Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community
Old 11-13-2021, 01:06 PM   #121
accord1999
Powerplay Quarterback
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lanny_McDonald View Post
with a weapon he freely admitted he knew was not legal to possess.
Based on the instructions that judge said he will give to the jury on that charge, it was legal in Wisconsin for 16-17 year old to posses and open carry an AR-15 as long as its barrel was 16" or longer.
accord1999 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2021, 01:32 PM   #122
FlamesAddiction
Franchise Player
 
FlamesAddiction's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Vancouver
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by accord1999 View Post
Based on the instructions that judge said he will give to the jury on that charge, it was legal in Wisconsin for 16-17 year old to posses and open carry an AR-15 as long as its barrel was 16" or longer.
From what I read, the intent of that law is for hunting purposes, not vigilante purposes. Although I will admit that the wording is ambiguous and not clear.
__________________
"A pessimist thinks things can't get any worse. An optimist knows they can."
FlamesAddiction is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2021, 04:03 PM   #123
Lanny_McDonald
Franchise Player
 
Lanny_McDonald's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by corporatejay View Post
There's a lot of people in this thread who are so confident of their opinion on this but they get basic facts wrong.

He did not cross state lines with a gun. He got it in Kenosha from his friend
That is different from some of the information presented. We'll go with this then, which doesn't change things other than the potential federal charge for interstate transport of a weapon.

Quote:
Originally Posted by accord1999 View Post
Based on the instructions that judge said he will give to the jury on that charge, it was legal in Wisconsin for 16-17 year old to posses and open carry an AR-15 as long as its barrel was 16" or longer.
That direction by the judge is not consistent with the law on the books. For Rittenhouse to have possession of the weapon he would have required approval by his legal guardian, not his "friend" who furnished the weapon. He also would have to have been accompanied by his legal guardian while in possession of the rifle. Neither condition existed. If he wishes to use the "hunting" defense, there is a requirement for him to have completed a training course and have the appropriate certificate to prove completion (Wisconsin RS 29.593 and 29.591. Rittenhouse had neither. The judge is asking for exceptions that Rittenhouse had not met. Just like the rest of his framing of this trial, this is inconsistent with what many judges would expect in their court rooms. This guy is a loose cannon, and I think the grounds are there for appeal on both sides because of the judge's actions.

Quote:
Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction View Post
From what I read, the intent of that law is for hunting purposes, not vigilante purposes. Although I will admit that the wording is ambiguous and not clear.
It seems to be pretty clear. It is the judge's interpretation that appears to be unclear.

Last edited by Lanny_McDonald; 11-13-2021 at 07:52 PM.
Lanny_McDonald is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2021, 05:29 PM   #124
jayswin
Celebrated Square Root Day
 
jayswin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by accord1999 View Post
Based on the instructions that judge said he will give to the jury on that charge, it was legal in Wisconsin for 16-17 year old to posses and open carry an AR-15 as long as its barrel was 16" or longer.
That it is just straight ****ed.
jayswin is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to jayswin For This Useful Post:
Old 11-13-2021, 05:47 PM   #125
SeeGeeWhy
#1 Goaltender
 
SeeGeeWhy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Exp:
Default

If Rittenhouse is not guilty is there an ability for a higher court to hear an appeal?

This judge does not appear to be very competent.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Biff View Post
If the NHL ever needs an enema, Edmonton is where they'll insert it.
SeeGeeWhy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2021, 09:04 PM   #126
White Out 403
Franchise Player
 
White Out 403's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Calgary
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SeeGeeWhy View Post
If Rittenhouse is not guilty is there an ability for a higher court to hear an appeal?

This judge does not appear to be very competent.
No, double jeopardy applies.
White Out 403 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2021, 09:17 PM   #127
btimbit
Franchise Player
 
btimbit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: SW Calgary
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lanny_McDonald View Post
That is different from some of the information presented. We'll go with this then, which doesn't change things other than the potential federal charge for interstate transport of a weapon.



That direction by the judge is not consistent with the law on the books. For Rittenhouse to have possession of the weapon he would have required approval by his legal guardian, not his "friend" who furnished the weapon. He also would have to have been accompanied by his legal guardian while in possession of the rifle. Neither condition existed. If he wishes to use the "hunting" defense, there is a requirement for him to have completed a training course and have the appropriate certificate to prove completion (Wisconsin RS 29.593 and 29.591. Rittenhouse had neither. The judge is asking for exceptions that Rittenhouse had not met. Just like the rest of his framing of this trial, this is inconsistent with what many judges would expect in their court rooms. This guy is a loose cannon, and I think the grounds are there for appeal on both sides because of the judge's actions.



It seems to be pretty clear. It is the judge's interpretation that appears to be unclear.
But, like I've been pointing out, he is not being charged with any of that
btimbit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2021, 06:53 AM   #128
Aarongavey
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SeeGeeWhy View Post
If Rittenhouse is not guilty is there an ability for a higher court to hear an appeal?

This judge does not appear to be very competent.
Rittenhouse has to feel confident right now. He went on a hunting trip to kill people fighting for social justice and he gets Archie Bunker as the judge. I would say it looks good for him.
Aarongavey is online now   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Aarongavey For This Useful Post:
Old 11-14-2021, 07:21 AM   #129
SeeGeeWhy
#1 Goaltender
 
SeeGeeWhy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aarongavey View Post
Rittenhouse has to feel confident right now. He went on a hunting trip to kill people fighting for social justice and he gets Archie Bunker as the judge. I would say it looks good for him.
The prosecution seems special too.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Biff View Post
If the NHL ever needs an enema, Edmonton is where they'll insert it.
SeeGeeWhy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2021, 09:02 AM   #130
PeteMoss
Franchise Player
 
PeteMoss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: SW Ontario
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by White Out 403 View Post
No, double jeopardy applies.

