Kyle Rittenhouse trial set for early November .

Status
Not open for further replies.
speculated that Binger was hoping to provoke an objection from the defense, just so that the prosecution could retort, "See how provocative pointing a gun at someone is?"
Click to expand...

I almost wish that had happened, consider how THAT would have "helped" the prosecution's case when their witness (the guy who was shot and survived) testified under oath that he didn't get shot until after the pointed his gun at Rittenhouse!

YES, pointing a gun at someone IS a provocative action and for generations (virtually every generation since guns were invented) some one pointing a gun at you was at the very least an unfriendly act and in many cases more than sufficient justification for shooting them.

HOW IS THIS NOT COMMON KNOWLEDGE???
 
Metal god said:
How if at all do we think this verdict effects the SCOTUS cases out of NY on concealed carry . Is there an argument that depending on the verdict the SCOTUS would write it's opinion differently . I don't mean there specific ruling yes/no but how it's written
Click to expand...
I don't see any connection between the two cases. Rittenhouse wasn't carrying a handgun, and he wasn't carrying concealed.

I remain of the opinion that in the NYSRPA case the Supreme Court will rule that New York's "may issue, if you show an extraordinary need" licensing system will be ruled unconstitutional.
 
sureshot said:
As the charges were all dropped, it will be interesting to see if the DA'S office orders the rifle to be returned to him.
Click to expand...
The charges were not all dropped. ONE charge was dropped. On the remaining five charges, he was acquitted.

There is a difference.
 
AlongCameJones said:
Kyle borrowed the gun from Mr. Black? The rightful gun owner doesn't get his rifle back? There's no reason for that.
Click to expand...
I don't think you have been paying attention. It is my understanding that Black purchased the rifle for Rittenhouse -- using Rittenhouse's money -- and then stored the rifle for Rittenhouse at his (Black's) father's (or grandfather's) house.

Since Rittenhouse was too young to purchase a firearm on his own, Black technically (and actually) committed a straw purchase. It remains to be seen whether or not the DA's office will hammer him for that.
 
This event sure has me reviewing each state's laws regarding self-defense. My state is similar to Wisconsin's. I may be wrong, but I think I read someplace that if a defendant successfully is judged to have used legitimate self-defense--they are also immune from future civil lawsuits in Wisconsin.
 
I don't see any connection between the two cases. Rittenhouse wasn't carrying a handgun, and he wasn't carrying concealed.
Click to expand...

Not to sound snarky but that seems a bit naïve . I've said this before so I'll use it again . If girls can be boys and boys can be girls ? You really don't think the anti's inside or outside the courts can't draw a straight line connecting the two cases . I asked the question before looking at any news reports of the case . I've since seen at least 3 different commentators talking about how this case is going to effect gun rights and laws moving forward . Now we both know this case has no precedent value but it does have political value and lots of it . To that point-ish In the descent in the NY case the three or four dissenting judges will mention in some way either directly or indirectly the Rittenhouse case . That's my prediction , haha but my track record on predictions in these matters has not been good lol
 
Last edited:
Since Rittenhouse was too young to purchase a firearm on his own, Black technically (and actually) committed a straw purchase. It remains to be seen whether or not the DA's office will hammer him for that.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure about that . Black may have intended to do a straw purchase but that was never completed . Kyle never actually took ownership as far as the evidence seems to show. Yes Black used Kyles money but that does not make the gun Kyles and Kyle other then the night in question never took the gun home . Kyle also according to the evidence stole or took the gun without the OK of Mr Black the night of the 25Th . Yes I know I don't by any of that either but seems like it could be arguable in court .
 
Justice cannot tolerate armed persons crossing state lines
Click to expand...
Blithering as is his standard, Nadler is . . .

A simple search will show Rittenhouse did not cross state lines with a rifle.
The rifle was in Kenosha to start (and end) with.
https://www.politifact.com/factchec...ittenhouses-mother-did-not-bring-him-kenosha/

The brainless mob cannot stand having its prey snatch from its jaws,
It will now rage in mindless fury like a rabid dog to destroy every thing and every one it encounters.

And the REAL people who brought this all on... the governors and mayors who are wont to "give them room to destroy...." stand aside out of cowardice.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P4pUbHdc-Ig
(Start at 1:00)
.
 
Last edited:
rickyrick said:
The concept of loosing your rights for moving around in your own country is the most worrisome part of all of this to me.
Click to expand...
But all of us who carry deal with that, regularly. I have a home state carry permit and non-resident permits for four other states, and there are still a dozen or more states I can't legally carry in.
 
Justice cannot tolerate armed persons crossing state lines looking for trouble while people engage in First Amendment-protected protest.
Click to expand...

I don't know about YOUR First Amendment,Representative Nadler, but MY First Amendment protects the Right to Peaceful Protest.

For the Citizens of Kenosha,,the "Peaceful Protest" was not any more "peaceful" than the Jan 6 "Peaceful Protest" that so alarms Congress.

IMO, Kyle Rittenhouse was far better at distinguishing who to shoot and who to not shoot than the Capitol Police who shot and killed Ashli. Who,BTW,is shielded by anonymity and not even charged.
Ashli was guilty of being in the wrong place at the wrong time. Perhaps she may have been charged with something. But she presented no mortal threat to anyone.

Yet she was killed by one of YOUR agents,Representative Nadler.

Kyle shot NO peaceful protestors. Not one.

He shot people who were trying to kill him.

The Verdict confirmed his innocence.

Statements like yours,Representative Nadler, incite violence and destruction and YOU should be held accountable.

The aftermath of the verdict should be "Its settled"

I'll give credit where its due,even President Biden agrees with that.

Lets not rekindle the wildfire. Give Kenosha a break.
 
The trial is over, the verdict is in. So this thread is done.

If you feel you have a valid Law & Civil Rights issue to discuss, feel free to start a new thread.

Closed.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top