|
Hot Dog Day #91 posted:I'd say Rittenhouse went wrong when he decided to bring a gun to a protest to protect an auto zone I mean... Rittenhouse got found not guilty, and is probably going to make a loving shitload of money as a right-wing grifter. I guess the real question is do the lawyers in this thread think everything is peachy-keen with a system where you can haul an illegal gun to a protest after talking on film about how you want to murder a bunch of "shoplifters", then murder a few people and your only consequence is a lucrative new career? And I don't mean a breakdown of issues in this particular case, but the system as a whole.
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2021 03:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 03:05 |
|
|
Lamo do you think lawyers thinkAmerican criminal law is good?
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2021 03:43
|
|
|
Thanatosian posted:I mean... Rittenhouse got found not guilty, and is probably going to make a loving shitload of money as a right-wing grifter. He killed people though. Most people think that killing others is bad. Some of us even think that it's bad in virtually every situation. He changed or ended many lives irreparably that day. If he becomes a rich right wing grifter, the change is no less made. I feel comfortable saying he went wrong when he decided property was worth carrying a gun.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2021 04:01
|
|
|
Most people think killing others is good . You have to be careful. Murder and killing aren’t the same
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2021 04:02
|
|
|
euphronius posted:Most people think killing others is good . Yeah, but they're not going to delve deep enough into their political beliefs to realize that fact.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2021 06:15
|
|
|
Thanatosian posted:I mean... Rittenhouse got found not guilty, and is probably going to make a loving shitload of money as a right-wing grifter. The dude is 18 years old. His future is far less certain than anyone stinking up the cheapseats and certainly anyone still posting on Something Awful. He might end up Fox News or whatever but I find it hard to be impressed by that take, considering you and others who run it to it have no intention of letting him do anything else.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2021 06:53
|
|
|
It definitely feels like a lacuna that you can legally carry a firearm that was illegally straw-man purchased on your behalf. But if we are calling out prior acts for legal responsibility then I'm surprised that more questions have not been asked of the hospital that discharged a patient from suicide watch, who then immediately travelled to the nearest riot and started threatening to murder people with guns and screaming at them to shoot him. I feel like perhaps there were some issues with the clinical decisions made there.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2021 11:31
|
|
|
Rittenhouse is just another beachhead in the culture war; everyone tacitly acknowledges that his actions fit the definition of self defense, so instead people get mad about all the "circumstances." I'm 100% convinced that if you pallette-swapped the parties, exact same circumstances, the Right would be calling for his head and the left would be defending him.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2021 14:06
|
|
|
blarzgh posted:Rittenhouse is just another beachhead in the culture war; everyone tacitly acknowledges that his actions fit the definition of self defense, so instead people get mad about all the "circumstances." You don’t even have to palette swap. Michael Reinoehl absolutely used self defense in a legally authorized way, and he was executed by federal officers on the president’s order. I also don’t think Rittenhouse has a valid self defense argument. You shouldn’t get to pick a fight, lose, and then use a gun in self defense. Wisconsin even has portions of its self defense statute that agree with me. In Florida, a valid claim of self defense under the stand your ground statute never reaches trial as it is disposed on a motion to dismiss. I don’t know if Wisconsin has something similar. For example, although a jury acquitted Zimmerman, he was not found to have used lawful self defense under Florida’s SYG statute. If he had, he would have been immune to both civil and criminal prosecution. Rittenhouse was acquitted because he’s a white kid who had millions of dollars of legal assistance to help convince a jury he wasn’t doing exactly what he set out to do.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2021 14:17
|
|
|
Mr. Nice! posted:I also don’t think Rittenhouse has a valid self defense argument. You shouldn’t get to pick a fight, lose, and then use a gun in self defense. Wisconsin even has portions of its self defense statute that agree with me. I'm unconvinced on what exactly happened but can we agree that if a prosecution claims a defendant brandished at someone, and then doesn't call that person to testify and doesn't present any evidence that the brandishing happened, no reasonable jury will believe that claim?
