The 2nd Amendment Thread

Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 [14] 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41

CRedskinsRule
11-23-2021, 03:51 PM
It had been said they could. The gun was bought on a straw purchase...that makes it illegal and Rittenhouse was part of that. Really , you are defending a 17 year old who thinks he needs an assault rifle and is getting paid to be security for a Car dealer , you're not that stupid.



https://giffords.org/lawcenter/state-laws/minimum-age-to-purchase-possess-in-wisconsin/





Wisconsin generally prohibits the intentional transfer of any firearm to an individual under age 18.1



The state also generally prohibits the possession of a firearm by any person under age 18.2



These restrictions do not apply, however, when the firearm is being used by a person under age 18 when supervised by an adult during target practice or a course of instruction.3



Wisconsin law generally provides that for hunting purposes, the minimum age for possession or control of a firearm is age 12.4 A person age 12 but under age 14 may not hunt without being accompanied by his or her parent, guardian or a person at least 18 years of age who is designated by the parent or guardian.5 A young person 12 to 14 years of age also may possess a firearm if he or she is enrolled in instruction under the state hunter education program and is carrying the firearm in a case, unloaded, to or from that class, or is handling or operating the firearm during that class under the supervision of an instructor.6So if he was charged for the illegal transfer it would have been a misdemeanor: from the Wisconsin Statute:
Any person under 18 years of age who possesses or goes armed with a dangerous weapon is guilty of a Class A misdemeanor.

Would that have been good enough in your view?

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

Giantone
11-23-2021, 04:15 PM
So if he was charged for the illegal transfer it would have been a misdemeanor: from the Wisconsin Statute:


Would that have been good enough in your view?

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

No,he walked away scott free,you happy with that???

Giantone
11-23-2021, 04:15 PM
G1
Esquire at Bullshit & Associates

Hell of a retort from the drunk uncle.

CRedskinsRule
11-23-2021, 04:26 PM
No,he walked away scott free,you happy with that???I am okay with the jury's verdict after they heard the evidence, yes.

What I am not okay with is the fact that I believe that if he had been a black teenager in the same situation he likely would have been put in jail for life. Rittenhouse's result isn't the problem, the problem is that justice in our society is not color blind, and people who ought to be free are sentenced wrongly because of stereotypes around their skin color.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

mooby
11-23-2021, 04:48 PM
Not a cult. (https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-jr-shares-meme-of-his-dad-awarding-presidential-medal-of-freedom-to-kyle-rittenhouse/ar-AAR2YaR?li=BBnb7Kz)

punch it in
11-23-2021, 06:09 PM
Not a cult. (https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-jr-shares-meme-of-his-dad-awarding-presidential-medal-of-freedom-to-kyle-rittenhouse/ar-AAR2YaR?li=BBnb7Kz)


Racist cult. 110%. Modern day KKK/ NAZI party.

nonniey
11-23-2021, 06:46 PM
It had been said they could. The gun was bought on a straw purchase...that makes it illegal and Rittenhouse was part of that. Really , you are defending a 17 year old who thinks he needs an assault rifle and is getting paid to be security for a Car dealer , you're not that stupid....


Since as you say I'm not that stupid, I'm almost certain that juries (excluding grand juries of course - different animal entirely) cannot add charges to a case. Pretty sure they could be given a range of charges to consider that they could choose from but they can't decide on their own to add charges.

And BTW defending the jury decision does not equate to defending Rittenhouse. They made the correct decision based on the evidence presented and the laws of the state. Your beef should be with the laws on the books not the jury or those that think the jury made the correct decision.

punch it in
11-23-2021, 06:52 PM
I blame the laws, the Judge, the prosecution for fumbling and bumbling. A strong prosecution would have gotten him.

mredskins
11-23-2021, 11:01 PM
I blame the laws, the Judge, the prosecution for fumbling and bumbling. A strong prosecution would have gotten him.

You realize he shot 3 white guys. One was a convicted sex offender against children and the other a ex con for violent crimes. I am confused why you guys are so up in arms about this.

I am as democrat as they come but just reading the stories of this trail I am just like ok 2 less pieces of white trash in the world.

Chico23231
11-24-2021, 06:42 AM
You realize he shot 3 white guys. One was a convicted sex offender against children and the other a ex con for violent crimes. I am confused why you guys are so up in arms about this.

I am as democrat as they come but just reading the stories of this trail I am just like ok 2 less pieces of white trash in the world.

It’s the same reason the media continues to lie about the case, it’s not about the facts or even right vs wrong…it’s wokeness cult-like religion which has infected your party. My sister voted GOP, Youngkin, for the first time in her life a month ago.

EZ Archive Ads Plugin for vBulletin Copyright 2006 Computer Help Forum