Trump defends armed St Louis couple | |
GonadTheBallbarian User ID: 76882965 United States 07/15/2020 10:03 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Just remember, only police officers can legally use ignorance of the law as an excuse. They will put you in a cage for it, even if you are righteously defending your property while ignorant. I'd rather be real and rejected than fake and accepted. Individualism is the logical conclusion of rational political/social opinions. Leftism is the absence of any. |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 78628485 Poland 07/15/2020 10:04 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | The problem with what they did was pointing the firearms at the protesters.. Quoting: ^TrInItY^ Every responsible firearm owner knows you CANNOT point your weapon at someone as a form of intimidation. Had they stood there with their weapons slung or holstered and not pointed at the protesters the DA would have nothing on them. You don't ever point a firearm at anyone unless you plan to shoot them. |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 73141749 United States 07/15/2020 10:05 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Aftermath: So, a mob broke down an iron gate, beat you to within an inch of your life, killed your wife and your dog, then burned your house to the ground? That’s correct. Don’t you own a gun? Yes, I do. Why didn’t you stop them? I didn’t want to get in trouble for BRANDISHING. |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 78628485 Poland 07/15/2020 10:06 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | The problem with what they did was pointing the firearms at the protesters.. Quoting: ^TrInItY^ Every responsible firearm owner knows you CANNOT point your weapon at someone as a form of intimidation. Had they stood there with their weapons slung or holstered and not pointed at the protesters the DA would have nothing on them. wouldn't they just need to provide evidence that the protesters had bad intentions? I don't see any difference between this or ol'lady shooting her 44 magnum at a burglar is her house. The protesters never crossed their property line as far as I know.. They were just walking by making bunch of noise.. Honestly the only time it would have been appropriate to point a gun at them is if they feared for their lives and then you better fucking shoot them. Pointing a gun at someone is a big fucking deal and you better not do it unless you intend to pull the trigger. Probably not popular with the tards around here but this was what I was taught growing up. |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 78913612 United States 07/15/2020 10:06 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | The problem with what they did was pointing the firearms at the protesters.. Quoting: ^TrInItY^ Every responsible firearm owner knows you CANNOT point your weapon at someone as a form of intimidation. Had they stood there with their weapons slung or holstered and not pointed at the protesters the DA would have nothing on them. From the Legal Dictionary Breaking and Entering n. 1) the criminal act of entering a residence or other enclosed property through the slightest amount of force (even pushing open a door), without authorization. The "protesters" broke down the gate to get into the property, they were actually fully within their rights to mow the mob down, let alone point their weapons at them. |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 78101210 United States 07/15/2020 10:06 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | The problem with what they did was pointing the firearms at the protesters.. Quoting: ^TrInItY^ Every responsible firearm owner knows you CANNOT point your weapon at someone as a form of intimidation. Had they stood there with their weapons slung or holstered and not pointed at the protesters the DA would have nothing on them. Really? He's wrong. As usual. On private property under threat it's absolute legal. He's always wrong. |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 78101210 United States 07/15/2020 10:07 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | ... Quoting: Xeven It was their own street. Private property behind a private gate. The street was owned by the house owners. Not a public street. Call it a driveway if you like. No, the street is owned and maintained by the community / HOA. Those people do NOT own the street. If they pay HOA fees...they have partial private ownership. Regardless, you don’t have to be on private property to protect yourself from a violent mob when they are threatening you. If this happened out in the public park, they don’t have the right to protect themselves? Meanwhile, CHOP idjets we’re running around the public street with guns and intimidating anyone who came within 2ft of their borders lol no they don't you guys are totally wrong and I hope none of you own firearms Says the 3.50 shill |