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2021 14:27
|
|
|
I do think people need to look less at comparing him to someone of a different race and instead comparing him to someone of a different political affiliation. Let’s assume for argument sake that Rittenhouse did act 100% in lawful self defense. Michael Reinoehl did the same less than a week later (just hours after I was held at gunpoint at a protest, myself). Kyle has fundraised millions (whether he gets all of that money is yet to be seen), has been coddled by half the nation, and will effectively be set for life because of what he did. He spent a small amount of time in jail, and has otherwise been a free man and minor celebrity. Michael was executed in his driveway by a large number of federal agents less than two weeks after he killed someone in lawful self defense. He didn’t spend any time in jail, because the president ordered him killed and his personal hitmen carried out the order minutes later. Seriously, trump essentially tweeted “why is reinoehl dead yet?” and less than 20 minutes later, he was. We are in a lot of trouble as a nation. Things are going to get much worse before they get better.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2021 14:36
|
|
|
Mr. Nice! posted:Michael Reinoehl As with the (correct) self defense acquittal of the other guy who shot at the cops I mentioned up thread, this is a cop problem. It's not a self defense law problem.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2021 14:41
|
|
|
Mr. Nice! posted:Kyle has fundraised millions (whether he gets all of that money is yet to be seen), has been coddled by half the nation, and will effectively be set for life because of what he did. He spent a small amount of time in jail, and has otherwise been a free man and minor celebrity. I don't understand how people convince themselves of this. Consider the world he lives in. He's not "set for life" by any normal person's understanding of what that means. His day-to-day is extraordinarily expensive and currently quite precarious--once the fifteen minutes are up there will be no one to bankroll it. He doesn't "get" to be a minor celebrity. Even if that were his sincere desire, he really doesn't have a say in the matter. The price of getting through the trial as a social pariah who lives in the crosshair of a hostile and frankly slanderous press is that he has to embrace the only allies he has, which are political groups led by some of the shadiest people on planet Earth. Unless you want to volunteer for his security detail or at least tell your comrades to stop sending death threats to the family, I'm not sure where you get off complaining about this. He isn't going to roll over and die just because you want him to.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2021 16:14
|
|
|
Woozy posted:I don't understand how people convince themselves of this. Consider the world he lives in. He's not "set for life" by any normal person's understanding of what that means. His day-to-day is extraordinarily expensive and currently quite precarious--once the fifteen minutes are up there will be no one to bankroll it. He doesn't "get" to be a minor celebrity. Even if that were his sincere desire, he really doesn't have a say in the matter. The price of getting through the trial as a social pariah who lives in the crosshair of a hostile and frankly slanderous press is that he has to embrace the only allies he has, which are political groups led by some of the shadiest people on planet Earth. Unless you want to volunteer for his security detail or at least tell your comrades to stop sending death threats to the family, I'm not sure where you get off complaining about this. He isn't going to roll over and die just because you want him to. He's not going to send some of the millions bankrolled on his behalf to you if you suck him off hard enough, dude.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2021 16:34
|
|
|
Woozy posted:I don't understand how people convince themselves of this. Consider the world he lives in. He's not "set for life" by any normal person's understanding of what that means. His day-to-day is extraordinarily expensive and currently quite precarious--once the fifteen minutes are up there will be no one to bankroll it. He doesn't "get" to be a minor celebrity. Even if that were his sincere desire, he really doesn't have a say in the matter. The price of getting through the trial as a social pariah who lives in the crosshair of a hostile and frankly slanderous press is that he has to embrace the only allies he has, which are political groups led by some of the shadiest people on planet Earth. Unless you want to volunteer for his security detail or at least tell your comrades to stop sending death threats to the family, I'm not sure where you get off complaining about this. He isn't going to roll over and die just because you want him to. You alright, buddy?
