Optics: THIS St Louis couple from the gated community

[bignflnut]

They're Back!

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/hun ... me-stlouis" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

After a couple gained notoriety last week for taking up arms to defend their home in St Louis from protesters who broke into the private property, hundreds returned to the scene this past weekend, vowing that the couple shouldn’t be allowed to live in peace.

SNIP

The report notes that protesters lingered close to the McCloskeys’ house for around 15 minutes, without this time trespassing through the barriers to the private street.

The couple appear to have hired security personnel, as around a dozen ‘men in plain clothes’ were seen surrounding the property.

The footage shows the protesters chanting “If we don’t get no justice, then they don’t get no peace.”

Lawyer for McCloskey family speaks out — ‘We expect them to be arrested by corrupt Kim Gardner’…

[steves 50de]

Can we please NOT do this?!

A Karen with her left hand on her hip? (and probably terrible trigger discipline)

A pink polo wearing "dude" who doesn't understand how to shoulder a long gun?

Both barefoot?! with all of 40 rounds ready to be misapplied?

Give me back the good ol boys in beards and jeans, or leather with shotguns and knives.

If guns are going to be vilified, can we please have people looking like they might have a clue what to do with them?

Sorry,... Don't agree with your observation they did what was required at the time. Some training is needed but they had the stones to stand out there and face the terrorists.

[AlanM]

Peaceful demonstration?

Why did this gate:



end up looking like this?

[Bruenor]

Peaceful demonstration?

Why did this gate:

end up looking like this?

traumatic instantaneous disassembly, caused by spontaneous rapid oxidation.

[kcclark]

5 On Your Side has learned St. Louis police officers executed a search warrant Friday evening at the home of Mark and Patricia McCloskey, the Central West end couple who confronted protesters with weapons in June.

Sources tell 5 On Your Side that police seized one of the weapons, the rifle, from the couple and they told police their attorney has the pistol seen in photos.

https://www.ksdk.com/article/news/local ... 87fba31f1c

These folks have enough $ to hire private security to make up for the government removing their ability to protect themselves. Most of us don't have that kind of $ and would be left defenseless.

[Javelin Man]

Most of us have extra rifles to use after the first is taken. I wonder if the warrant would've taken all his guns? It sounds like it was just the ones used in the "assault".

[M-Quigley]

Here's an aspect of the law there that I was not aware of.

https://www.ksdk.com/article/news/local ... aa1ef69ba4" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Anders Walker, a professor of constitutional and criminal law at Saint Louis University, said there are two prongs to his reasoning: Missouri’s Castle Doctrine and the uniquely private street where the encounter occurred.

“A lot of people are not familiar with Missouri's Castle Doctrine, which we have extended to real property,” Walker said.

That means people are allowed to use force to defend not only their home but also their land.

And in this case, the gated, private Portland Place, where homeowners Mark and Patricia McCloskey live, counts as their land, Walker said.

Walker said the neighbors collectively own the street, so the McCloskeys had the right to defend it. The protesters didn’t have the right to be there.

“Constitutional law generally holds that you have the right to protest on a sidewalk. It’s called a public forum. But if it’s a private street, it’s not a public forum,” he said.

Walker said in this case, it appears it’s the protesters who broke the law.

“The protesters themselves are trespassing,” he said.

St. Louis Circuit Attorney Kim Gardner doesn’t appear to agree with his reasoning. She released a video statement Monday saying she was disturbed by what happened and she would use Missouri law to “hold individuals accountable.”

"We must protect the rights to peacefully protest, and any attempts to chill it through intimidation or use of force will not be tolerated,” Gardner said.

Unfortunitely the bottom line is it really doesn't matter who is right and who is wrong, the legal system will go after the couple simply for political reasons, and it will cost them money. (unless the lawyers can sue the government for some of the cost as was done in the Zimmerman case in Florida)

[JustaShooter]

Unfortunitely the bottom line is it really doesn't matter who is right and who is wrong, the legal system will go after the couple simply for political reasons, and it will cost them money. (unless the lawyers can sue the government for some of the cost as was done in the Zimmerman case in Florida)

They are getting what they voted for. I really don't have a lot of sympathy for them.

[JustaShooter]

I was not aware of this aspect of the situation - although I wonder if there is any legal backing for his opinion that they collectively own the street.

https://www.ksdk.com/article/news/local ... aa1ef69ba4" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Walker said the neighbors collectively own the street, so the McCloskeys had the right to defend it.

[ArmedAviator]

They are getting what they voted for. I really don't have a lot of sympathy for them.

Did they vote for them, though? I didn't vote for DeWeenie, yet I'm subject to his terrible, likely illegal Emergency Orders.

[kcclark]

Apparently the wife's pistol does not work.

Joel Schwartz, the couple’s lawyer, said a search warrant was served Friday evening and that the gun Mark McCloskey was holding in the video was seized. Schwartz told The Associated Press that arrangements have been made to turn over to authorities on Saturday the gun that Patricia McCloskey had been holding, adding that her gun was inoperable at the time of the protest and still is.

https://whnt.com/news/police-execute-se ... ng-couple/

[M-Quigley]

They are getting what they voted for. I really don't have a lot of sympathy for them.

Did they vote for them, though? I didn't vote for DeWeenie, yet I'm subject to his terrible, likely illegal Emergency Orders.

^^^^^^^^^^ this.

[Mr. Glock]

Unfortunitely the bottom line is it really doesn't matter who is right and who is wrong, the legal system will go after the couple simply for political reasons, and it will cost them money. (unless the lawyers can sue the government for some of the cost as was done in the Zimmerman case in Florida)

They are getting what they voted for. I really don't have a lot of sympathy for them.

Let’s review this statement when President Biden takes office, and calls up ole Beto, shall we?

[JustaShooter]

Unfortunitely the bottom line is it really doesn't matter who is right and who is wrong, the legal system will go after the couple simply for political reasons, and it will cost them money. (unless the lawyers can sue the government for some of the cost as was done in the Zimmerman case in Florida)

They are getting what they voted for. I really don't have a lot of sympathy for them.

Let’s review this statement when President Biden takes office, and calls up ole Beto, shall we?

Not sure what you are getting at. The couple are registered Democrats who were publicly in support of BLM. They undoubtedly voted for the leftist administration that is allowing the protesters and rioters to run free, and who decided to investigate them and seize their weapons. Since there is no way on this planet I'd vote for Biden, I'm unclear on how you are trying to draw a parallel.

[Mr. Glock]

I’m going a bit more broadly. We don’t all vote for the government we get, and the legal system is far from justice for all.

But, that said, so if they are BLM-supporting Uber-Democrats, their rights under the Second Amendment don’t exist? They should, without cause (private street, death threats), have their guns seized by search warrant? What better lesson that the 2A is for everyone. Messy, yes, but a true display.