Black Lives Matter

[Sombeech]

By cleaning up BLM graffiti, he doesn't think black lives matter.

Good thing BLM and Antifa are mostly professional WHITE protesters shipped in from other states, and all 3 that were shot are white with criminal records.

What are the odds

[oldno7]

Lots of internet forums have a cadre of lawyers who participate for whatever reasons.
We have the illustrious Mr. Card.
This is an attorney from another site going over legalities of the Kanosha 17 year old shooter.



Rittenhouse prevailed in at least four physical encounters, at least one if not two of which involved contests for control of his weapon by larger, presumably stronger assailants. Rittenhouse's use of a tactical sling would seem to have been of enormous help in permitting him to retain control of his weapon in the physical contest with Huber.
To the extent Rittenhouse made tactical mistakes the most obvious would seem to include:
1. Entering an (Kenosha) environment alone and without apparent support. While Rittenhouse may have been casually associated with some of the groups on the ground it seems to be the case that his association was struck up on his arrival, not a pre-existing one.
2. Allowing himself to become physically isolated and surrounded at the scene of Engagement 1. It is not clear what precipitated the initial conflict with Short Bald Subject, but in this Rittenhouse appears to have been rather unlucky to become entangled in a dispute with one of the more volatile individuals on the scene. This said, it should be entirely foreseeable that volatile individuals would be at the scene of a riot or civil unrest.
3. Failing to remain as situationally aware as possible, particularly to threats behind him, and permitting himself to be repeatedly overtaken from the rear in between Engagements 1 and 2. Prior to going to the ground at the beginning of Engagement 2, Rittenhouse allowed no less than three attacks from the rear which resulted in physical contact. Rittenhouse was lucky that none of these attacks disabled him or rendered him helpless in the face of the pursuing mob. The first battery to the back of Rittenhouse's head, in particular, had the potential to take Rittenhouse out of the fight for good. If, in fact, Huber and Short Bald Subject were associated, it isn't hard to imagine Rittenhouse would have come out badly on the wrong side of Engagement 2 if Huber was the vengeful type.

Legal Analysis (Note: I am a lawyer but certainly not yours, and not in Wisconsin):
Possession of Firearms in Wisconsin and Illinois:

Wisconsin firearms law provides for open carry of loaded rifles and pistols for those 18 and older not otherwise prohibited from possessing firearms. Unless Rittenhouse's age has been incorrectly reported he would be in violation of these statutes. Similar statutes exist in Illinois.
Further, in Wisconsin and Illinois, providing an underaged individual with a firearm is a felony. It seems safe to assume that Rittenhouse's enthusiasm for firearms was supported at least in some measure by his legal guardians. If they knowingly lent him use of the AR he carried in Kenosha they may face charges under these statutes.

Transportation of Firearms between Wisconsin and Illinois:

Federal law pre-empts the prosecution of illegal transportation via 18 U.S.C. §?926A which provides:
"Notwithstanding any other provision of any law or any rule or regulation of a State or any political subdivision thereof, any person who is not otherwise prohibited by this chapter from transporting, shipping, or receiving a firearm shall be entitled to transport a firearm for any lawful purpose from any place where he may lawfully possess and carry such firearm to any other place where he may lawfully possess and carry such firearm if, during such transportation the firearm is unloaded, and neither the firearm nor any ammunition being transported is readily accessible or is directly accessible from the passenger compartment of such transporting vehicle: Provided, That in the case of a vehicle without a compartment separate from the driver’s compartment the firearm or ammunition shall be contained in a locked container other than the glove compartment or console."
Any number of state statutes in Wisconsin or Illinois may govern the illegal importation or exportation of firearms where the "peaceable journey" exemption of 18 U.S.C. § 926A does not preempt. Rittenhouse is in jeopardy here if his age is reported correctly as he is not legally able to possess the AR platform he possessed in Kenosha in either Wisconsin or Illinois.