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2021 16:57
|
|
|
Mr. Nice! posted:You don’t even have to palette swap. Michael Reinoehl absolutely used self defense in a legally authorized way, and he was executed by federal officers on the president’s order. This is kind of my point: if you trim the hedges down to the shooting itself, you'd have to conclude that either they both acted in self defense, or neither of them did. (Though there's some extraneous information that makes the Reinoehl shooting less clear, he may have been following the deceased, rather than running from him) The social argument is about how the system treated the two, and people want Rittenhouse to pay because of it. Mr. Nice! posted:I also don’t think Rittenhouse has a valid self defense argument. You shouldn’t get to pick a fight, lose, and then use a gun in self defense. Wisconsin even has portions of its self defense statute that agree with me. And to make the distinction, people decide either he "picked a fight" by "being a chud" (videos, reason for being there, etc.) or by simply looking at the initial assault. I think people just want it to be a crime that Rittenhouse was there, being a chud, with a gun.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2021 17:01
|
|
|
Woozy posted:I don't understand how people convince themselves of this. Consider the world he lives in. He's not "set for life" by any normal person's understanding of what that means. His day-to-day is extraordinarily expensive and currently quite precarious--once the fifteen minutes are up there will be no one to bankroll it. He doesn't "get" to be a minor celebrity. Even if that were his sincere desire, he really doesn't have a say in the matter. The price of getting through the trial as a social pariah who lives in the crosshair of a hostile and frankly slanderous press is that he has to embrace the only allies he has, which are political groups led by some of the shadiest people on planet Earth. Unless you want to volunteer for his security detail or at least tell your comrades to stop sending death threats to the family, I'm not sure where you get off complaining about this. He isn't going to roll over and die just because you want him to. If he wanted to he could hide away from society for a few years taking college classes or whatever and appear in another state under a different name and his life would likely be pretty normal. He could probably raise an initial 'Help Kyle' GoFundMe and run off with the money to bankroll it. Im sure he's already doing that. Instead he's walking towards the infamy including having a tucker Carlson 'documentary'. He's a chud. A child chud but he's embracing this path not resisting it. blarzgh posted:I think people just want it to be a crime that Rittenhouse was there, being a chud, with a gun. Yes? Bringing a gun to a protest to actively go looking for trouble should absolutely be a crime. In saner countries it is a crime.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2021 17:05
|
|
|
Outrail posted:Yes? Bringing a gun to a protest to actively go looking for trouble should absolutely be a crime. In saner countries it is a crime. Sure, I just think people are conflating wanting him to go to jail under what the law should be, rather than what the law is.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2021 17:14
|
|
|
blarzgh posted:Sure, I just think people are conflating wanting him to go to jail under what the law should be, rather than what the law is. Yep, or they had no idea it was actually completely legal to do what he did. Could his mother be charged with negligence or child endangerment or something? Handing a minor a gun and driving them to a violent protest to walk around unsupervised looking for people to shoot seems like child endangerment. Coz I had no idea this is a completely okay and legal thing to do and just assumed it wasn't. Outrail fucked around with this message at 17:21 on Nov 24, 2021 |
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2021 17:18
|
|
|
Outrail posted:Could his mother be charged with negligence or child endangerment or something? Handing a minor a gun and driving them to a violent protest to walk around unsupervised looking for people to shoot seems like child endangerment. His mother didn't do either of those things.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2021 17:33
|
|
|
Outrail posted:If he wanted to he could hide away from society for a few years taking college classes or whatever and appear in another state under a different name and his life would likely be pretty normal. The people in charge of his money and security want him on Tucker. That's the whole point of the fundraising, which I'm sure you realize. Others in his orbit advised against it but either way I find it very difficult to fault this play, considering your proposed alternative is to tell an 18-year-old who's livestreamed murder trial was the site of literal rending and gnashing from activists who credibly threatened both him and the jury to "just lay low for a while, maybe change your name" like witness protection is an acceptable outcome for someone who was acquitted. Outrail posted:Yep, or they had no idea it was actually completely legal to do what he did. No she can't because she didn't do any either of these things.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2021 17:34
|
|
|
I think it's notable that the verifiable instances of Rittenhouse's involvement with the far-right coincide entirely with the period where Lin Wood was representing him. And if he doesn't tap that well for money then he's spending life in prison so it's an indictment of the system that those are the kinds of choices that are forced on people (and which black Americans do not have the same recourse to), but I'm not going to blame an individual for reaching for any lifebelt they can.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2021 17:40
