Quote from: Killer Clouds on September 27, 2020, 07:02:14 AM
You're full of shit and lying your ass off. Nothing I've said has anything to do with emotions. I've stated facts and the law. Now whose acting like a lefty accusing someone of doing what they are doing? That would be you.

You see, herein lies the problem. There is no leftist that over rides the Constitution. I have lied about nothing and exposing your emotional attachment to your claim he broke the law exposes your ignorance of our Bill of Rights.

QuoteWhen have I said he didn't have a right to self defense?

Oh Jeez. When you played Judge Jury and Hangman! Damn son, are you even paying to the emotional Bull Shit you're spewing?

QuoteAll I have said all along is he broke the law by having the gun. You keep saying he was legal to have it and that is a lie.

Yes, a misdemeanor! Your claim is it was a felony, which you have failed to prove!

QuoteHow's it feel to be a lying lefty piece of shit that you are?

I'll just leave this here for when Rittenhouse walks and you are proven a fool. Not to worry. I won't say "I Told You So", it won't be necessary as you finish off a 8 course crow dinner.

Quote from: Solar on September 27, 2020, 08:57:24 AM
You still did not answer the question. Is that because you realized it blows all your silly claims out of the water?
And you are wrong again, many states allow kids to own and shoot weapons.

.I did answsr the question many times. There are states that allow minors to own firearms and to shoot firearms. There are no states that allow minors to open carry a firearm in public. You have no argument. You know you're wrong and then call me a lefty. The facts are the facts. Rittenhouse was in possession of a rifle that was illegally aquired. He was carrying that weapon illegally.  He shot 3 people with that weapon in self defense. He was not in compliance of Minnesota state law.
You still haven't answered the question I posed to you either. Again I'll answer the question. 3c makes 2a a felony instead of a misdemeanor. One more time  3c  MAKES 2a A FELONY INSTEAD OF A MISDEMEANOR.

Quote from: Killer Clouds on September 27, 2020, 09:32:55 AM
.I did answsr the question many times. There are states that allow minors to own firearms and to shoot firearms. There are no states that allow minors to open carry a firearm in public. You have no argument. You know you're wrong and then call me a lefty. The facts are the facts. Rittenhouse was in possession of a rifle that was illegally aquired. He was carrying that weapon illegally.  He shot 3 people with that weapon in self defense. He was not in compliance of Minnesota state law.
You still haven't answered the question I posed to you either.

First off, it was a misdemeanor!!! Secondly, I never called you a lefty, I simply pointed out how libs debate based on emotion.
And yes, I answered it 3 times, you just don't like the answer!

QuoteAgain I'll answer the question. 3c makes 2a a felony instead of a misdemeanor. One more time  3c  MAKES 2a A FELONY INSTEAD OF A MISDEMEANOR.

See, that's not an answer, you need to show how it suddenly becomes a felony. Can you do that?

Quote from: Solar on September 27, 2020, 10:12:00 AM
First off, it was a misdemeanor!!! Secondly, I never called you a lefty, I simply pointed out how libs debate based on emotion.
And yes, I answered it 3 times, you just don't like the answer!
See, that's not an answer, you need to show how it suddenly becomes a felony. Can you do that?

The violations in 3c are felonies. That's how it becomes a felony. You haven't answered my question so I will simplify it and pose it again. If you walk down the street in the town you live in in the state you live in open carrying an unloaded single shot 22lr rifle what would you be charged with? How would your 2nd amendment rights apply then? The answer is you'd be charged with a misdemeanor and your 2nd amendment rights wouldn't mean shit.
And so what if Rittenhouse only committed a misdemeanor. He still broke the law. Are you saying a misdemeanor isn't a  crime? Shoplifting is a misdemeanor and is a crime.

Quote from: Killer Clouds on September 27, 2020, 10:34:39 AM
The violations in 3c are felonies. That's how it becomes a felony. You haven't answered my question so I will simplify it and pose it again. If you walk down the street in the town you live in in the state you live in open carrying an unloaded single shot 22lr rifle what would you be charged with? How would your 2nd amendment rights apply then? The answer is you'd be charged with a misdemeanor and your 2nd amendment rights wouldn't mean shit.
And so what if Rittenhouse only committed a misdemeanor. He still broke the law. Are you saying a misdemeanor isn't a  crime? Shoplifting is a misdemeanor and is a crime.

Cut the bull shit and explain how you've made the connection to felony. Show me the law that makes this a felony!

Quote from: Solar on September 27, 2020, 11:28:22 AM
Cut the bull shit and explain how you've made the connection to felony. Show me the law that makes this a felony!

You cut the bulletin and prove me wrong.
Here are the facts about Rittenhouse I think we agree on.
1) He is 17 years old.
2) He is a resident of Illinois.
3) He was in possession of a firearm.
4) The firearm did not belong to him.
Can we agree on those facts not withstanding what else happened?

Quote from: Sick Of Silence on September 23, 2020, 01:50:40 PM
Whose side are you on?

Quote from: Killer Clouds on September 27, 2020, 11:47:29 AM
You cut the bulletin and prove me wrong.
Here are the facts about Rittenhouse I think we agree on.
1) He is 17 years old.
2) He is a resident of Illinois.
3) He was in possession of a firearm.
4) The firearm did not belong to him.
Can we agree on those facts not withstanding what else happened?

You still haven't shown the connection of how the law says he's a felon. Show us the law he broke that makes this a felony, connect the dots.
I know once you figure his out, you won't be happy, or is it you already know you made a mistake and don't ant to connect the dots?

