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

[T. A. Gardner]

That's Grosskreutz's mug shots.

That's Grosskreutz's criminal record.

 

[Legion]

Not true. As his criminal history--which was posted--shows, he plead guilty to 2 felony charges. That means he's a convicted felon.

In Wisconsin you need a permit to conceal carry and a felon may not possess a firearm. Grosskreutz was committing two felonies by possessing and concealing a pistol. Rosenbaum was videoed committing several arsons just prior to chasing and attacking Rittenhouse before being shot. He is also a convicted felon.

941.29  Possession of a firearm.

(1m) A person who possesses a firearm is guilty of a Class G felony if any of the following applies:
(a) The person has been convicted of a felony in this state.

 

[Walt]

There is no requirement of a 17 year old to be hunting with a firearm he possesses. Wisconsin law allows any 17 year old to openly carry a rifle. No hunting requirement. No parent permission required.
The homicides were justified. Self defense is not murder.

Wisconsin law does not allow people under 18 to carry a gun, unless they are involved with hunting, target shooting, or military service. Rittenhouse was not hunting, so he has been charged with being a minor in possession of a gun. Night may not like the law, but that is the law.

 

[Into the Night]

It was the middle of a city,

Irrelevant.

and Rittenhouse had not secured a hunting license.

Irrelevant.

It was not meant to be used for hunting.

Irrelevant.

Worse yet, Rittenhouse says he was carrying the rifle as part of a paramilitary force, so not hunting.

Irrelevant.

Maybe if the facts were different, Rittenhouse could get the hunting exception, but the facts are not different.

There is no 'hunting exception'.

So we lead in with a criminal weapon,

The weapon was legal.

which makes the rest of the crimes easier for the jury to imagine.

What crimes? Self defense is not a crime.

They can play the previous films of him attacking people, losing the fight, and screaming he wished he had his gun.

Irrelevant. No such video presented. Do you have a link to one?

The case is not perfect, he is a cute white kid, but it is reasonably good.

False authority fallacies. See Wisconsin law. It is legal for a 17 year old to carry a rifle in Wisconsin. No hunting exceptions required. No other conditions relevant to the incident specified. Self defense is not murder.

 

[Legion]

So we lead in with a criminal weapon.

How is the weapon in question "criminal"?

Of course, I will understand if no explanation is forthcoming.

 

[Into the Night]

Wisconsin law does not allow people under 18 to carry a gun, unless they are involved with hunting, target shooting, or military service. Rittenhouse was not hunting, so he has been charged with being a minor in possession of a gun. Night may not like the law, but that is the law.

That is not the law. You are misquoting the law.

 

[Walt]

Grosskreutz is a felon. He is not allowed to carry a gun, openly or concealed.

You may not like it, but Grosskreutz had a concealed carry permit. He was able to get that concealed carry permit, because he had absolutely no felony convictions. He had every legal right to carry a concealed weapon.

 

[Sailor]

Wisconsin law does not allow people under 18 to carry a gun, unless they are involved with hunting, target shooting, or military service. Rittenhouse was not hunting, so he has been charged with being a minor in possession of a gun. Night may not like the law, but that is the law.

You have no idea why he had that gun. That is for a court to decide. Other than that the law you are hanging your hat on is a misdemeanor. Next.

 

[Phantasmal]

Wisconsin law does not allow people under 18 to carry a gun, unless they are involved with hunting, target shooting, or military service. Rittenhouse was not hunting, so he has been charged with being a minor in possession of a gun. Night may not like the law, but that is the law.

Well, it seems to T. A. and a few others, little Rittenhouse was hunting for felons and even though he had no prior knowledge of this fact, he was justified in shooting them because they had a record!

 

[Walt]

In Wisconsin you need a permit to conceal carry and a felon may not possess a firearm. Grosskreutz was committing two felonies by possessing and concealing a pistol.

Grosskreutz had a concealed carry permit. In the State of Wisconsin, he had every right to carry his legal gun in a concealed way. He was able to get that concealed carry permit, because he was over age 18, had no felony convictions, and lived in Wisconsin.

Grosskreutz having a permit makes proving a crime virtually impossible.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

Here's Anthony Huber's record:

As for Rosenbaum, he's just a total POS. Below is his Arizona Dept. of Corrections disciplinary record while in prison.