|
|
|
e: Nm this is n't the thread for this Outrail fucked around with this message at 18:47 on Nov 24, 2021 |
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2021 18:26
|
|
|
Woozy posted:I don't understand how people convince themselves of this. Consider the world he lives in. He's not "set for life" by any normal person's understanding of what that means. His day-to-day is extraordinarily expensive and currently quite precarious--once the fifteen minutes are up there will be no one to bankroll it. He doesn't "get" to be a minor celebrity. Even if that were his sincere desire, he really doesn't have a say in the matter. The price of getting through the trial as a social pariah who lives in the crosshair of a hostile and frankly slanderous press is that he has to embrace the only allies he has, which are political groups led by some of the shadiest people on planet Earth. Unless you want to volunteer for his security detail or at least tell your comrades to stop sending death threats to the family, I'm not sure where you get off complaining about this. He isn't going to roll over and die just because you want him to. Uh no, he absolutely had the option to plead guilty to the murder he committed and not be a social pariah. So no, you're a loving moron, legally speaking.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2021 19:07
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:I think it's notable that the verifiable instances of Rittenhouse's involvement with the far-right coincide entirely with the period where Lin Wood was representing him. And if he doesn't tap that well for money then he's spending life in prison so it's an indictment of the system that those are the kinds of choices that are forced on people (and which black Americans do not have the same recourse to), but I'm not going to blame an individual for reaching for any lifebelt they can. 3-5 out in 2 for good behavior is not "for life". He's a white kid, if he'd pleaded they'd have been very very unreasonably reasonable with his sentencing and parole.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2021 19:09
|
|
|
I'm really confused how him having that gun in Wisconsin in the first place was legal. I saw a statute cited somewhere that said minors can't have guns unless under parental supervision for instruction. This is obviously not that, and his mother didn't give him the gun because he got it in Wisconsin from someone else, right?
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2021 19:44
|
|
|
Woozy posted:I don't understand how people convince themselves of this. Consider the world he lives in. He's not "set for life" by any normal person's understanding of what that means. His day-to-day is extraordinarily expensive and currently quite precarious--once the fifteen minutes are up there will be no one to bankroll it. He doesn't "get" to be a minor celebrity. Even if that were his sincere desire, he really doesn't have a say in the matter. The price of getting through the trial as a social pariah who lives in the crosshair of a hostile and frankly slanderous press is that he has to embrace the only allies he has, which are political groups led by some of the shadiest people on planet Earth. Unless you want to volunteer for his security detail or at least tell your comrades to stop sending death threats to the family, I'm not sure where you get off complaining about this. He isn't going to roll over and die just because you want him to. “A white supremacist who crossed state lines with the intent of terrorizing people and maybe-accidentally killed two people won’t have unlimited money forever” is not the hot take you think it is.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2021 19:51
|
|
|
BonerGhost posted:I'm really confused how him having that gun in Wisconsin in the first place was legal. I saw a statute cited somewhere that said minors can't have guns unless under parental supervision for instruction. This is obviously not that, and his mother didn't give him the gun because he got it in Wisconsin from someone else, right? They very deliberately jumped through hoops in the law. It's illegal for him to buy the firearm under 18 and/or to cross state lines with it but not to possess the firearm in WI. So he gave his over 18 friend the money to buy it with the deal that ownership would be transferred once he hit 18. He travels into WI and his friend gives him the gun. Friend is being prosecuted for the straw-man purchase and it's not entirely clear if he's legally bang to rights - they both treated it as Kyle's gun he had the right to take any time he wanted, but they also kept it at the friend's house so they were clearly trying to walk right up to the line of what the law allows. It might have been prosecutorial choice but it doesn't look like Kyle can have any charges from the straw-man purchase.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2021 19:56
|
|
|
I suppose I'll console myself with the verdicts in the Ahmaud Arbery case. They're all going down for murder.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2021 19:58
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:They very deliberately jumped through hoops in the law. It's illegal for him to buy the firearm under 18 and/or to cross state lines with it but not to possess the firearm in WI. So he gave his over 18 friend the money to buy it with the deal that ownership would be transferred once he hit 18. He travels into WI and his friend gives him the gun. https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/statutes/statutes/948/60 But wasn't Rittenhouse committing at least a misdemeanor by having the gun? Like what possible argument could there be that the friend didn't commit the class I or H felony?
