Kyle Rittenhouse Trial

[tvc184]

7 hours ago, Setx fan said:

Everybody seems to agree that a underage kid has the right to take guns across state lines to defend businesses that don’t belong to him or his family after curfew hours. Ok cool but I have another question. Do adults have the right to defend themselves against people breaking in their homes? Even if it unknowingly happens to be the cops breaking in their home? 

Rittenhouse did not cross state line with a gun. He certainly did not do so to defend businesses. But hey, it’s on the Internet.

I am not sure about Wisconsin law but in Texas it would not matter. In Texas you can use deadly force under some circumstances to defend property belonging to someone else even when they did not ask for help.

Defending your home against intruders depends on the circumstances, even if it is the police. A little over two months ago a grand jury refused to indict a man who shot a Texas DPS trooper through the door after the man identified himself as a trooper but was in plain clothes. The trooper was reported to be knocking or pounding on the door and the man shot the officer through the door and was cleared of charges. 

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

[tvc184]

5 hours ago, Setx fan said:

1. He stood trial as an adult and was found not guilty on ALL CHARGES. They even found some type of loophole to get around the the fact that he was an UNDERAGED kid who illegally possessed a firearm. He crossed state lines to go tend to someone else’s business rather the gun crossed with him or not. He illegally possessed a firearm at the time when he ended up shooting people in “self defense”. 
 

2. Cops don’t legally have to anounce themselves when they have a no-knock warrant and sometimes they don’t. Now answer my question. 

The AR15 was kept at another person’s  home or storage in Kenosha.  Much has been made about him crossing state lines however the US Constitution gives us the right to go anywhere in this country. In fact Rittenhouse lived about 20 miles away and worked in Kenosha and had family members living there. It would be a little more than driving from Beaumont to Port Arthur. If you want to add a state line scenario, it would be like driving from Orange, Texas to Vinton, Louisiana. The way it is portrayed on the Internet you would think somebody drove from Oklahoma to California to be involved in a protest.

[tvc184]

4 hours ago, Setx fan said:

1. His case doesn’t make much of a difference to me. I just assumed he would face some type of charges for illegal possession. Is it legal for kids under 18 to have guns? I assumed not but maybe I’m wrong

2. My question is not really a “legal” question although I would like to hear tvc and whoever else’s opinion. I’m just asking what you think about the situation in your own moral opinion. 

It is not against federal law for a 17-year-old to possess a long gun. It may be against the law for the person who provided the gun but federal law allows a parent or guardian to give a gun to a juvenile. The Wisconsin law is kind of convoluted but I do not think it is against the law to carry a rifle or shotgun at 17 years of age in Wisconsin. That is why that charge will dismissed by the judge. In Texas making a readily dischargeable firearm recklessly accessible to a child only applies to a person under 17 years of age. Then the law only applies if the gun is loaded.

[tvc184]

3 hours ago, Setx fan said:

1. LOL Thanx for your honesty. So after you hit em with the magnum or the TRR8 and you find out the guys breaking in your house were actually cops what do you think should happen next? 
 

2. There’s been riots since the Rittenhouse verdict? 

Yes. 

[tvc184]

8 hours ago, Setx fan said:

Everybody seems to agree that a underage kid has the right to take guns across state lines to defend businesses that don’t belong to him or his family after curfew hours. Ok cool but I have another question. Do adults have the right to defend themselves against people breaking in their homes? Even if it unknowingly happens to be the cops breaking in their home? 

How about Andrew Coffee IV who was found not guilty on the same day as Rittenhouse after he shot and killed a police officer who was part of a team serving a valid warrant? 

 

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

[Setx fan]

2 hours ago, tvc184 said:

1. Rittenhouse did not cross state line with a gun. He certainly did not do so to defend businesses. But hey, it’s on the Internet.

I am not sure about Wisconsin law but in Texas it would not matter. In Texas you can use deadly force under some circumstances to defend property belonging to someone else even when they did not ask for help.

2. Defending your home against intruders depends on the circumstances, even if it is the police. A little over two months ago a grand jury refused to indict a man who shot a Texas DPS trooper through the door after the man identified himself as a trooper but was in plain clothes. The trooper was reported to be knocking or pounding on the door and the man shot the officer through the door and was cleared of charges. 

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

1.  Lol here we go with the deflecting semantics again. It’s allready been clarified that Kyle didn’t have the gun with him when HE CROSSED THE STATE LINE. And if he didn’t do so to stand against the rioters looting businesses then please clarify why he was there because he certainly didn’t step outside his house getting ready to go hunt with his “hunting” gun when he suddenly seen rioters. 
 

2. That’s a interesting link with some different variables than the situation I described but you didn’t answer my question as to what you personally think about the situation I described. 

