Opti
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 10:45:38 GMT -5
Posts: 39,592
Location: New Jersey
Mini-Profile Name Color: c28523
Mini-Profile Text Color: 990033
|
Post by Opti on Nov 20, 2021 9:04:53 GMT -5
"To bring an illegal gun across state lines"
The gun was bought in Wisconsin and stored in Wisconsin.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,385
|
Post by billisonboard on Nov 20, 2021 9:15:57 GMT -5
Absolutely not guilty, charges should have never been bought forth in the first place. Going to be a rich man after all defamation lawsuits are done.
Merica. We shoot people. We sue people.
|
|
ken a.k.a OMK
Senior Associate
They killed Kenny, the bastards.
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 14:39:20 GMT -5
Posts: 14,080
Location: Maryland
|
Post by ken a.k.a OMK on Nov 20, 2021 9:23:18 GMT -5
"To bring an illegal gun across state lines" The gun was bought in Wisconsin and stored in Wisconsin. Then a more accurate statement would be: He illegally possessed a gun and brought it across state lines. Better?
|
|
ken a.k.a OMK
Senior Associate
They killed Kenny, the bastards.
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 14:39:20 GMT -5
Posts: 14,080
Location: Maryland
|
Post by ken a.k.a OMK on Nov 20, 2021 9:59:08 GMT -5
I don't care where the gun was stored. He isn't old enough to have one.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,385
|
Post by billisonboard on Nov 20, 2021 10:01:53 GMT -5
Then a more accurate statement would be: He illegally possessed a gun and brought it across state lines. Better? No. Is it really that hard to understand the gun was stored in Wisconsin where he could use it when he was there? He is not the legal buyer. "... where he could use(d) it (to shoot people) when he was there ..."
|
|
Opti
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 10:45:38 GMT -5
Posts: 39,592
Location: New Jersey
Mini-Profile Name Color: c28523
Mini-Profile Text Color: 990033
|
Post by Opti on Nov 20, 2021 10:07:19 GMT -5
No. Is it really that hard to understand the gun was stored in Wisconsin where he could use it when he was there? He is not the legal buyer. "... where he could use(d) it (to shoot people) when he was there ..." Here's an article with a better summary about the gun. Kyle retrieved the gun from the home it was stored at, probably in Kenosha, before showing up at the demonstration. (His friend is his sister's boyfriend.) news.yahoo.com/kyle-rittenhouse-didnt-illegally-bring-043226324.htmlMyth: Kyle Rittenhouse possessed the weapon illegally
Rittenhouse and his friend, Dominick Black, testified that Black, who was 18 at the time, used Rittenhouse's money to purchase the weapon at a Wisconsin hardware store in May 2020. The two reportedly agreed that Black would keep the gun until Rittenhouse turned 18 in January 2021, according to court testimony.
Black is now being prosecuted for participating in the illegal straw purchase of the weapon on behalf of Rittenhouse. But Rittenhouse's possession of the firearm at the time was technically legal.
Earlier this week, Judge Bruce Schroeder threw out a count of possession of a dangerous weapon by a person under 18 after Rittenhouse's defense argued the rifle was not short-barreled, capitalizing on an exception to the Wisconsin statute involving the barrel length of a gun.
|
|
Miss Tequila
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 10:13:45 GMT -5
Posts: 20,602
|
Post by Miss Tequila on Nov 20, 2021 10:53:11 GMT -5
|
|
pulmonarymd
Junior Associate
Joined: Feb 12, 2020 17:40:54 GMT -5
Posts: 7,333
|
Post by pulmonarymd on Nov 20, 2021 10:58:49 GMT -5
"... where he could use(d) it (to shoot people) when he was there ..." Here's an article with a better summary about the gun. Kyle retrieved the gun from the home it was stored at, probably in Kenosha, before showing up at the demonstration. (His friend is his sister's boyfriend.) news.yahoo.com/kyle-rittenhouse-didnt-illegally-bring-043226324.htmlMyth: Kyle Rittenhouse possessed the weapon illegally
Rittenhouse and his friend, Dominick Black, testified that Black, who was 18 at the time, used Rittenhouse's money to purchase the weapon at a Wisconsin hardware store in May 2020. The two reportedly agreed that Black would keep the gun until Rittenhouse turned 18 in January 2021, according to court testimony.
