Kyle Rittenhouse Post-Trial

[Anonymous]

Yes, that is correct. Rittenhouse did not crossed state lines without the gun. He couldn’t legally purchase a firearm in his home state because he was underage, so he secretly had an out-of-state friend make the purchase for him and keep the gun at his house. That’s how he skirted the law.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes, that is correct. Rittenhouse did not crossed state lines without the gun. He couldn’t legally purchase a firearm in his home state because he was underage, so he secretly had an out-of-state friend make the purchase for him and keep the gun at his house. That’s how he skirted the law.

*should say he crossed state lines without the gun. It was kept in the state where he used it.

[Anonymous]

so, premeditated? Great

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes, that is correct. Rittenhouse did not crossed state lines without the gun. He couldn’t legally purchase a firearm in his home state because he was underage, so he secretly had an out-of-state friend make the purchase for him and keep the gun at his house. That’s how he skirted the law.

It’s only a straw purchase if the weapon is Kyle’s. The purchaser can lend it out

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, that is correct. Rittenhouse did not crossed state lines without the gun. He couldn’t legally purchase a firearm in his home state because he was underage, so he secretly had an out-of-state friend make the purchase for him and keep the gun at his house. That’s how he skirted the law.

It’s only a straw purchase if the weapon is Kyle’s. The purchaser can lend it out

It was Kyle’s.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, that is correct. Rittenhouse did not crossed state lines without the gun. He couldn’t legally purchase a firearm in his home state because he was underage, so he secretly had an out-of-state friend make the purchase for him and keep the gun at his house. That’s how he skirted the law.

*should say he crossed state lines without the gun. It was kept in the state where he used it.

What’s the point of buying a gun and keeping at a friend’s house? If the purpose of guns is to defend yourself, your family, and your home—as gun owners claim—how does a personal gun stored somewhere other than your home accomplish that? What did he think he was going to do with that gun?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, that is correct. Rittenhouse did not crossed state lines without the gun. He couldn’t legally purchase a firearm in his home state because he was underage, so he secretly had an out-of-state friend make the purchase for him and keep the gun at his house. That’s how he skirted the law.

*should say he crossed state lines without the gun. It was kept in the state where he used it.

What’s the point of buying a gun and keeping at a friend’s house? If the purpose of guns is to defend yourself, your family, and your home—as gun owners claim—how does a personal gun stored somewhere other than your home accomplish that? What did he think he was going to do with that gun?

I’m sure the plan was just to keep it at his friend’s house until he was old enough to own it legally. His mother knew nothing about this gun. He just wanted to own a gun, idolized first responders, and wanted to be a hero. That’s why he was a vigilante that night, seeking out criminals even as he broke the law himself.

[Anonymous]

Here's an interesting question - putting aside each of their 15 minutes of fame, who is a higher quality human being between Kyle Rittenhouse and George Floyd? be honest in your answers!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Here's an interesting question - putting aside each of their 15 minutes of fame, who is a higher quality human being between Kyle Rittenhouse and George Floyd? be honest in your answers!

I doubt anyone here knew both of them, so how could we know and who are we to judge such a thing?

They had some things in common. They both broke the law at some point. Rittenhouse had his straw purchased gun that he couldn’t legally own and violated a curfew. Floyd committed acts of theft and violence, and was addicted to illegal drugs. Floyd had poor judgment because he was a drug user. Rittenhouse had poor judgment because he was a kid.

There are two differences between them. Floyd, though sometimes violent, didn’t kill anyone. Although Rittenhouse wanted to help people, he took several lives. Also, Rittenhouse’s fate was decided by the justice system, while Floyd was murdered on the spot for an alleged crime that had not been adjudicated.

I wouldn’t want either one of them in my life, but Rittenhouse has the opportunity to learn from his mistakes and make something of himself, which I hope he does.

[Anonymous]

Little punk has abandoned his family and is letting them get evicted, in spite of the fact that his actions are affecting their employment:

Further proof that simply owning a gun doesn’t make you a responsible man or a good person.

[Anonymous]

haha

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Little punk has abandoned his family and is letting them get evicted, in spite of the fact that his actions are affecting their employment:

Further proof that simply owning a gun doesn’t make you a responsible man or a good person.

I can’t feel too sorry for his mother as she was the one who drove the little monster across state lines.