Rifle Confiscated

[ladder13]

So carrying bricks, bats, rocks, Molotov cocktails, etc don't qualify as "brandishing"?

Yeah, plenty of clowns out there indeed.

I know, the "protestors" were just going to do their civic duty.

 

[Absalom]

Could the couple have had guns visible on them to serve as a deterrent to the mob without meeting the definition of brandishing? I read open carry may be banned by municipality in Missouri, but if someone has a Missouri carry permit carry that trumps local restrictions and you can open carry. ...
If they had their guns not visible I suspect it would have gotten very ugly in terms of the mob doing whatever it wanted to do, and at that point perhaps guns would have had to come out and be used.

Since they were on their front porch lawn, I don't think any of this would actually been an issue. They were well within their rights to have the guns, even visible.

The brandishing problem would arise from their pointing the guns at people slowly walking past on the sidewalk and street, none of whom is setting foot on the property or making any moves, aggressive or not, toward the couple or their house.

Especially the wife can be seen in video to actively and quite aggressively verbally engage protestors while pointing her gun at specific people who are not showing any threatening behavior.

And that of course is the main point. The "violent mob" simply never existed.

 

[vt_shooter]

When it comes to mob behavior, it could be that the entire mob is guilty of the behavior of any of them. They were all in there illegally after they got in via breaking and entering. Maybe the argument can be made that it's okay to point a gun at someone who's just broken and entered. They're lawyers - they'll figure it out.

 

[Steve912]

The "violent mob" simply never existed.

Well, they mob tore the homeowner's wrought iron gate off the
hinges, and walked into their yard.

That's kinda violent, to me...and threatens further violence,
as the mob was approaching the house itself.

That's when the homeowners retrieved the weapons.

Seemed like further violence, was quelled...simply.

 

[Onomea]

Hmm. Didn't know that. Got a link?

 

[scoobysnacker]

I watched the video awhile back, and am a little fuzzy on some details. Best of my knowledge, the couple remained on their own property, so I'd THINK any "open carry" restrictions wouldn't apply. I mean, unless you're not allowed to have a firearm at all, you CAN hold one on your property... right?

Now, if the protesters tore down a gate on their property, that definitely is an illegal action and a potential threat, I would think. Fences are in place to keep people out, a mob tearing one down seems like a slam-dunk "I feel threatened" moment.

Now, my question is, did they point the guns at anyone? I know she seemed to sweep the crowd (and hubby too) with the pistol a few times, but did he ever with the rifle? I thought he stood there holding it. His finger appeared to stay away from the trigger, and he never raised it.
Legal question- you can stand in front of your house holding a rifle, can't you? Not sweeping the crowd, but just stand there?

 

[ContinentalOp]

Well, they mob tore the homeowner's wrought iron gate off the
hinges, and walked into their yard.

There seems to be some debate as to whether or not the gate was damaged. There's video showing "protesters" entering through a gate, but the video shows the gate already open, so it's still up in the air exactly how they got the gate open. Here's a link to an article that includes the video: Couple Who Pointed Guns at Protesters Release Statement in Support of Protesters | News Blog I can't say if the article is accurate or not, but if you scroll down to, I believe, the second video, it shows the "protesters" entering the gate.

However, what's not in dispute is that the entire gated community the lawyer couple lived in is considered private property, so, at the very least, the "protesters" were trespassing.

I haven't been following this story, but I did read somewhere that after this incident the couple hired private security for their home. Don't have a source for that info.

 

[jeffrefrig]

Sad times we're in. I don't believe they should've been holding the guns pointed the way they show in the picture, as they are basically asking for trouble. Don't point any gun at anyone unless you are planning on using it, and the person(s) better be threatening you and/or your family's life or otherwise causing some physical harm. This is only what I have been taught all my life and what I personally feel from observing what has been going on for a long time now; especially right now. Just use common sense. Right now is not the time to be a martyr, especially if all the witnesses are the protesters. As we have seen lately, everyone wants to capture the event of someone getting killed rather than helping the person. Yeah, you will be arrested for interfering with an arrest, but the person getting killed will live and the DA will eventually, more likely than not, drop the charges against you. The way the woman is holding that pistol is stupid. Holster it or hold it downward. The man, same thing...sling it over the shoulder or just hold it pointed down. If the SHTFan, it's a split second to pull it up and shoot. I'm sorry, it's just my stupid opinion. Nowdays, it's just best to keep my mouth shut; I tried hard to keep it just that: an opinion. Both sides of America need to pull together. I need a beer!
Be safe everybody! Jeff T., PGH PA

 

[Puller]

This is one of those things that speculation won't help.
Apply the 48 hour rule and see what unfolds.