Black is now being prosecuted for participating in the illegal straw purchase of the weapon on behalf of Rittenhouse. But Rittenhouse's possession of the firearm at the time was technically legal.
Earlier this week, Judge Bruce Schroeder threw out a count of possession of a dangerous weapon by a person under 18 after Rittenhouse's defense argued the rifle was not short-barreled, capitalizing on an exception to the Wisconsin statute involving the barrel length of a gun.He should not have had access to the gun. He was underage. It was not provided by his legal guardian. Even if it was technically legal for him to possess the weapon, he violated the spirit of the law. 17 yo should not have access to a rifle when not provided by a parent. Funny how in another situation I can think of, conservatives would be losing their shit if the same facts were present
|
|
Miss Tequila
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 10:13:45 GMT -5
Posts: 20,602
|
Post by Miss Tequila on Nov 20, 2021 11:14:56 GMT -5
Here's an article with a better summary about the gun. Kyle retrieved the gun from the home it was stored at, probably in Kenosha, before showing up at the demonstration. (His friend is his sister's boyfriend.) news.yahoo.com/kyle-rittenhouse-didnt-illegally-bring-043226324.htmlMyth: Kyle Rittenhouse possessed the weapon illegally
Rittenhouse and his friend, Dominick Black, testified that Black, who was 18 at the time, used Rittenhouse's money to purchase the weapon at a Wisconsin hardware store in May 2020. The two reportedly agreed that Black would keep the gun until Rittenhouse turned 18 in January 2021, according to court testimony.
Black is now being prosecuted for participating in the illegal straw purchase of the weapon on behalf of Rittenhouse. But Rittenhouse's possession of the firearm at the time was technically legal.
Earlier this week, Judge Bruce Schroeder threw out a count of possession of a dangerous weapon by a person under 18 after Rittenhouse's defense argued the rifle was not short-barreled, capitalizing on an exception to the Wisconsin statute involving the barrel length of a gun.He should not have had access to the gun. He was underage. It was not provided by his legal guardian. Even if it was technically legal for him to possess the weapon, he violated the spirit of the law. 17 yo should not have access to a rifle when not provided by a parent. Funny how in another situation I can think of, conservatives would be losing their shit if the same facts were present You can find someone guilty for violating “the spirit of the law”. He was legally allowed to have possession of that gun because of the length of the barrel Do I think he should have been there? He was a 17 year old kid who should have been far away from there. I have no idea what his true intent was by going there. I do believe that the left has tried to crucify him without even knowing the facts or watching any of the trial. Which is evident by the comments in this thread. If you read Wisconsin law, he should have never been charged. But instead of gathering evidence, they charged him ASAP to make an example out of him. Everyone keeps saying if he wasn’t a white kid he would have been convicted. I say if he wasn’t a white kid he wouldn’t have been charged
|
|
chiver78
Administrator
Current Events Admin
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 13:04:45 GMT -5
Posts: 38,385
|
Post by chiver78 on Nov 20, 2021 11:16:40 GMT -5
if he wasn't a white kid, he wouldn't have been alive to charge or not. 🤷♀️
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,385
|
Post by billisonboard on Nov 20, 2021 11:17:35 GMT -5
"... where he could use(d) it (to shoot people) when he was there ..." Here's an article with a better summary about the gun. Kyle retrieved the gun from the home it was stored at, probably in Kenosha, before showing up at the demonstration. (His friend is his sister's boyfriend.) news.yahoo.com/kyle-rittenhouse-didnt-illegally-bring-043226324.htmlMyth: Kyle Rittenhouse possessed the weapon illegally
Rittenhouse and his friend, Dominick Black, testified that Black, who was 18 at the time, used Rittenhouse's money to purchase the weapon at a Wisconsin hardware store in May 2020. The two reportedly agreed that Black would keep the gun until Rittenhouse turned 18 in January 2021, according to court testimony.
