Your narrative is completely incorrect. I live in this neighborhood. They were peacefully protesting. Then these two came running out of their Home shouting and waving guns around like fucking idiots."
The guy in the video is a moron. He must be a communist because he’s strongly advocating against private property rights. Gated communities are private land. The roads and sidewalks in that land are maintained by the property owners through HOA fees not through public taxation. They were on those individuals land. It’s no different than if people came inside your locked fence and were on your driveway without your permission. The common property of an HOA/Condo is owned by the entire “gated” community not the tax payers and they pay to maintain it roads and all and pay taxes on those roads as property improvements to the land to the state. Thus the protesters were trespassing on private land. The protesters have a track record of destroying property, committing arson, grand theft, assault, murder, rape, vandalism, kidnapping, etc. so the individuals were actually practicing common sense. They were not aggressive towards the protesters, they were just standing around with their guns in the even that the BLM group did what they normally do before the police show up.
Where’s the threatening I don’t see it? It’s literally just a crowd of people waking by and a crazy lady pointing her gun at everyone like a mad person is obviously going to attract attention. Those people did not break into the neighborhood and they are peacefully protesting which is completely legal.
If a violent mob breaks in and surrounds your home that's intimidation
They weren’t violent, they were simply walking past her home
After breaking through the gate, then they surrounded their home.
First the videos you have seen have been taken BY the “protesters” so I highly doubt you’ll ever see where they threatened the property owners, and threatened to kill their dog! The couple allege that while some “protesters threatened to burn the house down” with them inside, others threatened “we gonna live in that house after we kill you!” The CIVIL RIGHTS ATTORNEY, only got his gun AFTER one was aimed it him! It’s worth pointing out that “they” were not just walking by the house on a public sidewalk, that couple OWN ALL THE PROPERTY including the sidewalk, and the street It’s not JUST a gated community, it is a PRIVATE community. It is not open to the public... ever! It would be like if YOU won the lottery, and bough a 100 acre farm, and built houses for all your family members. You also built roads, sidewalks, and a park on YOUR property. Then you put a GAINT IRON GATE, that reads “Private Property No Trespassing” since when in America was it okay to trespass on private property? Even if that private property LOOKED LIKE a public street? Also this attorney, currently represents the LAST African American who was assaulted by the police, before the George Floyd incident. So this man has by his actions proved himself to be an ally to the black community of St. Louis. The police HATE him because he sues them so much, for violence against the black community. He gave a great interview on local TV, where he asked “what about all the black lives lost every day on the streets of St. Louis? Why don’t THEIR lives matter?” He went on “It would seem that to this organization, the only black lives that matter, are the politically expedient ones” the interview is here :
@RevScott it’s actually not just a “Gated Community”, it is a “Private Community.” My dad (a police detective) told me, that there is a huge difference. In a gated community the roads and sidewalks are usually still technically public! In a private community, the roads and sidewalks belong to the residents! My dad explained it like this: it would be like if you won the lottery and bought a couple of hundred acres. Then you build one house each for everyone in your family. Then you have roads and sidewalks put in so that your family could drive to their house, from the main road. Finally you put up a giant iron gate at the entrance with a sign on it that read private property do not enter! You owned every square inch of the land before you began construction, you still own every square inch of the property when it’s a neighborhood! The sidewalks do not magically become public property just because they look like public property! He had every right to defend his home... ESPECIALLY since the mob who surrounded his home, and threatened to kill him, his wife, and their dog are the same mob that have been looting and burning private property every night since May 25th when George Floyd was murdered! (Not necessarily the same people, but the same mob? Yes!) AND... The guy is a civil rights attorney! He has been fighting for the black and brown communities of St. Louis, since he moved there in 1988. Also, the guy is a registered Democrat, and a liberal! This has nothing to do with politics or ideology, simply property rights, and the right to self defense! There is no doubt in my mind that if he and his wife ran, they would have burned that home to the ground!
If someone calls you a name and threatens you or your dog, they are guilty of ASSAULT, a verbal threat on your well-being. If they touch/hit/shove/throw stone at, etc. you, then they are guilty of BATTERY.