I don't know us law, but assuming it's the same as Canada you can appeal if the judge made a mistake in his charge to the jury or his rulings on what is admissible
PeteMoss is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2021, 09:11 AM   #131
PeteMoss
Franchise Player
 
PeteMoss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: SW Ontario
Exp:
Default

Seems quite likely he'll be found not guilty for self defense reasons. Based on existing laws and rules that makes sense.

There is the question on self defense laws themselves and how they apply in situations like this. Basically he's out there armed and taking the law into his own hand. The thing he's supposedly protecting has no link to him. If he's not armed to the hilt does any of this happen? https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/13/u...e=articleShare
PeteMoss is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2021, 09:16 AM   #132
White Out 403
Franchise Player
 
White Out 403's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Calgary
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PeteMoss View Post
I don't know us law, but assuming it's the same as Canada you can appeal if the judge made a mistake in his charge to the jury or his rulings on what is admissible
The only exception in the United States is if the judge was literally bribed by the defendant. Otherwise you cannot appeal a jury acquittal in the United States
White Out 403 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2021, 09:18 AM   #133
blankall
Ate 100 Treadmills
 
blankall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PeteMoss View Post
Seems quite likely he'll be found not guilty for self defense reasons. Based on existing laws and rules that makes sense.

There is the question on self defense laws themselves and how they apply in situations like this. Basically he's out there armed and taking the law into his own hand. The thing he's supposedly protecting has no link to him. If he's not armed to the hilt does any of this happen? https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/13/u...e=articleShare
This has more to do with gun control laws.

At that point in the night there were many looters out, some of them armed themselves. The local law enforcement was encouraging people to defend their own property.

The obvious solution is to pull the guns off the street. It's even nuttier that teenagers are allowed to carry guns, the major restriction being barrel length. Not only do you have guns, but they are in the hands of emotionally immature people, who aren't deemed old enough to drink or vote.... But they can carry an ar-15 as long as the barrel is long enough and then purposely walk into a tense situation with that weapon.
blankall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2021, 09:18 AM   #134
Amethyst
First Line Centre
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Calgary
Exp:
Default

Getting yourself all armed up, going in search of people, provoking them, and then shooting them when they react doesn't seem like it should count as self defence to me.

It's not like he was somewhere, minding his own business, when a protest came along.
Amethyst is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2021, 09:22 AM   #135
blankall
Ate 100 Treadmills
 
blankall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Amethyst View Post
Getting yourself all armed up, going in search of people, provoking them, and then shooting them when they react doesn't seem like it should count as self defence to me.

It's not like he was somewhere, minding his own business, when a protest came along.
There's no law that says you have to mind you own business.

Imagine the same thing playing out without the guns. It's a pretty clear case of self defence then. The major issue is, once again, carrying assault weapons on the street.
blankall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2021, 09:39 AM   #136
Amethyst
First Line Centre
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Calgary
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by blankall View Post
There's no law that says you have to mind you own business.

Imagine the same thing playing out without the guns. It's a pretty clear case of self defence then. The major issue is, once again, carrying assault weapons on the street.
I see two strangers arguing in the street and join in the yelling, one of them tries to chase me off and I punch them in the face... that doesn't seem like self defence either.
Amethyst is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2021, 09:44 AM   #137
blankall
Ate 100 Treadmills
 
blankall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Amethyst View Post
I see two strangers arguing in the street and join in the yelling, one of them tries to chase me off and I punch them in the face... that doesn't seem like self defence either.
If you try to back off, then yes it is. There are no laws preventing someone from arguing. Theoretically, no matter how angry someone is, they shouldn't be assaulting anyone else, and yes chasing someone is a threat.
blankall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2021, 10:02 AM   #138
Locke
Franchise Player
 
Locke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Income Tax Central
Exp:
Default

I think when the reality is that law and justice are divorced from reality and morality there is a far more serious problem afoot.

Rittenhouse provoked a reaction but maintained the lethal force to end it in his favour.

To then say he is 'not responsible' or worse 'innocent' is quite callous and the fact that it would be deemed legal? Even worse.

If that turns out to be the case then it stands to reason that those laws are well and truly broken.
__________________
The Beatings Shall Continue Until Morale Improves!

This Post Has Been Distilled for the Eradication of Seemingly Incurable Sadness.
Locke is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Locke For This Useful Post:
Old 11-14-2021, 10:37 AM   #139
81MC
#1 Goaltender
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Amethyst View Post
I see two strangers arguing in the street and join in the yelling, one of them tries to chase me off and I punch them in the face... that doesn't seem like self defence either.
If you run down the street to get away and I pursue you, catching up to you in an alley, damn right your actions are self defence. Otherwise, what protection is afforded to someone who is being attacked?
__________________
No, noIm not sloppy, or lazy. This is a sign of the boredom.
81MC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2021, 10:40 AM   #140
Yamer
Franchise Player
 
Yamer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Red Deer
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 81MC View Post
If you run down the street to get away and I pursue you, catching up to you in an alley, damn right your actions are self defence. Otherwise, what protection is afforded to someone who is being attacked?
Not getting involved at all is the general point.
__________________
"It's a great day for hockey."
-'Badger' Bob Johnson (1931-1991)

"I see as much misery out of them moving to justify theirselves as them that set out to do harm."
-Dr. Amos "Doc" Cochran
Yamer is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
guns , kenoshawisconsin , usa

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:19 AM.

Calgary Flames
2022-23




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2023, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright Calgarypuck 2021