Black is now being prosecuted for participating in the illegal straw purchase of the weapon on behalf of Rittenhouse. But Rittenhouse's possession of the firearm at the time was technically legal.
Earlier this week, Judge Bruce Schroeder threw out a count of possession of a dangerous weapon by a person under 18 after Rittenhouse's defense argued the rifle was not short-barreled, capitalizing on an exception to the Wisconsin statute involving the barrel length of a gun. Kyle retrieved the gun from the home it was stored at, probably in Kenosha, before showing up at the demonstration (where he shoot three people, killing two).
|
|
Miss Tequila
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 10:13:45 GMT -5
Posts: 20,602
|
Post by Miss Tequila on Nov 20, 2021 11:21:09 GMT -5
if he wasn't a white kid, he wouldn't have been alive to charge or not. 🤷♀️ Perhaps that’s true. I have no way of knowing. But that has no bearing on the law and what rittenhouse should have been charged with.
|
|
Miss Tequila
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 10:13:45 GMT -5
Posts: 20,602
|
Post by Miss Tequila on Nov 20, 2021 11:23:47 GMT -5
Here's an article with a better summary about the gun. Kyle retrieved the gun from the home it was stored at, probably in Kenosha, before showing up at the demonstration. (His friend is his sister's boyfriend.) news.yahoo.com/kyle-rittenhouse-didnt-illegally-bring-043226324.htmlMyth: Kyle Rittenhouse possessed the weapon illegally
Rittenhouse and his friend, Dominick Black, testified that Black, who was 18 at the time, used Rittenhouse's money to purchase the weapon at a Wisconsin hardware store in May 2020. The two reportedly agreed that Black would keep the gun until Rittenhouse turned 18 in January 2021, according to court testimony.
Black is now being prosecuted for participating in the illegal straw purchase of the weapon on behalf of Rittenhouse. But Rittenhouse's possession of the firearm at the time was technically legal.
Earlier this week, Judge Bruce Schroeder threw out a count of possession of a dangerous weapon by a person under 18 after Rittenhouse's defense argued the rifle was not short-barreled, capitalizing on an exception to the Wisconsin statute involving the barrel length of a gun. Kyle retrieved the gun from the home it was stored at, probably in Kenosha, before showing up at the demonstration (where he shoot three people, killing two). Kyle retrieved a gun from a house in Kenosha where he legally carried it to a demonstration. I’m not saying I want a bunch of people walking around with AR-15s, especially not in riots. But the fact is that the allowed it. If people do not like the law, work to change it. But you can’t find someone guilty because you don’t like the law
|
|
chiver78
Administrator
Current Events Admin
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 13:04:45 GMT -5
Posts: 38,385
|
Post by chiver78 on Nov 20, 2021 11:26:20 GMT -5
if he wasn't a white kid, he wouldn't have been alive to charge or not. 🤷♀️ Perhaps that’s true. I have no way of knowing. But that has no bearing on the law and what rittenhouse should have been charged with. and that is a fair statement. don't you think it's a point we shouldn't ignore in the general conversation? ETA: to add to your other post-many have been working to change the laws, which is opposed mostly by angry white men - which is exactly what Kyle Rittenhouse is. ironic, eh?
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,122
|
Post by Tennesseer on Nov 20, 2021 11:28:28 GMT -5
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,122
|
Post by Tennesseer on Nov 20, 2021 11:31:59 GMT -5
|
|
ken a.k.a OMK
Senior Associate
They killed Kenny, the bastards.
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 14:39:20 GMT -5
Posts: 14,080
Location: Maryland
|
Post by ken a.k.a OMK on Nov 20, 2021 11:35:26 GMT -5
I don't feel comfortable with people walking around with AR-15 rifles unless they are part of the military and have a reason.
