Rifle Confiscated

[robrossk]

On local 5pm news in St Louis, their attorney made a statement and had the handgun in a bag to show media. He said the handgun did not even function and that they were clearly not trained to handle firearms. That said the St Louis DA (Gardner) is pandering big time. She is NOT liked by most of the locals (except maybe the criminals).

 

[Jon651]

On local 5pm news in St Louis, their attorney made a statement and had the handgun in a bag to show media. He said the handgun did not even function and that they were clearly not trained to handle firearms. That said the St Louis DA (Gardner) is pandering big time. She is NOT liked by most of the locals (except maybe the criminals).

Have the excuses "the handgun didn't work" or "I was not trained to handle firearms" ever been used successfully in a criminal defense? I don't even remotely know the St. Louis DA, but if this is the best the McCloskey's attorney can do to defend his clients' actions then perhaps HE should have been charged with criminal ridiculousness...

 

[K Frame Keith]

They say a liberal is a conservative who hasn't been mugged yet. I read they are/were dedicated liberals. Based on experience, I doubt they've been reformed. But I still support their second amendment rights.

 

[K Frame Keith]

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.

Castle doctorine state. End game. Malicious prosecution.

 

[K Frame Keith]

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".

I agree those two were a clown show, but that entire city is a circus right now. Criminals rule. Protestors burn and riot. No consequences for the mob.

 

[J. R. WEEMS]

LOCAL RESTRICTIONS

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. I doubt either of them has a permit based on no apparent firearms handling training, and suspect St. Louis would be a place that banned open carry. Does open carry apply to having a rifle hanging off your shoulder on a sling while pointed at no one or would that be brandishing without a permit? 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.

Could be The idiot in Richmond got a so-called law through giving every little berg in the state the right to over ride state laws pertaining to and about guns. Now every little greasy spot in the roads are passing their own laws. No way to keep up with that, not that I know of. So, leave it home or else, which is what they are after.

 

[meaneyedcatz]

I don't know if this was already related, I could have missed it.
The couple in question here are lawyers who live in a multi million dollar mansion. I don't watch the evening sensationalism show every night since it's pretty obvious you will get a one sided biased story.
And I wouldn't believe the night stalkers with a cause either.
The homeowners sure look stupid with their display but you are getting a one sided biased story.
Keep in mind I'm not siding with them but telling you some info you already know.

 

[meaneyedcatz]

And Kim Gardner the stl da is a useless oxygen waster. Laws don't apply to her or anyone brought to her.

 

[Catwrangler]

There's video on You tube from both the couple with their guns and an interview with the husband by some meat puppet on Fox News. The interview reveals the man to be:
1.- A self-centered, entitled jackleg.
2.- A total idiot.
I'd love to see an interview with the wife as well. I'm sure she's even worse.
As to the firearms confiscation, great. They're incompetent enough in their handling of firearms to be a threat to themselves as well. Twice in the video the the husband's muzzle appears to sweep his wife?
I know if those two showed up at a range, I couldn't load my truck fast enough to vacate the premise. Privileged- yes.
Rich- yes
Smart? Not a lick.

 

[meaneyedcatz]

They live in a neighborhood built I believe early 1900's down the street from the stl mayor.
A neighborhood private enough that google earth has not driven and recorded it.
I have years ago and the houses are beautiful if you take into account the history. But big houses often contain big egos.

 

[G-Mac]

I read on another site that a gun store posted that they are willing to give the couple a free AR-15 to replace the confiscated one. Sorry, I couldn't find the link to it.

 

[JS Esq.]

FWIW, I have a friend who lives in that neighborhood. This couple is widely despised by their neighbors, at least one of whom they've apparently pulled a gun on previously.

Also, he's a big Trump contributor, so may not be accurate to describe him as a "liberal". Browse Individual contributions
| FEC

 

[7tenz]

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.

And out of how many homes in that development, 50? 100? No other reasonable persons out there with ARs yelling get off my lawn.

 

[Doug M.]

^ Not a small point, but also not clearly valid. Most people have NO CLUE what a threat looks like. Once the gate was broken, the risk analysis shifts a LOT. As far as them being lawyers, I doubt that there are 1000 in the whole country who are truly qualified to discuss use of force in detail.

How about ... first step call 911 to report the risk. Keep the line open. While 911 is a poor response to a real threat, it at least documents that you had reason to perceive a risk. Maybe if the line is open and being tape when the excretia hits the fan, there will be a decent record of what happened and why.

 

[DeathGrip]

From what I'm seeing, The gate was private community property. It's debatable if it was broken or just opened, I did see the private property sign on the gate. One thing seems certain, There was no human security at the gate. Houses in communities like that can afford better security. Cheep jerks depending on electronics?

If these "protesters/trespassers" didn't come on his personal property then he amped the situation by trying to look tough in his pink polo. He became a self appointed security guard kinda like our friend Zimmerman.

I wonder if he was the first house after the gate and if the mayors house was even accessible from there.

People aren't thinking. Everyone is running on emotion. This whole thing is just stupid meeting stupid.

Like Zimmerman and so many other similar stories.

 

[carpriver]

The couple lives in a gated community, the rioters did break threw the gate. from what I read the rioters did not go onto the the couples propriety. You need to know what your state law is related to brandishing a firearm.

 

[7tenz]

If I have to enter a gate and they give me a bum code I usually don't have to wait long for a resident or employee to come up behind me to open it.

 

[flagman1776]

It's a private road... and private sidewalks. I'm not sure how the ownership of the private road is technically held. Is the private road held in common, with shared ownership? Or do the abuters own to the road center line, with an easement for members travel? So the mob was guilty of trespass. (A crowd returned a day or two later but did not come beyond the gate. By then the homeowners had hired security on site.) Generally speaking, one can't shoot for simple trespass.

A mob does not need weapons to be a deadly threat but I'd really like to see security footage of the crowd / mob. We only have pictures of the homeowners. I don't think you get to incite a confrontation and then claim you were threatened.
Meanwhile, both these yahoos let their muzzles sweep themselves and others. HE actually had a straight trigger finger, clearly shows in photos. Hers was clearly in the trigger. I think a DA could make a case for assault based on the muzzle direction alone. Had they kept their muzzles pointed in a safe direction and fingers off the triggers, I don't think we'd be having this conversation.

 

[Steve912]

From what I'm seeing, The gate was private community property. It's debatable if it was broken or just opened, I did see the private property sign on the gate.

People aren't thinking. Everyone is running on emotion. This whole thing is just stupid meeting stupid.

Like Zimmerman and so many other similar stories.

The pic of the gate showing the "private property" sign is a
'before' shot, from public area side. The pic showing it with
left panel dangling is after, from the private property side.

Yes, it's a rehash of Zimmerman, all over. Left media
criticizes defensiive use of firearms by citizens, and chunks of
gun community buy into the media characterization/
propaganda, and ignore the reality of what actually happened.

It's what, ten years since Zimmerman, and "gun people" still
hold onto the media misrepresentation that "he was doing
something he shouldn't have" and "he should have just called
the police", "he was stupid" and any of the other
mischaracterizations.

Pretty embarrassing, actually. "Gun people" condemning gun
use by fellow citizens.

One guy in this thread didn't even know about the gate or
private property aspect of this event, which means he'd not
taken time or effort to read even a single account.

Have we become that lazy?

 

[ladder13]

So a couple hundred people come prancing through your street, carrying whatever and chanting whatever, and you just go back in the kitchen and eat cookies?
Maybe you'll go out and greet them with a right fist in the air?

"Respect us or expect us." Sounds thuggish to me.