|
|
|
NOTE!
This is a real-time comments system. As such, it's also a
free speech zone within guidelines set forth on the Post
Comments page. Opinions expressed here may or may not
reflect those of KeepAndBearArms staff, members, or
any other living person besides the one who posted them.
Please keep that in mind. We ask that all who post
comments assure that they adhere to our Inclusion
Policy, but there's a bad apple in every
bunch, and we have no control over bigots and
other small-minded people. Thank you. --KeepAndBearArms.com
|
The
Below Comments Relate to this Newslink:
WI: Kyle Rittenhouse's case quickly became a sensation during Kenosha unrest. A year later, there's a long way to go
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
are 2 comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
It's been a year since Kenosha prosecutors charged Kyle Rittenhouse with killing two people and wounding a third during unrest that followed the police shooting of Jacob Blake.
Since then the case and its characters have provided a constant stream of intrigue, outrage and propaganda, in both mainstream and niche conservative media outlets where he has been portrayed as a patriot and symbol of run rights as ell as a self-defense hero and boy-next-door.
Rittenhouse, now 18, faces five felonies, a misdemeanor and a curfew ticket from the events of Aug. 25. Using an AR-15-type rifle, he killed Joseph Rosenbaum, 36, Anthony Huber, 26, and wounded Gaige Grosskreutz. His lawyers say he acted in lawful self- defense. |
| Comment by:
PHORTO
(8/19/2021)
|
A hot mess.
Riots if he's acquitted, and bankruptcy of the justice system if he's convicted. |
| Comment by:
hisself
(8/19/2021)
|
One year? Whatever happened to the Sixth Amendment, "In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial. . ."??
One year is no way speedy! |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| For, in principle, there is no difference between a law prohibiting the wearing of concealed arms, and a law forbidding the wearing such as are exposed; and if the former be unconstitutional, the latter must be so likewise. But it should not be forgotten, that it is not only a part of the right that is secured by the constitution; it is the right entire and complete, as it existed at the adoption of the constitution; and if any portion of that right be impaired, immaterial how small the part may be, and immaterial the order of time at which it be done, it is equally forbidden by the constitution. [Bliss vs. Commonwealth, 12 Ky. (2 Litt.) 90, at 92, and 93, 13 Am. Dec. 251 (1822) |
|
|
