Another "I can't breath" death: Police Reform & Protests in the USA

[cubby]

No, I was misinformed, just as you are.

That hasn't changed at all - only that you actually admit it. Which is a refreshing change.

My question was asked, where are the MULTIPLE felonies you said he was going to charged with. My question is where is your proof and links?

He is being charge with multiple felonies. That's just your admitted ignorance coming back out. Look up felony murder statues and get back to us when you're caught up.

Feel free to use that NYTimes one I posted!

(hey - are you still struggling with linking things? try that course I mentioned, it's great!)

[Orange Joe]

You got an actual intelligent response about this? If you are being chased and a gunshot is behind you and someone is lunging at you, you do not wait for a second shot. Look at the distance in the pictures.

I wouldn't be down there with a ar-15 in the first place. Let alone being a minor in illegal possession of a gun.

[Mayhem]

So I said Wisconsin and you picked Illinois. The shooting happened in Wisconsin...where, wait for it, it is legal for him to carry it. You did see I said Wisconsin, or did you just ignore it in your rush to prove me wrong?

The minimum age to open carry in Wisconsin is 18.

There, because you seem to be unable to also click on links.

[Orange Joe]

So I said Wisconsin and you picked Illinois. The shooting happened in Wisconsin...where, wait for it, it is legal for him to carry it. You did see I said Wisconsin, or did you just ignore it in your rush to prove me wrong?

it is not legal for a minor to carry a gun in any state without parental supervision.

[EyeSeeYou]

This is just precious. Look at the last link there bud. And I linked Illinois just to cover if he had purchased the gun legally.

This is just precious........And yet https://www.jsonline.com/story/news/...ld/3444231001/

John Monroe, a lawyer who specializes in gun rights cases, believes an exception for rifles and shotguns, intended to allow people age 16 and 17 to hunt, could apply.

Under that law, he could carry the rifle......soooo you goin o link me more Illinois stuff?

- - - Updated - - -

it is not legal for a minor to carry a gun in any state without parental supervision.

And yet....... https://www.jsonline.com/story/news/...ld/3444231001/

Kyle Rittenhouse, a 17-year-old militia member who has been arrested and is facing a homicide charge in the matter, was not old enough to legally carry the assault-style rifle he had, according to statutes, which say anyone under 18 who "goes armed" with any deadly weapon is guilty of a Class A misdemeanor. John Monroe, a lawyer who specializes in gun rights cases, believes an exception for rifles and shotguns, intended to allow people age 16 and 17 to hunt, could apply.

[Mayhem]

This is just precious........And yet https://www.jsonline.com/story/news/...ld/3444231001/



Under that law, he could carry the rifle......soooo you goin o link me more Illinois stuff?

Is your argument now that the 17yo was out past curfew to go hunting?

[Krakan]

Still yet to be confirmed, as the apparent eyewitness accounts indicate that Rittenhouse was the one instigating the violence by threatening them with his weapon. They acted in self defense according to that story.

I mean it could of happened... I am extremely skeptical of that especially given who attacked him and their prior rap sheets but it could of happened.

[EyeSeeYou]

The minimum age to open carry in Wisconsin is 18.

There, because you seem to be unable to also click on links.

There are exceptions....because....wait for it.......I am able to click on links.


https://www.jsonline.com/story/news/...ld/3444231001/
Kyle Rittenhouse, a 17-year-old militia member who has been arrested and is facing a homicide charge in the matter, was not old enough to legally carry the assault-style rifle he had, according to statutes, which say anyone under 18 who "goes armed" with any deadly weapon is guilty of a Class A misdemeanor. John Monroe, a lawyer who specializes in gun rights cases, believes an exception for rifles and shotguns, intended to allow people age 16 and 17 to hunt, could apply.

[Krakan]

That is horseshit. Straight, unmitigated horseshit.

Rittenhouse and the white nationalist terrorists were the ones itching for a brawl. That's why they were heavily armed, gloved up and not from there.

Then why where they attacked rather then attacking?

[s_bushido]

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article...protest-tweets

No problem, just a police chief posting about wanting to let cops off the leash so they can murder folks.

With a username like "sheepdawg" you'd think it was just a parody account of the type of people who buy into that police warrior """training""" offered by the lunatic who teaches them that they're the sheepdogs and we're the sheep.

[Orange Joe]

This is just precious........And yet https://www.jsonline.com/story/news/...ld/3444231001/



Under that law, he could carry the rifle......soooo you goin o link me more Illinois stuff?

- - - Updated - - -



And yet....... https://www.jsonline.com/story/news/...ld/3444231001/

Do you know what the word "could" means?

[Templar 331]

This is just precious........And yet https://www.jsonline.com/story/news/...ld/3444231001/



Under that law, he could carry the rifle......soooo you goin o link me more Illinois stuff?

There's a lot of use of the word could there. And was he going hunting? Wait, no. We already know that answer since he shot three people.

[Edge-]

https://www.mercurynews.com/2020/08/...t-and-looting/

A sheriff’s deputy suspected of assaulting an alleged looter and stealing from the San Bernardino business he was dispatched to protect faces felony and misdemeanor charges and has been fired from the department, officials said Wednesday.

Prosecutors charged Erdem Gorgulu, 46, of Redlands, Aug. 26, on suspicion of assault under color of authority and assault with a deadly weapon, both felonies, San Bernardino County District Attorney’s officials said in a statement. He is also accused of misdemeanor counts of filing a false police report and looting.

The defendant had been dispatched in the wake of civil unrest to investigate reports of looting at Big 5 Sporting Goods, 2150 East Highland Ave., about 2 a.m. on June 1, San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department officials said in a news release. His partner reported that he used force to apprehend a suspect later identified as a 28-year-old San Bernardino resident, and believed Gorgulu’s actions to be “unwarranted and unethical,” prompting both a criminal and internal investigation, the release said.

