All purpose news and politics thread part VI: This Is Not The Time For Posing

[shooshoomanjoe]

You are right in that it is really simple.

Just not what you are saying took place.

He was there for plenty of time where he did not so much lay a finger on anyone. Once other folks were actually foolish enough to attack a person holding a gun, he still let one of them live when the shot he fired was not lethal.

A while back here in Illinois, there was a two car rolling gang shootout. Kim Foxx refused to charge anyone because it amounted to mutual combat.

If the side that attacked Rittenhouse had never approached him?

What does anyone have that is anything like proof that Rittenhouse would have done anything to him?

There are sides here. Sure, one is that Rittenhouse not being there would have changed the outcome.

The obvious issue is that the other side is that if the folks in question had never confronted Rittenhouse no one would have died.

They insisted on doing that. That was the actual catalyst. Without it, nothing would have happened even with Rittenhouse being there. He acted in self-defense, and even let one of them live when he could not have.

It is obvious self-defense.

Past that, no one is discussing that the folks shot while chasing him down were taking part in the exact same vigilantism that they say Rittenhouse never should have been taking part in to start with.

That said, agreed on that they should have charged him with something that they could convict on to send a message.

They decided not to.

I agree but he still should have been in trouble for illegally having a weapon. A crime that the biased judge let go.

[Iron Maiden]

Maybe the AG should have made the weapon charge a separate case although would that verge on a kind of double jeopardy? My question is, what about the mother for dropping off her son and leaving him to roam around armed with a high powered weapon?

I had Conservative friend who echoed the Fox News bs on how Rittenhouse needs to sue the media and Biden. They don't seem to really nail why beyond how he was "painted bad". Like you know...shooting some folks during this isn't some heroic deed and the mean nasty media made hero Kyle look bad.

I've also read reports that some feel that the Rittenhouse defense team should be sued for defaming his victims.

[Iron Maiden]

IMO the Democratic Party should listen up and pay heed to Bill Maher's campaign coaching ...

[numberthirty]

I agree but he still should have been in trouble for illegally having a weapon. A crime that the biased judge let go.

I'm here in Illinois, so I've heard them go into the issue with this law a few times.

From the sound of everything that I have heard, it is a law specifically aimed at being able to charge if the police turned up "Sawed Off..." weapons.

While it's not one hundred percent, the gun that he had was standard length and long enough so that the law did not really apply to it.

[Gray Lensman]

Maybe the AG should have made the weapon charge a separate case although would that verge on a kind of double jeopardy? My question is, what about the mother for dropping off her son and leaving him to roam around armed with a high powered weapon?



I've also read reports that some feel that the Rittenhouse defense team should be sued for defaming his victims.

I read an interview on Slate with a lawyer for the Liberal Gun Club and she stated she felt that the prosecution was actively trying to lose the case.

[numberthirty]

I had Conservative friend who echoed the Fox News bs on how Rittenhouse needs to sue the media and Biden. They don't seem to really nail why beyond how he was "painted bad". Like you know...shooting some folks during this isn't some heroic deed and the mean nasty media made hero Kyle look bad.

I saw Katy Tur repeat the lie that he carried a gun across state lines on Wednesday.

If an investigation in the state of Illinois disproved that garbage last year?

Why shouldn't he be suing people who are repeating lies about him that have clearly been disproved?

Never mind repeating them while he is being tried for a crime...

[shooshoomanjoe]

I saw Katy Tur repeat the lie that he carried a gun across state lines on Wednesday.

If an investigation in the state of Illinois disproved that garbage last year?

Why shouldn't he be suing people who are repeating lies about him that have clearly been disproved?

Never mind repeating them while he is being tried for a crime...

Looks more like it's a loophole. No, the judge was just biased as hell.

Any person under 18 years of age who possesses or goes armed with a dangerous weapon is guilty of a Class A misdemeanor.” A lead-in paragraph defines dangerous weapon as several things, including “any firearm, loaded or unloaded.”

The subsection that defense attorneys relied upon to seek dismissal reads: “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 ...” That section of law isn’t specific to minors, but rather forbids any person from having a short-barreled shotgun or rifle.

