Teen arrested for defending him self against the mob!

[Faun]

More weapon grade stupid.

yet, for all the rantings, all the opinions, and the facts presented, a teenager who lacked the guidance of adults with common sense, faces charges of murder.

Even is this boy wins, he still loses. He is in jail and will be for a long time. He will either face a trail(sic) or accept a plea deal. He would be a fool to go to trail(sic).

Actually, it will likely never see a trial, being dismissed by a judge.

He will not be able to afford a great lawyer. Maybe he will get lucky and all those that support him, here, will get together and commit your money to his defense fund. But, even with money, that will not guarantee his lawyers will be great.

He has lawyers tripping over each other to represent him pro bono. He will have legal help on par with Simpson's "dream team", not that he will need it.

Right or wrong really don't matter for this kid now, I am sure he sits in jail and wonders why he was so fucking stupid as to take a weapon of war to a riot to enforce peace.

Yes, he should have just been quietly murdered.

"Actually, it will likely never see a trial, being dismissed by a judge."

Based on what grounds?

 

[Jarlaxle]

Wisconsin law explicitly permits someone age 16-20 to open-carry a long gun as long as he has a FOID card, which Kyle did. (WI accepts his IL card.)

And yet, you post and you post, and you ignore this post, where I have called you out. You are a liar, there is no law that allows Illinois' minors to open carry in Wisconsin.

Here is the link to Wisconsin law. Go ahead and cite the law you claim exists. Hell, I did the work for you and am giving you the link. Now you being the self-proclaimed righteous expert must merely give us the statue.

Go ahead, prove you are not a low life liar

Wisconsin Legislature: 948.60

docs.legis.wisconsin.gov

Boy, you're wrong. I saw the relevant law, and you are just wrong: open carry of a long gun by a 16-20 year old who has a FOID card (Illinois cards accepted) in Wisconsin is, explicitly, legal.

Found where it was copy/pasted to the FB page where I initially saw it...

Section (2)(a) reads, "Any person under 18 years of age who possesses or goes armed with a dangerous weapon is guilty of a Class A misdemeanor."
That ALSO incorporates (3)(c), which reads:
"(c) This section applies only to a person under 18 years of age who possesses or is armed with a rifle or a shotgun if the person is in violation of s. 941.28 or is not in compliance with ss. 29.304 and 29.593"
941.28: Possession of short-barreled shotgun or short-barreled rifle

(Not applicable, Kyle had a full-length AR.)

29.304: Restrictions on hunting and use of firearms by persons under 16 years of age. NOTE: This section does not reference >16 but <18.

(Kyle is 17, so not applicable.)

 

[jc456]

It is not wrong to leave your house with your gun, nor to go to a public place and stand there.

Rittenhouse did not do that. 17 year old Rittenhouse left his mother's apartment in Illinois, crossed the Wisconsin border, obtained a dangerous weapon from, "a friend". He then went into a riot prepared to use the deadly weapon.

There are so many details missing from this story. It will be interesting to find them all out.

Rittenhouse also dropped out of High School, he certainly was not the smartest 17 year old.

Fact, he shot in self defense. Right?

 

[Jarlaxle]

He is not in jail. He has superlative high powered representation in Lin Wood as lead counsel and the entire Fight Back foundation with their attorneys and support staff. Find out the facts before you argue a position.

Wisconsin's best 2A law firm is representing him...not clear if it is pro bono, or someone has agreed to cover his legal fees.

 

[elektra]

He is not in jail. He has superlative high powered representation in Lin Wood as lead counsel and the entire Fight Back foundation with their attorneys and support staff. Find out the facts before you argue a position.

He has a superlaxative for an attorney? I bet he is shitting his brains out. Seems Rittenhouse is still in jail. You should find out the facts before you argue a position.

Antioch teen Kyle Rittenhouse appears in court on murder charges for Kenosha protest shooting, lawyers say he acted in self-defense

Kyle Rittenhouse, 17, will remain in Illinois custody until his next hearing in September for murder charges in the shooting of Kenosha protesters Tuesday night.

abc7chicago.com

At Friday morning's court hearing, Rittenhouse's public defender did not waive extradition and asked for more time. He will remain in Illinois custody and the next hearing has been set for Sept. 25.

 

[Jarlaxle]

More weapon grade stupid...

Yes, he should have just been quietly murdered.

Yes, your stupidity is weapon grade, sling shot grade.
He should of spent the evening at home and not put himself in a position that he faces murder charges.

