa militant who does "weapons training" for far left communist revutionary groups according to his own social media posts. (He could have shot him and didn't, end of)

4) I agree peaceful demonstrations are good, I disagree that no felons should ever be disarmed. It is a right and must remain so especially since police are not there to protect you so you have to protect yourself and your family. I would like to see more training on proper handling and use though. (I didn't say anything about disarming anyone)

5) I also agree cops should do their jobs. Over and over the problem has been Democrat politicians ordering police and D.A.s not to do their jobs when the offenders are left wing but then demanding disproportionate applications of the law for everyone else. (You're conflating discussion points and responding to things I didn't say)

Responded to each of your points in the post itself in parentheses.

I do think Rittenhouse's mom is a piece of shit though. I would never, not in 1000 years, take my son/daughter to a riot. They are my offspring and I would never sacrifice them for any god damn thing on God's green Earth. End of.

She never took him to a riot. As testified in court she drove her son to his best friend's house 48 hours before the events that night. How do you not know this? That left wing lie was debunked over a year ago.

I don't keep track of this trial obsessively, that's why. And I don't know that she's telling the truth. Who let's their teen leave for the weekend? Did he take his weapon to spend time with his friend?

Seems odd to me.

WTF? You STILL ignorantly think Kyle ever had his friend's rifle in Illinois? You shouldn't even comment on this case if you are so poorly informed. The rifle was always owned by his friend Black and was always kept legally in a gun safe at Black's parent's house. It is astounding how little you know yet still you mouth off as if you do.

This is how liberals operate and it is always out of ignorance.

He paid for it and it was his "friend's rifle" until he turned 18. That's illegal, fuckface. I know because my partner recently bought a gun and wanted another one. The gun he wants can't be purchased in CA. I suggested he have his son, in another state, buy it for him. He said that it's illegal to have someone else buy a gun for him.

It was Rittenhouse's money and it was his intention to keep the firearm, liar.

idiot, nothing illegal happened as long as the buyer kept legal ownership of it. Apples and oranges, retard.

 

[X]

@Lokmar
you gonna be okay bro'
shit, I'd hate to see you go take out a shopping mall now
what a strange cocksucker

 

[Lokmar]

When you leave home carrying a weapon as he was, you're looking for trouble, otherwise why have one?

To defend yourself if someone else brings trouble to you, even if you avoid it.

If I carry a can of bear spray when I go hiking in bear country, do you really think I am looking for a confrontation with a bear?

I hope this helps you understand.

pepper spray mentality Vs. the Gun zealot ... two very diff things .. he prays for circumstances in which he may caress his trusty gun, may even invent reasons ..

You are over-generalizing. But even if that were true in this case, the fact is that the circumstances presented the opportunity to smoke a couple of douchebags in legal self-defense.

That's exactly what it was, legally, Kylie is still a pussy that would get smoked if not for his trusty lifeline...as is the case with 98 percent of the gun zealot population

My AR's make me more badass than Rambo, faggit ass! PWN3D!

you're a pussy

and I know that from here, imagine that

KA PWN3D !!!!!!!

You're a cucknadian faggit and a hysterical lil bitch. Now go spoon with your gay papa, josephine! PWN3D!

 

[Lokmar]

@Lokmar
you gonna be okay bro'
shit, I'd hate to see you go take out a shopping mall now
what a strange cocksucker

Kyle's gonna be ok when he walks on all charges. YUO'll be all melty tho, faggit ass! PWN3D!

 

[X]

@Lokmar
you gonna be okay bro'
shit, I'd hate to see you go take out a shopping mall now
what a strange cocksucker

Kyle's gonna be ok when he walks on all charges. YUO'll be all melty tho, faggit ass! PWN3D!

Melty ??

like yoo the last 5 minutes ???



OmFUCK !

 

[Lokmar]

There are so many armed people in America that it does seem prudent to arm yourself when going into a potentially volatile situation.

just asking for trouble

I disagree.

I trained in fighting techniques so I could defend myself.

When I went out, even to an event where fighting was highly probable, I was not asking for trouble. I was prepared for it if it came to me.

you were honorable, gun zealots have no honor only cowardice

I think honour is a good word to describe it.

But expecting everyone else to be honourable might be a little naive.

I remember when I was a teenager and I got into a few scraps. My dad sat me down and had a talk. He was known to be a bit of a scrapper when he was younger. He told me that when he was young, it was less dangerous. He said that very rarely did someone "put the boots" to someone. So if you lost, it was over. If you said "I've had enough." it was over. He told me that it was much more dangerous for me (this was int he 1980s) because people would continue and beat the shit out of someone even after they could no longer defend themselves.

40 years later, I think honour is even rarer.

you're right
but what your entering is a realm of owning a gun for the reason it is intended, a GUN not an automatic rifle in civilian hands, I mean if I lived in 'Merica I would have a gun, I would HAVE TO HAVE ONE ..I would be in the 2 percent that needs protection from the other 98 percent of gun zealots

civilians dont own automatic guns without federal regulation, stupid ass.