Quote from: T Hunt on September 14, 2020, 06:16:32 AM
Like what? He was right to be there, there needs to be armed militias at all these riots to keep them in line. If this happened more often the riots wld die out fast.

No he was not right to be there. He was asking for trouble and he got it. He was, by law, illegally carrying a firearm. He was only 17yo. The rioters are not right to be there either.

Quote from: Killer Clouds on September 14, 2020, 06:50:14 AM
No he was not right to be there. He was asking for trouble and he got it. He was, by law, illegally carrying a firearm. He was only 17yo. The rioters are not right to be there either.

The constitution does not state an age at which the right to self defense begins. Can he not hold a gun in his own home?
On top of that, He was old enough to carry a gun in the military.
He was defending his own property also, giving him a legit reason to be there.
I see him as someone myself and other on the right shld emulate.

Quote from: T Hunt on September 14, 2020, 09:32:52 AM
The constitution does not state an age at which the right to self defense begins. Can he not hold a gun in his own home?
On top of that, He was old enough to carry a gun in the military.
He was defending his own property also, giving him a legit reason to be there.
I see him as someone myself and other on the right shld emulate.

I'm with you on this T... he did nothing wrong and before the incident was behaving like a model citizen.

https://conservativehardliner.com/patriot-kyle-rittenhouse-made-world-better-place-taking-out-some-antifa-blm-trash

Quote from: T Hunt on September 14, 2020, 09:32:52 AM
The constitution does not state an age at which the right to self defense begins. Can he not hold a gun in his own home?
On top of that, He was old enough to carry a gun in the military.
He was defending his own property also, giving him a legit reason to be there.
I see him as someone myself and other on the right shld emulate.

He was not in his own home. He is not in the military.  He was in public illegally carrying a firearm that didn't belong to him. He was a minor that made a bad decision. He is partially responsible for what happened. His parents are also partially responsible for what happened. His friend that gave him the gun is partially responsible for what happened. The rioters are definitely mostly responsible for what happened.  The kid is not a hero. He is a juvenile delinquent criminal. He was breaking the law just like the rioters were and are. He should never have been there in the first place. He knew there was going to be trouble and his avoidable actions insured trouble would happen. Everyone can make excuses but the facts don't change. He made bad decisions and got the trouble he was looking for.
What are you doing tonight Kyle?
I'm going downtown where the riots are to remove graffiti from Mr. Smith's furniture store.
That's not a good idea. It's also dangerous.
Don't worry Dad. Johnny is letting me borrow his AR15 to protect myself.
Ok Kyle have fun and be careful.

Quote from: Killer Clouds on September 14, 2020, 06:45:55 AM
Rittenhouse was breaking the law too. A 17yo  carrying an AR15 to a riot was an invitation to a fight and he got it. He should not have been there. Granted the rioters were in the wrong too and I have no sympathy for the assholes that were shot.

WRONG   He was not carrying a borrowed frearm to a Riot he was engaging in LEGAL civic minded action IE clean up of damaged and destroyed property. The RIOTERS decided to re-engage and commence hostilities when they were outraged that citizens would defy their lawlessess and clean up their mess. So the onus lies entirely with them.

And here is a tenuous matter of law, what law says a 17 year old cannot carry a firearm? True He cannot buy one but what statute do you cite that says a minor can't carry a firearm WHEN ENGAGED IN LEGAL ACTIVETY, such as Hunting or target shooting, and twist it as you might he was engaged in a legal activety. So when did he come to possess this weapon?....did an adult give it to him?  A relative?  When? at the scene? when? at the point where armed rioters returned to instigate a fight?

He is NOT a juvenile delinquent, a delinquent under common law is a minor who has frequent brushes with the law

I have a serious issue with you over the fact you say he should NOT have ever been there in the first place.  Who has the authority to say where he can go or not?  The cops did not corrdon off the area or limit access so HE HAS A RIGHT TO BE ANYWHERE......FREEDOM OF MOVEMENT...just like you do driving down the road. He or anyone else does not have to submit to mob rule or the dictates of anarchists who say "this is "our" area stay out."

Quote from: Billy's bayonet on September 14, 2020, 12:57:18 PM

WRONG   He was not carrying a borrowed frearm to a Riot he was engaging in LEGAL civic minded action IE clean up of damaged and destroyed property. The RIOTERS decided to re-engage and commence hostilities when they were outraged that citizens would defy their lawlessess and clean up their mess. So the onus lies entirely with them.

And here is a tenuous matter of law, what law says a 17 year old cannot carry a firearm? True He cannot buy one but what statute do you cite that says a minor can't carry a firearm WHEN ENGAGED IN LEGAL ACTIVETY, such as Hunting or target shooting, and twist it as you might he was engaged in a legal activety. So when did he come to possess this weapon?....did an adult give it to him?  A relative?  When? at the scene? when? at the point where armed rioters returned to instigate a fight?

