Now I've seen everything: St Louis couple comes out of their house and points guns at protesters marching in front of their street

[okeydokey]

Have you guys seen what is going on in Portand?(hint: don't listen to the mayor). what is going on still in seattle again? the looting in big citys? and the shootings in new York and Chicago and who knows where else? Just watch what can happen when "peaceful" protests get out of hand. I have no idea if this protest would get out of hand, but the judges husband that answered the door the other day for the fed ex man, didn't either. and we know what happened there. Be prepared. Buy ammo. And don't be a sitting duck.

Protests in Portland are "getting out of hand" because of the secret police instigating violence and throwing people in unmarked vans and driving them away with no charges. There is no need for black op unidentified federal forces to be involved in local matters.

 

[okeydokey]

I think littlejimmy is making the point that it seems like a lot of bad things are happening lately, and it affected the homeowners judgement of the situation.

If you are a gun owner you have a responsibility to have clear judgement.

 

[3 MEN AND A BOAT]

If you are a gun owner you have a responsibility to have clear judgement.

I agree.
It would also be dishonest to pretend current events haven’t affected people’s judgement.

 

[3 MEN AND A BOAT]

Be prepared. Buy ammo. And don't be a sitting duck.

I completely agree.

 

[cabanafrau]

Basically if you want to exercise your right to free speech and right to assemble the effects of recent events on your judgment should compel you to do so while lawfully bearing arms so that you are not a sitting duck in case those who wish to take away your right to protest decide to threaten you by brandishing guns and verbally threatening to shoot you if you do not cease your free speech and your right to assemble.

An eye for an eye, and soon everyone is blind -- or worse.

 

[Starport Seven-Five]

I agree.
It would also be dishonest to pretend current events haven’t affected people’s judgement.

"Current events" that happened nowhere near where they lived. Maybe they should reconsider their consumption of news if it's clouding their judgement to the point that they're pointing guns at random groups of people walking down the street?

 

[bcla]

Basically if you want to exercise your right to free speech and right to assemble the effects of recent events on your judgment should compel you to do so while lawfully bearing arms so that you are not a sitting duck in case those who wish to take away your right to protest decide to threaten you by brandishing guns and verbally threatening to shoot you if you do not cease your free speech and your right to assemble.

An eye for an eye, and soon everyone is blind -- or worse.

There were people out there in the crowd who had firearms. Likely loaded. And not one of them drew them.

At least cooler head prevailed. Fortunately the crowd saw the McCloskeys as the poseurs who they were. I'm not opposed to anyone having a firearm for self-defense purposes. However, it's an extreme responsibility to wield one (loaded, operable, or not). Mark McCloskey was somewhat careless with his rifle. I originally thought that maybe he might not be held as culpable since he wasn't just randomly pointing his rifle, although there were a few times where he did sweep it towards the crowd. Patricia McCloskey had absolutely no business having a gun in her hand, and her husband even admitted that she knew nothing about how to handle it. There's all the video of people who are imploring them to put the guns down, one saying that there are children in the crowd that she's pointing her gun at, and that the crowd isn't there to protest them.

 

[donaldbuzz&minnie]

https://news.yahoo.com/trump-says-plans-send-law-153804641.html
Reuters reported this morning that Trump plans to send the same kind of troops he's using in Portland to other Democratic-led cities around the country.
Absolutely terrifying.

"It can't happen here."

Yeah, it can.

 

[cabanafrau]

There were people out there in the crowd who had firearms. Likely loaded. And not one of them drew them.

At least cooler head prevailed. Fortunately the crowd saw the McCloskeys as the poseurs who they were. I'm not opposed to anyone having a firearm for self-defense purposes. However, it's an extreme responsibility to wield one (loaded, operable, or not). Mark McCloskey was somewhat careless with his rifle. I originally thought that maybe he might not be held as culpable since he wasn't just randomly pointing his rifle, although there were a few times where he did sweep it towards the crowd. Patricia McCloskey had absolutely no business having a gun in her hand, and her husband even admitted that she knew nothing about how to handle it. There's all the video of people who are imploring them to put the guns down, one saying that there are children in the crowd that she's pointing her gun at, and that the crowd isn't there to protest them.

I'm not opposed to anyone exercising their rights, I happen to believe they are invaluable. I'm just pointing out what happens when you have those who seek to deny others free speech under cover of a grotesque misapplication of Constitutional protections and it is rebuffed with force.

 

[3 MEN AND A BOAT]

"Current events" that happened nowhere near where they lived. Maybe they should reconsider their consumption of news if it's clouding their judgement to the point that they're pointing guns at random groups of people walking down the street?

So you’re saying No protests in St Louis turned violent?
I’m not defending them, but it would be disingenuous to think that the current state of things hasn’t affected peoples judgement.

 

[bcla]

I'm not opposed to anyone exercising their rights, I happen to believe they are invaluable. I'm just pointing out what happens when you have those who seek to deny others free speech under cover of a grotesque misapplication of Constitutional protections and it is rebuffed with force.

I know where you're coming at. I know there can be knee jerk responses to people with guns. But there were people on both sides of this incident who had guns, but only one side side drew them. That's important as a legal matter.

