There is a chance I am wrong. I am used to Texas gun laws, not Wisconsin, but...
Kyle Rittenhouse - 17-year-old who shot and killed 2,
wounded 1.
I keep hearing claims that his gun was illegal, yet the only
evidence I can find about the gun being illegal are claims that since he wasn't
18 he couldn't legally possess/transport a gun, but that's not true.
But when I research this claim, what I typically see is articles like this (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-53934109) that say things like this (see image 1) saying it is illegal to own or possess a gun under Federal, Wisconsin, and Illinois laws. But then you open the link and you see this (see image 2) stating that there is no minimum age for "long guns" like rifles in federal law.
 |
| Image 1 |
 |
| Image 2 |
So, he could have legally bought and possessed and
transported and carried the weapon according to federal laws... and since he is
in Wisconsin, Illinois laws do not apply to him. And Wisconsin only cares about
and enforces Wisconsin law. And since I am hearing he was in Wisconsin because
of defending a family business (the town is only 8 minutes from where he lives
in Illinois), he had every legal and moral right to be there.
The only law I see him having possibly violated is the open
carry law, but that is questionable.
I am still looking into that one but looking at their law it
looks like he should be in the clear on that.
The law: https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/statutes/statutes/948/60
This is what he would be charged with:
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.
BUT in (3) it says:
(3)(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.
941.28 Possession of short-barreled shotgun or short-barreled rifle.
https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/statutes/statutes/941/III/28
Which, presumably, it was not, so he is not violating that. If it was, then he is guilty of a class A misdemeanor.
29.304 - Restrictions on hunting and use of firearms by persons under 16 years of age.
https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/statutes/statutes/29/IV/304
29.593 - Requirement for certificate of accomplishment to obtain hunting approval.
https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/statutes/statutes/29/VIII/593
He might not be in compliance here... so maybe he could be
charged? But just a quick glance, there seem to be a lot of loopholes on this
one and I have not fully flushed it out. I would argue he's in compliance with this law since he wasn't actually hunting.
Add to all this comments from the police chief and I am pretty sure he's going to walk:
Miskinis believed Rittenhouse allegedly “was involved in the use of firearms to resolve whatever conflict was in place” which resulted in “disturbance that led to the use of deadly force.”
Miskinis was of the view that armed civilians had every right to exercise their constitutional rights.
https://news.yahoo.com/kenosha-police-chief-blames-protesters-021200418.html
Some additional info:
No comments:
Post a Comment