He is NOT a juvenile delinquent, a delinquent under common law is a minor who has frequent brushes with the law

I have a serious issue with you over the fact you say he should NOT have ever been there in the first place.  Who has the authority to say where he can go or not?  The cops did not corrdon off the area or limit access so HE HAS A RIGHT TO BE ANYWHERE......FREEDOM OF MOVEMENT...just like you do driving down the road. He or anyone else does not have to submit to mob rule or the dictates of anarchists who say "this is "our" area stay out."

The law says a minor can have a firearm for hunting or target practice.  Which one was he doing? Either way it was illegal. He did have a borrowed firearm he admitted he got from a friend. Also illegal. Just because you can do something doesn't mean you should. He went there knowing what was happening and knew there would be trouble. He got what he wanted. He ended up killing 2 people and injuring another in self defense. He never should have been there in the first place. He's not a hero. He is a criminal too. He's a stupid kid that did a stupid thing and almost got killed in the process.
Your spin is just that. SPIN! But the facts don't change. He was a minor that was illegally carrying a borrowed firearm to an area where a riot was happening. That is fact. It doesn't matter why he was there. He didn't need to be there and shouldn't have been there. Your "He was doing his civic minded duty" is unadulterated BULL SHIT.

Quote from: Killer Clouds on September 14, 2020, 01:04:55 PM
The law says a minor can have a firearm for hunting or target practice.  Which one was he doing? Either way it was illegal. He did have a borrowed firearm he admitted he got from a friend. Also illegal. Just because you can do something doesn't mean you should. He went there knowing what was happening and knew there would be trouble. He got what he wanted. He ended up killing 2 people and injuring another in self defense. He never should have been there in the first place. He's not a hero. He is a criminal too. He's a stupid kid that did a stupid thing and almost got killed in the process.
Your spin is just that. SPIN! But the facts don't change. He was a minor that was illegally carrying a borrowed firearm to an area where a riot was happening. That is fact. It doesn't matter why he was there. He didn't need to be there and shouldn't have been there. Your "He was doing his civic minded duty" is unadulterated BULL SHIT.

No he was not carrying it illegally. And whats wrong with going to a riot to defend your own property? And whats wrong with helping others while there?

Quote from: T Hunt on September 14, 2020, 04:17:50 PM
No he was not carrying it illegally. And whats wrong with going to a riot to defend your own property? And whats wrong with helping others while there?

Yes he was carrying it illegally. IT WAS A BORROWED WEAPON! HE'S A MINOR. HE'S ONLY 17YO! ILLEGAL! What don't you understand? He wasn't defending his own property. The kid is a criminal.

Quote from: Killer Clouds on September 14, 2020, 01:04:55 PM
The law says a minor can have a firearm for hunting or target practice.  Which one was he doing? Either way it was illegal. He did have a borrowed firearm he admitted he got from a friend. Also illegal. Just because you can do something doesn't mean you should. He went there knowing what was happening and knew there would be trouble. He got what he wanted. He ended up killing 2 people and injuring another in self defense. He never should have been there in the first place. He's not a hero. He is a criminal too. He's a stupid kid that did a stupid thing and almost got killed in the process.
Your spin is just that. SPIN! But the facts don't change. He was a minor that was illegally carrying a borrowed firearm to an area where a riot was happening. That is fact. It doesn't matter why he was there. He didn't need to be there and shouldn't have been there. Your "He was doing his civic minded duty" is unadulterated BULL SHIT.

As a trained investigator for a major metropolitan Police Dept for more than two decades and a few more in private practice I do not engage in SPIN or BULLSHIT, I deal in facts and the law, trust me on this I have been before the courts many many times and the issues I raise will be a point of contention by the lad's lawyers.

But first, lets back up and regroup, I asked you to CITE THE STATUTE, or ordinance that says a minor (or adult) is prevented from carrying a firearm in public space....or perhaps private property. So do it or stand down.

And you are showing your ignorance of the law by saying "it does'nt matter why he was there"  His INTENT certainly does matter.  Being  present in such conflicted area is a major factor...he did not go there to shoot people
he went there to clean up a mess A LEGAL PURPOSE. Something HE HAS A RIGHT TO DO. In the course of which it was necessary to defend himself and others FROM CRIMINAL ACTIVETY  (Attempted murder aggrivated assault etc etc)

Quote from: Billy's bayonet on September 14, 2020, 05:09:42 PM
As a trained investigator for a major metropolitan Police Dept for more than two decades and a few more in private practice I do not engage in SPIN or BULLSHIT, I deal in facts and the law, trust me on this I have been before the courts many many times and the issues I raise will be a point of contention by the lad's lawyers.