The law is a funny animal, and because we always extenuating circumstances, the law makes provisions for that as well, which is why your claim of his being a felon is ludicrous beyond belief.

And it's Wisconsin, by the way.

(2) Provocation affects the privilege of self-defense as follows:

(a) A person who engages in unlawful conduct of a type likely to provoke others to attack him or her and thereby does provoke an attack is not entitled to claim the privilege of self-defense against such attack, except when the attack which ensues is of a type causing the person engaging in the unlawful conduct to reasonably believe that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm. In such a case, the person engaging in the unlawful conduct is privileged to act in self-defense, but the person is not privileged to resort to the use of force intended or likely to cause death to the person's assailant unless the person reasonably believes he or she has exhausted every other reasonable means to escape from or otherwise avoid death or great bodily harm at the hands of his or her assailant.

I hope you read that carefully, because assuming as you claim, he was breaking the law, he is still entitled to use deadly force.
If you watch the video again, you'll note he was on the ground and exhausted all chance of escape...

Quote from: Solar on September 27, 2020, 01:09:59 PM
You still haven't shown the connection of how the law says he's a felon. Show us the law he broke that makes this a felony, connect the dots.
I know once you figure his out, you won't be happy, or is it you already know you made a mistake and don't ant to connect the dots?

The law is a funny animal, and because we always extenuating circumstances, the law makes provisions for that as well, which is why your claim of his being a felon is ludicrous beyond belief.

And it's Wisconsin, by the way.

(2) Provocation affects the privilege of self-defense as follows:

(a) A person who engages in unlawful conduct of a type likely to provoke others to attack him or her and thereby does provoke an attack is not entitled to claim the privilege of self-defense against such attack, except when the attack which ensues is of a type causing the person engaging in the unlawful conduct to reasonably believe that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm. In such a case, the person engaging in the unlawful conduct is privileged to act in self-defense, but the person is not privileged to resort to the use of force intended or likely to cause death to the person's assailant unless the person reasonably believes he or she has exhausted every other reasonable means to escape from or otherwise avoid death or great bodily harm at the hands of his or her assailant.

I hope you read that carefully, because assuming as you claim, he was breaking the law, he is still entitled to use deadly force.
If you watch the video again, you'll note he was on the ground and exhausted all chance of escape...

. Can we agree on the points I made or not?

Quote from: Killer Clouds on September 27, 2020, 01:19:37 PM
. Can we agree on the points I made or not?

Not until you show us how you came to your conclusions. Don't just post the subsection of the law, post the law and how it makes him out to be a felon.

Quote from: Solar on September 27, 2020, 01:32:27 PM
Not until you show us how you came to your conclusions. Don't just post the subsection of the law, post the law and how it makes him out to be a felon.

Answer my question and I will show you. Can we agree on those facts or not?

Quote from: Killer Clouds on September 27, 2020, 01:47:29 PM
Answer my question and I will show you. Can we agree on those facts or not?

Your question has been answered three times, and now you want to broaden the spectrum in hopes of saving face?
I have no interest in entertaining "What If's", so cut the crap and build your case, or just admit you were wrong and that other laws come into play, that no issue is cut and dried, no matter how emotionally one gets involved.

You forget, I was once law enforcement and had to understand the law, and that no matter what your first impression is, there is always extenuating factors to consider, and that's why I stayed out of this discussion for as long as I did. Never get emotional over any given issue, it will always cloud your decision making process.

Quote from: Solar on September 27, 2020, 02:54:43 PM
Your question has been answered three times, and now you want to broaden the spectrum in hopes of saving face?
I have no interest in entertaining "What If's", so cut the crap and build your case, or just admit you were wrong and that other laws come into play, that no issue is cut and dried, no matter how emotionally one gets involved.

You forget, I was once law enforcement and had to understand the law, and that no matter what your first impression is, there is always extenuating factors to consider, and that's why I stayed out of this discussion for as long as I did. Never get emotional over any given issue, it will always cloud your decision making process.

I don't give a flying fuck what you did. You're wrong. When Rittenhouse borrowed that rifle he was an accomplice to a felony both state and federal. He illegally aquired a weapon he had no right to have. That is fact. His possesion of the rifle was a fel9ny because of that. Before Rittenhouse shot anyone it was a class I felony.  After he shot someone it was a class H felony. Rittenhouse is a minor from Illinois. He had no legal authority to have the rifle. He also had no authority to protect anything with that rifle.
18 USC 922 (a) (5)
948.60
ss.29.593

Quote from: Killer Clouds on September 27, 2020, 03:09:59 PM
I don't give a flying fuck what you did. You're wrong. When Rittenhouse borrowed that rifle he was an accomplice to a felony both state and federal.

Read the damned law, he is not the one who will be charged, the adult will!!!

He illegally aquired a weapon he had no right to have. That is fact. His possesion of the rifle was a fel9ny because of that. Before Rittenhouse shot anyone it was a class I felony.

Quote

Jeeezus, it's a damned misdemeanor! I posted the law stating so!

QuoteAfter he shot someone it was a class H felony. Rittenhouse is a minor from Illinois. He had no legal authority to have the rifle. He also had no authority to protect anything with that rifle.

AS I proved by law, it matters not, it was self defense, plain and simple!!

Quote18 USC 922 (a) (5)
948.60
ss.29.593

Cut the bull shit and quote the damn sentences you claim he's guilty under!

I don't know why you're being so damn thick headed about this, I proved he acted in self defense, go back and read it again!

Quote from: Killer Clouds on September 27, 2020, 03:09:59 PM
ss.29.593

For the 100000th time, he wasn't hunting.  That's what your entire BS hangs on?