[dcarter]

He's a high school drop out!... that's exactly my point.

If he wants to "serve and protect" he needs to do his duty, which at 17 means applying himself to his studies so he can graduate from high school and go on to become a contributing adult, whether that's vocational training, the armed services, college, family business, whatever.

At the very least, he should be studying for his GED.

And yes, I am judgmental: I don't think I've encountered a scenario yet in which "17 year old high school drop out on the streets at midnight" led to anything like a constructive outcome for them.

DH

Have you ever heard of Tim Pool? Never went to high school, now a millionaire.

 

[FrontSight]

Column: Here's why Kyle Rittenhouse, the teen shooting suspect in Kenosha killings, is likely to get off

https://www.chicagotribune.com/colu...0200903-susvsg45yndn7pb67l42ywnzn4-story.html
from the author; "
Do I support that? No. I'd like to see open carry in public spaces by civilians of any age banned.

But under the current weapons and self-defense laws, will these killings result in prison time for the shooter? From what I saw down in the rabbit hole, I doubt it.

I predict Kyle Rittenhouse is going to walk."

Thomas Massie praises Kyle Rittenhouse, says he showed 'incredible restraint'
https://www.courier-journal.com/sto...tenhouse-says-he-showed-restraint/5708904002/

"Rittenhouse's attorney John Pierce tweeted Wednesday that his client "will go down in American history alongside that brave unknown patriot at Lexington Green who fired 'The Shot Heard Round The World' on April 19, 1775. A Second American Revolution against Tyranny has begun."

The post was later removed by Twitter for violating its policy against glorifying violence, according to a post by Rittenhouse's other lead attorney.

[URL='https://twitter.com/CaliKidJMP/status/1300927120282132480]Pierce also tweeted a video[/URL] of Rittenhouse speaking with him over the phone from jail, thanking supporters who had sent him mail.

"I just want to let you all know that I'm going to be out of here soon and stay strong," Rittenhouse says. "And I hope to see you guys soon.""

 

[moe mensale]

Column: Here's why Kyle Rittenhouse, the teen shooting suspect in Kenosha killings, is likely to get off

https://www.chicagotribune.com/colu...0200903-susvsg45yndn7pb67l42ywnzn4-story.html

Yes, it seems certain that Rittenhouse was in violation of Chapter 948.6 of Wisconsin law when he was guarding business properties with a weapon of war slung across his back. That law bans minors from carrying guns...

No, it doesn't. The "liberal/progressive bent" author missed the exception at (3)(c) which only bans minors from carrying short barreled rifles, which Kyle did not.

 

[Montieth]

Once again, we see why reporters aren't qualified to speak on law issues. They can't even fully grasp the 'this section shall not apply to' bits.

Do I support that? No. I'd like to see open carry in public spaces by civilians of any age banned.

So, no guns for cops or anyone not in the military? That's curious. Whither Posse Comitatus?

How do you square that with the 2nd amendment at all?

 

[TimBob]

Once again, we see why reporters aren't qualified to speak on law issues. They can't even fully grasp the 'this section shall not apply to' bits.

So, no guns for cops or anyone not in the military? That's curious. Whither Posse Comitatus?

How do you square that with the 2nd amendment at all?

You and I both know that when they say "civilian" they mean anyone not special like a cop, federal agent, judge, DA, and yes... even the military... even though the word actually means "non military."

For example, here at the Marine base in Albany we have a CIVILIAN Marine Corps police force on base. Yet local city cops continually refer to any non LEO as a civilian. The reporter in the article is simply following the lead of most LEOs.

 

[Clark]

Literally definition I can find for "civilian" is "anyone not in the military or police"

 

[jrm]

Literally definition I can find for "civilian" is "anyone not in the military or police"

That is a (very) unfortunate artifact of repeated incorrect use of a word: the word's definition evolves to the point that the usage no longer is incorrect. There's no denying that the historical definition of "civilian" is "not military." But the para-militarization of police agencies and other factors have for decades caused LEOs to use "civilian" to use "not police."

 

[FrontSight]

Once again, we see why reporters aren't qualified to speak on law issues. They can't even fully grasp the 'this section shall not apply to' bits.

So, no guns for cops or anyone not in the military? That's curious. Whither Posse Comitatus?

How do you square that with the 2nd amendment at all?

I made no comment on my OP, everything in the OP was quoted from the articles I posted.

 

[TimBob]

That is a (very) unfortunate artifact of repeated incorrect use of a word: the word's definition evolves to the point that the usage no longer is incorrect. There's no denying that the historical definition of "civilian" is "not military." But the para-militarization of police agencies and other factors have for decades caused LEOs to use "civilian" to use "not police."

Good explanation, jrm, thank you. However, we still have civilian police on military bases all over the country. Looks like it came here to Albany in 2005:

https://www.hqmc.marines.mil/ppo/Un...w-Enforcement-and-Corrections-PSL/SELE/MCLEP/

Sorry I derailed the thread!

 

[Montieth]

That is a (very) unfortunate artifact of repeated incorrect use of a word: the word's definition evolves to the point that the usage no longer is incorrect. There's no denying that the historical definition of "civilian" is "not military." But the para-militarization of police agencies and other factors have for decades caused LEOs to use "civilian" to use "not police."

Yep. Any use of the word Civilian to mean non law enforcement is wrong. Cops aren't subject to UCMJ. They are in fact civilian law enforcement.

 

[Montieth]

I made no comment on my OP, everything in the OP was quoted from the articles I posted.

My mistake, the quoting was very confusing.

 

[gunsmoker]

I use "armed civilian" to mean an armed person who is NOT CLOTHED WITH A SPECIFIC GRANT OF AUTHORITY OF THE GOVERNMENT to use government-issued weapons to enforce society's laws and policies.