But first, lets back up and regroup, I asked you to CITE THE STATUTE, or ordinance that says a minor (or adult) is prevented from carrying a firearm in public space....or perhaps private property. So do it or stand down.

And you are showing your ignorance of the law by saying "it does'nt matter why he was there"  His INTENT certainly does matter.  Being  present in such conflicted area is a major factor...he did not go there to shoot people
he went there to clean up a mess A LEGAL PURPOSE. Something HE HAS A RIGHT TO DO. In the course of which it was necessary to defend himself and others FROM CRIMINAL ACTIVETY  (Attempted murder aggrivated assault etc etc)

You say you don't deal in spin and that obviously is a lie. If you are what you say you are you know damn good and well a minor cannot open carry a firearm in public. I will not stand down because you are wrong and when this goes to court the kid will get time. If it was legit he wouldn't still be held. Rittenhouse was breaking the law too.

Quote from: Killer Clouds on September 14, 2020, 05:26:05 PM
You say you don't deal in spin and that obviously is a lie. If you are what you say you are you know damn good and well a minor cannot open carry a firearm in public. I will not stand down because you are wrong and when this goes to court the kid will get time. If it was legit he wouldn't still be held. Rittenhouse was breaking the law too.

Billy is indeed legit.  I was hoping, though, you could cite the law he broke.  Otherwise, I'd hope that you'd conceded that point.

https://www.bucherlawgroup.com/milwaukee-county-lawyer/open-carry-laws-in-wisconsin-what-you-should-know
Open carryEdit

Open carry is legal anywhere concealed carry is legal. It is legal for all adults unless they are prohibited from possession of firearms. Wisconsin state law 948.60(2)(a) states: "Any person under 18 years of age who possesses or goes armed with a dangerous weapon is guilty of a Class A misdemeanor." However, the exception is: "when the dangerous weapon is being used in target practice under the supervision of an adult or in a course of instruction in the traditional and proper use of the dangerous weapon under the supervision of an adult." [8] Wisconsin statute 948.60(3)(c) states: "This section applies only to a person under 18 years of age who possesses or is armed with a rifle or a shotgun if the person is in violation of s. 941.28 or is not in compliance with ss. 29.304 and 29.593."[9] Statute 29.304(3)(b) states: "Restrictions on possession or control of a firearm. No person 14 years of age or older but under 16 years of age may have in his or her possession or control any firearm" with added exceptions listed.[10] Children over 12 and under 16 are allowed to use rifles and shotguns under very limited, supervised situations.[11] A license for adults is not required unless in a taxpayer-owned building or within 1000 feet of school property and not on private property.[12]

In the past, some jurisdictions have tried to prosecute open-carry by equating the open carry of handguns with disorderly conduct. On April 20, 2009 the Wisconsin Attorney General's office released a memorandum to all law enforcement agencies stating that mere open carry of a firearm was not disorderly conduct, and instructed both law enforcement and the district attorneys to cease this practice.

In 2011 a subsection was added to the Disorderly Conduct statute (947.01 [13]) reading "Unless other facts and circumstances that indicate a criminal or malicious intent on the part of the person apply, a person is not in violation of, and may not be charged with a violation of, this section for loading, carrying, or going armed with a firearm, without regard to whether the firearm is loaded or is concealed or openly carried." This codified open carry, ending any debate as to its legality.

Loading, or having a loaded, uncased handgun inside a vehicle was legalized beginning November 1, 2011.[14] The firearm must not be "hidden from ordinary observation" while inside the vehicle unless the citizen has a license.[15] However, the Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled that a license is required to have a concealed loaded handgun within reach in a vehicle, regardless of the Safe Transport Statue removing restrictions on transporting loaded handguns.[

Eat shit Billy! A minor cannot open carry or conceal carry a firearm in public.
Rittenhouse is a resident of Illinois.  He didn't own the firearm he used. If he owned it he did so illegally. That opens another can of worms.
https://gun.laws.com/state-gun-laws/illinois-gun-laws

Quote from: taxed on September 14, 2020, 05:27:58 PM
Billy is indeed legit.  I was hoping, though, you could cite the law he broke.  Otherwise, I'd hope that you'd conceded that point.

Billy is full of shit on this one.

Quote from: Killer Clouds on September 14, 2020, 05:51:23 PM
Billy is full of shit on this one.

One thing Billy is never full of is shit.

Quote from: taxed on September 14, 2020, 05:59:44 PM
One thing Billy is never full of is shit.

He is on this subject. He's completely WRONG! Kyle Rittenhouse was illegally open carrying a borrowed firearm in Wisconsin. Kyle Rittenhouse, being a resident of Illinois, cannot legally own a firearm. Billy is full of shit on this one.