Self Defense:

In general, and Wisconsin is no exception, a "self-defence" defence to homicide (i.e. "justifiable homicide" or "excusable homicide") or the use of deadly or potentially force requires several elements. Those claiming self defence must:

1. Have the reasonable belief that...
2. ...they or another person...
3. ...are in imminent...
4. ...danger of death or great bodily harm, and...
5. ...that the use of deadly force is necessary to prevent said harm.

Key elements of the defence to hone in on are:
Reasonability. It is not reasonable to claim that you feared for your life when your snotty eight year old cousin charged you with a Star Wars Lego Imperial Star Destroyer at Christmas dinner (even if the Turbo Lasers appeared to be charged because of the flickering of the dinner table candlelight in the translucent plastic).
Imminent. You cannot pop Jimbo next door in the head with your Barrett M82 because he is planning to poison you tomorrow. Well, technically you can, but your self-defence argument might be somewhat weakened by the non-immediacy of the threat (no matter how real the threat is and how deadly the poison).
Wisconsin incorporates these elements in its excusable homicide statute thus:
"A person is privileged to threaten or intentionally use force against another for the purpose of preventing or terminating what the person reasonably believes to be an unlawful interference with his or her person by such other person. The actor may intentionally use only such force or threat thereof as the actor reasonably believes is necessary to prevent or terminate the interference. The actor may not intentionally use force which is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm unless the actor reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself." (Wisconsin Updated Statutes 2019 § 939.48(1))
Further, many jurisdictions do not permit defendants to use self-defence as an argument if deadly force was used in a confrontation the defendant him or herself precipitated. Wisconsin is one such jurisdiction, terming the restriction "Provocation" providing:
"A person who engages in unlawful conduct of a type likely to provoke others to attack him or her and thereby does provoke an attack is not entitled to claim the privilege of self-defence against such attack, except when the attack which ensues is of a type causing the person engaging in the unlawful conduct to reasonably believe that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm. In such a case, the person engaging in the unlawful conduct is privileged to act in self-defence, but the person is not privileged to resort to the use of force intended or likely to cause death to the person's assailant unless the person reasonably believes he or she has exhausted every other reasonable means to escape from or otherwise avoid death or great bodily harm at the hands of his or her assailant.
The privilege lost by provocation may be regained if the actor in good faith withdraws from the fight and gives adequate notice thereof to his or her assailant.
A person who provokes an attack, whether by lawful or unlawful conduct, with intent to use such an attack as an excuse to cause death or great bodily harm to his or her assailant is not entitled to claim the privilege of self-defence." (Wisconsin Updated Statutes 2019 § 939.48(2))

Use of Deadly Force By Rittenhouse

My own review of the Engagements suggests that it is difficult to argue that Rittenhouse was not of the reasonable belief that deadly force "was necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself."

Engagement 1:
Reasonable belief...
In the initial encounter with Short Bald Subject, Rittenhouse can be seen turning at least once to face the pursuing Short Bald Subject after Short Bald Subject hurled an object at Rittenhouse. In that quick turn it is possible that Rittenhouse brought his rifle barrel to bear. Short Bald Subject seems to hesitate, but continues to come on just as strong thereafter, charging Rittenhouse at full tilt. I would be at pains to articulate an argument that Rittenhouse did not reasonably believe that force was necessary to avoid a physical confrontation.
..that he faced imminent...
You don't get a lot more imminent than an adult male charging you at full tilt, especially as close as Rittenhouse permitted Short Bald Subject to approach (1.0-1.5 meters from the look of it).
...danger of death or great bodily harm...
It is entirely reasonable, within the context of civil unrest, mob action, and a lack of any real police presence, to expect that a full on physical fight with a determined adversary will result in your great bodily harm. I would expect that Rittenhouse's own exposure to police cadet programs and training would make this reasonable belief by him easy to establish based on what he may have learned in such programs, but anyone watching the news or even vaguely aware of the propensity for mob violence in cities facing unrest (and Kenosha in particular) would be reasonable in fearing great bodily harm or death if they are jumped in that context. Ironically, Rittenhouse's own words in the prior video interview, that he was armed because he might have to go "into harm's way" is a good piece of evidence vis-a-vis his state of mind at the time.
...and, that the use of deadly force is necessary to prevent said harm.
Again, Short Bald Subject was not stopping for anything. Given the video evidence of Short Bald Subject's disposition at the Ultimate station earlier, I suspect any third party will be able to safely infer that the prison-hardened Short Bald Subject did not intend to give Rittenhouse an over-the-knee spanking.