@SarahNiemann that's a whole lot of nonsense, you weren't there.
according to your logic property> human life
@RyanK9 that’s a very jaded view. No property is worth human life. None of you were there and can’t possibly make correct assumptions. It’s quite ignorant to think you know what happened while not actually being there. Your opinion means absolutely nothing and writing anymore is a waste of time and energy for anyone involved in this discussion.
"it's just a crowd of people walking by"
Yeah, no. This is the gate that was closed. They weren't "just walking by".
@ChefPapiChulo Actually. It was a well reasoned, well thought-out clarification of an emotionally charged issue. You may disagree with some part of it, but I wouldn’t know, you just attacked. Next time take a few minutes, think about the subjective and objective “facts” surrounding the issue. Then come to an opinion based on the most likely event... That a lifelong Democrat, and civil rights attorney saw a peaceful gathering of folks, taking a leisurely stroll on his street, and being the vile racist that we all “KNOW” him to be, he grabbed his gun, and threatened to kill them if they didn’t get off his street... OR, a lifelong Democrat, and civil rights attorney has been watching mobs of “peaceful protestors” loot and burn and murder almost every single night since the evening of May, 26th. He’s watched in horror as people were dragged from their cars and businesses, and beaten (in some cases to death), and after watching them destroy an IRON gate, and stream onto his property, he called 911 (who couldn’t help), he called the private security firm (who wouldn’t help) and as. They approached his front door, he grabbed his gun, and HE stopped them! Look don’t worry, they’ll burn his house down later this week, maybe next. You’ll get your pound of flesh! But the irony of a BLM protest attacking the leading civil rights attorney in St. Louis... A man who has gotten more justice for the black victims of actual racist white cops? If it wasn’t so terrifying it might actually be funny!
@SarahNiemann that’s crazy talk
They “did not break into the neighborhood”? This is the locked gate they “peacefully” BROKE to get INTO the neighborhood in that “Completely Legal” way you mentioned!
@SarahNiemann what the fuck are you talking about
No they did not “break” into the neighborhood forcefully their is a video showing all of them walking in through the gate peacefully, this couple has nothing to do with anything, the protesters were not bothering with the couple. They came to protest outside the majors house to demand she resign because mayor Lyda krewson read the name and addresses of several residents who support defunding they police during an online briefing, some of the people she mentioned lived in her neighborhood. What she did was wrong and innocent people could have potentially been doxed and harmed.
Yes some people have illegally trespassed but where was security to stop this trespassing? And some of those people lives in that neighborhood so they had a right to be there
@saraniemann the couple that is seen in the video with guns are actaully registered republicans who have donated thousands of dollars to the trump campaign, their not democrats
@scarlett774 u saw the image of the broken gate right?
That image was taken after all the protesters left, when they entered they did it peacefully, there’s no video recording or evidence from the security systems that the protesters broke that gate, you cannot make claims until their is proven evidence to back that up
Also it’s not verified that this gate is the right one for that community.
@ChefPapiChulo Yeah, well there are over 20 cellphone videos out there... You REALLY need to research this, b4 you say... oops, too late!
Nothing peaceful about trespassing
@SarahNiemann you have to be a bot.
@ChefPapiChulo That is SUCH an asshole, cop-out thing to accuse a person of! You are more than happy to. message me when I write sexy answers, but as soon as I have an opinion YOU disagree with, then I’m clearly not even a human being? You are such a misogynistic POS!
@SarahNiemann you're definitely a bot, I've never messaged you.
@ChefPapiChulo Whatever asshole! To fuckin’ deny a woman’s humanity... you REALLY are a POS!
@SarahNiemann definitely a bot.
Breaking the gate would be delinquent, not violent. Violent would be a mob with torches and pitchforks stabbing the couple to death then burning down their home, or alternatively, shooting the couple dead and looting the house. The only act of "violence" you can find is the small amount of property damaged they caused while trying to do their protest. I'm not defending the property damage, however that is not really an act of violence, someone should be pay the couple for the damage, but once again, it wasn't violent.