He did something stupid which led to the killing of two people. I hope he learns something from this. I know police officers who have killed in the line of duty and have had trouble getting over it.
|
|
chiver78
Administrator
Current Events Admin
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 13:04:45 GMT -5
Posts: 38,385
|
Post by chiver78 on Nov 20, 2021 11:42:44 GMT -5
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,122
|
Post by Tennesseer on Nov 20, 2021 11:42:47 GMT -5
I sure hope so. And I hope the families win. Bigly win. Could Kyle Rittenhouse face civil penalties despite acquittals in Kenosha deaths?As an 18-year-old online college student, Kyle Rittenhouse wouldn't appear to have deep pockets to pay for any award should he face —and lose — a civil trial in the shooting deaths of the two men he was acquitted of killing on Friday. But Rittenhouse has proven to be a prodigious fundraiser when it comes to gathering resources to pay for his bail and defense in the wake of the deadly violence last year in the aftermath of the police shooting of Jacob Blake in Kenosha, Wisc. "He's a public figure now, and money might come in," said Ion Meyn, who teaches law at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. "I'm not convinced there's nothing there." Supporters have already given more than $2 million for his legal defense. If Rittenhouse were taken to civil trial for wrongful death, the teen could claim self-defense, as he did during the criminal case. He has said that he went to Kenosha to protect property from rioters but that he came under attack and feared for his life when he shot three people, two of them fatally. But the burden of proof civil plaintiffs need to make, by a preponderance of evidence rather than beyond a reasonable doubt, is much lower than what Kenosha prosecutors faced during the criminal trial, legal experts say. "In a civil case you just have to prove negligence," said Rory Little, a professor at the University of California Hastings College of Law. "Did his conduct fall below the standard of care that the average person would have?" Rittenhouse "could say, 'I didn't have the intent to kill anyone — I just panicked,'" Little added. "The jury could still say, 'We didn't think the average person would do what you did.' If your conduct is judged to be less than that, you lose." A civil action would also allow a jury to examine a broader range of evidence. In the criminal case against Rittenhouse, Judge Bruce Schroeder barred jurors from considering Rittenhouse's links to the sometimes-violent, far-right Proud Boys and from seeing a video that prosecutors said showed him injuring a teenage girl. Instead, jurors were told to focus on the few moments before the shootings — or what Little called "a narrow piece of the day's action." "In a civil case, you can broaden the field," he said. "You can look into things like, what was he doing there?" Complete article here: Could Kyle Rittenhouse face civil penalties despite acquittals in Kenosha deaths?
|
|
Miss Tequila
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 10:13:45 GMT -5
Posts: 20,602
|
Post by Miss Tequila on Nov 20, 2021 11:49:04 GMT -5
Perhaps that’s true. I have no way of knowing. But that has no bearing on the law and what rittenhouse should have been charged with. and that is a fair statement. don't you think it's a point we shouldn't ignore in the general conversation? ETA: to add to your other post-many have been working to change the laws, which is opposed mostly by angry white men - which is exactly what Kyle Rittenhouse is. ironic, eh? Of course I think the discussion is appropriate. But what I’m seeing is a bunch of people that want to crucify Kyle because he is white. Everyone should have access to a fair trial. Do I truly think of a black man was walking in the middle of a riot with an AR-15 that he would have made it out alive? Here is my honest opinion. A black man walking down a street in my town with an AR-15 would not have faired as well as Kyle. During the riots, the cops stood down and let their towns burn. I honestly do not believe cops would have done anything. Mainly because if one of them had to shoot another black man, even armed to the teeth, all hell would have broken loose, even worse than they were experiencing. In every day life, I would be petrified to see anyone walking down my street with an AR-15. Normal people don’t walk the streets with an AR-15 strapped to their bodies in everyday life.
