1. No shit Sherlock!?! That has been established and STILL puts widdle Kyle and his dopey friend in violation of the laws (no target practice, hunting intended, no legal right to carry in public streets).
2. Either you can't read or you're just a bad liar. The law plainly states that under aged persons cannot possess or carry a weapon unless under the supervision of an adult for the express purpose of target practice or hunting. Having widdle Kyle sitting in a house with the gun as a gift doesn't justify the subsequent actions (no hunting or target practice, roaming the streets at night with a loaded weapon).
3. Yeah, I told YOU about the barrel length BS. Because of that archaic law, the judge kept vital information from the jury. Here's how that "logic" works: an out-of-towner arrives in a city that is having civil unrest/riots. He is driven there by his mother, as he is not of age to have a full driver's license. He goes to friends house, where they both dress up in para-military type clothes and carry some first aid kits. The friend gives the out-of-towner an AR-15 style weapon, of which by law he (under age) is NOT allowed to have or carry in public. He can only use in hunting or target practice SUPERVISED BY THE ADULT THAT GAVE HIM THE WEAPON. They go to the area of civil unrest/riot, enter pass the police line. The out-of-towner goes to areas where there are small businesses (UNINVITED) BRANDISHING THEIR WEAPONS, and becomes embroiled in a confrontation with some of the rioters. Scuffles and a chase ensues, with the out-of-towner shooting his chasers, killing two, wounding one. He goes to present cops and states he just shot some people, but is not detained, disarmed or arrested. He leaves the area, later to turn himself in.
We can rehash this until the cows come home, but YOU CANNOT ELIMINATE ALL THE FACTS TO WHICH THE JUDGES RULING WAS DUBIOUS AT BEST.
The civil trial is going to be REAL interesting.[/QUOTE]
RAAA. You are still chanting mindlessly.