National Protest and 'disband the cops' discussion (please review page 1)


Grade A analysis. Thanks for sharing.

This is looking like the sort of situation I've been expecting to happen;

Unrelated parties(grey camo pants guy) popping off shots near armed [protestors/counter-protesters/rioters/boog bois/whatever you wanna define them as], which creates generalized chaos as people react to the situational fog and engage the first weapon/political enemy they see.
 
Additional perspective FWIW (not sure anything new/relevant is really being shared)...
We Witnessed The Kenosha Shootings. Here’s What Really Happened - The Daily Caller

A 17 YO had no business being armed, much less being there in the first place.

"Warning shot guy"...fuck whoever that was. Here's another person that shouldn't have taken a firearm that night.

The guy shot first had zero business trying to disarm anyone. That's asking for a bullet.

Two more try to disarm the shooter with one even attacking him. That's also how you take a bullet.

This was 100% avoidable, but a whole bunch of stupidity on both sides showed up looking for a fight. There's the real tragedy, Americans consider it some type of honor to injure Americans. Disgusting.
 
It's about as accurate a narrative as the "the guys he shot were violent pedophile felons" narrative going around.

I don't give a damn about anything someone did prior to this incident, unless it was literally "I cant wait to shoot those subhuman commies" or "I can wait to light a fascist fuck on fire".

All that matters is what happened to lead to the shooting, and the shooting itself.

Convicted pedophile with gun at protest. Pretty sure he was committing a few crimes of his own right there.

But as we've continued to see, these are not protests. These are riots and the rioters are armed.
________

The problem with catch and release is...oh yeah recidivism.


Oh this is also great. Ted Wheeler sends a letter to the POTUS and they're outside his condo.

 
It's really hard for me to condemn the kid, even though it's something I would never do, unless it was my streets they were destroying.

When the breakdown of law and order is so bad hundreds of structures in a city get burned (Minneapolis), police and government are ineffective, only the regular people are left to stand up for what's right.
 
It's really hard for me to condemn the kid, even though it's something I would never do, unless it was my streets they were destroying.

When the breakdown of law and order is so bad hundreds of structures in a city get burned (Minneapolis), police and government are ineffective, only the regular people are left to stand up for what's right.

That pretty much sums it up for me.
 
17-year-olds should never have to feel like they need to pick up a rifle and go out to defend their country, but then so did Audie Murphy and countless others. Hardly the same, but the sentiment is there.

I believe Kyle shouldn't have gotten involved in all of this, and now it's going to stay with him for the rest of his life. But at the end of the day, I guess only he'll be able to say, years from now (post-trial and post-reflection), whether it was all worth it in the end. All that being said, he handled himself as well as possible given the challenging circumstances he was faced with.

The meme I posted on the previous page was just to poke fun at the hypocrisy of Leftists who only seems to believe in borders when it suits them, like in this case. State lines and all other borders very much DO matter.
 
From the NY Post:

This is why Jacob Blake had a warrant out for his arrest

So something we were also missing earlier. In this thread it has been posted the arrest warrant filing by me that was dated 7 July. As those were charges filed. His "Girlfriend", well at least the one who called 911 had a restraining order in against him forbidding him from contact with her.

Read the article, it's also explicit with language.
 
I don't understand the whole transport gun argument. Maybe one of you can help me with this one. I'm not aware of any law that prohibits anyone from lawfully bringing a firearm across state lines unless the firearm is illegal to possess in one of those states.

New Jersey is a state that makes it difficult to cross state lines with a firearm. Here's a list of briefs on every state, specifically as it pertains to handguns.

Have Gun Will Travel... Transporting Your Handgun Across the U.S.
 
New Jersey is a state that makes it difficult to cross state lines with a firearm. Here's a list of briefs on every state, specifically as it pertains to handguns.

Have Gun Will Travel... Transporting Your Handgun Across the U.S.
I understand these things but this idea that simply crossing a state line with a firearm is illegal, especially going from IL to WI, is just odd and I don't know where it stems from. Living just across WI western border, I've travelled there many times with firearms. Many from MN hunt in WI, and vice versa.

I'm not an expert on gun laws but I do abide by them. I've travelled to many states with firearms, both via car and via airplane. Sure, you have to comply with the laws of the states you travel to but I've never heard of any law that prohibits "crossing state lines" or similar, especially for long guns.
 
