Rittenhouse take: what kind of a-hole is the business owner?

Honestly. I mean, what kind of irresponsible a-hole gives a 17-year-old a gun, and asks him to defend their business?

I don't know if the kid is in the right or the wrong legally. I don't care to argue that point.

I want to discuss this "friend" who armed a 17-year-old kid and tasked him with protecting his business.


And what about Rittenhouse's parent's? why did they allow their underage son to go do this? Why would they allow him to drive 20-45 minutes or so away to a dangerous situation?

Maybe they didn't know he was going there. THat's a legit possibility and better than if they gave him their blessing to participate in this scenario.

If that is the case, I'm suing the business owner for his irresponsible handling of this. He put the kid in danger. He deserves to face some consequences.

Also, I know theres a debate about whether the kid was legally allowed to have the gun. Someone in the other thread posted that someone under 18 cannot open carry. that could be complicated. Especially for the person who gave him the weapon.

I do want to know if the fact he didn't own a gun license in Wisconsin could come into play.(the fact he was too young to get an open carry in Wisconsin seems like it could complicate his right to have one. But i don't know for sure.)


Anyway...I'm just pissed that this kid was put in this situation in the first place, and I feel that the person or persons who armed him and put him in there should get some blowback.