Also, how is walking past a home/on somebodies property intimidation? They weren't surrounding it with plans on attacking, the crowd was slowly shambling around in a mostly disorganized manner.
Nothing inherently violent about trespassing. I've trespassed before nist out of curiosity, without hurting anyone or getting myself hurt. Tresspassing can be violent, or it can be peaceful, the idea that it's never peaceful because it breaks the law is simply moronic. By that same standard I can set a law that makes protests illegal, then call protesters violent for breaking the law, and have them gunned down by national guard, simply for trying to make use of their first amendment rights. Trump is killing first amendment by the way.
@Massageman okay... first of all you're wrong, calling someone a name is not aasault, for example, I can call you a dumbass, and guess what? That's not assault. A verbal threat is illegal but it's still not assault. so give me evidence that the crowd was touching/hitting/shoving/throwing things at the couple?
" Where’s the threatening I don’t see it?"
The part where they're trespassing on private property, threatening to kill them and their dog, and are refusing to leave, all in the context of nation-wide riots.
@AllThatSweetJazz I'd like to mention that a "mob" is usually a group of people with a violent, single agenda, not a group of shambling protesters, some of whom might've said threatening things to that couple. Mobs lynch people, burn down their houses, or sections of town, rampantly loot, rape and lay waste. There are always people who attach themselves to movements who should not be there: who are opportunists who create chaos. Any rational group of people trying to create positive change do not yell epithets at property owners, trespass on private property, loot or burn homes or businesses. A lunatic fringe is part of EVERY group. BLM cannot sanction or attend to every protest where someone wears their logo! It seems clear that this was a protest where a group of people decided to trespass into a private community. The goal of the protest was not to kill dogs or burn down houses and NONE OF THESE THINGS HAPPENED!!! Angry people mouth off all the time. As someone else said, I've been on "posted" property before. I wasn't a threat. I was looking around in the woods. Yep. I was there illegally. And I left after looking around. The protesters were protesting. Yes they were there illegally. They protested and they left. They were not a threat. If police had been present, they would've been fined for trespass. Seems no police were there to fine them. But violent? No. We, as someone else said, don't know HOW they got into the community. Maybe someone who lived there let them enter. So we don't even OFFICIALLY know if they were trespassing. If a resident LET THEM IN, they were there legally. NOW. The protest still might have been illegal because of community bylaws. They might have needed a permit to "parade" on private streets. Since none of us knows the facts, this is all guesswork. The home wasn't "surrounded." They protesters were walking by. Their destination was the mayor's house, not these people's.
@Screenwriter “a "mob" is usually a group of people with a violent, single agenda, not a group of shambling protesters, some of whom might've said threatening things to that couple.”
A mob needn’t strictly be that. You can just look at the definition and that’s how a normal person uses the word. I can lump the fringe leaders, the violent supporters, and the sheeple all into “mob”. They’re a mob.
“Any rational group of people trying to create positive change do not yell epithets at property owners, trespass on private property, loot or burn homes or businesses.”
Well that’s just an argument that they’re not a rational group of people trying to create positive change.
“A lunatic fringe is part of EVERY group.”
Some groups more than others. And in this case they’re a disproportionately lunatics and those lunatics are disproportionately leaders.
“BLM cannot sanction or attend to every protest where someone wears their logo!”
They can denounce misuse. They don’t often do that. Some leaders have, and they’ve left. They said it’s been hijacked by antifa. Which is partially true. Antfia certainly have a vested in them and aim to turn that energy toward their cause, but there’s also BLM leaders that are open Marxists and are fully on board with that agenda. And perpetuating the confusion about who is running the show serves to benefit both groups.
“The goal of the protest was not to kill dogs or burn down houses”
Doesn’t need to be the goal for it to happen.
“They were not a threat.”
Except for the threatening…
Not when you’re met with an assault rifle, no. That’s the virtue of guns.