Catalyst4Thought User ID: 79145243 United States 07/15/2020 10:07 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | ... Quoting: PureSnow CASTLE DOCTRINE - you ABSOLUTELY can use deadly force in Missouri when invaders are on your property. They were not on their property. They were on the street in front of their house. The entire neighborhood was gated, and posted as private property. [link to bloximages.newyork1.vip.townnews.com (secure)] Exactly. The protestors were not on a public street. They were on private property. It would be akin to violent trespassers threatening to kill residents on the driveway of their home's property / front lawn. No matter the outcome, legally it will be viewed as such. In Missouri, my understanding is that a person's home (castle law) extends to their front lawn. The way it was told to me by the sheriff is that there ARE cases where castle doctrine can extend outside the four walls of your home but to be safe you have to let them cross the threshold of your house. That's where stand your ground comes in, you have the right to self defense wherever you are, moreso on your own property. I believe if it's fenced off private property and they violate the no trespassing sign castle doctrine applies but I'm not 100% on that. This nonsense arguing that it was assault with a deadly weapon is exactly that, nonsense. The protestors had a history of violence, destroyed property to gain entrance, then threatened the homeowners. It's not even up for debate. "the purpose of war is not to die for your country but to make the other guy die for his." - Patton "What happens if the parachute doesn't open?" "Bring it back and we will give you one that works." "Dark humor is like food, not everybody gets it." |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 78810739 United States 07/15/2020 10:07 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | The problem with what they did was pointing the firearms at the protesters.. Quoting: ^TrInItY^ Every responsible firearm owner knows you CANNOT point your weapon at someone as a form of intimidation. Had they stood there with their weapons slung or holstered and not pointed at the protesters the DA would have nothing on them. it was posted and fenced private property protesters also had weapons and were issuing verbal threats this is lawfare of the roberta kaplan type so you call the police and you sit in your house if they they try to get into your house or shoot at your house you kill them end of story or they kill you and the story ends on the ultimate sour note |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 77391584 United States 07/15/2020 10:08 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | ... Quoting: PureSnow Incorrect. They damaged property on the couple's private property. Not sure how to embed images.. [link to bloximages.newyork1.vip.townnews.com (secure)] Vandalism doesn't give you the right to pull a gun on someone. I'm just saying guys, it was a fuckup on their part. No question about it. Respectfully, it actually does, especially when there's overwhelming force and death threats - that's called the castle doctrine. I'm not trying to start sh*t here, I just want to make sure the law and the episode are understood. You're wrong. Castle doctrine doesn't apply to your yard and certainly doesn't apply to an HOA owned street in front of your home. Had they tried to enter the home those people would have been perfectly legal to kill them. On the news they said it applied to your property. |
Xuki User ID: 72417015 United States 07/15/2020 10:08 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | The problem with what they did was pointing the firearms at the protesters.. Quoting: ^TrInItY^ Every responsible firearm owner knows you CANNOT point your weapon at someone as a form of intimidation. Had they stood there with their weapons slung or holstered and not pointed at the protesters the DA would have nothing on them. Bullshit! Show me the law that I cannot point a fire arm at assholes invading my property, threatening to burn down my home and kill me. Get the fuck outa here! I also like to stand around with my hands in my pockets whistling as the mobs surrounds me as well. "If you gotta eat a turd eat it fast." |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 78628485 Poland 07/15/2020 10:09 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | ... Quoting: PureSnow That's not the law: "1. A person may, subject to the limitations of subsection 2, use physical force upon another person when and to the extent that he or she reasonably believes it necessary to prevent what he or she reasonably believes to be the commission or attempted commission by such person of stealing, property damage or tampering in any degree." Maybe in Texas, after dark... But that's about the only place.. What state were they in? Wow you are quite stupid I promise neither will be convicted any da can bring a case and on top of that I predict a large payout for trampling their basic rights only way to tell for sure is wait and see No, I'm far from stupid and am highly educated on firearm laws both federal and state. Why? Because I legally carry a concealed weapon 24/7 and have for more than 12 years. That being said, I can promise you I would NOT have done what they did. Why? Because it's fucking illegal. |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 76720150 United States 07/15/2020 10:10 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | The problem with what they did was pointing the firearms at the protesters.. Quoting: ^TrInItY^ Every responsible firearm owner knows you CANNOT point your weapon at someone as a form of intimidation. Had they stood there with their weapons slung or holstered and not pointed at the protesters the DA would have nothing on them. It depends on if the protesters stepped on their property If they stepped even a foot on the property then the owners had a legal right to point the guns at them |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 64009323 Canada 07/15/2020 10:10 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 79132049 United States 07/15/2020 10:10 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | The problem with what they did was pointing the firearms at the protesters.. Quoting: ^TrInItY^ Every responsible firearm owner knows you CANNOT point your weapon at someone as a form of intimidation. Had they stood there with their weapons slung or holstered and not pointed at the protesters the DA would have nothing on them. Bullshit |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 78061422 United States 07/15/2020 10:11 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | The prosecutor or DA..in St Louis is a far left wing black idiot who has repeatedly shown her tendency's to be soft on black crime and hard on conservatives. The states AG is livid about her processing the couple rather than the mob who torn down a gate to enter the property's. PROVING AGAIN NOT ONE DEMORAT SHOULD REMAIN IN OFFICE AFTER ELECTIONS.. |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 77391584 United States 07/15/2020 10:11 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | In Florida you cannot use deadly force unless you fear for your life or you're attempting to stop a forceable felony in progress. Quoting: ^TrInItY^ Each state is different but mostly it goes like that everywhere. Michael White murdered Sean Schellenger and used the. "I feared for my life", even though Sean was stabbed in the back. Sean had turned aroung as had White, then White turned and stabbed him, out right murder, but got 0 time in jail because (well because Bronx jury). |
GonadTheBallbarian User ID: 76882965 United States 07/15/2020 10:11 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Aftermath: Quoting: Anonymous Coward 73141749 So, a mob broke down an iron gate, beat you to within an inch of your life, killed your wife and your dog, then burned your house to the ground? That’s correct. Don’t you own a gun? Yes, I do. Why didn’t you stop them? I didn’t want to get in trouble for BRANDISHING. At the end of the day, that is the decision we are faced with: - listen to words written on paper by people who dont care about us - defend your life and property regardless of the law But you can't imagine law into existence, or interpret it a way that's counter to its actual wording. It is what it is. Do what you have to do, and make sure you are willing to deal with the consequences when the law doesn't adequately cover your ass. I'd rather be real and rejected than fake and accepted. Individualism is the logical conclusion of rational political/social opinions. Leftism is the absence of any. |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 78628485 Poland 07/15/2020 10:11 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | The problem with what they did was pointing the firearms at the protesters.. Quoting: ^TrInItY^ Every responsible firearm owner knows you CANNOT point your weapon at someone as a form of intimidation. Had they stood there with their weapons slung or holstered and not pointed at the protesters the DA would have nothing on them. It depends on if the protesters stepped on their property If they stepped even a foot on the property then the owners had a legal right to point the guns at them Yeah they have that right. The State also has the right to confiscate their firearms afterward during the investigation. What part of the legal process do you not understand? |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 78617574 United States 07/15/2020 10:14 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | it was two people on their own property against a crowd that appeared unruly to them. they were fearful for their lives. they did not even have, as a practical matter, enough arms or ammo to defend themselves from that crowd on their person, should that crowd have decided to, I don't know, dismember them. |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 78913612 United States 07/15/2020 10:14 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | The problem with what they did was pointing the firearms at the protesters.. Quoting: ^TrInItY^ Every responsible firearm owner knows you CANNOT point your weapon at someone as a form of intimidation. Had they stood there with their weapons slung or holstered and not pointed at the protesters the DA would have nothing on them. wouldn't they just need to provide evidence that the protesters had bad intentions? I don't see any difference between this or ol'lady shooting her 44 magnum at a burglar is her house. The protesters never crossed their property line as far as I know.. They were just walking by making bunch of noise.. Honestly the only time it would have been appropriate to point a gun at them is if they feared for their lives and then you better fucking shoot them. Pointing a gun at someone is a big fucking deal and you better not do it unless you intend to pull the trigger. Probably not popular with the tards around here but this was what I was taught growing up. We're not all fucking tards, and yeah, it's the way most of us with street wise parents, or just came up on the streets, were taught. However, we live in very different times now, things have changed in major ways and normal people who would never even pull a weapon are being forced to defend themselves, their families, their businesses and their homes. There was a mob not a half mile from my home in the burbs, damn straight I was fully prepared and would've been sitting right out on my porch 12G in hand. Luckily it didn't come to that, but if it did I'm not going to sit in my home and wait for them to destroy my property and throw molotovs in my fucking window. The rules of engagement have changed |
Busterhymen User ID: 78940028 United States 07/15/2020 10:17 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | The problem with what they did was pointing the firearms at the protesters.. Quoting: ^TrInItY^ Every responsible firearm owner knows you CANNOT point your weapon at someone as a form of intimidation. Had they stood there with their weapons slung or holstered and not pointed at the protesters the DA would have nothing on them. .............and what the narrative doesn't show is that there were at least two protesters that displayed their weapons. Also, in the days before this incident, there were protests right outside this community. I agree that the couple didn't not have good firearms etiquette, but considering that Burn-Loot-Murder had now invaded their neighborhood, you can understand where they were coming from. FCK the WEF! Keep your hands off my country! |
Ignatius J User ID: 79117186 United States 07/15/2020 10:19 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | The homeowners were wrong in this case. Their first obligation is their duty to retreat which they did not do. They did the exact opposite. The "private" property you are all discussing is not theirs. Do a little research on these folks. They are charlatans and you all are now falling for their shtick. And to the rest of you here: Your irrational fear of black and brown folks does not give you the right to intimidate them with firearms. Your lives aren't in danger every time someone of a different race crosses your path. The saddest part is that you are so scared that you automatically "fear for your life". This is also the reason that police shoot unarmed people of color at a inordinate rate. "I am at the moment writing a lengthy indictment against our century. When my brain begins to reel from my literary labors, I make an occasional cheese dip." |
TexasDon User ID: 50962024 United States 07/15/2020 10:21 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | The homeowners were wrong in this case. Their first obligation is their duty to retreat which they did not do. They did the exact opposite. The "private" property you are all discussing is not theirs. Quoting: Ignatius J Do a little research on these folks. They are charlatans and you all are now falling for their shtick. And to the rest of you here: Your irrational fear of black and brown folks does not give you the right to intimidate them with firearms. Your lives aren't in danger every time someone of a different race crosses your path. The saddest part is that you are so scared that you automatically "fear for your life". This is also the reason that police shoot unarmed people of color at a inordinate rate. It is not their obligation to retreat. |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 78913612 United States 07/15/2020 10:22 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | The homeowners were wrong in this case. Their first obligation is their duty to retreat which they did not do. They did the exact opposite. The "private" property you are all discussing is not theirs. Quoting: Ignatius J Do a little research on these folks. They are charlatans and you all are now falling for their shtick. And to the rest of you here: Your irrational fear of black and brown folks does not give you the right to intimidate them with firearms. Your lives aren't in danger every time someone of a different race crosses your path. The saddest part is that you are so scared that you automatically "fear for your life". This is also the reason that police shoot unarmed people of color at a inordinate rate. Do your own fucking research dumbass, more whites, both armed and unarmed are shot every year by cops than blacks are. You're not only full of shit, you're an anti-American piece of shit, fuck off douchecanoe. |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 73141749 United States 07/15/2020 10:22 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Homeowners come out, armed, and point their guns at the mob threatening to murder them. The Mob’s reaction: Scream more threats to murder the homeowners then run to the police claiming the homeowner threatened them by pointing a gun at them. The homeowners pointed guns at us!!!! That’s threatening! ARREST THEM!!!! Ahem, didn’t you break down a gate, trespass onto private property and threaten to murder them, their dog and burn their house down? Well yeah, but they pointed guns at us!!! |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 7279210 United States 07/15/2020 10:29 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | The problem with what they did was pointing the firearms at the protesters.. Quoting: ^TrInItY^ Every responsible firearm owner knows you CANNOT point your weapon at someone as a form of intimidation. Had they stood there with their weapons slung or holstered and not pointed at the protesters the DA would have nothing on them. Bullshit Yes and no. YES you Should have no limits to defense of self on property because once social and community standards are intentionally and violently breached you have no fucking clue what's next or where it stops. No, because the courts and reinterpretation from preexisting common sense common law which founded the BoR have been INTENTIONALY corrupted so that every fucking thing previously well understood and clear was made conditional so that the courts could access the deep pockets of the productive public to grant ever increasing power to compel and extort the public by an insurgency of constitutional criminals and defectives seeking unearned support and avoiding once commonly accepted consequences for noncompliance with natural law. That's why the system is named for a tribe of invaders and and not actually for a legitimate objective process and why, who promotes and benefits from it, and who ALWAYS gets fucked out of their privacy, property and liberty are who they are. THIS IS THE very definition of LAWFARE against the productive public in accordance with the founding law of the Judiciary, Lev 25, 44-46. You cant win and they can't lose, your laws no longer apply. |
Ignatius J User ID: 79117186 United States 07/15/2020 10:31 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | The homeowners were wrong in this case. Their first obligation is their duty to retreat which they did not do. They did the exact opposite. The "private" property you are all discussing is not theirs. Quoting: Ignatius J Do a little research on these folks. They are charlatans and you all are now falling for their shtick. And to the rest of you here: Your irrational fear of black and brown folks does not give you the right to intimidate them with firearms. Your lives aren't in danger every time someone of a different race crosses your path. The saddest part is that you are so scared that you automatically "fear for your life". This is also the reason that police shoot unarmed people of color at a inordinate rate. Do your own fucking research dumbass, more whites, both armed and unarmed are shot every year by cops than blacks are. You're not only full of shit, you're an anti-American piece of shit, fuck off douchecanoe. Evidently math wasn't your strong suit. When I state that an inordinate amount of unarmed people of color are shot, that means that they are killed at a higher percentage. Take it easy there David Duke---your hood is showing "I am at the moment writing a lengthy indictment against our century. When my brain begins to reel from my literary labors, I make an occasional cheese dip." |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 7279210 United States 07/15/2020 10:33 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | ... Quoting: ^TrInItY^ No, the street is owned and maintained by the community / HOA. Those people do NOT own the street. If they pay HOA fees...they have partial private ownership. Regardless, you don’t have to be on private property to protect yourself from a violent mob when they are threatening you. If this happened out in the public park, they don’t have the right to protect themselves? Meanwhile, CHOP idjets we’re running around the public street with guns and intimidating anyone who came within 2ft of their borders lol no they don't you guys are totally wrong and I hope none of you own firearms Says the 3.50 shill Doubt per diem or per piece, definitely salaried with bennies |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 78913612 United States 07/15/2020 10:41 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | The homeowners were wrong in this case. Their first obligation is their duty to retreat which they did not do. They did the exact opposite. The "private" property you are all discussing is not theirs. Quoting: Ignatius J Do a little research on these folks. They are charlatans and you all are now falling for their shtick. And to the rest of you here: Your irrational fear of black and brown folks does not give you the right to intimidate them with firearms. Your lives aren't in danger every time someone of a different race crosses your path. The saddest part is that you are so scared that you automatically "fear for your life". This is also the reason that police shoot unarmed people of color at a inordinate rate. Do your own fucking research dumbass, more whites, both armed and unarmed are shot every year by cops than blacks are. You're not only full of shit, you're an anti-American piece of shit, fuck off douchecanoe. Evidently math wasn't your strong suit. When I state that an inordinate amount of unarmed people of color are shot, that means that they are killed at a higher percentage. Take it easy there David Duke---your hood is showing They kill themselves at a higher percentage, that's their cultural issue, not mine. You bolded your statement about our irrational fear of blacks and browns, now accompany that with the statement about them being killed at a higher percentage, BY THEIR OWN RACE. Do you not see the bullshit in your agenda driven post? I sure the fuck do. |