Teen arrested for defending him self against the mob!

[Jitss617]

I'm still hazy on what happened with the first shooting. That could easily change things.

I think there's a lot of grey in this incident. I can see a final ruling landing somewhere in the middle of both extremes. On one hand, he shouldn't have even been there and this is why we don't let kids play with guns. On the other hand, the second and third shootings were clearly self-defense.

And frankly, I'm not big on the protests for Jacob Blake either, at least with the evidence I've seen so far.

Nope, not self defense. He was fleeing from a felony murder. He did not have the law on his side to kill others attempting to effect a citizen's arrest.

He was running from a mob lol it’s on video, One guy was going to execute them at point-blank range if he wasn’t skilled enough to shoot his fucking arm off

He started running after shooting his first victim even though no one was chasing him.

He was chased by the shootee ,, he was cornered, he immediately called the cops and said he killed someone.. than he was chased, again by the mob

Cornered? Where? he ran between two parked cars and then around one of them after shooting his victim. How is that possible if he was cornered?

He was tired of running,, no man should run from a mob,, same guy called him a ****** earlier, why did he hide his face with his shirt?

LOLOL

You poor, demented Russian troll, he wasn't running from a mob.

Lol there is video of it,, they were throwing stuff at him one looked like a bottle that was on fire

Yes, there is. And it shows him being chased by 1 guy, not a mob. Like I said, you're demented.

Not what I saw .. I saw man in the street

One guy was chasing him, that's it. No mob was chasing him. But then you also saw a twig on the ground and thought it was a hammer. So there's that.

Good you admitted he crashed him and he paid the price .. View attachment 380406theracist democrat kelts saying nicca .. why?

And now the teen murderer will spend the rest of his life in prison.

He killed in defense of his life. He will be exonerated if he even goes to trial. The video is very clear.

Nope. Wisconsin self defense laws don't cover folks in the commission of a crime.

It’s a mild Misdemeanor in Wisconsin law.. whoop die do lol

i.e., crime. Thanks for confirming what I said.

So start a thread about his mild misdemeanor Lol

 

[hadit]

This whole thing was so predictable from the beginning. The left has for decades been accustomed to holding violent protests, burning things, assaulting people, damaging property, etc, with little or no repercussions. In fact, they have a sympathetic media that focuses more on their cause than their actions. This level of on-going and increasing violence, however, has finally caused a counter reaction. Property owners and innocent bystanders have realized that the official power structure is not going to protect them and they are starting to fight back. I said that it wouldn't be long before these thugs went after somebody that was armed and willing to defend himself, and people would die, and now it has. This won't stop here, either, because the violent protesters have no intention of stopping their violence and will only increase it because they still believe there are a lot of soft targets that won't fight back. The counter reaction will only increase, as it becomes ever more apparent that protection is not to be found. This only stops when the protesters stop being violent.

You can argue that this kid broke the law himself, that he should not have been on the streets with a rifle, but when the police are pulled back, who is going to enforce the laws that the kid broke? The flip side of the argument, of course, is that without the violent protesters in the streets, the kid would never have been walking around carrying an AR-15. Think of how foolish it is for the protesters to, on the one hand, scream that the police need to be defunded and disbanded, while on the other, want those same police to protect them from the inevitable results of their actions.

Circular reasoning.

This kid took it upon himself to illegally arm himself and protect the property of other people.

That does not excuse rioters, looters or arsonists from their crimes.

You're missing the point, which is that the violence of the protests has been escalating and has reached the point where other citizens no longer are going to allow themselves to be helpless victims. When the power structure prevents those who are charged with keeping the peace from doing that, the citizens will do it themselves. It only gets bloodier from here until either the protests become less violent (and the protesters actively discourage the violence) or the police are allowed to break them up before they become riots. People are going to die is the ultimate point.

I'm not missing the point.

Rittenhouse was ILEGALLY carrying a firearm in public.

That is a fact and not up for debate.

