4829
Comments (294)
sorted by:
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
218
SBOJ_JOBS 218 points ago +219 / -1

These are just show charges for a show trial. Anyone who knows anything about criminal law knows this, whether or not they are willing to admit it.

123
tiwal 123 points ago +123 / -0

So also a way for a citizen to lose money and freedom fighting the government's prejudice actions.

84
SBOJ_JOBS 84 points ago +84 / -0

Almost, but it's less passive than that. This is a scam wherein crooked lawyers steal money from taxpayers to fund their lifestyle and whatever activist causes they chose. And also make the point that you should passively accept being shot if the elite decide you need to be shot.

8
FlimboFlongins 8 points ago +8 / -0

So it's all good when all the Charges are Nullified, and Civil Action demanding Compensation is brought against the Municipal Entity of Kenosha, agreed?

As in Kyle Sues for Wrongful Prosecution, and Injury, and wins, also ending this Prosecutor's Career.

Expect it.

5
spicy_deluxe 5 points ago +5 / -0

"Kyle Sues for Wrongful Prosecution"

Good luck with that. In modern America when the left wants to punish you the trial and process is the punishment whether you broke the law or not.

53
TrumpTrain 53 points ago +54 / -1

“If every law-abiding American showed up in the city that they loved with an AR-15, the chaos would stop immediately.”

6
Gunmolester 6 points ago +6 / -0

the city I love wont tolerate this problem in the first place...but Alas...I do not live there yet...My City can go to hell

15
traveravis 15 points ago +19 / -4

The process is the punishment

2
JackLemon 2 points ago +2 / -0

Remember this if Durham and Barr refuse to charge any of the top Obama people involved in the coup against Trump.

8
whybag 8 points ago +8 / -0

"The process is the punishment."

52
Sl0re10 52 points ago +52 / -0

also gun law is really labyrinthine. In my state someone under 18 couldnt buy a rifle... but older law allowed transfers within immediate family. So; a kid could still have an AR if a parent gave it to them. Hardly anyone realized that including police. But that was the law....

40
SBOJ_JOBS 40 points ago +41 / -1

That is a natural result of legislators who want to micromanage human behavior with stacks of laws.

38
ForeverPatriot1776 38 points ago +38 / -0

The goal is to make sure you're always violating some obscure law, so that those who step out of line can be targeted via selective enforcement.

Honestly, what's the difference between "rule of a billion obscure laws you're always guilty of" and "rule of the arbitrary whims of a king"?

22
streakybacon 22 points ago +22 / -0

The Pharisees and Sadducees did the same thing.

They took the 10 Commandments and turned them into 613.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/613_commandments

Then they charged you for the right to bypass their impossible set of laws.

Sound familiar?

5
probablyacoincidence 5 points ago +5 / -0

Yes this here is such a problem. I have always tried so hard to stay rigidly on the line of legal, guns ammo etc. I have spent so much time and money educating myself and complying. And the laws are written to intentionally leave so much gray, that on any day you can be arrested on "interpretation" its such a huge problem.

5
RagnarD 5 points ago +5 / -0

There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws.

--Ayn Rand

8
deleted 8 points ago +8 / -0
6
meals23 6 points ago +6 / -0

and this is the problem more than any other! it's by design, as most who have gone into political office over the last half century have served at some point or another as an attorney

if your government is made up of lawyers, the laws will soon be written only in legalese so that they can enrich themselves and their brothers and sisters by ensuring if you don't want to go to jail for violating some bullshit directive, you need to hire a team of lawyers to translate the word salad for you into english.

complete bullshit

1
sub-collector 1 point ago +1 / -0

That is a natural result of

Toute nation a le gouvernement qu'elle mérite.

26
Isthisreallife2016 26 points ago +26 / -0

"Also gun law is... always unconstitutional." FTFY

-30
sorrytodisagree -30 points ago +7 / -37

His lawyer is actually just being a good lawyer and bending the truth with specific hunting law exceptions about 16 year olds that don't apply here. It wasn't legal for him to carry a long gun, you must be 18. Pg 5 second paragraph. But who cares. That's going to get tossed with the rest of the bullshit charges against this hero.

34
throwawaytoday 34 points ago +35 / -1

You're wrong. Exceptions exist for rifles and shotguns. Read the relevant laws.

Look through my post history.

-14
sorrytodisagree -14 points ago +1 / -15

The exception applies only for those "in compliance with" the the hunting law statute. Which means he had to actively be on a hunt with an adult or undergoing instruction. Or 16, 17 who have "obtained" a WI hunting license. Going armed under any other circumstances not in compliance with the hunting/practice regs means the exception no longer applies. It is a temporary and situational exception that expires. He wasn't hunting or accompanied by the "responsible adult" or licensed, so he was not "in compliance" with the exception.

18
silvershibe 18 points ago +18 / -0

Yeah, I’m gonna listen to the lawyer over a random internet guy. Thanks though.

6
PeaceThroughStrength 6 points ago +7 / -1

You're wrong

I broke this down with other lawyer pedes regarding the possession by a minor.

I understand your confusion, someone helped me out with it too.

https://thedonald.win/p/GvTrsNq5/x/c/16ZE9Gufd0?d=50

-8
sorrytodisagree -8 points ago +1 / -9

No the law is not silent on 16-17 year olds. It says they have to "obtain" a WI hunting license to furthermore hunt or carry their firearm unsupervised. So anyone not hunting with or undergoing instruction with an adult, or with a hunting license is not actively "in compliance" with the hunting law exception. The exception to the general under 18 rule is entirely contingent on having obtained a hunting license or being under 16 with a responsible adult.

So essentially a WI hunting license is almost, but not quite, a long-gun open carry license for 16-17 year olds.

3
rshackleford 3 points ago +3 / -0

That's incorrect, Under federal law, with certain exceptions, a person under age 18 is generally prohibited from possessing a handgun.

Kyle Rittenhouse was not carrying a handgun.

-1
sorrytodisagree -1 points ago +1 / -2

And WI law 948.60 "helpfully" infringes further on long guns under 18 if they aren't exempted by meeting specific hunting regulations.

-3
wizdom -3 points ago +2 / -5

Read the law more carefully. It ONLY applies to short-barreled rifles, not long guns.

6
IsrorOrca 6 points ago +6 / -0

No, you have it inverted, it prohibits short barrel. Will Chamberlain already did the live read legal review of WI possession laws.

15
deleted 15 points ago +15 / -0
3
thallos 3 points ago +3 / -0

Hmm, virtue vs virtue signaling. I think you should expand on this meme.

7
deleted 7 points ago +7 / -0
4
CommonSensePill 4 points ago +4 / -0

Oh yea, there's not a snowball's chance in hell that he could ever actually see jail time for the shooting of those 3 losers.

Can't wait for Chauvin to get exonerated, now I can't wait for Kyle to get exonerated too.

1
RackOps 1 point ago +2 / -1

He's seeing jail time right now.

He's in custody.

1
CommonSensePill 1 point ago +1 / -0

He won't be convicted.

He'll bailout. Already tons of people donating for him to get released.