Posted on 12/12/2021 6:21:35 AM PST by marktwain
Hmmmm, did Boggie get to keep the weapons from his movie character parts? (Rhet.) See the gun, name the movie.
Bogart is one of the five coolest men who ever lived.
L
On August 25, the night of the self defense shootings, Kyle was carrying a Smith & Wesson MP15 version of the AR15.
Dominick Black was carrying a similar version. I am not certain it was a Smith & Wesson MP15.
Both rifles were admitted as evidence in the trial, and both were identified by Dominick Black.
It would be impossible for him to know that Kyle would actually cause the death of another person. That fact was never proven in court, nor shown to ANY level of satisfaction that I'm aware of. It's a hard thing to convict with if you have an honest, unbiased jury, IMO.
It only requires the accused to knowingly provide it to a person under the age of 18, and for the person it is provided to, to discharge it which results in the death of another person.
In the Rittenhouse/Black case, it does not apply because the weapon provided is exempted by one of the exceptions in the law.
It is an unclear statute, IMO. The two conditions should never have been tied together.
It is a stupid statute.
It is what you get when people believe things which are not true.
IMHO, the whole statute should be done away with.
In was only enacted in 1987. Most of which was because of the stupid trend to outlaw possession of martial arts weapons, because of the Kung Fu Fighting movies.
We have way too many laws on the books.
Yep... motivation and actual knowledge of possible future events isn’t something that is easily proven. It leaves the door open for triggered juries to imagine all sorts of things that just may not be the case..
Since there was no crime associated with Dominick Black's gun, I would have assumed he could get it back, pronto, as soon as the case closed, since there is no need for it in the case against Black.
“Alec Baldwin is not free. He’s chained to the inspirations of the Devil.”
Narcissists don’t mentally process actions that way. In his mind Baldwin has absolved himself of any guilt whatsoever.
Since there was no crime associated with Dominick Black's gun, I would have assumed he could get it back, pronto, as soon as the case closed, since there is no need for it in the case against Black.
Woke or simply anti-gun prosecutors do not work that way.
Black is indicted with a felony. He is not legally allowed to possess a gun.
Lots of prosecutors and police refuse to give a gun back to the person who owns it until they have a court order in hand ordering them to do so.
Knocking myself upside the head... Of course. Honestly, as much as I hope Black's case is ended in his favor in January, people under felony indictments, by and large, probably shouldn't have guns.
Kyle has already requested that the weapon be destroyed. He doesn’t want it back.
Kyle does not legally own the rifle he carried.
I do not see he has legal control of it.
He can request all he wants.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.