You're hung up on that point. It doesn't matter to the dead protester if the kid was illegally carrying the gun or not, does it? You might as well say the most important thing that happened in the 2016 election was that Hillary got more popular votes than TRUMP! did. Sure, she got them, and sure it means that she was slightly more popular in a few densely populated areas, but it's not the big takeaway, is it? The big takeaway from 2016 is that TRUMP! is president, and the big takeaway from this event is not that some kid broke a gun law, but rather that the riots are getting more and more violent, the power structure is appearing less and less able to do anything about it, and citizens are taking more responsibility to protect themselves. There will be more violence and there will be more death. That's the big takeaway.

 

[pknopp]

There is nothing illegal about having a knife in your car

Fixed blade knives may not be carried concealed, unless they are a hunting knife and are being carried for such a purpose. ... As well, it is illegal to carry these, concealed or otherwise, in a vehicle unless under the same exceptions.Oct 25, 2017

No idea where you got that.

look it up.

Dude you are one fking lazy asshole

Are Switchblades Legal? Knife Laws By State | Survival Life

Find out if switchblades are legal in your state. We've listed knife laws by state for switchblades, butterfly knives & other knives for all 50 states.

blog.gunassociation.org

.

LOL, now he had a switch blade? I suppose that is a step up from the earlier claims that he had a gun.

how the fk do I or the cops know? he stated he had a knife while being questioned. Why would the cops know if it was legal or not? you think they're fking stupid? hahahahahahahahahaha dude, you continue to lose when you debate me. you don't have shit to stand on. Plus, your efforts stink.

You still haven't stated why the cops were there.

I did.

 

[jc456]

That's what you wish. That is not the law.

then post the law.

The Fourth Amendment.

post the part that backs your claim. quote the piece.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue,but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

where does that say that a cop's stop order can be ignored? BTW, there was probable cause, the man admitted to having a knife in his vehicle. one was found. so again, even with your made up attempt to undermine the debate, there is that. And the cop was called out there, and there's that.

There is nothing illegal about having a knife in your car.

BTW, why were the cops called out there? who put the cops there?

They appear to have been called over a fight.

and they showed up to do what?

 

[pknopp]

That's what you wish. That is not the law.

then post the law.

The Fourth Amendment.

post the part that backs your claim. quote the piece.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue,but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

where does that say that a cop's stop order can be ignored? BTW, there was probable cause, the man admitted to having a knife in his vehicle. one was found. so again, even with your made up attempt to undermine the debate, there is that. And the cop was called out there, and there's that.

There is nothing illegal about having a knife in your car.

BTW, why were the cops called out there? who put the cops there?

They appear to have been called over a fight.

and they showed up to do what?

Check on the call.

 

[jc456]

That's what you wish. That is not the law.

then post the law.

The Fourth Amendment.

post the part that backs your claim. quote the piece.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue,but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

where does that say that a cop's stop order can be ignored? BTW, there was probable cause, the man admitted to having a knife in his vehicle. one was found. so again, even with your made up attempt to undermine the debate, there is that. And the cop was called out there, and there's that.

There is nothing illegal about having a knife in your car.

BTW, why were the cops called out there? who put the cops there?

They appear to have been called over a fight.

and they showed up to do what?

Check on the call.

what do you think that entails?

 

[Crepitus]

That's what happens when mayors and governors don't stop the riots, people defend their property....using....
Self-Defense and the Castle Doctrine
Wisconsin law allows deadly force in self-defense in the limited circumstances where the person defending themselves “reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm” to their person.

Wisconsin Court Clarifies New Self-Defense Rule | Gimbel, Reilly, Guerin & Brown, LLP

A Wisconsin court's recent ruling could affect defendants who claim self-defense when facing criminal charges. Call a Milwaukee defense lawyer to learn more.

www.grgblaw.com

does that apply to riot tourists?

He was defending a car dealership.
There is a video of the owner thanking him for volunteering to defend the car dealership from rioters.
His mistake was going alone, he should have had backup.
He was a defender, not a rioter.

He went looking for an excuse to shoot somebody. That's premeditated murder.

 

[easyt65]

Yes, they should have called the cops on him if they thought he was carrying the firearm illegally

Domestic terrorists on the way to burn down someone's business is not going to call the cops on someone they think may be breaking the law....

I knew you wouldn't get it with your room temperature IQ.

Ouch, you really got me with that one, snowflake.

