Tortured to death: Myanmar mass killings revealed – BBC News

Comment by tonytran2015: This would not happen if Burmese people had constitutional right to bear arms.

…The Myanmar military carried out a series of mass killings of civilians in July that resulted in the
deaths of at least 40 men, a BBC investigation has found…

Rittenhouse Aquitted! – The Marshall Report
Kyle Rittenhouse was finally set free in a full Aquittal of all charges! A 12 member jury found Kyle Rittenhouse NOT GUILTY on two counts of homicide, one count of attempted homicide, and two counts of recklessly endangering safety during RIOTS that were called “peaceful protests” repeatedly by fake news media and presented that tragic…Continue…

Was Rittenhouse’s Possession of the AR-15 Unlawful? – JONATHAN TURLEY

In covering the motions hearing last week in the trial of Kyle Rittenhouse, I noted a surprising comment from Judge Bruce Schroeder that he had “spent hours” with the Wisconsin gun law and could not state with certainty what it means in this case. The statement could effectively knock out the misdemeanor gun possession count — the one count that could still be in play for the jury after the prosecution’s case on the more serious offense appeared to collapse in court. A close examination of that provision reveals ample reason to question not just its meaning but its application to this case.

The unlawful possession of the gun has been a prominent fact cited not only by the prosecutors but the press.

At trial, however, prosecutor Thomas Binger at points seemed to be learning the governing law from Rittenhouse. For example, he pressed Rittenhouse on why he did not just purchase a handgun rather than an AR-15. Rittenhouse replied he could not possess a hand gun at his age. Binger then asked in apparent disbelief that the law allowed him to have an AR-15 but not a handgun and Rittenhouse said yes. Binger then moved on after seemingly drawing out a point for the defense.

The exchange was all the more baffling because it drew attention to the fact that one of Binger’s alleged “victims” was an adult named Gaige Grosskreutz who also decided to bring a handgun to the protests and pointed his 9mm at the head of Rittenhouse when he was shot in the arm.

However, the most damaging moment came outside of the presence of the jury when the judge drilled down on the law. He told the prosecutors “I have been wrestling with this statute with, I’d hate to count the hours I’ve put into it, I’m still trying to figure out what it says, what’s prohibited. I have a legal education.” He added that he failed to understand how an “ordinary citizen” could understand what is illegal.

It is hard to understand how the count could be given to the jury without a clear understanding of what it means. It is also hard to instruct a jury on an ambiguous statute. Criminal laws are supposed to be interpreted narrowly. It is called the “rule of lenity” and has been around in the English system for centuries. For example, in 1547, the court was faced with a law making it a felony to steal “Horses, Geldings or Mares.” Given the use of plural nouns, the court ruled that it did not apply to stealing just one horse.

The problem with the Wisconsin statute is not a problem of pluralization but definition. It is not clear that the statute actually bars possession by Rittenhouse. Indeed, it may come down to the length of Rittenhouse’s weapon and the prosecutors never bothered to measure it and place it into evidence.

In Wisconsin, minors cannot possess short-barreled rifles under Section 941.28. Putting aside the failure to put evidence into the record to claim such a short length, it does not appear to be the case here. Rittenhouse used a Smith & Wesson MP-15 with an advertised barrel length of 16 inches and the overall length is 36.9 inches. That is not a short barrel.

Then there is the rest of the statute and ultimately the word “and.” Under Section 948.60(2)(a) (“Possession of a dangerous weapon by a person under 18”), “[a]ny person under 18 years of age who possesses or goes armed with a dangerous weapon is guilty of a Class A misdemeanor.” That makes Rittenhouse guilty, right?

Well, you then have to look at the subsection (c), which states that “This section applies only to a person under 18 years of age who possesses or is armed with a rifle or a shotgun if the person is in violation of s. 941.28 or is not in compliance with ss. 29.304 and 29.593.”

