The persons Rittenhouse shot were all criminal felons with records...

How the Left thinks...

giphy.gif

Same works for the Right. A key example being Donald J. Trump.
 
He is also charged with possession of a dangerous weapon by someone under the age of 18 after taking the Smith & Wesson AR-15 style rifle across states into Kenosha.[/I]

That's a misdemeanor, and the rifle in question was owned by a Wisconsin resident, according to a defense attorney.

https://www.jsonline.com/story/news/crime/2020/08/26/wisconsin-open-carry-law-kyle-rittenhouse-legally-have-gun-kenosha-protest-shooting-17-year-old/3444231001/
 
All of which can be true and still not get Rittenhouse off the hook for all of his charges. Next time, please check your facts, Chief.

https://www.newsweek.com/pam-bondi-kyle-rittenhouse-fox-hannity-1533746
Rittenhouse is charged with first-degree intentional homicide, first-degree reckless homicide, attempted first-degree intentional homicide and two counts of first-degree reckless endangerment.

He is also charged with possession of a dangerous weapon by someone under the age of 18 after taking the Smith & Wesson AR-15 style rifle across states into Kenosha.

I'm betting the only charge that will stand is the misdemeanor possession of a firearm by someone under age.

In the case of Grosskreutz, his having a pistol and aiming it at Rittenhouse clearly is a case of self-defense. Try getting a jury to vote otherwise. Huber attacked Rittenhouse unilaterally with a skateboard, one of several people that attacked him at that point. Huber struggled with Rittenhouse for his weapon too. Again, it's going to be hard to get a jury to buy murder in that case.
Rosenbaum is more problematic. The DA might, might, be able to present a case there but even that one will be weak seeing as how Rosenbaum chased Rittenhouse, physically assaulted him at least once, was in the known commission of felonies (arson), and cornered Rittenhouse by that gas station. That's going to be a real stretch to prove Rittenhouse intended to unilaterally, and without a valid reason murdered Rosenbaum.
 
That's a misdemeanor, and the rifle in question was owned by a Wisconsin resident, according to a defense attorney.

https://www.jsonline.com/story/news/crime/2020/08/26/wisconsin-open-carry-law-kyle-rittenhouse-legally-have-gun-kenosha-protest-shooting-17-year-old/3444231001/

Is it?
 
I'm betting the only charge that will stand is the misdemeanor possession of a firearm by someone under age.

In the case of Grosskreutz, his having a pistol and aiming it at Rittenhouse clearly is a case of self-defense. Try getting a jury to vote otherwise. Huber attacked Rittenhouse unilaterally with a skateboard, one of several people that attacked him at that point. Huber struggled with Rittenhouse for his weapon too. Again, it's going to be hard to get a jury to buy murder in that case.
Rosenbaum is more problematic. The DA might, might, be able to present a case there but even that one will be weak seeing as how Rosenbaum chased Rittenhouse, physically assaulted him at least once, was in the known commission of felonies (arson), and cornered Rittenhouse by that gas station. That's going to be a real stretch to prove Rittenhouse intended to unilaterally, and without a valid reason murdered Rosenbaum.

How much, Chief? :)

It's up the courts. I'm with you on the murder charges but not so confident on the other ones. There's also the possibility of Illinois and Federal charges depending upon the facts of the case.
 
I mean that you need a lot of patience...if you're waiting for a leftist to post evidence.


68af9e99d950caf89bb1c1eff26b4639.gif


But I can see how being a special ed teacher prepared you for dealing with them.
Correct;) Homonyms are fun:)
 
It is going to be a long, ugly road with a lot of lies, and probably more violence. trump The left and Party of the Jackass will be cheering on the violence all the way.

I fixed your bullshit and made it factual and credible. Dishonest dumbass.
 

It is, and if the defense can prove the weapon in question never crossed state lines, that charge will not stick.

Any person under 18 years of age who possesses or goes armed with a dangerous weapon is guilty of a Class A misdemeanor.

https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/statutes/statutes/948/55

The owner of the rifle might be in trouble, though.
 
A good reason for more Americans to buy guns and become proficient with their use. Freedom isn't free. If you want to stop fascists, be ready to do it with a bullet. When the Civil War comes, be ready to kill those who hate America.

Your stupidity is a threat to the Republic.
 
Most definitely. I lived for killing bad guys and ridding the planet of scumbags. It's good for our nation, good for the gene pool and it's very satisfying.

Legally, I have to wait for the Civil War before it becomes open season on Nazis, KKK and other anti-American assholes, but if they commit suicide, by their own hand or by cop, so much the better.

tenor.gif
 
How many rounds did Rittenhouse fire, Senior Chief? Is it official Naval policy for you to support shooting off half a magazine into a crowd? How do you control a bullet once it leaves the barrel? Do you think any of those houses have holes in them from Rittenhouse's rifle? If so, do the homeowners have both a legal and criminal case against him?

tenor.gif
 
No, it is absurd to think you could erupt with anything other than lie filled lunacy thinking it doesn't make you look stupid and pathetic. ;)

Are you calling Legion a liar and a lunatic? He clearly posted this...


Under Wisconsin statutes that say anyone under 18 who "goes armed" with any deadly weapon is guilty of a Class A misdemeanor. Under that statute Rittenhouse, 17, was not old enough to legally carry the assault-style rifle he had.

But John Monroe, a lawyer who specializes in gun rights cases, believes an exception for rifles and shotguns, intended to allow people age 16 and 17 to hunt, could apply.
 
Are you calling Legion a liar and a lunatic? He clearly posted this...Under Wisconsin statutes that say anyone under 18 who "goes armed" with any deadly weapon is guilty of a Class A misdemeanor. Under that statute Rittenhouse, 17, was not old enough to legally carry the assault-style rifle he had. But John Monroe, a lawyer who specializes in gun rights cases, believes an exception for rifles and shotguns, intended to allow people age 16 and 17 to hunt, could apply.

That's a quote from a newspaper report, which I linked to in that post. "John Monroe, a lawyer who specializes in gun rights cases", said it. I didn't.

If a person is not otherwise prohibited from possessing a firearm, it is legal to carry any legal firearm openly in Wisconsin.

Under Wisconsin statutes that say anyone under 18 who "goes armed" with any deadly weapon is guilty of a Class A misdemeanor. Under that statute Rittenhouse, 17, was not old enough to legally carry the assault-style rifle he had.

But John Monroe, a lawyer who specializes in gun rights cases, believes an exception for rifles and shotguns, intended to allow people age 16 and 17 to hunt, could apply.

Lake County, Illinois, records suggest that at least one death will be charged as first-degree intentional homicide, which carries a mandatory life sentence. The case could resolve in a lesser charge through plea bargaining. Rittenhouse could face a reckless homicide charge in the second death,

https://www.jsonline.com/story/news/crime/2020/08/26/wisconsin-open-carry-law-kyle-rittenhouse-legally-have-gun-kenosha-protest-shooting-17-year-old/3444231001/


You either are too stupid to realize that, or dishonest enough to claim that I said it.

Maybe you're both.
 
Back
Top