Star Member Stuart G (27,810 posts)
https://www.democraticunderground.com/100213984460
I have never been for the death penalty, but maybe now one exception:..... Kyle Rittenhouse
.Perhaps a lifetime in prison would be more cruel for him. But maybe he ought to get what he did to others.And save a lot of money for the rest of us. It sure sounds cruel for me to say that, and I have never stood that way on this issue, but every once in a while we change our opinions on some ideas for a while, and then we change back to the original thoughts latter. I could say more...but that is really enough.
LisaL (35,589 posts)
2. Death penalty is not on the table.
He is a minor, thus not eligible for a death penalty.
BGBD (880 posts)
48. Feds do
He crossed state lines to commit his crime.
He did not cross state lines for the purpose of the crime, DUmbass. Not to mention, it was self defense...
BGBD (880 posts)
53. I'm counting on
a different Attorney General in 5 months to make that call.
Star Member The Velveteen Ocelot (86,727 posts)
54. The law requires a defendant to be charged within a short time or they can't hold him, and he has to be tried within 90 days unless both sides agree to a continuance. They won't (and can't) hold him for five months waiting for a new AG. I expect the state of Wisconsin to charge him as an adult with two counts of first-degree murder and one of attempted murder, and to do so within the week.
BGBD (880 posts)
55. there is nothing to stop Wisconsin from charging him and a federal investigation to be launched in January.
He wasn't old enough to legally possess a firearm, and killing someone with an illegal firearm qualifies for the federal death penalty. There are also potential charges on use of interstate facilities to commit a crime, denial of civil liberties, conspiracy, and terrorism.
Star Member Kaleva (25,337 posts)
59. You are mistaken
"killing someone with an illegal firearm qualifies for the federal death penalty."
Your comment above is not accurate.
"If you kill someone as a result of using a firearm or ammunition to commit a federal offense, you can be prosecuted for murder or manslaughter in addition to any other crime committed resulting in death. "
https://www.wklaw.com/federal-firearms-laws
Only certain murders, such as the killing of a federal officer, are considered to be federal crimes.
It is not a federal crime for a minor to posses a rifle.
"B. 18 USC § 922(x)(2). A person under age 18 may not possess a handgun or handgun-only ammunition; (NOTE: Certain exceptions apply to A & B, such as where juvenile possesses written permission of a parent.);"
https://www.justice.gov/usao-sc/programs/ceasefire/brochures-and-talking-points/federal-firearms-laws
BGBD (880 posts)
73. It isn't that narrow
If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same; or
If two or more persons go in disguise on the highway, or on the premises of another, with intent to prevent or hinder his free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege so secured—
They shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, they shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.
He was part of an organized group that conspired to intimidate people expressing a 1st amendment protected right and his actions resulted in the deaths of those people.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/241
There is a clear argument for federal jurisdiction and a capital offense there alone.
they went to stop looters...
you ****ing idiot.
Star Member Stuart G (27,810 posts)
7. I had forgotten that this killer is a "minor." But he planned to kill and went to kill and used
a weapon to kill, and he killed 2 people. Yes, he is a "minor"...but maybe in this case he deserves what he gave.
"Your Honor, the video, taken at the scene, clearly shows Kyle retreating from the angry mob, and only turned WHEN FIRED UPON, and returned fire on his attacker. When a second attacker pointed a firearm at Kyle, only then did he fire IN PROTECTION OF HIS LIFE, and again, only fired to protect himself after being assaulted by a third attacker when he was struck by the attacker's skateboard in his head."
tulipsandroses (2,096 posts)
6. That little shit and his enablers should be put in a vat of hot oil
I was very happy to hear John Heileman call him a domestic terrorist on tv today. No mincing words about a "troubled kid" like other journalists. Call this shit out for what it is. When young men join the Taliban, Isis they are not called "troubled".
Young minority men that join gangs are not called troubled. Lets stop the bullshit!
tulipsandroses (2,096 posts)
41. Trial. Then Vat of oil. Electric Chair. Lethal Injection. Don't care how
I am responding to the topic that was posted. Death Penalty- which I don't object to for this terrorist.
AkFemDem (550 posts)
13. So you are saying young men who join gangs...
And subsequently kill someone should be boiled in a vat of oil?
Seriously, wtf? Since when do democrats embrace torture and disfigurement as a legitimate punishment?
Star Member The Velveteen Ocelot (86,727 posts)
16. Funny how we can talk just like the folks we deplore. Let's not.
Star Member USALiberal (5,753 posts)
12. WTF! NO!!!!How China, Iran and Saudi Arabia of you! nt
Star Member qwlauren35 (4,860 posts)
27. I feel that way about Dylann Roof
I can't remember ever wanting a person to die, slowly and painfully, as I do Dylann Roof.
Life in prison is waaaaaaaaaaaay too good for him.
Chain him to a rock and whip him for an hour every day.
Or just draw and quarter him. That's my favorite idea.
Star Member The Velveteen Ocelot (86,727 posts)
34. Some of the comments on this thread, advocating torture and death
for someone who's entitled to the same Constitutional protections and is subject to the same lawful penalties as any other criminal defendant, are pretty appalling. I thought liberals weren't into punishing people by boiling them in oil or killing them (and in a state where the death penalty isn't even available). Even the guy who tried to blow up an airplane over Detroit is in a federal prison instead of having been tortured and executed. Do we advocate for those extrajudicial, unconstitutional penalties to be imposed only on right-wing terrorists while arguing that foreign terrorists are entitled to the protection of our Constitution - which we have done, and should continue to do? Come on, people. Get a grip. Either you're for the death penalty or you're against it. Either you're for torture or you're against it. Pick a position and explain why it should only apply to this one guy because - why, he's a murderous right-wing MAGAt punk? He is certainly that, but he has the same right to a fair trial as all the other terrorists who are now sitting in prison, alive and not tortured, because our laws won't let us do that. And remember, it was the right-wingers who were all about torture and death for foreign terrorists. We're not like them, are we?
Oh, come on... you are all good little fascists who would cheerfully push your enemies into the gas chambers...