Since there is no evidence that Rittenhouse violated Section 941.28, he presumably must be in violation of both sections 29.304 and 29.593.. The defense conceded Rittenhouse was in violation of Section 29.593, which requires certification for weapons. However, he is not in violation of section 29.304, entitled “Restrictions on hunting and use of firearms by persons under 16 years of age.” As the title indicates, the section makes it illegal for persons under 16 to use firearms. Rittenhouse was 17 at the time and the prosecution has not challenged that fact.

If Rittenhouse were convicted on that count, it could face a serious challenge on appeal. Indeed, it is curious is why Schroeder would even submit the count to the jury if it is uncontested that Rittenhouse was 17. If that is the correct interpretation of the statute, there would be no way for a jury to reasonably convict Rittenhouse. It is akin to giving the jury a criminal count based on his use of force as a police officer when there is no evidence that he was a police officer.

The defense also offered legislative history to support the narrower interpretation but the prosecution opposed such reliance on material beyond of the language itself. However, that language is difficult to square with the charge and the evidence in this case.

Rittenhouse is obviously facing other counts. However, on that count, the question comes down to the “and.” To paraphrase Johnnie Cochran from the O.J. Simpson trial, if that clause “doesn’t fit, you must acquit.”

Illinois Supreme Court Rules Tax On Guns & Ammo Unconstitutional
Illinois Supreme Court Rules Tax On Guns & Ammo Unconstitutional By Lorenz Duchamps of Epoch Times, The Illinois Supreme Court ruled on Oct. 21 that two taxes on guns and ammunition in Cook County violate the state’s constitution because they affect law-abiding citizens’ Second Amendment right to acquire firearms for self-defense. TINLEY PARK, IL – […]

‘Everybody has to buy a rifle, damn it!’ Brazilian President Bolsonaro tells his supporters — RT World News

Armed people will never be enslaved, Brazil’s president, Jair
Bolsonaro, who is trailing in polls for the 2022 election, told a crowd
of his supporters in the capital Brasilia, urging everyone to get a
rifle as soon as possible.
Bolsonaro’s ratings have
crumbled amid the Covid-19 pandemic, which has seen Brazil become one of
the world’s worst-affected countries with almost 21 million infections
and more than 578,000 deaths. A recent poll by XP/Ipespe revealed that
only 24% of those surveyed plan to vote for the 66-year-old when he runs
for reelection next year, while his leftist opponent, former president
Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, received the support of some 40%.

rightist president has already threatened to not accept the outcome of
the 2022 election, claiming it could be rigged against him due to the
alleged vulnerabilities of the country’s purely electronic voting
system. He’s now facing an investigation over those statements, which
were never backed by any convincing proof.

Also on
‘Son of a b**ch!‘: Brazilian President Bolsonaro insults top judge amid electoral system dispute (VIDEO)

One group of Brazilians who have been increasingly happy with
Bolsonaro since he took office in 2019 are gun enthusiasts, whom he once
again addressed on Friday.

“Everybody has to buy a rifle, damn it! Armed people will never be enslaved,” the head of state told a crowd of supporters outside his official residence, the Alvorada Palace.

He acknowledged that weapons “cost a lot,” but insisted that those who oppose guns should stop nagging people who want and can afford to buy them.

his campaign for office, Bolsonaro vowed to relax Brazil’s gun laws so
that citizens could protect themselves from the country’s rampant crime
and violence.

And he kept that promise, issuing almost a dozen
decrees that made firearms, including semi-automatic assault rifles,
more easily available to the public. Some of them, however, were
modified by the National Congress.

The president’s latest
initiative in February allowed Brazilian citizens to own up to six guns
and stripped back federal police and army oversight of firearms
ownership. Those with hunting licenses are now free to buy 30 guns,
while sports shooters can have as many as 60.

Also on
Brazilian President Bolsonaro rushed to hospital after 10 days of hiccups, may need surgery

According to data obtained from law enforcement by O Globo
newspaper, the number of firearms in private ownership in the country
has increased from around 700,000 to over 1.2 million since 2018.