Effect of Provocation:

As I was unable to locate video or audio of the events immediately preceding Engagement 1, it is entirely possible that Rittenhouse somehow provoked Short Bald Subject within the meaning of § 939.48(2):
"A person who engages in unlawful conduct of a type likely to provoke others to attack him or her and thereby does provoke an attack is not entitled to claim the privilege of self-defence against such attack..."
It is not impossible to argue that Rittenhouse's illegal possession of a firearm, and perhaps some "assault by pointing" behavior not visible on the available video might have "provoked others [Short Bald Subject] to attack him...." This "assault by pointing" trigger concept isn't a terrible theory given Short Bald Subject's dialogue at the Ultimate station, which seems to describe the origins of his animus:
"Don't point no mother****ing gun at me [homes.]?"
Even allowing this provocation argument, it would seem to be obviated by two caveats:
First the language that follows in the statute: "...except when the attack which ensues is of a type causing the person engaging in the unlawful conduct to reasonably believe that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm. In such a case, the person engaging in the unlawful conduct is privileged to act in self-defence, but the person is not privileged to resort to the use of force intended or likely to cause death to the person's assailant unless the person reasonably believes he or she has exhausted every other reasonable means to escape from or otherwise avoid death or great bodily harm at the hands of his or her assailant."
Given what we do see on video, Rittenhouse retreating, turning, retreating again with Short Bald Subject giving chase until Rittenhouse is cornered, the provocation argument would seem to be defused. More so by the next clause:
"The privilege lost by provocation may be regained if the actor in good faith withdraws from the fight and gives adequate notice thereof to his or her assailant."
Whatever preceded the video we do have of Engagement 1, it seems obvious that Rittenhouse was withdrawing with every means available to him.

Engagement 2:

Reasonable belief...
In the video of the chase immediately before Engagement 2 Rittenhouse can be clearly seen looking behind him, obviously registering the number of pursuers he faced. If he had any doubts about their intentions the blow delivered to the rear of his head by White Shirt (a Misdemeanor Battery in Wisconsin) should have made them clear. When Rittenhouse fell to the ground and turned to face his attackers he had a view of at least a dozen individuals approaching him, including the four primary assailants.
..that he faced imminent...
While Red Backpack is deterred by the sight of the barrel of the rifle coming to bear and therefore receives no fire, in each of the cases where Rittenhouse used deadly force (Light Pants, Huber, Grosskreutz) Rittenhouse fires when contact is either imminent or already initiated.
...danger of death or great bodily harm...
An attempted drop kick to the head (White Pants), a skateboard-wielding assailant fighting for control of Rittenhouse's weapon (Huber), and a handgun carrying assailant that fakes surrender to try and gain tactical surprise (Grosskreutz). Nearby an individual with a blunt instrument held upward. A group of pursuers who had chased Rittenhouse two or three blocks already shouting out things like "Get his ass!" and who swarmed on him when he fell.
...and, that the use of deadly force is necessary to prevent said harm.
Rittenhouse's attackers were undeterred by the presence of and then even the discharge of his weapon. Still two of them (Huber and Grosskreutz) attacked.