|
|
Miss Tequila
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 10:13:45 GMT -5
Posts: 20,602
|
Post by Miss Tequila on Nov 20, 2021 11:52:07 GMT -5
I don't feel comfortable with people walking around with AR-15 rifles unless they are part of the military and have a reason. He did something stupid which led to the killing of two people. I hope he learns something from this. I know police officers who have killed in the line of duty and have had trouble getting over it. I agree with you on people walking around with AR-15s. I actually just said that in my reply to chiver.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,385
|
Post by billisonboard on Nov 20, 2021 12:01:59 GMT -5
Kyle retrieved the gun from the home it was stored at, probably in Kenosha, before showing up at the demonstration (where he shoot three people, killing two). Kyle retrieved a gun from a house in Kenosha where he legally carried it to a demonstration. I’m not saying I want a bunch of people walking around with AR-15s, especially not in riots. But the fact is that the allowed it. If people do not like the law, work to change it. But you can’t find someone guilty because you don’t like the law Kyle retrieved a gun from a house in Kenosha where he legally carried it to a demonstration (where he shoot three people, killing two). He is now not guilty of a crime because the jury found him not guilty. They sat through the trial and came to a decision. I support that system of justice so accept their decision. I am only pointing out that the sentence is a misleading incomplete statement of what happened.
|
|
Miss Tequila
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 10:13:45 GMT -5
Posts: 20,602
|
Post by Miss Tequila on Nov 20, 2021 12:05:37 GMT -5
Kyle retrieved a gun from a house in Kenosha where he legally carried it to a demonstration. I’m not saying I want a bunch of people walking around with AR-15s, especially not in riots. But the fact is that the allowed it. If people do not like the law, work to change it. But you can’t find someone guilty because you don’t like the law Kyle retrieved a gun from a house in Kenosha where he legally carried it to a demonstration (where he shoot three people, killing two). He is now not guilty of a crime because the jury found him not guilty. They sat through the trial and came to a decision. I support that system of justice so accept their decision. I am only pointing out that the sentence is a misleading incomplete statement of what happened. Your statement is also misleading. You left out the part that he was attacked prior to shooting. You left out the fact that the guy who lived admitted on the stand that he pointed a gun at Kyle prior to Kyle shooting. Facts matter He didn’t just take an AR-15 and start shooting people.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,385
|
Post by billisonboard on Nov 20, 2021 12:06:55 GMT -5
Kyle retrieved a gun from a house in Kenosha where he legally carried it to a demonstration (where he shoot three people, killing two). He is now not guilty of a crime because the jury found him not guilty. They sat through the trial and came to a decision. I support that system of justice so accept their decision. I am only pointing out that the sentence is a misleading incomplete statement of what happened. Your statement is also misleading. You left out the part that he was attacked prior to shooting. You left out the fact that the guy who lived admitted on the stand that he pointed a gun at Kyle prior to Kyle shooting. Facts matter He didn’t just take an AR-15 and start shooting people. Point accepted.
|
|
pulmonarymd
Junior Associate
Joined: Feb 12, 2020 17:40:54 GMT -5
Posts: 7,333
|
Post by pulmonarymd on Nov 20, 2021 12:14:06 GMT -5
Kyle rotten house, through his reckless behavior, caused the desth of those people. The fact that he is not being held accountable is absurd
|
|
Miss Tequila
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 10:13:45 GMT -5
Posts: 20,602
|
Post by Miss Tequila on Nov 20, 2021 12:21:47 GMT -5
Kyle rotten house, through his reckless behavior, caused the desth of those people. The fact that he is not being held accountable is absurd And yet 12 people who sat and listened to every piece of testimony disagree with you. Perhaps you are driven by emotion and “spirit of the law” instead of the actual law.