“Backdoor Gun Control” – How Biden Banning Russian Ammo Will Make Range Ammo “Hard To Come By”
“Backdoor Gun Control” – How Biden Banning Russian Ammo Will Make Range Ammo “Hard To Come By” The folks at Baltimore-based The Machine Gun Nest (TMGN) explained how the latest Russian-made ammo ban is likely a “backdoor gun control” measure by the Biden administration to make it more difficult for Americans to procure cheap ammo. TMGN published a video Friday describing…

A blast from the past from beings who still live there | Jim Campbell’s

Taliban Orders All Citizens to Surrender Privately Owned Weapons Within a Week. Hear That, America?

Louder with Crowder


August 28, 2021

If you follow the gun debate at all, you’ve heard pro-gun people say when socialists and/or authoritarians take over a country, the first thing they do is restrict a citizen’s right to firearms. Those people, the pro-gun people, are the people we call “on the right side of history:”

Because if you look at the Taliban taking over Afghanistan, the first thing they did was start confiscating the people’s guns. Saying that the people didn’t “need” them anymore. Sound familiar?

Now, Afghans have a week to hand over their firearms. I’m assuming, “or else.” This is from the Taliban spokesman. Yes, the Taliban has a spokesman:

“Announcement of the security organs of the Islamic Emirate: In Kabul, all those who have the means, weapons, ammunition and other government goods are informed to hand over the mentioned objects to the relevant organs of the Islamic Emirate within a week. So that there is no need for the offenders to be prosecuted or dealt with legally if they are discovered.”

These next items are things that have happened in the news. Whether or not you think any combination of them may be related is on you.


‘Proud Boys’ leader sentenced to jail for burning BLM banner in DC and having rifle magazine — RT USA News

Leader of the ‘Proud Boys’ group Enrique Tarrio was sentenced to
a total of 300 days in jail for bringing a loaded rifle magazine into
Washington, DC and setting a Black Lives Matter banner on fire outside a
Tarrio was given 240 days
in prison – 90 of them suspended – and a fine for the unlawful
possession of the magazine, and another 60 days for destroying the
banner. Judge Harold L. Cushenberry Jr. of DC Superior Court handed down
the sentence on Monday.

is expected to report to the same DC jail where the hundreds of people
charged in the January 6 riot at the US Capitol are currently being

“This court must respect the right of any citizen to peacefully assemble, protest, and make his or her views known on issues,” Cushenberry said at the sentencing, according to CNN.

Mr. Tarrio’s conduct in these criminal cases vindicate none of these
democratic values. Instead, Mr. Tarrio’s actions betrayed them.”

Also on
‘Case closed’: Police shooting of Ashli Babbitt during January 6 riots ruled ‘lawful,’ officer will NOT face disciplinary action

Tarrio “clearly, intentionally and proudly crossed the line
from peaceful protest and assembly to dangerous and potentially violent
criminal conduct,” the judge added.

The ‘Proud Boys’ chairman
wasn’t actually in DC on January 6. He was arrested the day prior – at
which point the police found the rifle magazines in his possession – for
the alleged “hate crime” of setting the banner on fire during a demonstration in December, and ordered to leave the city.

Monday’s sentencing hearing the pastor of the church from which Tarrio
took the Black Lives Matter banner said that its burning “sparked feelings of hurt, anger, confusion.”

“I made a grave mistake,” Tarrio told the judge after that testimony, adding that he would “like to profusely apologize” for his actions, describing them as “wrong.”

Also on
SHOOTING erupts as Antifa & Proud Boys clash violently in Portland (VIDEOS)

That was quite a change from his statements back in December,
when he admitted to being responsible for burning the sign. He said he
didn’t do it out of hate but “out of love,” calling BLM “a racist movement that has terrorized the citizens of this country.”

Department of Excuses- Politicians give us the same wrong answers about guns — SlowFacts – Freedom Is Just Another Word…

Some politicians want to confiscate guns from civilians. I might be talking about what happened half a century ago in Cuba. Gun confiscation happened again a decade ago in Venezuela. It happened again last week when the Taliban took control of Afghanistan. The excuses are the same, and the results are more government violence and […]

Department of Excuses- Politicians give us the same wrong answers about guns — SlowFacts