No great lawyer is running to his defense. Link to any article showing the lawyers names who wish to represent this idiot.

And it is the idiot that goes to a riot and gets himself charged with murder.

Wisconsin's #1 2A law firm is representing him, per a FB post from one of their attorneys.

 

[Jarlaxle]

"Actually, it will likely never see a trial, being dismissed by a judge."

Based on what grounds?

Self defense, open and shut. The charging documents read like they were drawn up by the defense. (Directly from a Wisconsin-licensed criminal lawyer.)

 

[Correll]

Unless the dems in the courts manage to railroad the kid.

Well, certainly it was not right to attack him. But it was even more wrong to leave home with your favorite assault rifle and put oneself in the middle of a riot. The only logical outcome of that is the outcome we see.

The dems wont have to railroad the kid. They will have to simply state what I just did while holding up his weapon.

It is not wrong to leave your house with your gun, nor to go to a public place and stand there.


That the mob found his present enough of a provocation that they attacked him for just being there, is them being violent criminals.


That you support that, is you siding with violent criminals.

"That the mob found his present enough of a provocation that they attacked him for just being there, is them being violent criminals."

There is no evidence that is true. No other RWers were chased.

Well, we have the history of your people's behavior over the last couple of months and we have the video, that seems to suggest it.

Oh? What other "armed citizens" taking it upon themselves to protect other peoples' property have been attacked?

I was referring to the way your lefty mobs attack anyone that does not kowtow to the lefty narrative, not limited to armed citizens.

As you well know. Your mobs have gotten used to ruling the streets with the support of the democrat mayors and government officials and the cops they control.

And in that time, they have shown that they randomly attack people, especially anyone that shows any hint of standing out from the mob, god forbid, actual disagreement.


Thus, combined with the behavior we see on the video, and it is reasonable to conclude that your marxist mob was the aggressor.

 

[elektra]

Fact, he shot in self defense. Right?

That will be up to a jury to decide, or Rittenhouse himself. Self-defense does not include being a minor, breaking laws, and provoking a riot to attack one's self. Had he stayed in his mother's apartment in Illinois, and was attacked, clear cut self-defense. Jumping into a riot with a weapon that was built to kill (as a prosecutor will present the case to a jury) is hardly self-defense.

He will be smart man to take a plea bargain. Either way he sits in jail with the burden of his stupid decisions before him. Was there anything he could of done to avoid this, like not leaving home, like not breaking the curfew in place, like not violating Wisconsin open carry laws. And those are laws he seems to have known, giving he was in a young officers program of some sorts?

 

[elektra]

Wisconsin's best 2A law firm is representing him...not clear if it is pro bono, or someone has agreed to cover his legal fees.

Yet a public defender represented him at the extradition trail?

 

[elektra]

Wisconsin's #1 2A law firm is representing him, per a FB post from one of their attorneys.

Yet, Friday, he appeared in court with public defenders. They certainly are quick to defend, most likely they made sure the check cleared before Friday was over, you know, to give him the best defense money can buy.

 

[Faun]

"Actually, it will likely never see a trial, being dismissed by a judge."

Based on what grounds?

Self defense, open and shut. The charging documents read like they were drawn up by the defense. (Directly from a Wisconsin-licensed criminal lawyer.)

Extremely doubtful. The defense would have to be able to convince a judge the charges should never have been brought forth in the first place and there's simply no evidence we've seen so far which demonstrates that. More likely a judge would dismiss such a motion and the let defense present their evidence of an affirmative defense to the jury.

 

[Correll]

It is not wrong to leave your house with your gun, nor to go to a public place and stand there.

Rittenhouse did not do that. 17 year old Rittenhouse left his mother's apartment in Illinois, crossed the Wisconsin border, obtained a dangerous weapon from, "a friend". He then went into a riot prepared to use the deadly weapon.

There are so many details missing from this story. It will be interesting to find them all out.

Rittenhouse also dropped out of High School, he certainly was not the smartest 17 year old.

It is not wrong to leave your friends apartment with your favorite gun and to to a public place and stand there.

He went to the "mostly peaceful protest" to use the gun in it's intended fashion, ie to use it's presence to deter aggression.


It worked. The mob did not attack and destroy the property they were defending.

Unfortunately, the police forced this lone teenager to be stranded by himself in a mob controlled war zone and he was attacked by the mob.

"It worked. The mob did not attack and destroy the property they were defending."

