Originally posted by cdtm
It was due to a super specific wording that only outlawed short barrel guns.I've heard of similar laws before, the intent is to attack common use weapons in street gangs like sawed off shotguns, while protecting guns used in hunting.
Well I guess that checks out. Admittedly I haven't paid that close attention to the case so I missed that.
Originally posted by Robtard
Back in January Rittenhouse was ordered by a judge to stop associating with known White supremacist because he had been, as part of his bail conditions.So good luck with him proving the allegations are false and hurt his feelings.
As if "white supremacist" is a legal term.
People call Nicholas Sandmann a white supremecist, the term has been twisted to mean "Anyone the Left does not like".
So my honest opinion is that, from all the videos I've seen of the incident, it was the correct judgement.
Rittenhouse would be wise to bow out of the limelight and try and live some kind of normal life. I expect he won't though. He'll likely be offered considerable money for TV appearances etc which, in fairness, would be hard to turn down. Perhaps the best middle ground would be for him to use those chances to show some contrition for the deaths of 2 people.
He hasn't got a track record for making good decisions though.
Originally posted by jaden_2.0
So my honest opinion is that, from all the videos I've seen of the incident, it was the correct judgement..
Glad we agree for once.
As to the rest of your post that I didn't quote, I still say he should seek damages for defamation from the media and even Biden who falsely labelled him a "white supremacist."
Originally posted by Klaw
TheDonald is really happy.
WTF spam link is that?