Authorities later found reason to believe Gorgulu may have taken merchandise from the business that was looted, and later discovered stolen items in his vehicle, sheriff’s officials said. He was placed on administrative leave June 3, and then fired on Aug. 24. He had been a deputy for over 11 years.

Hey, one of the "good guy" cops that was supposed to be protecting property from those dangerous looters was not only a looter himself, but also committed felony assault in the process. Oh yeah, and he filed false police reports.

[Krakan]

Okay, I'll grant, totally, maybe something went down that we couldn't see. Maybe the three in question fired a shot first, MAYBE. But like, this kid isn't Batman here to dispense justice.

Bottom line is, this seventeen year old should be at home doing his Catcher in the Rye chapter analysis essay or whatever, and not role-playing as Judge Dredd in the streets of a riot zone he doesn't even live in with a loaded gun giving out executions to people.

I 100% agree. That said it doesn't change the fact he was attacked and defended himself if you age him up a year he wouldn't be guilty of anything.

[Edge-]

There are exceptions....because....wait for it.......I am able to click on links.


https://www.jsonline.com/story/news/...ld/3444231001/
Kyle Rittenhouse, a 17-year-old militia member who has been arrested and is facing a homicide charge in the matter, was not old enough to legally carry the assault-style rifle he had, according to statutes, which say anyone under 18 who "goes armed" with any deadly weapon is guilty of a Class A misdemeanor. John Monroe, a lawyer who specializes in gun rights cases, believes an exception for rifles and shotguns, intended to allow people age 16 and 17 to hunt, could apply.

What was he hunting? Protesters?

[Krakan]

The fuck they did. The first one, maybe. I just left work, so I took the time to go watch all the footage I could find of the actual event. The first victim possibly assaulted Rittenhouse, he is seen being belligerent earlier in the night, and at the time he was shot he was rushing at Rittenhouse. The reason why he was rushing him is not clear, reports are that Rittenhouse was threating people and pointing his weapon at people. At any rate, there is something of a case for self defense to be made there... maybe. At least a lawyer will undoubtedly try it, although when you are wandering around the street pointing a rifle at people that isn't exactly clear.

The second two are much more clear cut. After Rittenhouse shot the first guy (In the head) he stood over the body and made a phone call while others tried unsuccessfully to revive the victim. Once people started yelling that he was the guy that shot him, he took off running, and several people pursued. At least one of those pursuing was armed, but they were pursuing someone that had just shot a man in the head and ran off. That is an entirely justified pursuit. Rittenhouse turns around, shoots one man in the torso (Who also dies) and then shoots the armed man in the arm, blowing a really gruesome chunk out of that persons arm.

Neither of those second two are guilty of anything at all, even if somehow the first one was (I am not sure if he was justified or not, I haven't seen good information on that). The second two were attempting to disarm and neutralize someone that had already shot someone, and was currently fleeing the scene. What follows after those two were shot is a SPECTACULAR dereliction of duty on the part of the police, who did not arrest Rittenhouse despite many people clearly yelling he was the shooter, and he was clearly still holding the rifle. They allowed him to completely leave the scene, and the state. That is gross incompetence in responding to a scene as the most generous interpretation.

You don't chase a someone to disarm them... you also don't disarm them by trying to cave in their head with a skateboard...

[Orange Joe]

You don't chase a someone to disarm them... you also don't disarm them by trying to cave in their head with a skateboard...

So do you disarm them by singing to them? blowing them kisses? look at them lovingly?

Police seem to disarm people by shooting them. Seems a skateboard is slightly less lethal.

[Mayhem]

You don't chase a someone to disarm them... you also don't disarm them by trying to cave in their head with a skateboard...

How do you disarm them then if chasing and fighting is out of the question?

[Themius]

You don't chase a someone to disarm them... you also don't disarm them by trying to cave in their head with a skateboard...

So... you want to start charging everyone with crimes who try to stop mass killers... okay.

[EyeSeeYou]

https://twitter.com/willchamberlain/...46068089430018

Here's some explanation about Wisconsin law as it applies to 17 year olds with rifles:

https://twitter.com/willchamberlain/...47410614833152

Here's the relevant Wisconsin statute

It does say that "any person under 18 years of age who...goes armed with a dangerous weapon is guilty of a...misdemeanor."

But it has a number of exceptions, including one for minors who are carrying a rifle or shotgun—note subsection 3(c)

https://twitter.com/willchamberlain/...48033154478080

As I read it, Rittenhouse was under 18, but he was carrying a rifle

So to have violated the statute, he either had to be "in violation of s. 941.28" or "not in compliance with ss. 29.304 and 29.593."

Section 941.28 prohibits sawed-off shotguns/rifles. That doesn't apply

https://twitter.com/willchamberlain/...48320451645441

Section 29.304 only imposes restrictions on the possession of firearms by minors under the age of 16

Hard to see how Rittenhouse could violate that, it says nothing about 17-year-olds that I can see

And section 29.593 talks about the need to have a certificate to go hunting

Rittenhouse wasn't hunting, so it's hard to see how he could have been violating that statute either

https://twitter.com/willchamberlain/...49055520256000

So to bring it back to the main statute: Kyle Rittenhouse was under 18, but he was carrying a rifle, and not in violation of three other relevant statutes

As a result, based on my reading, he committed no crime by open-carrying a rifle in Wisconsin at 17

FIN

He has links to all the pages in Wisconsin laws. It appears that he was not violating any laws IN WISCONSIN except for the charge of murder.