If they were they legally, they would have said so. But they weren’t and it makes no sense for them to be there anyway. Protesting on a private street away from the public eye is pointless.
@Screenwriter You can make all sorts of excuses about why it’s all a misunderstanding and whatever, but this is not a one off. It’s been going on for years and it’s ramped up like crazy over the ongoing 6 weeks of rioting. When people in your group yell threats and you say nothing while you continue supporting the group, you’re complicit. When people start throwing bricks and you just say nothing, you’re letting it happen. When people in your group are burning shit, looting, attacking cops and regular people and you say nothing, you’re complicit.
The sane people aren’t going to buy the “largely peaceful” narrative anymore. “27 officers injured in largely peaceful protest” is not a peaceful protest. Too many times, things have gotten violent and the police are obviously demoralized by this hateful opposition and complicit governors. So the people are going to greet you with guns if you turn up as a mob in the midst of national rioting. That’s just good sense.
The “protestors” who went to the McCloskey’s house came back, why? Because of a misunderstanding? I doubt it. They’re mad specifically at the McCloskey’s this time, what’s there to protest over if it was all just a misunderstanding? Well the couple hired security and so the protestors pissed off after 15 minutes. A peaceful protest should be indifferent to security, so it’s weird how the “totally innocent” crowd suddenly felt like that didn’t have anything worth sticking around to protest over anymore. HMMMMM big thinks. We can weasel out of it with “well we’ll never really know what they were thinking”, well it’s better to just hire security and greet an uncooperative crowd with weapons than to take the chance that these people are not as noble as they are so frequently insisted to be in the MSM.
I buy that the protesters were pure of heart about as much as CHAZ was a summer of love.
I bet you didn't see the story of a white young woman/mother being shot in the head for daring to say 'all lives matter' in response to passing some BLM thugs screaming their very creative /sarc phrase.
Blacks are sooooo asking for what is coming as a collective. I know some good decent black folks even as a WN i cannot lie.
But the majority (especially the youth) are loser thug 'victimized' whore punks. Just this week I've seen multiple different videos of blacks attacking whites for the 'crime of being white.' Course it doesn't make headline/National/International news like ever when it's a black on white crime (the vast majority) but show me one George Floyd or Trayvon Martin incident and I will show you, "The agenda."
And I will also tell you the end result of all of this. And it isn't pretty for the people of former slavery, oh wait I could be literally talking about any race when I say slavery, whoops (But most people wouldn't know that.)
People who are stupid enough will believe anything.
@Mossberg500 "blacks are sooool asking for what is coming as a collective" yes because the crimes of one member of a race makes all members of that race guilty of that crime. Do you even understand how stupid you are being? Punishing black people as a collective is wrong if there is even a single innocent black person.
@ChefPapiChulo She is actually pretty much on target on this situation. Every word she wrote are true and accurate of the conflict.
@ChefPapiChulo What kind of fucking moron are you! With your thinking any group of hoodlums should be able to take over your home and property without you defending it.
@katiesmuff that’s not how you argue. You idiot.
@ChefPapiChulo you are the idiot here mate, you dont have any arguments. They broke the gate. If you dont defend yourself from people like that you have no backbone.
@startingfitness it’s claimed that when the protesters first entered, they all entreated legally because they were protesting with people who lived in the community and those people let the in, the gate someone showed in the picture wasn’t even confirmed that it was the real gate from that community. A gate may have been destroyed when they all left running out but that’s also a meter of security because there’s suppose to be security patrolling the area by that gate and there was none. There’s no evidence so far that’s come out to say those protesters broke and or vandalized the gate. That could be a random gate off of google
And who is making these claims?
The video was shot by the protestors not the couple. The way i see it if a mob of people were trespassing into my property id be ready with guns as well. Especially of they broke my gate down. These people who say its excessive have never seen a real rioy.
Its normal and natural for people to protect themselves. What is unnatural is to not protect yourself.
@startingfitness that gate must be really important to you.
Shoot all the BLM supporters if they step on your property
Ya im 100% violent ☺ even more with BLM
Does it have to do with my addiction to violence?