Last edited:
a bad point for the kid is, Wisconsin law doesn’t allow him to possess/carry a firearm at 17 years of age, think there is a hunting defense...but that doesn’t help him here. Should be an interesting case tho.
There are some modifiers to WI statute 948.60 , which defines firearm restrictions for those under 18, that make it allowable for those over 16 yo. Section 3c is the pertinent section here. The complete 948.60 is really long but it states:
"948.60  Possession of a dangerous weapon by a person under 18.
(1)  In this section, “dangerous weapon" means any firearm, loaded or unloaded; any electric weapon, as defined in s. 941.295 (1c) (a); metallic knuckles or knuckles of any substance which could be put to the same use with the same or similar effect as metallic knuckles; a nunchaku or any similar weapon consisting of 2 sticks of wood, plastic or metal connected at one end by a length of rope, chain, wire or leather; a cestus or similar material weighted with metal or other substance and worn on the hand; a shuriken or any similar pointed star-like object intended to injure a person when thrown; or a manrikigusari or similar length of chain having weighted ends.
(2) 
(a) Any person under 18 years of age who possesses or goes armed with a dangerous weapon is guilty of a Class A misdemeanor.
(b) Except as provided in par. (c), any person who intentionally sells, loans or gives a dangerous weapon to a person under 18 years of age is guilty of a Class I felony.
(c) Whoever violates par. (b) is guilty of a Class H felony if the person under 18 years of age under par. (b) discharges the firearm and the discharge causes death to himself, herself or another.
(d) A person under 17 years of age who has violated this subsection is subject to the provisions of ch. 938 unless jurisdiction is waived under s. 938.18 or the person is subject to the jurisdiction of a court of criminal jurisdiction under s. 938.183.
(3) 
(a) This section does not apply to a person under 18 years of age who possesses or is armed with a dangerous weapon when the dangerous weapon is being used in target practice under the supervision of an adult or in a course of instruction in the traditional and proper use of the dangerous weapon under the supervision of an adult. This section does not apply to an adult who transfers a dangerous weapon to a person under 18 years of age for use only in target practice under the adult's supervision or in a course of instruction in the traditional and proper use of the dangerous weapon under the adult's supervision.
(b) This section does not apply to a person under 18 years of age who is a member of the armed forces or national guard and who possesses or is armed with a dangerous weapon in the line of duty. This section does not apply to an adult who is a member of the armed forces or national guard and who transfers a dangerous weapon to a person under 18 years of age in the line of duty.
(c) This section applies only to a person under 18 years of age who possesses or is armed with a rifle or a shotgun if the person is in violation of s. 941.28 or is not in compliance with ss. 29.304 and 29.593. This section applies only to an adult who transfers a firearm to a person under 18 years of age if the person under 18 years of age is not in compliance with ss. 29.304 and 29.593 or to an adult who is in violation of s. 941.28.
History: 1987 a. 332; 1991 a. 18, 139; 1993 a. 98; 1995 a. 27, 77; 1997 a. 248; 2001 a. 109; 2005 a. 163; 2011 a. 35.
Sub. (2) (b) does not set a standard for civil liability, and a violation of sub. (2) (b) does not constitute negligence per se. Logarto v. Gustafson, 998 F. Supp. 998 (1998)."
The exceptions/modifiers in 3c above are important and what potentially changes the age to 16. We'll see what applies for this kid but not quite as cut and dry as it may appear.
 
Last edited:
Sure, you have to comply with the laws of the states you travel to but I've never heard of any law that prohibits "crossing state lines" or similar, especially for long guns.
New Jersey and especially New York both have ridiculously stringent state laws regarding traveling through with firearms. In fact, according to the NRA-ILA's guide to interstate transportation of firearms, if you are stopping in New York on a layover, your safest bet is to ship your firearm to your arrival destination. A quick Google search will turn up quite a few news articles from the last few years telling of airline passengers who had a layover or were otherwise redirected to JFK/LaGuardia with a firearm in their checked baggage without the proper state licensure regarding the possession of same, and were promptly hauled out of the airport and incarcerated for possession of said firearms, FOPA be damned.
 
Back
Top