Cops may be non-military, but they're not like private citizens because of this grant of authority, the Oath of Office that they must take (and can be legally sanctioned for violating), and the special rules and protections that apply to them when they do things that would normally be considered violating other "civilians" rights.

 

[gunsmoker]

Back to the shootings by Kyle Rittenhouse:
This is the first so-called "victim." Joseph (Jo-Jo) Rosenbaum, a **** pedophile who raped multiple young boys from age 9 and up. A registered sex offender, and clearly an irrationally angry nutcase who should never have been left free to roam the streets and mix with the public in the first place.

https://www.theamericanconservative...ouse-vs-his-enemies-kenosha-joseph-rosenbaum/

Now, no matter how Joseph Rosenbaum was killed, I would not mourn the outcome or question that society is better off. Our net quality of life, safety, and security, would be equally enhanced if this guy died in any manner.

But legally, it matters A LOT how Rosenbaum died.
He's the first guy 17 y/o Rittenhouse shot that night. One of the other protesters who later attacked Rittenhouse (the guy with the skateboard bludgeon) was seen standing right behind Rosenbaum was screaming obscenities and using fighting words to some armed militia-type peacekeepers (which may or may not have included Kyle-- I don't know).

The legality or illegality of the shooting of Rosenbaum may impact the analysis on the legality or illegality of other surviving protestors chasing and attacking Kyle right afterward, down the street a block or two.

So, at this point more than a week after the triple shooting in Portland, WHAT DO WE KNOW ABOUT what THE FIRST so-called 'victim' -- Joseph Rosenbaum-- BEHAVED IN THE MINUTES AND SECONDS prior to his death?

What were his interactions with Kyle Rittenhouse?
What were his interactions with others that Kyle Rittenhouse actually saw or knew about, and thus would be legally relevant and could be considered a short time later when these two men got physical with each other?

If there's no clear definitive answer, are there alternate and conflicting stories about how it went down? A pro-militia side of the story vs. a communist protestor's pro-rioter side of the story?

I mean a story in substantial detail-- not empty platitudes and rhetoric about "it was self defense, he was attacked" or "it was obviously murder because he shot a protestor for taunting him." Let's get into details.

 

[moe mensale]

So, no guns for cops or anyone not in the military? That's curious. Whither Posse Comitatus?

How do you square that with the 2nd amendment at all?

The author doesn't have to square his comment with the 2nd Amendment because

Eric Zorn is an op-ed columnist for the Chicago Tribune with a liberal/progressive bent...

 

[Montieth]

Gunsmoker, I've seen footage that shows another one of the defenders there with a green shirt who Rosenbaum seemed to have issue with. However in all of that, I don't put it past them just deciding that Rittenhouse was away from the group and an easy mark. Rosenbaum DOES make at several points demands that they take their guns. I think it highly likely that he felt that he could take Rittenhouse's firearm from him. Clearly he was mistaken.

This amateur makes a good case for this.

 

[Schweisshund]

Back to the shootings by Kyle Rittenhouse:
This is the first so-called "victim." Joseph (Jo-Jo) Rosenbaum, a **** pedophile who raped multiple young boys from age 9 and up. A registered sex offender, and clearly an irrationally angry nutcase who should never have been left free to roam the streets and mix with the public in the first place.

https://www.theamericanconservative...ouse-vs-his-enemies-kenosha-joseph-rosenbaum/

Now, no matter how Joseph Rosenbaum was killed, I would not mourn the outcome or question that society is better off. Our net quality of life, safety, and security, would be equally enhanced if this guy died in any manner.

But legally, it matters A LOT how Rosenbaum died.
He's the first guy 17 y/o Rittenhouse shot that night. One of the other protesters who later attacked Rittenhouse (the guy with the skateboard bludgeon) was seen standing right behind Rosenbaum was screaming obscenities and using fighting words to some armed militia-type peacekeepers (which may or may not have included Kyle-- I don't know).

The legality or illegality of the shooting of Rosenbaum may impact the analysis on the legality or illegality of other surviving protestors chasing and attacking Kyle right afterward, down the street a block or two.

So, at this point more than a week after the triple shooting in Portland, WHAT DO WE KNOW ABOUT what THE FIRST so-called 'victim' -- Joseph Rosenbaum-- BEHAVED IN THE MINUTES AND SECONDS prior to his death?

What were his interactions with Kyle Rittenhouse?
What were his interactions with others that Kyle Rittenhouse actually saw or knew about, and thus would be legally relevant and could be considered a short time later when these two men got physical with each other?

If there's no clear definitive answer, are there alternate and conflicting stories about how it went down? A pro-militia side of the story vs. a communist protestor's pro-rioter side of the story?

I mean a story in substantial detail-- not empty platitudes and rhetoric about "it was self defense, he was attacked" or "it was obviously murder because he shot a protestor for taunting him." Let's get into details.

I believe Kyle Rittenhouse was filmed (videoed?) extinguishing a fire in a dumpster that Rosenbaum had started. Kyle Rittenhouse was recorded while carrying a fire extinguisher - it was a brief recording but it did show what his intentions were - to put out a dumpster fire. Rosenbaum was also pushing the dumpster, while on fire, in the direction of a gas station (this was recorded) , and Kyle kept extinguishing the fire and Rosenbaum kept trying to restart it.

Kyle was trying to protect the gas station that Rosenbaum was trying to light on fire.

 

[OWM]

it was a brief recording but it did show what his intentions were - to put out a dumpster fire.

Seems he put out several dumpster fires as it were.

 

[45_Fan]

Was there a toxicology report on Rosenbaum?

 

[N.T.F.S.]

Was there a toxicology report on Rosenbaum?

Yes he died of lead poisoning

 

[Nemo]

Ouch!

Nemo :shakehead: