The AC 37 has started, news and rumours

[pluscount]

Oh not needing a boom boom stick to make myself feel better..

BTW, the correct term is "Freedom stick."

 

[Rennmaus]

Hummmm.  I looked up common sense in the Wisconsin penal code.  Not  there.  Damn that pesky "Rule of Law" thing.

Was he allowed to bear that specific rifle?

 

[enigmatically2]

Jal, perhaps you have your laws confused.  Kenosha is in Wisconsin, USA, subject to Wisconsin, USA laws, not British laws, not Euro laws, not any other laws.

 
In Wisconsin, there is a right to bear arms and a right of self defense.  Mr Rittenhouse relied on those rights and was tried by a jury of his peers who agreed with him.  Game Over.  Had the jury convicted him, also Game Over because most of us in the USA agree with the "Rule of Law", not the "Rule of what ever you want to think."
 
Upon which Rule do you rely?

There is no such right for U18s. He was U18.

Law

 

[porthos]

Was he allowed to bear that specific rifle?

He was. Wisconsin law permits someone under the age of 18 to possess a rifle so long as it is not a short-barreled rifle (defined as under 16” in length). The Rifle Rittenhouse had was not a short-barreled rifle. It’s why the judge dismissed the charge the weapons charge. Regardless of whether you like the law, which is an entirely different issue, the law is clear.

 

[porthos]

There is no such right for U18s. He was U18.

Law

In Wisconsin, there is. Whether that is a good idea is certainly debatable. 

 

[Rennmaus]

He was. Wisconsin law permits someone under the age of 18 to possess a rifle so long as it is not a short-barreled rifle (defined as under 16” in length). The Rifle Rittenhouse had was not a short-barreled rifle. It’s why the judge dismissed the charge the weapons charge. Regardless of whether you like the law, which is an entirely different issue, the law is clear.

but thanks

 

[JALhazmat]

The fact you make assumptions and accusations with no evidence shows there is more than just a whiff about you.

How do you point a gun at someone after you have been shot? 
 

 

[porthos]

How do you point a gun at someone after you have been shot? 
 

The person who pointed the gun at Rittenhouse got shot after pointing the gun at him. 

 

[floater]

Of course he is. RNZYS wants a successful Defence, as does TNZ.

in my world the cup is not a hideous ewer, instead its a match race. If the race leaves Auckland then well and truly RNZYS has lost the cup.

Some background. But you've probably seen this already?

'Emirates Team New Zealand's chief designer Dan Bernasconi says he was initially skeptical that it would be possible to develop an AI Bot that would work in the America's Cup context. While it was easy enough to get a the AC75 agent to sail in a straight line, tacking and gybing was a lot more complex.

"The crucial moment came when it started beating the sailors," says Bernasconi. "It could do upwind and downwind times and tacks that were better than the sailors. That was the moment when we thought, OK this is going to be useful."

When one of the design team comes up with a new foil design, it can be run through the AI agent, which will immediately tell the designer whether it is faster or slower than the "learned" AC75 that the bot has developed based on its learnings and improvements developed from the current performance data from Te Rehutai.

The team claim that the process is ten times faster than normal testing processes - and is accurate.'

https://www.sail-world.com/news/235683/Americas-Cup-AI-lifts-Kiwi-crew-to-a-new-level 

so, you're saying, Te Rehutai had a herbie?

 

[P Flados]

JAL,

You really seem to be making emotional arguments and wild derogatory accusations with no regard for facts.

Given we are posting on SAAC, I expect nothing less.

Please continue with your nonsense as you see fit

 

[dg_sailingfan]

@JALhazmat & @P Flados

If there is one person who is to be blamed for all the mess that happened in Kenosha in the aftermath of the Jacob Blake Shooting it is Wisconsin Governor Tony Evers.

The Kenosha Police Department, knowing what happened earlier in Minneapolis, requested Assistence from the Governor after the incident with Blake happened and Governor Evers did absolutely nothing.

 

[enigmatically2]

He was. Wisconsin law permits someone under the age of 18 to possess a rifle so long as it is not a short-barreled rifle (defined as under 16” in length). The Rifle Rittenhouse had was not a short-barreled rifle. It’s why the judge dismissed the charge the weapons charge. Regardless of whether you like the law, which is an entirely different issue, the law is clear.

Only if you own the weapon in question (which he did not) or for target shooting or hunting under adult supervision.

Ridiculously weak restrictions but he still wasn't compliant

 

[Stingray~]

A current-events summary

America's Cup: Progress equals complex >> Scuttlebutt Sailing News (sailingscuttlebutt.com)

 

[accnick]

@JALhazmat & @P Flados

If there is one person who is to be blamed for all the mess that happened in Kenosha in the aftermath of the Jacob Blake Shooting it is Wisconsin Governor Tony Evers.

The Kenosha Police Department, knowing what happened earlier in Minneapolis, requested Assistence from the Governor after the incident with Blake happened and Governor Evers did absolutely nothing.

Let's take this discussion away from this thread, which is nominally about AC37.

 

[Stingray~]

 

[Stingray~]

^ that Arcona 435 is pretty dang sweet. drool....

 

[porthos]

Only if you own the weapon in question (which he did not) or for target shooting or hunting under adult supervision.

Ridiculously weak restrictions but he still wasn't compliant

I'm sorry, but none of that is correct. There is a carve-out for rifles and shotguns that exempt those guns from the restrictions you mentioned. Granted, the statute is poorly drafted, but it's clear enough.  It's Wisc. Stat. Sec. 948.60(3)(c). Here is the relevant language with my explanation:

"This section [which includes the restrictions you mentioned] applies only to a person under 18 years of age who possesses or is armed with a rifle or a shotgun [as opposed to a handgun, to which all of the restrictions you mention apply] if the person is in violation of s. 941.28 [which prohibits short-barreled rifles, which was never at issue in the Rittenhouse case because the rifle he had wasn't short-barreled] or is not in compliance with ss. 29.304 [someone under the age of 16, which Rittenhouse wasn't -- he was 17] and 29.593 [which is the section requiring a hunter's safety certificate]." (Bold and underline emphasis mine.)

The "and" is critical in the second part. In more clear terms, Rittenhouse could have the rifle (the statute does not require that you own it) and not comply with the other provisions of the statute such as those you listed so long as the rifle was not a short-barreled rifle (and it wasn't) and he was 16 or older (which he was). If he was under the age of 16, he would have had to have a hunter's safety certificate (or all of the restrictions you mentioned would apply), but because he was over the age of 16 he didn't need it.

To be clear, I am in no way claiming this law makes sense or is a good idea. But the law is clear and the judge properly dismissed the weapons charges against Rittenhouse under this part of the Wisconsin statutes because the facts don't support the charge. No lawyer is surprised by that.

 

[enigmatically2]

I stand corrected @porthos

But as you say. Dumb laws.

these crazy americans

 

[Stingray~]

Dumb laws.

Yep.............

 

[pluscount]

 @porthos

But as you say. Dumb laws.

Agree, but Laws none the less.