Yes im against BLM. Yes a likely answer 😆 yes anonymous duh 😊
@asshole_ You blind asshole? They were peaceful at all. Let's see what happens when they come crashing into your house?
😆 he's not very smart
he's very angry and aggressive for supporting peacefulness as well. He seems like a ticking time bomb to me..
@asshole_ imagine if this was the other way around. white people love to protest-matter of fact-that's how freedom began,
Glad im white i really really am
I saw this just last night and it's pretty ridiculous. These idiots broke the gate and entered private property that had signs that says no trespassing.
And of course they paint themselves as the victims. I mean when you break into a private community with a mob that's loud and chanting. I'd be afraid too after seeing how much destruction was caused by protestors. I wouldn't want these fools burning down my house.
So these two people arming themselves I feel is a natural response. The way they handled their guns tho is a different story. I do think they need training cause just looking at how their holding and brandishing their weapons just doesn't seem like they know how to handle it properly.
And not sure if it's true but I heard that there were Protestors that were armed in this incident.
People need to understand that just because you have the right to protest doesn't mean that allows you to break other laws.
Seriously just take away the right to protest. Or at least modify it.
When people start fucking with people at their homes that is where the line has to be drawn.
My husband works as a retail manager for a well known company that sells guns and the gun sales have been through the roof. They even have people waiting in line before the store opens to buy guns. The BLM movement has done absolutely nothing and in my opinion it has caused people who would be classified as closeted racists to come out in full force. Its like you want a war you have it. I think in 20 years people will look back a realize that things shouldn't have been handled they way they were.
You Individually actually do Know that You bring More Back
I may, have failed you
I will Never Fail You Individually Again
It is literally not Vilolence That is the answer
You're Inciting Violence
@OpenNudist Tha'ts still not as threatening as a mob who loots and riots. What are you afraid of, that they'll shoot someone who didn't break through the gate to their private road and pour through it with weapons?
That only happens in drive-bys to young kids who are in the wrong place at the wrong time. That women isn't even in a car so no chance she'll shoot someone innocent.
Absolutely No Comment any more
I mean it’s good to know who the closeted racists are
Enough with the Rhetoric on both sides
@NotAggainn That's right. Keep calling everyone a racist because they have a different opinion. Those are the people who got fed up of SJW bullying and voted for Trump four years ago.
@SuccessfulHornDog cause not everything requires the uneffecteds opinion. Like help or stay out of it lol
Protesters broke trough the gated community. In doing so they were violent and I can see how those people could have felt threatened. That woman needs gun training though. Aiming at the protesters straight away isn't going to resolve the situation. But TYT is crazy. How much do you wanna bet that if the same protesters did the same exact thing in front of his house, he'd be going nuts. And if the protesters were conservatives and if the property owners were black the media would be against the protesters.
30 rounds in the magazine seems enough to disperse any blm rioters
Good to know my comment is going to get deleted, I'll keep it short. If the protestors wanted to be violent, those two would have died. I'm sorry but even with those guns, the two of them would have been overrun in 5 seconds flat if the mob was violent. I think the show of force was unnecessary and reckless as it could have potentially escalated things if the protestors thought they were going to be shot for nothing. Luckily it didn't escalate, the crowd seemingly had a peaceful time for the majority of the protest other than that. With that said I don't think the property owners should be charged with a crime though.
Not true. With 30 in the magazine once 5.56 starts flying out they'd trample each other to get away.
You're not wrong, but that's because the crowd wasn't violent. If this crowd had violent intentions beforehand then I doubt either of them would be able to shoot more than one person each before they get grabbed by 3 people, and given that neither of them are trained with firearms (quite obviously), it's doubtful that they would even land their initial shot in their panicked state, and if they did it would most likely not be fatal. The crowd had the numbers advantage, if they were organized for a violent purpose then those two with guns would not have stopped them. Besides that, if they planned on being violent, why wouldn't they arm themselves? Sure, that gun is nice and all, but if you have 6 people surrounding you, aiming guns at you, what are you gunna do? I don't think this crowd was violent, at worst it was delinquent.
