Yeah, don’t think so.. Kyle did the community a service..
He should be given a medal not prison
Kyle Rittenhouse
- Thread starter B00Mer
- Start date
Yeah, don’t think so.. Kyle did the community a service..
He should be given a medal not prison
I find it funny (not HAHA funny, but strange) that you have to go out of your way to look up anything about this trial. Other notorious trails of this sort, such as the Chauvin/Floyd thing was reported 24/7 in the mainstream media.....This one, you have to go to YouTube or some other place to see what's going on.
HMMMMMM....wonder why??????
HMMMMMM....wonder why??????
Yep. He cleaned graffiti. And he came to Kenosha to do it because he'd already cleaned all the graffiti in Antioch.
And as for the gun, he was legally and innocently carrying a gun it was illegal for him to possess.
Turns out not even illegal. The restriction applies to short barreled, and/or guns under a certain overall length for persons of 17 years of age. One assumes that was to allow them to hunt, but that said, Rittenhouse's AR 15 had a legal barrel, and a legal OAL for Kyle to possess it.
He didn't break the law.
Maybe you should have been the prosecutor, you are obviously the smartest person in every room you visit .
How is it reasonable? Are you fucking serious? Sooo it's unreasonable to prohibit a discharged felon who was incarcerated for say, 1st degree murder from legally owning a firearm? It's unreasonable to prohibit people who are known to NOT have a firm grip on their mental state from legally owning a firearm? What are you, a fucking anarchist?
As for limiting rights for some and not others, riddle me this. How was it reasonable for leftist govts to prohibit freedom of assembly for religious groups while at the same time encouraging their leftist shit bag agitators to gather in large throngs to protest and riot? Which also included a state-like funeral for a violent career criminal. Meanwhile some places got so draconian in their effort to "protect" the population that they even prohibited drive-in church services.
But yeah, do keep crying about the injustice of reasonable limits on rights.
As reasonable as it would be to deny those groups the right to refuse warrantless searches, or to deny them the right to free speech.
Hey, your mob are the ones who hold that the right to keep and bear arms is as fundamental as freedom of speech, freedom from unreasonable searches, and freedom from deprivation of life, liberty, or property without due process of law. So I ask, how can you take away a fundamental right from a discharged felon or a person with mental-health problems that the society has not chosen to deem incompetent?
Oh, fer. . .
Petros actually posted the relevant section of the Wisconsin Statutes.
It's section 948.60.
Subsection (1) states, and I quote, "In this section, “dangerous weapon" means any firearm, loaded or unloaded. . ."
And subsection (2), paragraph (a), states, and I quote, "Any person under 18 years of age who possesses or goes armed with a dangerous weapon is guilty of a Class A misdemeanor."
Even if he only meant to scrub graffiti with his AR.
I've been asking this for years and I've yet to have an answer. Rather it's blatantly ignored, because they know they can't answer the question. To answer the question would provide a loophole in their desire for everyone to have a gun.
"Reasonable" is decided by 12 people not a bent, jaded, lesbian with a grudge.
Yep. Jinentonix is suddenly talking about "reasonable" restrictions.
Like maybe discharged felons, the mentally ill but not incompetent, and who knows? maybe even people with protection orders against them, or with a significant rap sheet of major misdemeanours.
And if we're being "reasonable," I've been told that this incident "proves" that Rittenhouse "needed" a rifle with a 30-round clip. Yet all the evidence is that he could have done exactly what he did with an M1 Garand (WWII infantry rifle with an 8-round, fixed magazine) or an SKS (Russian/Chinese Korean-war era battle rifle with a 10-round, fixed magazine). Or with lever-action cowboy rifle. Or with a revolver.
But for some reason, that's not "reasonable."
Like I said earlier you should have been prosecutor , now I would like to add judge jury and executioner. You are definitely the smartest person in the room . And just think you pulled yourself out of abject poverty to be the greatest Internet lawyer , Ev ah . Living the American dream .
That we're still waiting on judgment is interesting. I thought the jury would have been back by now.
As for widdle Kyle boy, if all he wanted to do was 'help' people then he didn't need a gun to begin with.
IMO, of course. I mean, if I want to go help people, I wouldn't think I need a gun as well.
And also interesting that of that night, the biggest issues were because of him...
But meh, in the end, he's the poor white kid who got railroaded, or whatever trash the right tells themselves.
You'd protect property in a US inner city from rioters and looters without a gun?
Yeah fucking right!
The rioters didn't need guns either if they were just going to burn and loot. All they needed were matches and bricks. But that isn't the mind set in the US, is it?
He probably figured, if I have this gun hanging from my shoulders, no one would dare bother me. Little did he know, some people there were stupider than he was.
He probably figured, if I have this gun hanging from my shoulders, no one would dare bother me. Little did he know, some people there were stupider than he was.
No, Kyle is perfectly understandable. Whenever I feel moved to help the community, I go to a different community in a different state to clean graffiti with an AR-15.
Nothing gets rid of ugly graffiti like a rifle! But only an AR-15. An M1, despite winning World War II, just can't get the really tough graffiti.