|
|
pulmonarymd
Junior Associate
Joined: Feb 12, 2020 17:40:54 GMT -5
Posts: 7,333
|
Post by pulmonarymd on Nov 20, 2021 12:41:56 GMT -5
Kyle rotten house, through his reckless behavior, caused the desth of those people. The fact that he is not being held accountable is absurd And yet 12 people who sat and listened to every piece of testimony disagree with you. Perhaps you are driven by emotion and “spirit of the law” instead of the actual law. Actually, I not. I believe he is responsible for those people’s deaths. The gun didn’t kill them. He pulled the trigger. The law is unjust, and multiple families are now without their family members. This is all based on the fantasy of a good guy with a gun. This just shows how wrong that can go. Multiple lives have been ruined. Any law that allows this outcome needs to be changed. Our gun laws are insane
|
|
Miss Tequila
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 10:13:45 GMT -5
Posts: 20,602
|
Post by Miss Tequila on Nov 20, 2021 12:48:19 GMT -5
And yet 12 people who sat and listened to every piece of testimony disagree with you. Perhaps you are driven by emotion and “spirit of the law” instead of the actual law. Actually, I not. I believe he is responsible for those people’s deaths. The gun didn’t kill them. He pulled the trigger. The law is unjust, and multiple families are now without their family members. This is all based on the fantasy of a good guy with a gun. This just shows how wrong that can go. Multiple lives have been ruined. Any law that allows this outcome needs to be changed. Our gun laws are insane Of course he is responsible for pulling the trigger. That is not the same as being guilty of a crime. Rosenblaum chased him and went for his gun. I would say if Rosenblaum had made better choices he would be alive Huber attacked him with a skateboard and then was shot Last guy admitted in court that he pointed a gun at Kyle before he was shot. Whether Kyle should have been there is as no bearing on whether he has the right to defend himself.
|
|
Opti
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 10:45:38 GMT -5
Posts: 39,592
Location: New Jersey
Mini-Profile Name Color: c28523
Mini-Profile Text Color: 990033
|
Post by Opti on Nov 20, 2021 14:04:32 GMT -5
and that is a fair statement. don't you think it's a point we shouldn't ignore in the general conversation? ETA: to add to your other post-many have been working to change the laws, which is opposed mostly by angry white men - which is exactly what Kyle Rittenhouse is. ironic, eh? Of course I think the discussion is appropriate. But what I’m seeing is a bunch of people that want to crucify Kyle because he is white. Everyone should have access to a fair trial. Do I truly think of a black man was walking in the middle of a riot with an AR-15 that he would have made it out alive? Here is my honest opinion. A black man walking down a street in my town with an AR-15 would not have faired as well as Kyle. During the riots, the cops stood down and let their towns burn. I honestly do not believe cops would have done anything. Mainly because if one of them had to shoot another black man, even armed to the teeth, all hell would have broken loose, even worse than they were experiencing. In every day life, I would be petrified to see anyone walking down my street with an AR-15. Normal people don’t walk the streets with an AR-15 strapped to their bodies in everyday life. That's not what you are seeing even though I am sure Tucker Carlson et al want you to see it that way. Different people would have been mad had it been a white male protestor doing a similar thing.
|
|
Miss Tequila
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 10:13:45 GMT -5
Posts: 20,602
|
Post by Miss Tequila on Nov 20, 2021 14:20:41 GMT -5
Of course I think the discussion is appropriate. But what I’m seeing is a bunch of people that want to crucify Kyle because he is white. Everyone should have access to a fair trial. Do I truly think of a black man was walking in the middle of a riot with an AR-15 that he would have made it out alive? Here is my honest opinion. A black man walking down a street in my town with an AR-15 would not have faired as well as Kyle. During the riots, the cops stood down and let their towns burn. I honestly do not believe cops would have done anything. Mainly because if one of them had to shoot another black man, even armed to the teeth, all hell would have broken loose, even worse than they were experiencing. In every day life, I would be petrified to see anyone walking down my street with an AR-15. Normal people don’t walk the streets with an AR-15 strapped to their bodies in everyday life. That's not what you are seeing even though I am sure Tucker Carlson et al want you to see it that way. Different people would have been mad had it been a white male protestor doing a similar thing. I actually don’t watch tucker Carlson or Fox News. They lost me over the Covid reporting. I’m speaking about comments I’m seeing from actual people, not talking heads. Even just in this thread
|
|