I don't know what you are talking about, do you?You really can't credibly make that argument while packing the same paragraph with just such armchair judgments
Rifle Confiscated
- Thread starter 7shooter
- Start date
- Status
armenius
US Veteran
Perhaps we have been served only selective video, 98% showing a White well off couple in an elite area using poor gun handling techniques. No real view of the crowd and their behavior. After seeing businesses pillaged and burned, police and citizens attacked and a killing or two I can understand how they felt and even untrained doing the best they could to defend themselves and property.
If I were at home during this current rioting activity and my dog, my wife my home or myself threatened with death or destruction I can assure I would defend myself until relieved by law enforcement, which may or may not show up with the current leadership.
If I were at home during this current rioting activity and my dog, my wife my home or myself threatened with death or destruction I can assure I would defend myself until relieved by law enforcement, which may or may not show up with the current leadership.
I don't know how this thing actually went down, and frankly no one else here does either. It's all just opinions and speculation based on what little info is shown from whichever side is trying to make their point.
I was just going to lurk and read but after reading many lament the impressions that the antis are going to take away from this have me baffled.
They are going to take away the the same impressions no matter WHAT actually happened. That much is fact.
They are winning if we begin to behave and speak so as to please them and not incur their wrath.
So pontificate all you want with what little facts we have but please don't do it based on what an anti gunner may think of it.
I quit caring long ago about that when they proved to me it doesn't really matter what the facts are.
I was just going to lurk and read but after reading many lament the impressions that the antis are going to take away from this have me baffled.
They are going to take away the the same impressions no matter WHAT actually happened. That much is fact.
They are winning if we begin to behave and speak so as to please them and not incur their wrath.
So pontificate all you want with what little facts we have but please don't do it based on what an anti gunner may think of it.
I quit caring long ago about that when they proved to me it doesn't really matter what the facts are.
Last edited:
"poor gun handling techniques" That's what you call that?
And nobody is saying that they, or anybody else, SHOULDN"T defend themselves. On the contrary, what they did is put themselves and everybody else in danger. Standing out in the open, waving guns around with your finger on the trigger, is begging to get shot. If anybody in the crowd decided to challenge them, they would have been the first and probably last to go down.
If that is an example of someone defending themselves....count me out. The reality is they could have easily have hunkered down behind concealment and "defended" themselves and their property.
Well in many cases when people are thrown into a very stressful position they sometimes forget proper safety procedures .Police have , and i am sure they have better training than the average home owner.Panic sets in when a group of people march into an area .See what happens when the a motor cycle group rides into some areas.It is easy to talk the talk until you are in their place Google the protest in Crown Point ,Indiana the home owners are now being accused of intimidating the marchers .The coments by police sums up the rights of both groups
[Senator Josh] Hawley seeks civil rights probe in case of St. Louis couple
U.S. Sen. Josh Hawley on Thursday urged Attorney General William Barr to launch a federal civil rights investigation of St. Louis' elected prosecutor, accusing her of abuse of power in her investigation of a white couple who wielded guns while defending their home during a protest.
Mark and Patricia McCloskey are under Circuit Attorney Kim Gardner's scrutiny for the June 28 confrontation when several hundred protesters marched by their $1.15 million mansion. The couple accused protesters of knocking down an iron gate marked with "No Trespassing" and "Private Street" signs.
Gardner's office was still investigating, but no charges have been filed. Hawley, a Missouri Republican, wrote in a letter to Barr that Gardner abused her power in seizing the couple's guns, investigating them and pursuing a possible indictment. He called her actions "an unacceptable abuse of power and threat to the Second Amendment."
"There is no question under Missouri law that the McCloskeys had the right to own and use their firearms to protect themselves from threatened violence, and that any criminal prosecution for these actions is legally unsound," Hawley wrote. "The only possible motivation for the investigation, then, is a politically motivated attempt to punish this family for exercising their Second Amendment rights."
