Black man shot in Kenosha, riots starting all over again...

[chipbennett]

Outside of the minor in possession law. I do t think he really has much to worry about. Whomever gave him the gun and possibly who transported him there just may.

Minor in possession of dangerous weapons: 948.60. Refer to subsection (3)(c):

"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."

941.28 deals with SBSs/SBRs, so we can agree that it does not apply, yes?

Section 29.304 deals with hunting. The title of the section is: "29.304  Restrictions on hunting and use of firearms by persons under 16 years of age." Given that this section a) deals with hunting, and b) involves persons under 16 years of age, can we also agree that it does not apply?

Section 29.593 deals with obtaining a hunting permit, and the firearm safety course required to obtain said permit: "29.593  Requirement for certificate of accomplishment to obtain hunting approval." The entire section describes the requirement for obtaining, or for applying to obtain, a hunting permit. Again, hunting is not a factor in this incident. Defending oneself does not require obtaining a hunting permit.

Nothing in either of these sections states or even implies that having a hunting permit is required for carry of a long gun, regardless of age, particularly for a 17 year old. (That assertion may change if we are talking about someone under 16 years of age.)

 

[MCgrease08]

I agree. After he is found "not guilty", Kyle and his parents should take a serious look at relocating to northern Idaho. Find a company that wants to employ him in a county that has a population and sherrif that has their head on straight.

Not knocking the sherrrifs in wi or il, just saying that a good sherrif is and will be damn important wherever he lands.

I bet there are some folks in the American Redoubt that have seen enough of his resume to go ahead and start the new hire paperwork.

I think Rittenhouse should start a self defense tactics and training company. The kid's got more street cred and real world experience than probably 75% of the trainers out there. Even without the beard and tats.

 

[dusty88]

This kid is 17. Or a young man, whichever you want to call him. He killed 2 people, blew the biceps off another. He's now locked up. He's both famous and infamous at the same time. He's going to need counseling and support. That's assuming he wins his case (which so far looks like he should)

 

[SheepDog4Life]

Incorrect. Read 948.60(C)(3).

Chip is correct here... 948.60 has a list of dangerous weapons that it's illegal for those under 18 to possess and for an adult to "give" to them to possess. That list includes "any firearm, loaded or unloaded".

However, (3)(c) indicates that for rifles and shotguns, the section ONLY APPLIES if the weapon is short barreled (SBR/SBS) OR if the rifle/shotgun is possessed while hunting and the hunting requirements have not been met.

There is nothing under this section of WI law that prevents a 17 year old from possessing a rifle or shotgun that is not a SBR/SBS when not hunting.

The charging document also lists 939.51(3)(a) which is the definition of punishments for Class A misdemeanor.

It appears that the prosecutors are not able to read their own laws! No idea if there is a different section that applies to open carry, but for this section, the charge should thrown out by the judge on a simple reading of the statute unless the rifle was an SBR, which it does not appear to be.

ETA: Chip could type much quicker than me... see post 1021.

 

[Leadeye]

Sadly I think he'll spend a lot of time looking over his shoulder at the end of all this. A lot of the Che wannabes will think killing him will raise their status.

 

[SheepDog4Life]

I'm on the ACLU email list... long story, not pertinent here. What is pertinent is how they portray the shooting of Jacob Blake in their call to action email... just walking to get into "his" car, that's it, just a black man walking away to get into "his" car and he gets shot in his back 7 times. Sheesh!

Only five days ago, Jacob Blake was shot in his back seven times by police officers while walking away to get into his car. This happened in broad daylight and in full view of his three children.

 

[Tombs]

Now be careful in answering this. What type of actions, powers should police have to stop or suppress these (or any other) riots? And keep in mind the consequences of your response, both presently and historically.

Night time curfew.

People remaining after curfew are subject to riot control tactics.

If people become violent after that, authorize live ammunition.


Nobody who has a job or a family can afford to be out after night looting stores and hurting people. The only people left after dark are the people looking for trouble.
You have to remember, allowing rioting is taking away the rights of people who aren't part of the riot. Typically your rights end where someone else's rights begin.

 

[Ark]

Honestly guys I'm completely over the legal hair-splitting. It's a 17-year-old with a clean record who showed up to clean graffiti and put out fires, versus a convicted child molester who spent 12 years in prison, a convicted rapist, and a pending felon with an illegal gun. All that criminality on display, and I'm supposed to care about Kyle being a few months shy of 18 or in technical violation of some byzantine, unconstitutional gun law?

A case for jury nullification if I ever saw one. I wish we had a hundred thousand more like him, mustering and reporting out to everywhere the police are standing by and allowing these criminals to loot, burn, and murder. When the state REFUSES to do its job and protect lives and property, what else can a man do but take it upon himself?

