It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Those "Observers" are hiding under the title MEDIC and PRESS all WHILE looting and rioting, hence why there was a temporary lift on their protections.
Legal observers are trained volunteers who support the legal rights of activists. They provide basic legal guidance and are independent witnesses of police behaviour at protests.
Legal observers are independent from the protest and do not participate as activists. They support protestors by:
Distributing bust cards and briefing activists about their rights.
Keeping notes about the actions of the police on protests, which may be later used to challenge the police on their behaviour.
Monitoring arrests, including collecting witnesses and helping to connect the arrestee with support in the police station.
Legal observers can be identified on actions by their orange hi-viz vests that say “Legal Observer”.
originally posted by: jidnum
originally posted by: wantsome
First of all he wasn't legally old enough to own the weapon. 2nd He crossed the state line to put himself in a situation he shouldn't have been involved in. It's not up to citizens to deal with rioters unless they are protecting their own property. The kid went looking for trouble and he found it. It's not the job of vigilantly militias to deal with rioters.
Just so you know, everything you stated is completely false. He was LEGALLY old enough to have a weapon.
Also he was PROTECTING property from the vigilantes.
Maybe this will help shed some light on your false information because you are waaaaaay off.
It is legal for all adults unless they are prohibited from possession of firearms. Wisconsin state law 948.60(2)(a) states: "Any person under 18 years of age who possesses or goes armed with a dangerous weapon is guilty of a Class A misdemeanor."
originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: vonclod
We know the name of the dude he called, haven’t seen anything about him being a cop. Not saying he is or isn’t, just curious that it’s not being made more of a deal of even by his supporters, if true.
Kyle is said to be a part of a militia. The US Constitution protects the right of unorganized militias, and all men age 17 and above qualify.
Cevallos noted that late Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia expressly stated in 2008 that the Second Amendment’s right to bear arms was “not unlimited.” That was in the U.S. Supreme Court’s seminal gun rights case District of Columbia v. Heller. Scalia also noted the constitutionality of “longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms.”
Cevallos, a criminal defense lawyer, called the defense “a reach” that is “not likely to succeed,” a sentiment that was widely shared but more scathingly expressed by other attorneys.
Criminal defense attorney Janet Johnson agued that, under the circumstances, such a defense “is not available” to Rittenhouse.
“To start with, he illegally possessed the gun and traveled to Wisconsin with it. This defense is not available to him. Period,” she wrote.
originally posted by: JAGStorm
a reply to: vonclod
He did not cross state lines with any weapon. I wouldn't hire that attorney.
Do you know that as a fact?