Legal Effect of Illegal Possession of Firearm on Rittenhouse's Self-Defense Arguments

A number of webytubeintermedia sources make much of Rittenhouse's apparent criminal conduct in bringing an illegally possessed weapon into Wisconsin and staying out past curfew. While criminal acts do have an effect on self-defence arguments in Wisconsin I do not believe they apply here. Specifically, Wisconsin statutes provide:
"A person who engages in unlawful conduct of a type likely to provoke others to attack him or her and thereby does provoke an attack is not entitled to claim the privilege of self-defence against such attack, except when the attack which ensues is of a type causing the person engaging in the unlawful conduct to reasonably believe that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm. In such a case, the person engaging in the unlawful conduct is privileged to act in self-defence, but the person is not privileged to resort to the use of force intended or likely to cause death to the person's assailant unless the person reasonably believes he or she has exhausted every other reasonable means to escape from or otherwise avoid death or great bodily harm at the hands of his or her assailant."
The only seeming effect of illegal action on the defence of excusable homicide is to strengthen the defendant's duty to retreat. Specifically until he or she: "reasonably believes he or she has exhausted every other reasonable means to escape from or otherwise avoid death or great bodily harm at the hands of his or her assailant."
In this instance Rittenhouse's amazing restraint, while tactically dangerous, would seem to easily satisfy the additional exhaustion requirement that might be imposed by illegal activity by Rittenhouse.
In fact, among use of force cases I have had any detailed familiarity with, Rittenhouse's is one of the most clear cut in terms of "exhaustion" of alternatives short of the use of deadly force and restraint I have encountered.

Recap:

Lessons learned:

Do not enter a zone of civil unrest alone and/or without support. If you find yourself separated from a group return to it immediately. Rittenhouse was vulnerable to Bald Short Subject because he was alone and without any support at the Car Source garage.
Check your baffles. Check it again.
Even when you check your baffles, and check it again, expect you are missing something in your baffles.
Effective slings are essential elements of weapon retention in CQB and the correct setup is a huge equaliser even against melee encounters with larger adversaries. This is a lesson for me in particular. I have resisted sling systems in the past.
Don't rely on firearm discharges or pointing to deter opponents determined to close distance with you.
Not that you needed reminding, but rifle stopping power is far superior to handgun stopping power. All three subjects Rittenhouse scored clear hits on were out of the fight immediately. One (Grosskreutz) melted down even though he had ample means to continue the fight. Grosskreutz is only alive today because of Rittenhouse's amazing (perhaps even naive) restraint. I don't know of any tactical instructor that wouldn't counsel a follow-up shot to center mass on Grosskreutz immediately after the arm-strike.
If attacking an individual armed with a firearm do not flinch no matter what. If you commit to grappling with a rifle or pistol holder you have to see your attack through. Four larger, assailants, one armed with a blunt instrument (skateboard) and one with a handgun were unable to subdue a nearly prone Rittenhouse because they shied from the muzzle blast at key moments. Had Grosswreutz followed through with his initial charge after the fatal center mass hit on Huber, Rittenhouse would likely have been subdued.

[oldno7]

Was chris rock a prophet?

[dougrz]

The poor kid has been charged with 1st degree. Sickening.

[oldno7]

Wisconsin DOJ Confirms Jacob Blake Was Armed When He Was Shot

Kenosha, WI – The Wisconsin Department of Justice confirmed Wednesday that Jacob Blake was armed with a knife when he was shot on Sunday.
“During the investigation following the initial incident, Mr. Blake admitted that he had a knife in his possession,” a Wisconsin DOJ statement said. “DCI agents recovered a knife from the driver’s side floorboard of Mr. Blake’s vehicle. A search of the vehicle located no additional weapons.”

https://bluelivesmatter.blue/wiscons...n-he-was-shot/

[BasinCruiser]

[oldno7]

[rockgremlin]

The poor kid has been charged with 1st degree. Sickening.

Gonna have a hard time making those charges stick.

It was either shoot, or succumb to lethal mob violence. No third option.

[Iceaxe]

NBA Players : IN SUPPORT OF BLM WE ARE BOYCOTTING. WE AREN'T PLAYING THE REST OF THE SEASON!!!!