The law does not allow lethal force to protect property you neither own nor operate.

It does allow you to stand there and defend yourself if attacked.

And it worked. They stood there, and the mob saw them and was deterred.

If you consider that behavior against the law, you should contact the local police and demand they issue warrants against the people that had guns and stood there.

Now, you will pretend to be too stupid to understand that you were talking about his and his group's intention, and not what happened with him, when the police forced him away from his group.

 

[bripat9643]

It is if you are 17 years old in Wisconsin you can not open carry, that is breaking the law.

I doubt you can site a law that says any of those things.

Wisconsin Legislature: 948.60

docs.legis.wisconsin.gov

948.60  Possession of a dangerous weapon by a person under 18.
(1)  In this section, “dangerous weapon" means any firearm, loaded or unloaded; ...
(2) (a) Any person under 18 years of age who possesses or goes armed with a dangerous weapon is guilty of a Class A misdemeanor.

Not if it's a shotgun or long gun, moron. This law has already been discussed ad nauseum.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Wisconsin's #1 2A law firm is representing him, per a FB post from one of their attorneys.

Yet, Friday, he appeared in court with public defenders. They certainly are quick to defend, most likely they made sure the check cleared before Friday was over, you know, to give him the best defense money can buy.

Post was only made yesterday evening...they may simply have not been ready yet.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

He is not in jail. He has superlative high powered representation in Lin Wood as lead counsel and the entire Fight Back foundation with their attorneys and support staff. Find out the facts before you argue a position.

Wisconsin's best 2A law firm is representing him...not clear if it is pro bono, or someone has agreed to cover his legal fees.

I know that Lin Wood is head attorney. He's Nick Sandmann's attorney. He is representing pro bono. The Fight Back foundation is also on the slate and they are picking up all necessary expenses. Right now Rittenhouse is in Illinois in a juvenile detention facility. That's where they keep kids waiting for a foster care placement. He's playing video games for the next month.

 

[Faun]

It is not wrong to leave your house with your gun, nor to go to a public place and stand there.

Rittenhouse did not do that. 17 year old Rittenhouse left his mother's apartment in Illinois, crossed the Wisconsin border, obtained a dangerous weapon from, "a friend". He then went into a riot prepared to use the deadly weapon.

There are so many details missing from this story. It will be interesting to find them all out.

Rittenhouse also dropped out of High School, he certainly was not the smartest 17 year old.

It is not wrong to leave your friends apartment with your favorite gun and to to a public place and stand there.

He went to the "mostly peaceful protest" to use the gun in it's intended fashion, ie to use it's presence to deter aggression.


It worked. The mob did not attack and destroy the property they were defending.

Unfortunately, the police forced this lone teenager to be stranded by himself in a mob controlled war zone and he was attacked by the mob.

"It worked. The mob did not attack and destroy the property they were defending."

The law does not allow lethal force to protect property you neither own nor operate.

It does allow you to stand there and defend yourself if attacked.

And it worked. They stood there, and the mob saw them and was deterred.

If you consider that behavior against the law, you should contact the local police and demand they issue warrants against the people that had guns and stood there.

Now, you will pretend to be too stupid to understand that you were talking about his and his group's intention, and not what happened with him, when the police forced him away from his group.

Moron, I responded to you pointing out the RWers prevented the destruction of property. Not to any of them being personally attacked. Try harder to focus.

As far as the initial attack on Rittenhouse, self defense laws are intended to allow someone to neutralize an imminent threat, up to lethal force if necessary. It's not a license to kill. The teen terrorist neutralized that threat with his first shot. Every shot after that was intended to kill the guy trying to take his gun from him.

 

[jc456]

It is not wrong to leave your house with your gun, nor to go to a public place and stand there.

It is if you are 17 years old in Wisconsin you can not open carry, that is breaking the law.
It was also breaking the curfew law in place.
It is also against the law to take an assault rifle to a riot with the intent to kill.

It is going to be very hard for the teenager to defend his actions when the prosecutor holds up a terrifying assault weapon to the jury and proclaims, "this is the military assault weapon this man intended to murder somebody with"


View attachment 382165

So far you are wrong on just about everything you posted....

The hispanic teenager may not have been breaking the law....there is an exception for long guns for under 21 year olds....and you have no evidence to show he wanted to kill people, in fact, the actual video evidence shows the exact opposite, you dumb shit.....

And it isn't a military weapon you dumb ass........the AR-15 has never been used by the military....

