Armed civilian, 17, shoots 2 dead during Kenosha happening
- Thread starter Iron
- Start date
- Status
Also, in regards to the whole issue of Rittenhouse carrying a firearm, he apparently hasn't committed any misdemeanor for carrying it because of the laws in Wisconsin.
Looking for journalism on Twitter is akin to looking for science at a pleasure beach.
Christ sometimes I'm glad I never decided to study law. Flow chats abound and the chapter and verse (I love that phrase though) is practically cryptography.Also, in regards to the whole issue of Rittenhouse carrying a firearm, he apparently hasn't committed any misdemeanor for carrying it because of the laws in Wisconsin.
I didn't excuse anything. Do you not see how quickly you spreading lies turned to conspiracy theory?
The autopsy listed 5 wounds from 4 shots. a graze across the head, one in the groin, one in the left hand, a grazed left leg, and the shot in the back. The extra wound is easily explained by the hand and leg getting hit by the same shot. The shot in the back is described as perforating his right lung and liver. So you've got two shots at least that were low, and the victim collapsed forwards while rounds were being fired. If you imagine Rittenhouse aiming low and hitting him in the leg and thigh, then he falls forward, so the next shot grazes his head, and the 4th goes into his back and through the lung into the liver as he hits the ground.
The likely explanation is only Rittenhouse shot him, and he did a Biden and aimed for the legs.
"Not a lawyer, not legal advice, informational purposes only"
I don't believe in charts from Twitter.
Well the weblinks would most likely lead back to the official website of the Wisconsin state legislate so it would be easy to believe that what they've posted is indeed the literal law. Just, other than CM156 and Tireseas I'd be wary of random user's interpretation or understanding of that law.
My parents once told me I could have made a good lawyer but I think I'm too much of a soft-hearted sap to be one.
I've seen them posted on here, and having read them, I don't trust random charts from Twitter claiming to have interpreted them correctly.
He literally shot his first victim in the back. That's not a lie.
The implication was that he shot someone who was running away, or who was unaware of his presence. That's what happens when you just say "shot in the back" with no further context.
You're doing what news headlines do, misinform and tell half-truths.
"Shot in the back" in this context is meaningless, and the only reason why one would want to draw attention to that is to mislead.
Or who wasn't a threat at the moment that they were shot. Which is probably the case.
And how long was "that moment"?
Have you ever seen a boxer or an MMA fighter throw punches while their opponent is clearly out of it and is already falling down?
Have you noticed how urgently the referee acts to separate the two fighters in even the most "civil" of knockouts or tap-outs?
Why do you think that is?
When you've made the mental decision to fight and to kill your opponent, you can't just "switch off" at a moment's notice, like "oh, my opponent is lurching forward, time to stop shooting, I believe I've made my point clear. Good day!"
So, I kinda don't know why I'm posting in this hornets nest again (well, if my job has taught me anything, is that I'm a stubborn and prideful fool, but anyway), and I do apologize for the extremely late response, it wasn't my intention to let it sit for so long but I needed a bit to cool off.
Secondly, (mainly because this sub forum got so fucking nasty in the past week or so) I would like to apologize if my posts seemed gruff or mean (well, with the exception of what I said to @Houseman, looking back I really could have worded it better but I still stand by the general thrust of it). I genuinely don't mean it, it's just that most of the time I'm here on the forum is during my spare time at work, and it's both physical labor and in 105°+ where I work too means I get testy.
And now to the actual topic: @Specter Von Baren, honestly nothing against you, but I'm skeptical of the fact he had a record, both because it is way to convenient that every single person he shot was a criminal like he has the Punisher's super power, and the fact that someone else in this thread tried to verify that one victim being a registered sex offender and couldn't find them in either the state or federal sexual predator database.
And Houseman, I don't have a specific law for my belief in the "illegal weapon for self-defense" outside of (my admittedly naive opinion that I would not like it to be legal for someone to set me on fire with a flamethrower and get off because of some self-defense nonsense and yes it is absurd hyperbole but just subsitute flamethrower with brass knuckles or any other weapon). I could not fimd anything in the laws about it except in relation to a random third party also being injured, but as someone born in Illinois, ill be damned if I'm going to pour any more effort into trting to understand laws written by cheddar heads.
Also, this is my fault, but when I say it makes self-defense no apply, I'm not arguing for the actual, law definition of it but rather the media/fictional version of it (but considering some of the arguments here about and Iron's comments seems to me others are using this version too) where self-defense is used to drop all charges.
And to clear up my own position, I don't want this kid to go to the electric chair or be charged with murder (I've only referred to the deaths as homicides and not murders) BUT I also don't want him to walk away scott free either.
Secondly, (mainly because this sub forum got so fucking nasty in the past week or so) I would like to apologize if my posts seemed gruff or mean (well, with the exception of what I said to @Houseman, looking back I really could have worded it better but I still stand by the general thrust of it). I genuinely don't mean it, it's just that most of the time I'm here on the forum is during my spare time at work, and it's both physical labor and in 105°+ where I work too means I get testy.
And now to the actual topic: @Specter Von Baren, honestly nothing against you, but I'm skeptical of the fact he had a record, both because it is way to convenient that every single person he shot was a criminal like he has the Punisher's super power, and the fact that someone else in this thread tried to verify that one victim being a registered sex offender and couldn't find them in either the state or federal sexual predator database.
And Houseman, I don't have a specific law for my belief in the "illegal weapon for self-defense" outside of (my admittedly naive opinion that I would not like it to be legal for someone to set me on fire with a flamethrower and get off because of some self-defense nonsense and yes it is absurd hyperbole but just subsitute flamethrower with brass knuckles or any other weapon). I could not fimd anything in the laws about it except in relation to a random third party also being injured, but as someone born in Illinois, ill be damned if I'm going to pour any more effort into trting to understand laws written by cheddar heads.
Also, this is my fault, but when I say it makes self-defense no apply, I'm not arguing for the actual, law definition of it but rather the media/fictional version of it (but considering some of the arguments here about and Iron's comments seems to me others are using this version too) where self-defense is used to drop all charges.
And to clear up my own position, I don't want this kid to go to the electric chair or be charged with murder (I've only referred to the deaths as homicides and not murders) BUT I also don't want him to walk away scott free either.
Thanks, that's all I wanted. So many people stubbornly refuse to admit to being wrong about anything.
Last edited:
..... But I did find him. He wasn't in the sexual offenders list because as soon as he died they took him off of it. But his actual prison record still existed and I linked it.
Edit: I also just found this video that shows even earlier video of the chase with Rosenbaum.
(Starts around 12:39)
Last edited:
Jennifer Scheurle best known for doxxing an innocent man and falsely accusing Nolan Bushnell of being a sexual harasser despite never have worked with him or even having met him or ever talked with any woman who actually had worked with him ever.
Well don't thank me, like I said I'm very firmly in camp "kid deserves some jail/prison time" (on top of the fact that whoever gave him that rifle is getting at least 3 felony charges too for his weapon being used in the homicides/assult).
Ok, but I'm gonna be entirely honest here: I don't really care at this point. Especially with that "someone else shot the first victim in the back" nonsense, it really feels like the next revelation is gonna be that the actual shooter wasn't even Rittenhouse, he just felt so bad for the victims that he took the blame for their killings or some shit. Is this a bad take? Probably, bordering on yes, but it's how I feel at this is point, sorry.
- Status