[numberthirty]

Looks more like it's a loophole. No, the judge was just biased as hell.

Any person under 18 years of age who possesses or goes armed with a dangerous weapon is guilty of a Class A misdemeanor.” A lead-in paragraph defines dangerous weapon as several things, including “any firearm, loaded or unloaded.”

The subsection that defense attorneys relied upon to seek dismissal reads: “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 ...” That section of law isn’t specific to minors, but rather forbids any person from having a short-barreled shotgun or rifle.

The gun in question was not short-barreled.

From that article...

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.

“There doesn’t seem to be much ambiguity here,” he said. “(The charge) should have been dismissed earlier.”

“We knew from the beginning, that if you read that statute correctly, he was legal in having that firearm,” Richards said Friday after Rittenhouse was cleared of the remaining charges.

[shooshoomanjoe]

The gun in question was not short-barreled.

From that article...

Like I said, it looks like a loophole because the law also says "any firearm, loaded or unloaded".

[JB]

Rittenhouse protesters shut down the Brooklyn Bridge. Portland demonstrators force open jail
https://www.cnn.com/2021/11/20/us/ke...sts/index.html

Also stores were looted in San Francisco.
"Looters hit Louis Vuitton and other Union Square luxury stores in wild rampage"
https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/...e-16637074.php

This was last night and there's more building up tonight, including in Chicago.
I'm all for protesting but property is being damaged again and I pray no one else gets hurt.

[numberthirty]

Like I said, it looks like a loophole because the law also says "any firearm, loaded or unloaded".

Not really.

It is just badly written law that makes enforcement harder.

Does not change that Rittenhouse never broke the law as it is written. He clearly had a gun that was not included in the law in question.

[Iron Maiden]

I read an interview on Slate with a lawyer for the Liberal Gun Club and she stated she felt that the prosecution was actively trying to lose the case.

Now that is an interesting theory..

[babyblob]

Rittenhouse protesters shut down the Brooklyn Bridge. Portland demonstrators force open jail
https://www.cnn.com/2021/11/20/us/ke...sts/index.html

Also stores were looted in San Francisco.
"Looters hit Louis Vuitton and other Union Square luxury stores in wild rampage"
https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/...e-16637074.php

This was last night and there's more building up tonight, including in Chicago.
I'm all for protesting but property is being damaged again and I pray no one else gets hurt.

Nothing screams I am mad about 2 people being killed like stealing a $5000 handbang in another city!

[skyvolt2000]

Past that, no one is discussing that the folks shot while chasing him down were taking part in the exact same vigilantism that they say Rittenhouse never should have been taking part in to start with.

Folks have discussed it. Because if the incident that started all this had not happened-none of this happens.

Along with if the police put more effort into the attacking of businesses than trying to arrest or whatever protestors who were NOT bothering anybody-Rittenhouse is still at home.

Far too many times we have seen Jedi handwaving when stuff is being trashed. What good is trashing Target going to do for George Floyd? With the excuse of folks are just mad and venting.

How many of those folks ARE the reasons why we have cops in large numbers in POC communities? How many have VOTED?
How many black children have died during this BLM movement? That have not gotten a march or anything destroyed in frustration?

The marches are NOT working. They are just attracting looters and trouble makers.

[Iron Maiden]

Nothing screams I am mad about 2 people being killed like stealing a $5000 handbang in another city!

I live near the Chicago area and it's become a regular event with a couple of the upscale malls in the suburbs and many times Louis Vuitton stores are the target. Northbrook Mall was hit twice in about a month recently and now Oakbook Mall has been hit a second time, most recently on this past Thursday the 18th.

I also got links going back to the same stores being targeted as far back as 2014. I have my doubts they are linked to the Rittenhouse trial. They just probably sell off the stuff they steal and when they need more money they make another hit. I am surprised the Louis Vuitton stores are still open with the thefts being this frequent....pretty hefty ones at that. I recall there were rumours last year around Chicago that a lot of stores will leave Michigan Avenue if the Mayor doesn't get have a better plan for the next time it happens. They may just decide not to renew their leases when they come up. There was a lot of damage from the 2020 "protests." IMO if your main objective is stealing than you are not protesting anything. You're just a common criminal