 

[Belle & Ariel]

I haven't read all the pages but I have read some who wondered why they panicked when the protesters came by their house.
There had been threats of taking the protests which at that time included looting and burning to the suburbs.
A group shows up and is coming their way. The mayor's house is in the opposite direction. If you were planning to protest at Splash Mountain, you would not enter MK and head toward the People mover. This is what the people did so I understand the couple panicking. The mayor and DA and leadership of St. Louis have told the police to stand down and the history in STL has lots of looting, rioting, and destruction by angry mobs. All while police are told to stand down. Living in St. Louis you know how fast things go crazy. I'm not condoning how they reacted, but I can understand the fear knowing what has happened in the last ten years there. Poor leadership has made my hometown on the top of different crime lists.

 

[sam_gordon]

I haven't read all the pages but I have read some who wondered why they panicked when the protesters came by their house.
There had been threats of taking the protests which at that time included looting and burning to the suburbs.
A group shows up and is coming their way. The mayor's house is in the opposite direction. If you were planning to protest at Splash Mountain, you would not enter MK and head toward the People mover. This is what the people did so I understand the couple panicking. The mayor and DA and leadership of St. Louis have told the police to stand down and the history in STL has lots of looting, rioting, and destruction by angry mobs. All while police are told to stand down. Living in St. Louis you know how fast things go crazy. I'm not condoning how they reacted, but I can understand the fear knowing what has happened in the last ten years there. Poor leadership has made my hometown on the top of different crime lists.

I understand being concerned.
I understand wanting to protect your property.
I DON'T understand what justification you (general) have for aiming a loaded weapon at a crowd that 50-100 feet away and not approaching you. Funny, no one who has defended this couple can answer that.

 

[bcla]

I haven't read all the pages but I have read some who wondered why they panicked when the protesters came by their house.
There had been threats of taking the protests which at that time included looting and burning to the suburbs.
A group shows up and is coming their way. The mayor's house is in the opposite direction. If you were planning to protest at Splash Mountain, you would not enter MK and head toward the People mover. This is what the people did so I understand the couple panicking. The mayor and DA and leadership of St. Louis have told the police to stand down and the history in STL has lots of looting, rioting, and destruction by angry mobs. All while police are told to stand down. Living in St. Louis you know how fast things go crazy. I'm not condoning how they reacted, but I can understand the fear knowing what has happened in the last ten years there. Poor leadership has made my hometown on the top of different crime lists.

Again, guns aren't illegal. But care has to be taken. Unless there's an imminent danger to person or property (i.e. someone intent on breaking into a house) the guns generally have to stay away from being pointed at anyone. They have been well within their legal right to just stand there with their guns pointed down.

But Patricia McCloskey was clearly agitated and pointing her gun at people who angered (but weren't threatening) her.

 

[cabanafrau]

I know where you're coming at. I know there can be knee jerk responses to people with guns. But there were people on both sides of this incident who had guns, but only one side side drew them. That's important as a legal matter.

If you have read my previous comments you will know I am not unaware of that.

 

[3 MEN AND A BOAT]

I understand being concerned.
I understand wanting to protect your property.
I DON'T understand what justification you (general) have for aiming a loaded weapon at a crowd that 50-100 feet away and not approaching you. Funny, no one who has defended this couple can answer that.

Simply put, to let them know that if they are intent on destruction that it will be dealt with. 50-100 feet away from a mob, protest, whatever is not that far. That distance could be cleared in less than a minute and then what? Your face to face with the same mob but now within closer distance.

 

[bcla]

Simply put, to let them know that if they are intent on destruction that it will be dealt with. 50-100 feet away from a mob, protest, whatever is not that far. That distance could be cleared in less than a minute and then what? Your face to face with the same mob but now within closer distance.

Let's say someone is on their own property and worried that some loud crowd may intend on doing harm.

Point the gun down and let the people on the street know that you have it - legal. It may look stupid but it's not necessarily illegal.

Point the gun at people on the street and then know you have it. Not legal unless there's an imminent danger of physical harm.

Do you see the difference? A gun can't be draw prophylactically on the premise that maybe someone in a crowd will do something against you.

 

[a1tinkfans]

I haven't read all the pages but I have read some who wondered why they panicked when the protesters came by their house.
There had been threats of taking the protests which at that time included looting and burning to the suburbs.
A group shows up and is coming their way. The mayor's house is in the opposite direction. If you were planning to protest at Splash Mountain, you would not enter MK and head toward the People mover. This is what the people did so I understand the couple panicking. The mayor and DA and leadership of St. Louis have told the police to stand down and the history in STL has lots of looting, rioting, and destruction by angry mobs. All while police are told to stand down. Living in St. Louis you know how fast things go crazy. I'm not condoning how they reacted, but I can understand the fear knowing what has happened in the last ten years there. Poor leadership has made my hometown on the top of different crime lists.

Sadly you are Exactly correct.

 

[okeydokey]

https://news.yahoo.com/trump-says-plans-send-law-153804641.html
Reuters reported this morning that Trump plans to send the same kind of troops he's using in Portland to other Democratic-led cities around the country.
Absolutely terrifying.

"It can't happen here."

Yeah, it can.

If the secret police abducting people on the streets in the US doesn't cross some kind of line for you, then you have no line.

 

[okeydokey]

Again, guns aren't illegal. But care has to be taken. Unless there's an imminent danger to person or property (i.e. someone intent on breaking into a house) the guns generally have to stay away from being pointed at anyone. They have been well within their legal right to just stand there with their guns pointed down.

But Patricia McCloskey was clearly agitated and pointing her gun at people who angered (but weren't threatening) her.

If she had actually killed someone, she would likely be facing a murder charge.