[Setx fan]

1 hour ago, tvc184 said:

It is not against federal law for a 17-year-old to possess a long gun. It may be against the law for the person who provided the gun but federal law allows a parent or guardian to give a gun to a juvenile. The Wisconsin law is kind of convoluted but I do not think it is against the law to carry a rifle or shotgun at 17 years of age in Wisconsin. That is why that charge will dismissed by the judge. In Texas making a readily dischargeable firearm recklessly accessible to a child only applies to a person under 17 years of age. Then the law only applies if the gun is loaded.

That law is intended for 16-17 year olds to be able to hunt. Not to have them out playing Call of Duty in the streets. But they found a way to make it work for him and I’m really not too upset about that. That’s not even the point of my comment

[Setx fan]

53 minutes ago, tvc184 said:

How about Andrew Coffee IV who was found not guilty on the same day as Rittenhouse after he shot and killed a police officer who was part of a team serving a valid warrant? 

 

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

I don’t see where he shot and killed a cop. It says he was found not guilty for the murder of his girlfriend who was caught in the crossfire but guilty and facing up to 30 years for possession of a illegal firearm. Too bad it couldn’t be considered a hunting gun. Doesn’t clarify if there were any drugs found in the raid or not 

[Unwoke]

7 hours ago, Setx fan said:

1.  Lol here we go with the deflecting semantics again. It’s allready been clarified that Kyle didn’t have the gun with him when HE CROSSED THE STATE LINE. And if he didn’t do so to stand against the rioters looting businesses then please clarify why he was there because he certainly didn’t step outside his house getting ready to go hunt with his “hunting” gun when he suddenly seen rioters. 
 

2. That’s a interesting link with some different variables than the situation I described but you didn’t answer my question as to what you personally think about the situation I described. 

I agree….. we must Stop people from Crossing Borders Lines Unlawfully. 
 

I propose we fully fund a new federal agency with the sole purpose of preventing border line crossing. 
 

Oh wait…..🤔

 

[baddog]

7 hours ago, Setx fan said:

I don’t see where he shot and killed a cop. It says he was found not guilty for the murder of his girlfriend who was caught in the crossfire but guilty and facing up to 30 years for possession of a illegal firearm. Too bad it couldn’t be considered a hunting gun. Doesn’t clarify if there were any drugs found in the raid or not 

Possession of an illegal firearm usually means by a convicted felon. 30 years seems a bit much for that charge, perhaps it is due to a variance of state laws.

[Reagan]

The devil has these people!  

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

[bullets13]

On 11/21/2021 at 12:27 AM, Setx fan said:

I don’t see where he shot and killed a cop. It says he was found not guilty for the murder of his girlfriend who was caught in the crossfire but guilty and facing up to 30 years for possession of a illegal firearm. Too bad it couldn’t be considered a hunting gun. Doesn’t clarify if there were any drugs found in the raid or not 

Then again, he was a drug dealer and convicted felon with a firearm. Even taking away the circumstances of his girlfriend’s death, you’d expect him to get sentenced fairly harshly.

[bullets13]

While I completely agree with the not guilty verdict, I guess I’m in the minority in thinking he’s kind of an idiot, rather than a hero.  His mom is definitely an idiot.  He didn’t deserve to be attacked, and rightfully defended himself, but never should’ve been there.  I can go up and down magnolia in bmt at 2 AM waving money around and wearing gold jewelry, and there’s a decent chance I’ll find myself in a justifiable self defense situation.  But the original action would still be stupid.  

[LumRaiderFan]

33 minutes ago, bullets13 said:

While I completely agree with the not guilty verdict, I guess I’m in the minority in thinking he’s kind of an idiot, rather than a hero.  His mom is definitely an idiot.  He didn’t deserve to be attacked, and rightfully defended himself, but never should’ve been there.  I can go up and down magnolia in bmt at 2 AM waving money around and wearing gold jewelry, and there’s a decent chance I’ll find myself in a justifiable self defense situation.  But the original action would still be stupid.  

I can understand a young man that had been watching what was going on and feeling a need to do something about it.  I'm with you on the mom, doesn't make sense to drop your 17 year old in a situation like that and expect it will turn out well.

[Separation Scientist]

20 hours ago, Reagan said:

The devil has these people!  

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

Thats literally correct. No one likes to admit it but Satan is on the loose like never before. He has taken control of most of the media, and the United States Government. Immorality reigns. 

[Hagar]

On 11/19/2021 at 7:37 PM, BS Wildcats said:

Rittenhouse should sue the 💩out of braindead biden!

Not only sue the Walking Dead, but the Leftist Media, who lied throughout the trial and amazingly continue to lie.  This is similar to what they did to Nick Sandmann, and they paid dearly.  Nick is encouraging Rittenhouse to do the same.  I agree.

