[SJackson]

Sorry, shouldn't have said accompany, the non-hunting exemption is 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. Instruction means more than formal range instruction, in my mind if I'm walking through the woods with my son instruction may be involved. The courts may well say that doesn't require being accompanied/in the presence of. Or they may not. As I mentioned earlier, this seems to be the only basis for the murder charges.

[freeandfreezing]

the non-hunting exemption is 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.

The provision you cited is 948.60 (3)(c). Keep reading and look at 948.60 (3)(c). That section says:

" 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 is a ban on short barreled rifles and shotguns, so presumably that does not apply, and 29.593 only relates to the need for a hunting license when hunting. 29.304 when you actually read it has regulations for 16 and under.

So a 17 year old is only subject to 948.60 if they happen to be carrying a short barreled rifle or shotgun.

Poorly drafted laws, but clear that they don't apply to Rittenhouse.