The Rittenhouse Incident

glhs837

glhs837

Power with Control
StmarysCity79 said:
He is working, he is trying to support himself. Everybody thinks that Kyle got so much money from this. Whatever money he did get is gone,” lawyer Mark Richards told Court TV.

“He’s living, I don’t want to say paycheck to paycheck, but he’s living to support himself. Obviously, as his lawyer and somebody who I want to do well, I hope he does re-engage in his studies.

Aww poor baby murderer.
Click to expand...

Could you explain this bit?
 
glhs837

glhs837

Power with Control
StmarysCity79 said:
When you shoot someone in the back who is unarmed and breaking no laws you are a murderer.
Click to expand...

Who was shot in the back and not breaking any laws? You are aware that assaulting someone breaks the law? You are also aware that every single person he shot was assaulting him? Are you also aware that there was another person he was legally permitted to shoot but didn't because that person wisely decided to lower the weapon they raised towards him?

I'll be honest, if you had asked what the odds were that any person not trained by the military no matter what age could go through that scenario and only shoot the exact people who threatened him and nobody else, I would place them a less than 3%. Cops? Maybe 20%.

His restraint and self control were astounding under the circumstances. Have you ever undergone high stress training? Having been through both Navy in person SERE (two different courses) and multiple trips through the helicopter egress trainer, maintaining self control under high stress is not easy. That this kid pulled it off was amazing.
 
Kyle

Kyle

Beloved Misanthrope
PREMO Member
glhs837 said:
Who was shot in the back and not breaking any laws?
Click to expand...
SMC can't stop her bull####.

The reality...

Rosenbaum then shouted "**** you!" and "lunged" at Rittenhouse and grabbed the barrel of his rifle.Rittenhouse then fired four shots at Rosenbaum, killing him. The bullets perforated Rosenbaum's heart, aorta, pulmonary artery and right lung, fractured his pelvis, and caused minor wounds to his left thigh and forehead.

Prosecutors said that protesters were heard on two different videos yelling "Beat him up!", "Hey, he shot him!" and "Get him! Get that dude!" One individual struck Rittenhouse, knocking off his cap, shortly after which Rittenhouse tripped and fell to the ground.

While Rittenhouse was on the ground, Maurice Freeland, one of the men in pursuit, jump kicked Rittenhouse, who fired twice but missed Freeland.
Click to expand...

Anthony Huber, struck Rittenhouse's left shoulder, neck and head with a skateboard as the pair struggled for control of the gun.

As Huber was pulling on the rifle, Rittenhouse fired once, hitting Huber in the chest, perforating his heart and right lung, causing his rapid death.

Grosskreutz approached Rittenhouse, who was on the ground, but stopped and put his hands up after Huber was shot. Grosskreutz then pointed his handgun and advanced on Rittenhouse, who shot Grosskreutz once in the arm, severing most of the biceps of his right arm.
Click to expand...
 
S

StmarysCity79

Well-Known Member
glhs837 said:
Who was shot in the back and not breaking any laws? You are aware that assaulting someone breaks the law? You are also aware that every single person he shot was assaulting him? Are you also aware that there was another person he was legally permitted to shoot but didn't because that person wisely decided to lower the weapon they raised towards him?

I'll be honest, if you had asked what the odds were that any person not trained by the military no matter what age could go through that scenario and only shoot the exact people who threatened him and nobody else, I would place them a less than 3%. Cops? Maybe 20%.

His restraint and self control were astounding under the circumstances. Have you ever undergone high stress training? Having been through both Navy in person SERE (two different courses) and multiple trips through the helicopter egress trainer, maintaining self control under high stress is not easy. That this kid pulled it off was amazing.
Click to expand...


A minor can't legally own or carry a gun in public in Wisconsin.

Therefore the rest of your argument is moot.
 
S

StmarysCity79

Well-Known Member
phreddyp said:
Why are you lying?
Click to expand...
a) Any person under 18 years of age who possesses or goes armed with a dangerous weapon is guilty of a Class A misdemeanor. (b) Except as provided in par. (c), any person who intentionally sells, loans or gives a dangerous weapon to a person under 18 years of age is guilty of a Class I felony.
 
glhs837

glhs837

Power with Control
StmarysCity79 said:
A minor can't legally own or carry a gun in public in Wisconsin.

Therefore the rest of your argument is moot.
Click to expand...

You mean your argument, that you jumped ship on the second I pointed out that every single aspect of it was bull? Why not defend that one?

As for this one
Hours before closing arguments began on Monday, Judge Bruce Schroeder granted a defense motion to toss out the weapons charge. Rittenhouse attorneys Mark Richards and Corey Chirafisi pointed to an exception in the law that they said allows minors to possess shotguns and rifles as long as they’re not short-barreled.

Assistant District Attorney James Kraus argued that the exception renders the state’s prohibition on minors possessing dangerous weapons meaningless. But when he acknowledged that Rittenhouse’s rifle’s barrel was longer than 16 inches, the minimum barrel length allowed under state law, Schroeder dismissed the charge.

To Kenosha-based defense attorney Michael Cicchini, the statute clearly requires a weapon to be short-barreled to apply, and the judge made the right call.
Click to expand...

apnews.com

EXPLAINER: Why did judge drop Rittenhouse gun charge?

MADISON, Wis. (AP) — Prosecutors in Kyle Rittenhouse’s murder trial may have lost their best chance at convicting the Illinois man of something when the judge threw out a charge that Rittenhouse was a minor in possession of a dangerous weapon.
apnews.com apnews.com

So, what else you got, since you admit it wasnt murder since he only shot people assaulting him, which you are perfectly entitled in self defense, and it was perfectly legal for him to possess that weapon. .
 
P

phreddyp

Well-Known Member
StmarysCity79 said:
a) Any person under 18 years of age who possesses or goes armed with a dangerous weapon is guilty of a Class A misdemeanor. (b) Except as provided in par. (c), any person who intentionally sells, loans or gives a dangerous weapon to a person under 18 years of age is guilty of a Class I felony.
Click to expand...
Please try again with the complete law including exceptions.
 
glhs837

glhs837

Power with Control
StmarysCity79 said:
When you shoot someone in the back who is unarmed and breaking no laws you are a murderer.
Click to expand...

Stress training.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top