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

[Reagan]

Boom: Alan Dershowitz Offers To Help Kyle Rittenhouse Sue The Living Daylights Out Of CNN!!

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

[Separation Scientist]

Here is one of Satans Lil' demons at work:

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

 

[CardinalBacker]

1 hour ago, bullets13 said:

While I completely agree with the not guilty verdict, I guess I’m in the minority in thinking he’s kind of an idiot, rather than a hero.  His mom is definitely an idiot.  He didn’t deserve to be attacked, and rightfully defended himself, but never should’ve been there.  I can go up and down magnolia in bmt at 2 AM waving money around and wearing gold jewelry, and there’s a decent chance I’ll find myself in a justifiable self defense situation.  But the original action would still be stupid.  

BUT, if you go out breaking windows, setting fires, and assaulting people you should kinda expect to get your head blown off, too, right?  It's a possibility at least.  I mean, if those boys weren't out breaking multitudes of laws, they'd still be alive, too. 

[SmashMouth]

On 11/21/2021 at 12:23 AM, Setx fan said:

That law is intended for 16-17 year olds to be able to hunt.

Says who?

[Setx fan]

5 hours ago, bullets13 said:

Then again, he was a drug dealer and convicted felon with a firearm. Even taking away the circumstances of his girlfriend’s death, you’d expect him to get sentenced fairly harshly.

I agree. I was just stating facts since tvc seemed to have them all mixed up. Also wondering how he could be so sure they were “serving a valid warrant” as he stated when he didn’t even have his facts straight on who actually got shot. Seems like another one of those people who just blindly back the blue rather they’re right or wrong 

[Setx fan]

35 minutes ago, SmashMouth said:

Says who?

Ok so explain to me the difference between a long gun and a hand gun. Why is one legal and the other illegal for people his age? 

[tvc184]

10 hours ago, Reagan said:

Boom: Alan Dershowitz Offers To Help Kyle Rittenhouse Sue The Living Daylights Out Of CNN!!

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

And Dershowitz is generally seen as a leftist. He is hardly they dyed in the wool conservative Republican.

I don’t always agree with Dershowitz’s opinion however he backs it up with the law and does not seem to always draw sides based on his politics.

[tvc184]

11 hours ago, bullets13 said:

While I completely agree with the not guilty verdict, I guess I’m in the minority in thinking he’s kind of an idiot, rather than a hero.  His mom is definitely an idiot.  He didn’t deserve to be attacked, and rightfully defended himself, but never should’ve been there.  I can go up and down magnolia in bmt at 2 AM waving money around and wearing gold jewelry, and there’s a decent chance I’ll find myself in a justifiable self defense situation.  But the original action would still be stupid.  

There is a difference. If you go waving money and jewelry around at 2AM you know that you were drawing attention to yourself and asking to be attacked.  Rittenhouse was one of several people with A.R. 15‘s openly carried and I really don’t think he was inviting people to attack him.

He was not smart but likely neither were the other people carrying A.R. 15‘s openly that did not get involved in any kind of incident. I’ve got some strong opinions about rioters and the use of deadly force to stop them however I’m not going to go anywhere near a riot. For example Texas law gives the authority to use deadly force to stop an arson if necessary. I don’t care if you told me ahead of time that I would be cleared, I’m not going into a deadly force situation if I don’t have to.

I seriously doubt the 17 year old kid had any clue as to the outcome that night. If you go flashing money and jewelry around in certain areas of town, you can almost guarantee the outcome. I know that you are aware but I spent 10 years on Swat, I’ve taught firearms including tactical firearms at the police academy for 30 years. I have qualified with and carry machine guns on duty and I would not have gone anywhere near that situation.  Was the 17 year old kid immature? Absolutely.

[tvc184]

7 hours ago, Setx fan said:

Ok so explain to me the difference between a long gun and a hand gun. Why is one legal and the other illegal for people his age? 

You’ll have to ask the people who make laws. I think it goes back to the old days and if you were going to commit a crime, you would  conceal the weapon until the last minute and a handgun is easy to conceal where a rifle or shotgun is not. Some states to this day say is against the law to carry a concealed weapon. You could put a pistol on your hip line in a holster as long as it is visible and it is legal but if you cover it with a T-shirt, it becomes a felony.

Why does the federal law say that an 18-year-old can possess a handgun and even buy one from another private citizen but the same legally purchased and carried handgun by the 18-year-old cannot be bought in a store such as Academy Sporting Goods. Does that make sense? An 18-year-old cannot go in the store and purchase a handgun but he could meet me in the parking lot of the same  store  and I could sell him one and it would be legal.

Again, you need to ask the legislators.