Domestic terrorists intent on burning down someone's business calling the cops on the people defending the business they intend to burn down....Oh, I get it, snowflake.

Bwuhahahahahaha.....

 

[Lucy Hamilton]

Anyone with eyes can clearly see it's the SAME person:

Yes, photohop is fun... I could put you in a picture with Hitler.

When you have a credible source this guy did something serious, let me know.

It's not a photoshop. Keep defending child rapists though it makes you look really good

 

[pknopp]

That's what you wish. That is not the law.

then post the law.

The Fourth Amendment.

post the part that backs your claim. quote the piece.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue,but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

where does that say that a cop's stop order can be ignored? BTW, there was probable cause, the man admitted to having a knife in his vehicle. one was found. so again, even with your made up attempt to undermine the debate, there is that. And the cop was called out there, and there's that.

There is nothing illegal about having a knife in your car.

BTW, why were the cops called out there? who put the cops there?

They appear to have been called over a fight.

and they showed up to do what?

Check on the call.

what do you think that entails?

Breaking up the fight if there is one and taking people's statements if not.

 

[easyt65]

He went looking for an excuse to shoot somebody. That's premeditated murder.

He was at the business Domestic Terrorists came to in order to burn it down. He did not go out looking for terrorists /trouble - they / it came to him. Had they stayed home they would not have gotten shot. Had they not attacked the young man they would not have gotten shot.

 

[jc456]

That's what you wish. That is not the law.

then post the law.

The Fourth Amendment.

post the part that backs your claim. quote the piece.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue,but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

where does that say that a cop's stop order can be ignored? BTW, there was probable cause, the man admitted to having a knife in his vehicle. one was found. so again, even with your made up attempt to undermine the debate, there is that. And the cop was called out there, and there's that.

There is nothing illegal about having a knife in your car.

BTW, why were the cops called out there? who put the cops there?

They appear to have been called over a fight.

and they showed up to do what?

Check on the call.

what do you think that entails?

Breaking up the fight if there is one and taking people's statements if not.

how do they do that if the participants walk away? do you think they attempt to control the scene? or is chaos what they ask for?

 

[westwall]

Kenosha violence: Juvenile arrested in deadly shooting amid Jacob Blake unrest, Illinois police say

A 17-year-old suspect has been arrested in connection to at least one of the two shooting deaths amid the unrest Tuesday night in Kenosha, Wis., Illinois police confirmed on Wednesday.

www.foxnews.com

How do arrest someone for self defense!? If we don’t get this child out of jail we are doing to let them
Arrest all of us! We need to fight back!

What was the "child" doing with a gun?

Killing bad guys. Apparently.

 

[Faun]

I'm still hazy on what happened with the first shooting. That could easily change things.

I think there's a lot of grey in this incident. I can see a final ruling landing somewhere in the middle of both extremes. On one hand, he shouldn't have even been there and this is why we don't let kids play with guns. On the other hand, the second and third shootings were clearly self-defense.

And frankly, I'm not big on the protests for Jacob Blake either, at least with the evidence I've seen so far.

Nope, not self defense. He was fleeing from a felony murder. He did not have the law on his side to kill others attempting to effect a citizen's arrest.

If he really did shoot the first guy in the head, then he's automatically guilty and he compounded his punishment.

I'm just not sure what happened with the first shooting.

He was being chased by the guy in the red shirt at the gas station. Possibly because the guy in the red shirt was pissed because people were pointing their guns at him, though the motive has not yet been established. He chased him to where some cars were parked, at which point, the teen murderer spun around and unloaded on him, fatally hitting him in the head. He then walks around a vehicle and goes back to see what he did. Then on his cell phone, informs someone, "I just killed someone." At which point, he takes off running.

wow sounds like you dont know your ass from a hole in the ground...just saying

You couldn't refute a word I said. Noted.

 

[pknopp]

That's what you wish. That is not the law.

then post the law.

The Fourth Amendment.

post the part that backs your claim. quote the piece.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue,but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

where does that say that a cop's stop order can be ignored? BTW, there was probable cause, the man admitted to having a knife in his vehicle. one was found. so again, even with your made up attempt to undermine the debate, there is that. And the cop was called out there, and there's that.

