TexasCHLforum.com

RottenApple wrote: ↑Thu Nov 04, 2021 8:45 pm

Jose_in_Dallas wrote: ↑Thu Nov 04, 2021 5:53 pmPardon my ignorance but does nothing become of him regarding the straw purchase on the AR? I know in the bigger picture, he gets acquitted of some bigger charges but I don't think he's getting off scot-free.

Why would there be? KR did **NOT** "straw purchase" a firearm; The person who completed the sale did. But did he really? A straw purchase occurs when one person buys a gun for someone else who is either prohibited by law from possessing a gun or who does not want his or her name associated with the transaction.

So who is a prohibited person?

This group includes anyone who:

• is a felon

• has been convicted of any crime punishable by more than a year in prison (whether or not they were ever sentenced to or served a day in prison)

• is under indictment for any crime punishable by more than a year in prison

• is a fugitive

• is an unlawful user of any controlled substance

• has been adjudicated as a mental defective

• has been committed to a mental institution

• is an illegal alien

• has a dishonorable discharge from the military

• has renounced their U.S. citizenship

• is the subject of a restraining order restraining the person from harassing, stalking, or threatening an intimate partner or the child of an intimate partner, or

• who has been convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence

The US military routinely takes 17 year olds and provides them with firearms. So just being 17 years old, at least under federal law, does not seem to make one a prohibited person.

srothstein wrote: ↑Wed Nov 03, 2021 7:58 pmIf this is true, it gets Rittenhouse off scot-free and lets all sides walk away with no change in the status quo and no decision on if it was self-defense or not. A Brady violation (hiding exculpatory evidence) is a violation of his rights that can cause the judge to set him free as punishment to the prosecution. The prosecutor can claim he did not hide it, the FBI lost it (and has already said in that article that they are not under his control). He can run for re-election based on having tried Rittenhouse and done his "best" for justice. The FBI doesn't care either way about the case or even looking bad by "losing" the video. They don't even care that everyone knows they deliberately destroyed it. And Rittenhouse is set free with no punishment so he and his lawyers are at least satisfied if not outright happy about it.

And the American people, especially Wisconsin residents, are the big losers because there is no clear cut decision on who was right and when self-defense is allowed. And we all get to stay just as divided as we are on believing who was right and wrong in this case.

I believe the appropriate quote is that "something is rotten in Denmark."