 

[jwamplerusa]

I thought Colion Noir did a nice review analysis with the available data, see link below. Since he passed the bar in his professional life, I figure his opinion is worth more than mine...

I am still not comfortable with what looks like the initial shot from Mr. Rittehouse and the interaction with the red shirted gentlemen. Noir's video however showed footage I hadn't seen before which certainly makes "red shirt guy" look like the aggressor.

https://youtu.be/NSU9ZvnudFE

 

[BugI02]

Saw that. Pretty young. Too bad. As a famous actor, he'd normally get a lot of press at his passing, but a cop didn't kill him, so now His life didn't matter... Except for the Marvel crowd, we wouldn't even know.

Too soon. The man fought a brave battle with cancer for four years, pursuing his craft as he could between chemo and/or surgeries. He was aclaimed for portraying Jackie Robinson as well as Thurgood Marshall in less fanciful movies. R.I.P.

 

[JCSR]

When you bring a handgun to a rifle fight.

 

[ghitch75]

When you bring a handgun to a rifle fight.

View attachment 90589

i just wonder if it was a HP or FMJ?

 

[JCSR]

i just wonder if it was a HP or FMJ?

I haven't heard but it sure stopped the fight.

 

[BugI02]

Meh.
Closet full of claymores maybe, but ORGANIZATION is what we will really lack. How many rounds would it really take? How many rounds do you think prepared INGO’ers have? It’s the lack of organization that could make it end badly.
American Contingency information network interests me, but it might be too little too late.
Maybe we should concentrate on keeping them in their little leftist enclaves, fallen or not, and not let them to our front door.

Let's see: 3 for red t-shirt, one for surprised skateboard punk, one for glock medic, maybe a couple of wild rounds. Seems like ten would do it

 

[Hatin Since 87]

Assuming you meant you "don't think he really has much to worry about."

I would say legally maybe not, but socially, I think this kid now has a huge target on his back. There will be leftists and antifa types angry enough to come looking for him with the intention of doing him harm.

Well so far they’re 0 for 3... they might wanna reconsider that and stick to hassling the weak people they usually target. Hopefully the “weak” (elderly/women) take notice and start carrying.

 

[injb]

I thought Colion Noir did a nice review analysis with the available data, see link below. Since he passed the bar in his professional life, I figure his opinion is worth more than mine...

I am still not comfortable with what looks like the initial shot from Mr. Rittehouse and the interaction with the red shirted gentlemen. Noir's video however showed footage I hadn't seen before which certainly makes "red shirt guy" look like the aggressor.

https://youtu.be/NSU9ZvnudFE

Looks like he thinks that the guy in the confrontation with red shirt guy at the gas station is Rittenhouse. It's not - different hat, and he's wearing shorts.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Minor in possession of dangerous weapons: 948.60. Refer to subsection (3)(c):

"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."

941.28 deals with SBSs/SBRs, so we can agree that it does not apply, yes?

Section 29.304 deals with hunting. The title of the section is: "29.304  Restrictions on hunting and use of firearms by persons under 16 years of age." Given that this section a) deals with hunting, and b) involves persons under 16 years of age, can we also agree that it does not apply?

Section 29.593 deals with obtaining a hunting permit, and the firearm safety course required to obtain said permit: "29.593  Requirement for certificate of accomplishment to obtain hunting approval." The entire section describes the requirement for obtaining, or for applying to obtain, a hunting permit. Again, hunting is not a factor in this incident. Defending oneself does not require obtaining a hunting permit.

Nothing in either of these sections states or even implies that having a hunting permit is required for carry of a long gun, regardless of age, particularly for a 17 year old. (That assertion may change if we are talking about someone under 16 years of age.)

Im fairly confident you’re reading it wrong. Or more specifically, taking things from one section and applying it to another.
Further, I have every confidence that Rittenhouse isn’t the first kid to get dinged for minor in possession of a dangerous weapon, and that case law will ultimately prove his possession of the rifle as being illegal.

 

[Hatin Since 87]

That only applies when hunting.

Oh. I read somewhere that the only statute about carrying a firearm under 18 was mentioned in relation to the hunters education course, but there’s nothing requiring someone who has completed the course to be in the act of hunting to be in possession of a firearm. Regardless, sounds like this kid will walk free.... and rightfully so

 

[rkwhyte2]

A fairly detailed and lengthy write up.
https://www.ar15.com/forums/general...alysis-WARNING-Bandwidth-Intensive/5-2362796/

 

[JCSR]

A fairly detailed and lengthy write up.
https://www.ar15.com/forums/general...alysis-WARNING-Bandwidth-Intensive/5-2362796/

I was going to link that as well but I didn't think anyone would actually read it before commenting.