The City on Fire

Quote: JCW09

Quote: AZDuffman

Quote: JCW09

Quote: AZDuffman

Quote: JCW09

Quote: AZDuffman

Unless you are an attorney you are speculating.

Wis. Stat. § 948.60(2)(a). These restrictions only apply to a person under age 18 who possesses or is armed with a rifle or a shotgun if the firearm is a short-barreled rifle or short-barreled shotgun, or if the person is not in compliance with the hunting regulations set forth in Wis. Stat. §§ 29.304 and 29.593.

If not a short barrel looks like he is in the clear.

He will likely get off. Will only take one holdout on the jury.

Please list your link as I am not finding any reference to the "short barrel" requirement in 948.60(2)(a).

Closed the link, just did a google search to pull it.

Wis Code 948.60
It isn't there, do you have a different cite?

No. Try highlighting the whole quote and googling. I am not going into it any further.

I did and provided you the link of the law section you quoted.
There is no short barrel requirement mentioned in the law.
Without further support/facts, I am concluding what you said is incorrect.

Try 945.60(3)(c)

Quote: Shrek

lol!

I'm gonna have to start using that one except he's now Donna Lemonhead!! 🤣🤣

I like when Lemonhead is mocking
Trump to Fredo Cuomo because
Trump said a couple items on
the cognitive test were not easy.
Lemonhead then calls a rino a hippo
and Fredo had to correct him. It's
like something out of a Dumb and
Dumber movie.

Looks like L. Lin Wood is representing Kyle Rittenhouse. This is baaaaaaaaaaaaaaad news for the libbies.
He is the same attorney who helped Nick Sandmann take CNN and the Washington Post to the cleaners. 😂😂

Lawyer for accused Kenosha shooter Kyle Rittenhouse demands ‘justice’

Here's one of Wood's tweets:

Quote: Gandler

I guess I remember the more recent one slightly different, it appears after backlash they never actually charged him:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/2015/08/04/outrage-and-an-officer-the-anatomy-of-a-navy-controversy-after-the-chattanooga-attack/


https://advance-lexis-com.ezproxy1.apus.edu/api/document?collection=news&id=urn:contentItem:5G78-V511-DXCW-D2KX-00000-00&context=1516831.


But, the charges being considered were not murder or manslaughter, they were charges for possessing a personal weapon on Federal property.

But, I am pretty sure it is correct to say, you can use a gun to defend yourself, even if you are possessing the gun illegally or carrying it where it should not be (again I know nothing about this case, or the individual, nor have I watched the videos or read beyond what has been posted here)…..

Point taken, my guess is this kid isn't given the same latitude as a Navy Lt that attempted to stop an active shooter.
The 17 year old shouldn't have been in WI with a long gun and he brought it there to use it illegally
Self Defense argument isn't going to work when he was only defending himself as a result of shooting someone else at the gas station.
As someone mentioned, they'll look at that shoot first to see if it was legal/good shoot.
If it isn't, everything else afterwards is illegal as well
You can't shoot a teller in a bank, run out of the bank and then shoot your pursuers in self defense.

Looks like "reckless homicide" is a lighter charge than criminally negligent.

I guess because you get credit for being a complete dumbass.

Quote: kenarman

Quote: JCW09

Quote: AZDuffman

Quote: JCW09

Quote: AZDuffman

Quote: JCW09

Quote: AZDuffman

Unless you are an attorney you are speculating.

Wis. Stat. § 948.60(2)(a). These restrictions only apply to a person under age 18 who possesses or is armed with a rifle or a shotgun if the firearm is a short-barreled rifle or short-barreled shotgun, or if the person is not in compliance with the hunting regulations set forth in Wis. Stat. §§ 29.304 and 29.593.

If not a short barrel looks like he is in the clear.

He will likely get off. Will only take one holdout on the jury.

Please list your link as I am not finding any reference to the "short barrel" requirement in 948.60(2)(a).

Closed the link, just did a google search to pull it.

Wis Code 948.60
It isn't there, do you have a different cite?

No. Try highlighting the whole quote and googling. I am not going into it any further.

I did and provided you the link of the law section you quoted.
There is no short barrel requirement mentioned in the law.
Without further support/facts, I am concluding what you said is incorrect.

Try 945.60(3)(c)

Which leads to 941.28 discussing the short barreled rifle, thank you Kernanman!
This gets us to AZ's position that the kid is OK in possession, my apologies AZ.
He may still have a problem with the first shoot, but I stand corrected on the short barrel piece of it.

If they are going to try him for being to young to have a rifle, they shouldn't do it in adult court.

Quote: rxwine

Looks like "reckless homicide" is a lighter charge than criminally negligent.

I guess because you get credit for being a complete dumbass.

''

He had the guts to try to defend the neighborhood while BLM was destroying it. Hardly a dumbass. BLM were the dumbasses. People supporting BLM are as well.

Quote: JCW09

Try 945.60(3)(c)
Which leads to 941.28 discussing the short barreled rifle, thank you Kernanman!
This gets us to AZ's position that the kid is OK in possession, my apologies AZ.
He may still have a problem with the first shoot, but I stand corrected on the short barrel piece of it.

No need but accepted.

Quote: AZDuffman

BLM were the dumbasses. People supporting BLM are as well.

Personal insult? We all know who supports BLM here...

Or would lefties be allowed to hypothetically say “people supporting Trump are dumbasses” now?