Rittenhouse NOT GUILTY!

BartenderElite said:
That's true, though for most who aren't trained, it's probably not something that crosses their mind in that kind of situation. I've tried to put myself in that position since the trial started: what if I turned around, and just saw someone w/ an AK shooting? I think my 1st thought would be that they were a danger to others and should be stopped.

We're much more conditioned for that kind of shooter at this point, which in itself is sad.

Tough case, all the way around. I think the jury was correct, given the laws. I don't think KR intended to kill anyone. I think he went there with good intent, the volume got turned up fast & he was in over his head before he had a chance to catch his breath. Just a tragic situation for everyone involved.

Many thanks for your service, btw! I know that has become sort of a token thing to say, but it is truly appreciated.
Click to expand...

I don't think KR intended to kill anyone. I think he went there with good intent, the volume got turned up fast & he was in over his head before he had a chance to catch his breath. Just a tragic situation for everyone involved.
Click to expand...

Totally agree. Plus the really sad thing is he will have to live with the guilt of taking two lives for the rest of his days.
 
Into the Night said:
The weapon was not illegally purchased. It is legal for Kyle to carry that weapon in Kenosha. Since these idiots attacked Kyle despite the fact Kyle was armed, they were insane, by your own definition.
Click to expand...

Sorry you are wrong he was 17 when he obtained the gun.
Wisconsin generally prohibits the intentional transfer of any firearm to an individual under age 18.
Click to expand...
 
Eagle_Eye said:
Sorry you are wrong he was 17 when he obtained the gun.
Click to expand...
The gun was kept in a gun safe at his friend's stepfather's home in Wisconsin. It would be legally transferred to Kyle's possession after Kyle's 18th birthday. Until that time its his friend's gun. Kyle broke no gun laws.
 
ExpressLane said:
The gun was kept in a gun safe at his friend's stepfather's home in Wisconsin. It would be legally transferred to Kyle's possession after Kyle's 18th birthday. Until that time its his friend's gun. Kyle broke no gun laws.
Click to expand...

If he was not 18 when he took the weapon and carried it without adult supervision he broke the law. Also he broke the law when he shot 3 men. You can rationalize all you want but the facts are still the facts.
 
Eagle_Eye said:
Wisconsin prohibits the sale or transfer to anyone younger than 18. He was 17 when he aquired the weapon.
Click to expand...

Perhaps the most persistent myth surrounding the case is the idea that Rittenhouse, then 17, brought an AR-15 across state lines.

Rittenhouse lived about 20 minutes outside of Kenosha, in Antioch, Illinois.

His Illinois residence helped spur rumors that the teenager traveled to Wisconsin with his rifle illegally in tow.

But during his trial, Rittenhouse testified in court that he drove himself from his home in Illinois to Kenosha on August 24, 2020.

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.



https://news.yahoo.com/kyle-rittenhouse-didnt-illegally-bring-043226324.html?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly9kdWNrZHVja2dvLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAACzf_Pf9omtKjmLQ1PmWw8D3w0uygR5TEqCOMSwngb1lkZ3JcEhOE7m5yqOhGeXGbBUChhY_xBkosNaGQh8Gg6DB0UQ7MSzr6XhUT5NrFK_IpycDacHXSSYDabInNHTbL445MK5r6r-RM0lMiWvNh0B7r2Wu6x8pezolhX5Vcukn
 
Eagle_Eye said:
If he was not 18 when he took the weapon and carried it without adult supervision he broke the law. Also he broke the law when he shot 3 men.
Click to expand...

Who told you that?

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.

Reasonable use of force in self defense is no crime.
 
Nordberg said:
He went there for the specific reason of confronting legal protesters.
Click to expand...
Just can't drop the playbook, can ya?

Arson, looting, assault, and pillaging is NOT legal. That is NOT a 'legal protest'.
Nordberg said:
He should have stayed home and 3 lives would have stayed the same.
Click to expand...
So you support arsonists, looters, child molesters, and thugs. Gotit.
Nordberg said:
The deaths are serious injury were done by him. It did not have to happen.
Click to expand...
They attacked Kyle. They were stupid enough to attack an armed person. They got shot for it.
Nordberg said:
He went there for that.
Click to expand...
Can't stop using the playbook, can ya?

He has family and works in Kenosha, dumbass.

Kyle can go anywhere he wants.
 
Eagle_Eye said:
If he was not 18 when he took the weapon and carried it without adult supervision he broke the law. Also he broke the law when he shot 3 men. You can rationalize all you want but the facts are still the facts.
Click to expand...

Self defense is not illegal.
Carrying an AR-15 by a 17 year old is not illegal.
Learn what 'fact' means.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top