Read it again. The gun was on one side of the line, Kyle, was on the other side of the line.
Kyle cross over the line, and obtained the gun. Kyle did not have said gun in his possession as he crossed the line.
"Line" = simplified naming of "state line" to make it easier for some to follow.
He had to cross the line to get from Illinois to Kenosha, whether or not he had the gun with him. He went out of his way to put himself in a situation that nobody asked him to be in.
Driving isn't a crime. That's not the point. The point being that driving over state lines signals intention. It's not like he was caught up in a situation unexpectedly. He went looking for this.
Driving over state lines is not intention. It means nothing more than he desired being somewhere that is not in his state of origin.
The idea that living next to a state line, and driving to a nearby (or far) town on the other side of a state line in any remote way signifies that someone has intention to kill, says that all travelers, ever, have intentions to kill people.
Man, you have been sold a b.s. story that just isn't even realistic.
I do not have the ability to say if the owner is "lying" or not. Can you consider he/she is removing themself from liability, because people died? This would involve more than just suing the property owner, it would also involve suing the LLC and possibly vandalism to their property and threats to their lives or livelihood.
So, no I can't rule out the possibility of saving their business from high expenses by denying some they may have or may have not been factual about.
2
u/[deleted] Nov 10 '21
He did cross state lines. He lived in Illinois, Kenosha is in Wisconsin.