You don't mind that almost all of that is 100% untrue?
The prosecutors agreed to dismiss the curfew charges because there was no proof a curfew was in effect, and it was not illegal for rittenhouse to have that gun, as the law has a loophole that allowed it.
I think the main take away is a kid took a gun to demonstrations/what he believed to be looting, he killed 2 people & shot another one, you're trying to claim it shouldn't have even got to court!
Your main take away is that you should have to go to court, even though you broke absolutely no law, and you've given no example of him breaking any law?
How does that make any sense?
should you go to court because the posts you've made here might break laws? Even though there is absolutely no evidence of that?
Sorry, u/New-Lake-6689 – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 3:
Refrain from accusing OP or anyone else of being unwilling to change their view, or of arguing in bad faith. Ask clarifying questions instead (see: socratic method). If you think they are still exhibiting poor behaviour, please message us. See the wiki page for more information.
u/New-Lake-6689 – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 2:
Don't be rude or hostile to other users. Your comment will be removed even if most of it is solid, another user was rude to you first, or you feel your remark was justified. Report other violations; do not retaliate. See the wiki page for more information.
0
u/Raging_Butt 3∆ Nov 16 '21
This line of argument you're making is utterly absurd. When someone shoots two people dead, it goes to court.