MovieChat Forums > Kyle Rittenhouse Discussion > Kyle Rittenhouse won't get his gun back ...

Kyle Rittenhouse won't get his gun back but will get a share of his $2 million bail money

posted 3 years ago by robocat893 (16257)
13 replies | jump to latest

Kyle Rittenhouse's rifle will be dismantled at the state crime lab in April, and he will get to keep nearly $1 million of the crowd-funded bail that was posted to keep him out of jail during his homicide trial last year.

At a short hearing Friday, Judge Bruce Schroeder approved two deals — one, agreed to by Rittenhouse, was to let authorities destroy the rifle; the other was to divvy up the $2 million bail with actor Ricky Schroder and a Texas non-profit organization led by Atlanta lawyer Lin Wood.

It looks like Rittenhouse won the lottery. What I don't understand is why he didn't get his rifle returned. He was found not guilty so he should have had his legally purchased rifle back.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/kyle-rittenhouse-wants-rile-used-120044611.html

[–] Ranb (11365) 3 years ago

So you didn't read the news article that you linked to?

"He used a Smith & Wesson M&P rifle that an older friend bought for him in May 2020 at a Rusk County hardware store. Rittenhouse was 17 at the time and couldn't legally purchase a firearm."

An older man bought it then gave it to him. As a child, Rittenhouse could not legally own the rifle, so it was never his.

[–] robocat893 (16257) 3 years ago

I admit I just scanned the article briefly so I appreciate your input. Rittenhouse being a minor it means he can't own a firearm but the rifle was legally purchased.

[–] Ranb (11365) 3 years ago

It was a straw purchase; illegal. Dominick Black was charged with two felonies.

Straw purchases by jerks like him are a source of a lot of problems associated with gun ownership in the USA. He was allowed to plead to a lessor charge to avoid the felonies he was charged with. Too bad he avoided prison.

https://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/man-charged-buying-gun-rittenhouse-takes-plea-deal-82155419

[–] blue1981 (8200) 3 years ago

He can buy plenty more guns with that money. It's only the beginning of him cashing in while the libs go nuts.

[–] Ranb (11365) 3 years ago

Why is the expression "libs go nuts" always used in associated with guns?

I work at a rifle range. Plenty of liberals with guns show up, some with rainbow stickers and Obama stickers on their cars and trucks. There are millions of liberal gun owners in this country.

[–] blue1981 (8200) 3 years ago

Because liberals hate guns and the few that own them are the exception and not the rule. Beto o Rourke said when he was running for president he would institute a gun grab to try and get rid of the Assault rifles.

[–] Ranb (11365) 3 years ago

Surely you mean SOME liberals hate guns? By FEW you mean millions? You understand that O'Rourke is not representative of liberals, democrats or Americans in general.

Your claim is like saying the GOP is pro-gun; but they generally are not. Trump's anti-gun agenda included a bump stock ban and pushing for red flag laws without due process. If Trump wanted to convince anyone he was pro-gun, he would have pushed for CCW and silencer de-regulation as hard as Clinton and Obama pushed for AWB's. But Trump didn't promote those bills at all.

When Trump grabbed bump stocks, just about every Trump supporter I talked to told me that Trump had no choice, or that no one should own those kinds of guns; typical anti-gun crap I was used to hearing from hard core gun grabbing Democrats.

Reagan and Bush also had anti-gun agendas that included prohibiting open carry, banning registration of new machine guns and confiscation of bump stocks.

No party has a monopoly on gun grabs, bans and promotion of the 2nd Amendment. There are self-loathing gun owners and anti-gun gun owners everywhere and in every political party.

[–] TandyMan (11357) 3 years ago

That rifle ain't being destroyed. It's gonna be sold to the highest bidder in a black market auction.

[–] Ranb (11365) 3 years ago

It is not Rittenhouse's rifle. He was 17 when it was seized and he was never the legal owner. The legal owner, Dominick Black, pleaded no contest to contributing to the delinquency of a minor over giving Rittenhouse the rifle.

[–] TandyMan (11357) 3 years ago

I'm just saying rich people love buying iconic weapons of murder throughout history.

[–] Ranb (11365) 3 years ago

You said it would be sold, not destroyed.

[–] CraigC (8842) 3 years ago

I’m sure the $700 rifle is the least of his concerns.

[–] TexasJack (12516) 3 years ago

He was planning to destroy it anyway, so this just saves him the trouble.