You don't know what you are talking about.

Family of AR-15 Inventor Eugene Stoner: He Didn't Intend It for Civilians


June 16, 2016, 11:19 AM UTC / Updated June 16, 2016, 6:24 PM UTC
By Tony Dokoupil


Family of AR-15 creator speaks out
June 16, 201601:56

The AR-15 is the most talked about gun in America.

But the AR-15’s creator died before the weapon became a popular hit and his family has never spoken out.

Until now.

"Our father, Eugene Stoner, designed the AR-15 and subsequent M-16 as a military weapon to give our soldiers an advantage over the AK-47,” the Stoner family told NBC News late Wednesday. "He died long before any mass shootings occurred. But, we do think he would have been horrified and sickened as anyone, if not more by these events."



Once Banned, These Assault Rifles Are Hugely Popular in the U.S.
June 14, 201600:52

The inventor’s surviving children and adult grandchildren spoke exclusively to NBC News by phone and email, commenting for the first time on their family’s uneasy legacy. They requested individual anonymity in order to speak freely about such a sensitive topic. They also stopped short of policy prescriptions or legal opinions.

But their comments add unprecedented context to their father’s creation, shedding new light on his intentions and adding firepower to the effort to ban weapons like the AR-15. The comments could also bolster a groundbreaking new lawsuit, which argues that the weapon is a tool of war — never intended for civilians.

Eugene Stoner would have agreed, his family said.

The ex-Marine and "avid sportsman, hunter and skeet shooter" never used his invention for sport. He also never kept it around the house for personal defense. In fact, he never even owned one.

And though he made millions from the design, his family said it was all from military sales.

"After many conversations with him, we feel his intent was that he designed it as a military rifle," his family said, explaining that Stoner was "focused on making the most efficient and superior rifle possible for the military."

He designed the original AR-15 in the late 1950s, working on it in his own garage and later as the chief designer for ArmaLite, a then small company in southern California. He made it light and powerful and he fashioned a new bullet for it — a .223 caliber round capable of piercing a metal helmet at 500 yards.

The Army loved it and renamed it the M16.
Family of AR-15 Inventor: He Didn’t Intend It for Civilians

who cares what his intentions were,,the 2nd amendment is specifically for weapons of war,,,

CASE CLOSED,,,

the 2nd amendment has its legal limits.

why can't you own a ground to air missile launcher? hell, how about yer own little nuke? those are shirley weapons of war.

uh-huh uh-huh uh-huh.

case blown wide open.

i WOULD SAY i LOVE HOW some take it to the extreme in defense of restrictions as a rational defense of your opinions,,

sadly I cant,,,truthfully its a pathetic defense,,,

we are talking about standard personal arms not nukes or missiles,,,

now explain to me why we should let the very people the 2nd was meant to protect us from should be allowed to dictate what we can own???

1st of all - i am not against the 2nd amendment & have several firearms in my home.

if you really wanna get technical about that there 2nd amendment - which was meant to protect society from its own gov'ment, should they turn tyrannical ... is a no contest situation if they really wanted to bring the hammer down.

washington has quite the regs when it came to guns & ammo.

you ever heard of vietnam or Afghanistan???

and sorry based on your comments you are not for the 2nd A,,you are merely a gun person that allows your choices controlled by people far away,,,

and its meant to protect us from tyranny where ever it may come from,,,

lol ...

based on yer comments - you need big powerful weapons of war to go ratatatat & boom boom boom to make up where you lack ...

elsewhere.

When it’s ten on one , certainly

 

[jc456]

yet, for all the rantings, all the opinions, and the facts presented, a teenager who lacked the guidance of adults with common sense, faces charges of murder.

Even is this boy wins, he still loses. He is in jail and will be for a long time. He will either face a trail or accept a plea deal. He would be a fool to go to trail. He will not be able to afford a great lawyer. Maybe he will get lucky and all those that support him, here, will get together and commit your money to his defense fund. But, even with money, that will not guarantee his lawyers will be great.

Right or wrong really don't matter for this kid now, I am sure he sits in jail and wonders why he was so fucking stupid as to take a weapon of war to a riot to enforce peace.

It’s trial stupid

 

[EvilCat Breath]

Wisconsin's best 2A law firm is representing him...not clear if it is pro bono, or someone has agreed to cover his legal fees.

Yet a public defender represented him at the extradition trail?

There hasn't been an extradition trial yet. That will be Sept 25. If this case lasts that long.