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2021 20:04
|
|
|
BonerGhost posted:
Read the whole statute. Carefully.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2021 20:12
|
|
|
Sonic Dude posted:“A white supremacist who crossed state lines with the intent of terrorizing people and maybe-accidentally killed two people won’t have unlimited money forever” is not the hot take you think it is. I'm curious why you think this detail is relevant, since it's not. Everyone who has some kind of take about this case talks about it in the same way. Are you suggesting there should be federal charges of some kind? Someone explain the "state line" blubbering to me. I realize beggars can't be choosers but ideally this person would be someone who ordinarily gives a poo poo about imaginary boundaries.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2021 20:19
|
|
|
Hi. You idiots. Who gives a poo poo someone ask a stupid legal question. "Uhh hey I'm a 40 year old goon and my parents are trying to evict me don't i have rights?"
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2021 20:26
|
|
|
Woozy posted:Read the whole statute. Carefully. Did you hear a zipper rattle somewhere? Why the gently caress are you talking to me?
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2021 20:29
|
|
|
So a ship on a time charter loaded 12 containers of sex arses, but on arrival at destination there were only 11 containers. The carriage was under a CONGENBILL 94, signed “as agent for the master”, who is liable to the rightful bill of lading holders for the missing container? Asking for a friend.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2021 20:31
|
|
|
Woozy posted:I'm curious why you think this detail is relevant, since it's not. Everyone who has some kind of take about this case talks about it in the same way. Are you suggesting there should be federal charges of some kind? Someone explain the "state line" blubbering to me. I realize beggars can't be choosers but ideally this person would be someone who ordinarily gives a poo poo about imaginary boundaries. I suppose the numerous posts talking about how he danced around firearms charges in different states were illegible. It’s telling that, for you, the white supremacy and killing are secondary to “but why would anyone dare to point out he didn’t even live near the T.J. Maxx that he felt he needed to defend with (technically) someone else’s high-powered rifle.” FrozenVent posted:Asking for a friend. Does the answer depend on whether the sex arses have gold fringe?
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2021 20:33
|
|
|
pseudanonymous posted:Uh no, he absolutely had the option to plead guilty to the murder he committed and not be a social pariah. So no, you're a loving moron, legally speaking. Lol yeah convicted murderers are definitely not shunned by society
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2021 20:44
|
|
|
FrozenVent posted:So a ship on a time charter loaded 12 containers of sex arses, but on arrival at destination there were only 11 containers. Rum sodomy and the lash
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2021 20:45
|
|
|
Sonic Dude posted:I suppose the numerous posts talking about how he danced around firearms charges in different states were illegible. Okay. Do you have some reason to think the weapon crossed state lines? Tell me where you're going with this, counselor.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2021 20:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 03:05 |
|
|
What can you, legally, do with a drunken sailor? edit: and can it only be done e'rly in the morning? toplitzin fucked around with this message at 21:00 on Nov 24, 2021 |
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2021 20:54
|
|