Here's the case that was pending against him at the time he was shot...

https://wcca.wicourts.gov/caseDetail.html?caseNo=2020CM000903&countyNo=30&index=0&mode=details

https://wcca.wicourts.gov/caseDetail.html?caseNo=2020CM000836&countyNo=30&index=0&mode=details

He was charged with bail jumping, battery, domestic abuse, and disorderly conduct awaiting trial on those charges.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

Grosskreutz had a concealed carry permit. In the State of Wisconsin, he had every right to carry his legal gun in a concealed way. He was able to get that concealed carry permit, because he was over age 18, had no felony convictions, and lived in Wisconsin.

Grosskreutz having a permit makes proving a crime virtually impossible.

How? He was a convicted felon. That means possession of a firearm was illegal for him. Are you claiming the official records from the state of Wisconsin are in error or a lie? His friend Cheong claimed that stuff, along with saying Grosskreutz wasn't a felon. The state of Wisconsin says otherwise.

 

[gfm7175]

Yup. $948.60, paragraph 3(c), $941.28, $29.304, and $29.593.

Nailed it. As I read those Statutes, the misdemeanor charge shouldn't even stick.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

Well, it seems to T. A. and a few others, little Rittenhouse was hunting for felons and even though he had no prior knowledge of this fact, he was justified in shooting them because they had a record!

What kind of insane strawman argument is that? All I am pointing out is that all three of the people he shot had a history of criminal activity and violence in their past. It doesn't justify anything on its own, but it does argue that they would have been inclined to violence unprovoked and that is largely borne out by the videos available of this incident. If Huber had left Rittenhouse alone and not beat him with his skateboard and tried to take his rifle, he'd be alive right now. If Grosskreutz hadn't gone for his pistol and had backed away from Rittenhouse like he first started to do, he wouldn't have been shot.
Rosenbaum? That major POS, career criminal, serial felon is in a whole 'nother class. He was a violent asswipe committing felonies, and wanted by police. He unilaterally attacked Rittenhouse and was shot for his actions. He deserved what he got and it was clearly self-defense.

 

[Walt]

That's Grosskreutz's criminal record.

You started by claiming it was Cheong's record. Then you claimed it was Huber's record. And now it is supposedly is Grosskreutz's record. How can three different people have identical records?

Of the three, it is closest to Huber's record. It replaces Huber's plea agreement to avoid a felony conviction with a guilty plea.

That's Grosskreutz's mug shots.

Grosskreutz has dark hair, and less sharp features. That is not Grosskreutz. It appears to be Huber. Just as a reminder, whatever Huber's record says does not effect Grosskreutz's ability to get a concealed carry permit for obvious reasons.

Here are pictures of the four of them, and you can clearly see that is NOT Grosskreutz.

 

[gfm7175]

Wisconsin law does not allow people under 18 to carry a gun, unless they are involved with hunting, target shooting, or military service. Rittenhouse was not hunting, so he has been charged with being a minor in possession of a gun. Night may not like the law, but that is the law.

I suggest you read the law a bit closer (and not leave any exceptions out)...

 

[Into the Night]

You may not like it, but Grosskreutz had a concealed carry permit. He was able to get that concealed carry permit, because he had absolutely no felony convictions. He had every legal right to carry a concealed weapon.

Irrelevant. It is not legal for a felon to carry any kind of firearm in Wisconsin, openly or concealed.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

You started by claiming it was Cheong's record. Then you claimed it was Huber's record. And now it is supposedly is Grosskreutz's record. How can three different people have identical records?

Of the three, it is closest to Huber's record. It replaces Huber's plea agreement to avoid a felony conviction with a guilty plea.



Grosskreutz has dark hair, and less sharp features. That is not Grosskreutz. It appears to be Huber. Just as a reminder, whatever Huber's record says does not effect Grosskreutz's ability to get a concealed carry permit for obvious reasons.

Here are pictures of the four of them, and you can clearly see that is NOT Grosskreutz.

Sorry, my error. That is Huber's record. Trying to do this on the fly with three felon's records is not easy.

 

[Into the Night]

You have no idea why he had that gun. That is for a court to decide. Other than that the law you are hanging your hat on is a misdemeanor. Next.

He doesn't need a reason to have the gun.

 

[Into the Night]

Well, it seems to T. A. and a few others, little Rittenhouse was hunting for felons and even though he had no prior knowledge of this fact, he was justified in shooting them because they had a record!

Nope. He shot them in self defense.