Owners : We aren't going to pay you if you don't play

NBA Players : What time is shootaround coach?

[rockgremlin]

NBA Players : IN SUPPORT OF BLM WE ARE BOYCOTTING. WE AREN'T PLAYING THE REST OF THE SEASON!!!!

Owners : We aren't going to pay you if you don't play

NBA Players : What time is shootaround coach?

NBA players still can't seem to wrap their brains around the fact that professional sports is a form of slavery, where the league is the plantation, and the coaches are the masters.

Sure they're getting paid millions of dollars, but that doesn't change the fact that the league owns their asses, to be traded and bartered with just like real world slaves so long ago. Players are driven under the lash of public entertainment, and are shamed when they don't live up to the audiences' expectations.

[BruteForce]

These folks (BLM Utah) are planning on staging a protest in South Jordan. I think I might need to be there.

https://www.facebook.com/groups/1043...o&__tn__=-UK-R

[Byron]

NBA players still can't seem to wrap their brains around the fact that professional sports is a form of slavery, where the league is the plantation, and the coaches are the masters.

Sure they're getting paid millions of dollars, but that doesn't change the fact that the league owns their asses, to be traded and bartered with just like real world slaves so long ago. Players are driven under the lash of public entertainment, and are shamed when they don't live up to the audiences' expectations.

I think they are well aware of this. A couple of months ago at least one NBA player floated the proposition of blacks forming their own league...haven't heard anything since but you've got to wonder just how it would go when the black owners have to negotiate salary, etc...I reckon they'd become the "bad guys" real quick.

Funny thing about these guys..."F*ck you, America...we're not going to play. We're not going to give you the pleasure of watching us perform" They're going to literally take their balls and go home. Kinda goes hand in hand with the blacks looting and burning their OWN neighborhoods, eh? They don't realize that they're hurting no one but themselves. They don't realize that the fans will give them the finger right back. Ever been to a home game where your team go their ass kicked? People file out of the stadium/arena all pissy and mad...ready to fire the coach, the quarterback, the point guard, whatever.

A quote from the movie Gladiator..."The mob is fickle, brother. He'll be forgotten in a month". In the case of that movie, the hero prevailed...but these black athletes aren't held up as heroes so much as spoiled fools.

You know who they're screwing over? All the young up and coming black athletes that are eager to get their shot at the big time.

[Byron]

These folks (BLM Utah) are planning on staging a protest in South Jordan. I think I might need to be there.

https://www.facebook.com/groups/1043...984838&__cft__[0]=AZWd-PCuw2ShXJrjRIM1afvEWbuQfSF8tHz8ZFwCMeIgLJaq4xc6Jlu lOv6NzqAeZtKWpt4TeGV_oZOcYDZANeKtEabhi5zRut42ih1LY aRYqXz_OTIoT4yaUomr-zgY3CTowVso5TZrtxfnH1ryD7fEz7UeL3IAJRsfkuoMul9k7zS CyviJ_QEQDIoDPf4CSCY2OQV_CqVmvoucylvMWSoH7gcxeYDjS jKFhBF71h5CB-IqlAl_wRrBxQByWyYY_Mo&__tn__=-UK-R

Sorry to say it Brute...but I think the best thing to do is stay well away from these jerk-offs.

Read some of the posts on this page...these people are pathetic and miserable. I'd go down there only if it were legal to put them out of their misery...Y'know, like prairie dog poppin'?

[Byron]

Was chris rock a prophet?

If I were the Prez, after my speech tonight I'd say "Alright all you black people that are concerned with the police, here's a little video clip for you and this is really all I have to say on the matter".

Seriously...I'd play this to the whole friggin' nation.

[oldno7]

[oldno7]

[rockgremlin]

Utter pathetic human being. Kyle did us all a favor when he dispatched that bald douchebag.

[oldno7]

[Sombeech]

A quick draw

[Byron]

A quick draw

If you (or anybody, quite frankly) could invade their website and draw that...that would be magical.