I agree ^^^ Everything I'm seeing in this thread so far is speculation or coming from media reports (which is just speculation with a leftist slant).

 

[zeke]

Missouri couple who defended home have rifle seized during police search: report | Fox News

Perhaps it helps to view both sides of situations. The video in the link clearly shows the gate to the community, which certainly appears to have been broken through. The property owners are saying they and their dog were being verbally threatened. Then, the "protesters" came back on another day. In most jurisdictions, people have the right to protect themselves, especially if police can't/won't.

 

[Marshwheeling]

All I can say for certain is that woman pointed her gun at the passersby with her finger on the trigger. The short video clip I saw didn't show anything that could reasonably be construed a threat to he life, or of bodily harm.
My first thought was "aggravated assault".

 

[ladder13]

. ............. Then, the "protesters" came back on another day.......

With chocolate chip cookies?

 

[Rpg]

Waving a gun around is a very bad idea folks.

But people keep doing it:

Man arrested who pointed gun at Columbia protesters near State House, police say

 

[Doug M.]

I am not sure why a warrant was sought. If I were a cynic, I would suspect that the local prosecutor has gone after them for political reasons.

BUT: this is also a really good lesson. Maybe don't go outside when there is blatant idiocy going on. Maybe have a HOLSTER and keep the pistol in it. Every rifle or other long gun should have a sling; mine do. A slung rifle or shotgun hanging does not create the same impression - it likely would to the ignorant, but it provides a HUGE image improvement in a situation like that and likely present a complete defense to some stupid "brandishing" charge.

I am not n favor of training mandates, but relying on the training that came in the box is dumb. These two looked like ignorant buffoons to me.

 

[Steve912]

Hmm. Didn't know that. Got a link?

Like any of the articles, covering the event...

 

[JS Esq.]

I'm not admitted in MO, but the general rule in American law is that the response must be proportional to the threat. Would a reasonable person in their situation believe their life was in imminent danger? If not, they could be facing criminal charges, depending on the specifics of state law.

While the protesters were trespassing on a private street, it was clear they were marching directly down the street and sidewalk to the mayor's house, while yelling chants demanding the mayor resign. I would argue that no reasonable person would be in fear for their life in that situation.

 

[Ziggy2525]

I just heard an interesting analysis on the radio (had to be true, right). According to that, MO has a very liberal Castle Doctrine law that allows a homeowner wide lattidude to protect both their home and property with deadly force. The DA didn't arrest the guy and his wife because he didn't break any MO law. Similar to mentioned above, the gun confiscation was to pander to the elected DA's base. For just the gun confiscation, the juice isn't worth the squeeze for the homeowner to sue (where a bad arrest may be).

 

[johngalt]

I'm not admitted in MO, but the general rule in American law is that the response must be proportional to the threat. Would a reasonable person in their situation believe their life was in imminent danger? If not, they could be facing criminal charges, depending on the specifics of state law.

While the protesters were trespassing on a private street, it was clear they were marching directly down the street and sidewalk to the mayor's house, while yelling chants demanding the mayor resign. I would argue that no reasonable person would be in fear for their life in that situation.

My sister lives in a suburb north of Milwaukee. A large 'peaceful' protest marched down the street 2 houses away from them. Fortunately they were ready in case something happened, but they didn't go outside. During this, someone tried to break into a neighbors house. The police found a gun outside.

As I read the story about the McCloskey's, they armed them selves AFTER the mob broke down the gate to the community and trespassed onto private property (breaking and entering?). Should they have stayed inside? In hindsight, probably yes. But they didn't have the luxury of hindsight.

It's pretty easy to call someone unreasonable from the comfort of your armchair.

 

[Absalom]

.... For just the gun confiscation, the juice isn't worth the squeeze for the homeowner to sue (where a bad arrest may be).

They probably will anyways. After reading up on the McCloskeys' decades-long history of making life hell for their neighbors, and suing or threatening to sue everybody and their hamster (it's all public record), this incident appears entirely in character. I think I'd much rather hang out with the protesters. McCloskey has actually admitted in court to previously pointing a gun at a neighbor who stepped on his lawn, which may come back to bite him in this case. What a piece of work.

 

[JS Esq.]

Should they have stayed inside? In hindsight, probably yes. But they didn't have the luxury of hindsight.

It's pretty easy to call someone unreasonable from the comfort of your armchair.

They were actually outside eating initially, then went inside to retrieve their guns, then went back outside to confront the protesters.

It's easy to call people unreasonable when they're throwing a temper tantrum. It's just higher stakes when they're pointing guns at people.