There is nothing illegal about having a knife in your car.

BTW, why were the cops called out there? who put the cops there?

They appear to have been called over a fight.

and they showed up to do what?

Check on the call.

what do you think that entails?

Breaking up the fight if there is one and taking people's statements if not.

how do they do that if the participants walk away?

As far as we know he did nothing illegal and can walk away. People refuse to assist all the time. They've learned that not getting who they are after they are perfectly fine in trying to arrest someone else for whatever.

Blacks learned this lesson from Eric Garner the hard way. Feddie Grey taught blacks to flee when cops show up or you may end up dead.

 

[Faun]

Kenosha violence: Juvenile arrested in deadly shooting amid Jacob Blake unrest, Illinois police say

A 17-year-old suspect has been arrested in connection to at least one of the two shooting deaths amid the unrest Tuesday night in Kenosha, Wis., Illinois police confirmed on Wednesday.

www.foxnews.com

How do arrest someone for self defense!? If we don’t get this child out of jail we are doing to let them
Arrest all of us! We need to fight back!

What was the "child" doing with a gun?

Defending himself against the terrorists in BLM....

You all have the strangest concept of self-defense. You're not defending yourself if you grab a gun, drive 20 miles to the melee in order to insert yourself into a volatile situation where you then use your weapon that you're not old enough to have to defend private property that's not even your own.

From my perspective that makes him the terrorist. It's questionable whether he could legally be in possession of the weapon he was carrying since he's not yet 18 and if he was indeed committing a crime by having it then everything that happened afterwards happened while he was in the commission of a crime.

I see it as someone who was trained with a rifile since he was a baby, going to protect business and elderly from getting attacked from the democrat mob. And did a great job, the new shot heard round the world.

Still illegal for him to be in possession of a firearm in Wisconsin.

 

[jc456]

As far as we know he did nothing illegal and can walk away. People refuse to assist all the time. They've learned that not getting who they are after they are perfectly fine in trying to arrest someone else for whatever.

first off, more white people die at the hands of cops, so let's stop playing pansy games.

No, the dude is not allowed to leave until the cop releases him. I posted you the procedures they follow.

 

[Jitss617]

Kenosha violence: Juvenile arrested in deadly shooting amid Jacob Blake unrest, Illinois police say

A 17-year-old suspect has been arrested in connection to at least one of the two shooting deaths amid the unrest Tuesday night in Kenosha, Wis., Illinois police confirmed on Wednesday.

www.foxnews.com

How do arrest someone for self defense!? If we don’t get this child out of jail we are doing to let them
Arrest all of us! We need to fight back!

What was the "child" doing with a gun?

Defending himself against the terrorists in BLM....

You all have the strangest concept of self-defense. You're not defending yourself if you grab a gun, drive 20 miles to the melee in order to insert yourself into a volatile situation where you then use your weapon that you're not old enough to have to defend private property that's not even your own.

From my perspective that makes him the terrorist. It's questionable whether he could legally be in possession of the weapon he was carrying since he's not yet 18 and if he was indeed committing a crime by having it then everything that happened afterwards happened while he was in the commission of a crime.

I see it as someone who was trained with a rifile since he was a baby, going to protect business and elderly from getting attacked from the democrat mob. And did a great job, the new shot heard round the world.

Still illegal for him to be in possession of a firearm in Wisconsin.

And what does that have to do with this thread?

 

[pknopp]

As far as we know he did nothing illegal and can walk away. People refuse to assist all the time. They've learned that not getting who they are after they are perfectly fine in trying to arrest someone else for whatever.

first off, more white people die at the hands of cops, so let's stop playing pansy games.

No, the dude is not allowed to leave until the cop releases him. I posted you the procedures they follow.

Unless they can state a reason to hold him he can leave.

 

[L.K.Eder]

He went looking for an excuse to shoot somebody. That's premeditated murder.

He was at the business Domestic Terrorists came to in order to burn it down. He did not go out looking for terrorists /trouble - they / it came to him. Had they stayed home they would not have gotten shot. Had they not attacked the young man they would not have gotten shot.

it was not his business (2x).