Not a law fag but thought I heard in the trial that Wisconsin allows 16-17 year old to possess a firearm over a certain length. Kyle described where his buddy bought the AR with the understanding that they would transfer ownership to Kyle when he turns 18. Legally, the AR does not belong to him and so it seemed to me that he was allowed to possess it. With all that said, the lawyers and judge were discussing some technicalities to the law that made it “complicated”.
The provocation seems to be the basis of the prosecution and the photographic evidence does not appear to pass the reasonable doubt test.
Correct. Wisconsin law restricts short guns, but not long rifles by age. There was no law preventing him carrying a long rifle. And the charges for curfew violation were dropped last week as they were either invalid, or generally not being enforced.
Not a law fag but thought I heard in the trial that Wisconsin allows 16-17 year old to possess a firearm over a certain length. Kyle described where his buddy bought the AR with the understanding that they would transfer ownership to Kyle when he turns 18. Legally, the AR does not belong to him and so it seemed to me that he was allowed to possess it. With all that said, the lawyers and judge were discussing some technicalities to the law that made it “complicated”.
The provocation seems to be the basis of the prosecution and the photographic evidence does not appear to pass the reasonable doubt test.
Correct. Wisconsin law restricts short guns, but not long rifles by age. There was no law preventing him carrying a long rifle. And the charges for curfew violation were dropped last week as they were either invalid, or generally not being enforced.