Hawley seeks civil rights probe in case of St. Louis couple
U.S. Sen. Josh Hawley on Thursday urged Attorney General William Barr to launch a federal civil rights investigation of St. Louis' elected prosecutor, accusing her of abuse of power in her investigation of a white couple who wielded guns while defending their home during a protest.
Mark and Patricia McCloskey are under Circuit Attorney Kim Gardner's scrutiny for the June 28 confrontation when several hundred protesters marched by their $1.15 million mansion. The couple accused protesters of knocking down an iron gate marked with "No Trespassing" and "Private Street" signs.
Gardner's office was still investigating, but no charges have been filed. Hawley, a Missouri Republican, wrote in a letter to Barr that Gardner abused her power in seizing the couple's guns, investigating them and pursuing a possible indictment. He called her actions "an unacceptable abuse of power and threat to the Second Amendment."
"There is no question under Missouri law that the McCloskeys had the right to own and use their firearms to protect themselves from threatened violence, and that any criminal prosecution for these actions is legally unsound," Hawley wrote. "The only possible motivation for the investigation, then, is a politically motivated attempt to punish this family for exercising their Second Amendment rights."
Hawley seeks civil rights probe in case of St. Louis couple
Can't say it much better.
Absalom
SWCA Member, Absent Comrade
The poor Attorney General isn't going to get any real work done, with all the folks who come crying for "civil rights investigations" because they don't like some local action.
Meanwhile, that article is interesting for another reason. I hadn't heard about the open letter signed by 24 households from the neighborhood condemning the McCloskeys in polite terms. You can find the text online, with full names of the undersigned. It fits with what's come out about them. They appear as genuine bad apples, terrorizing their neighbors for many years with lawsuits, threats of lawsuits, and in one case pointing a gun.
So not taking their side goes beyond making fun of their gun handling skills or belittling them as overly frightened. There is a documented pattern of unreasonable over-reacting, up to a previous threat of deadly force. Defending characters like these as a matter of 2nd Amendment principle doesn't do the principle any good.
Meanwhile, that article is interesting for another reason. I hadn't heard about the open letter signed by 24 households from the neighborhood condemning the McCloskeys in polite terms. You can find the text online, with full names of the undersigned. It fits with what's come out about them. They appear as genuine bad apples, terrorizing their neighbors for many years with lawsuits, threats of lawsuits, and in one case pointing a gun.
So not taking their side goes beyond making fun of their gun handling skills or belittling them as overly frightened. There is a documented pattern of unreasonable over-reacting, up to a previous threat of deadly force. Defending characters like these as a matter of 2nd Amendment principle doesn't do the principle any good.
This may be the perfect test case. If you aren't aware of it Floyd had a record long as your arm, so did the guy shot at Wendy's. It doesn't matter because past activities don't count. Even the fact that they are on parol and violating it. The violence is coming from the Left. Now we have people who want to bad mouth the home owners for their past actions. In other words they are not likable by their neighbors. What does that matter in this case?
It shouldn't matter at all. They aren't the best kind of people but they have as much rights as the scum that is protesting. Why wouldn't they sue the city every way but loose. They file Federal and they will win.
It shouldn't matter at all. They aren't the best kind of people but they have as much rights as the scum that is protesting. Why wouldn't they sue the city every way but loose. They file Federal and they will win.
Then may we assume you would agree to the following if applied to...lets say...the mobs now controlling Portland?
Defending characters like these as a matter of 6th Amendment principle doesn't do the principle any good.
Absalom
SWCA Member, Absent Comrade
Huh? Can you disentangle that so I know what you mean?
Since I'm not prosecuting anyone, but criticizing somebody's public behavior, I fail to see the relevance of the 6th Amendment comparison, which deals with the modalities of prosecutions. I also don't get your jump to the Portland anarchists, who have nothing to do with the St. Louis protesters. Why would anyone defend them on the basis of the 6th Amendment?
OK...
Were done here...
Thank you all for your input
Were done here...
Thank you all for your input
- Status