I saw it in Afghanistan. A violent crowd attacked and afgan security forces fired 3 rounds into the crowd and the crowd fled.
That's a bit different since it's military personnel, they are trained, there was probably more than 2 of them, and they can call for back up, in this scenario, the crowd could have overrun the couple, killed them, smashed any cameras that spotted them, looted the house, and then dispersed before police could arrive.
What do you mean by, "violent crowd attacked"? As in a crowd was screaming and shouting and protesting? Or do you mean the crowd physically attacked the soldiers? Because you seem to misuse the work violent sometimes.
Nope nobody wants to get shot for the cause especially not Liberals
XD alright bud, you keep telling yourself that. You're not wrong that nobody WANTS to get shot, but trying to turn this political/partisan is just stupid. With that said, I can point to a pretty east example of "liberals" being willing to be shot for the cause, the french revolution, another one? Liberal gang members. This idea that the guns scared the crowd out of attacking the couple is ridiculous and unfounded. I think if they charged the couple, it's fairly likely the couple would run instead of firing, they are very clearly untrained and afraid. I think in this scenario nobody actually wanted violence, there were just two sides who were afraid they were going to be attacked.
those were muskets not an ar 15 with a 30 round magazine. That guy was basically 40 guys with muskets and more leathel than that. Also in the French revolution people were starving and a lot were soldiers.
Okay? Whats you're point? Sure, a soldier with an ar-15 can kill a lot more people, faster, than if he had a musket. However if anyone in the crowd had a gun it wouldn't matter because a pistol is still enough to easily kill someone, especially if they're busy gunning down other people.
Point is that the french revolution happened, and you might want to pretend like automatic guns would stop them from acting and would make them cower in their boots, but you have no evidence for that. You wanna pretend like they were scared of the ar-15, yet even when he aimed it at them they didn't seem very scared, thet certainly didn't run off his property at the sight of it. I see no evidence that an ar-15 could have stopped that crowd in any way from committing violence, if that had been their goal.
Okay? A lot of Americans are soldiers, and I really dont think that many french people were soldiers at the time but admittedly I'm not sure. as for the starving factor, yeah that kicks people in the ass, but you still can't pretend that that means that people who aren't starving won't stand up.
None in the crowd were willing to die for the cause. The French revolution and now differ vastly be people's circumstances. These privileged white middle class college kids aren't starving.
XD privileged middle class college kids xD I'm fucking crying right now this is so funny. What are they entitled to? Debt? A degree that won't get them anywhere? A lot of these middle class college kids are starving, literally starving themselves to get through college. Trust me, I know people in college, most of them from middle and lower class families eat kraft dinner and McDonald's, only 1 meal a day, to save money. Go ahead and google it, there are even statistics that back me up, food insecurity and malnutrition is common among college students, particularly middle and lower class college students. Then you add in the debt they have to pay off after and I really wonder what privileges you are talking about. Like, nice try, you made me laugh, but be serious and stop making shit up, we are currently living in the worst time to be a college student, since the medieval ages.
Also, by that logic, you can call any crowd violent. Next time I see a group of protestors, I'll make sure to call them violent cowards xD we all know they would attack if they thought they were safe to do so, because modern criminals are snowflakes who can't handle any kind of threat. XD your logic is amazing.
I myself am prior service 4/68 armor 82 abn, I volunteered to go to Grenada in 83 plus cpl other places i volunteered for. these civilians think that all rioters are peaceful the cpl discussed had every right to defend their property and since the BLM is manage by a Marxists trying to start a civil war, we need to keep a close eye on this. right now most of us vets like you and I are the only ones with common sense to know what we are seeing.
Bullets are faster than feet.
If the protestors started attacking they would 100 percent be minced meat. You can't iverrun guns. This isn't marvel dumbass.
@startingfitness I suggest you start looking after your mental fitness, you are being really quite stupid about this. Bullets might be faster than feet but that doesn't change that you need to aim and shoot, further, it doesn't change that he would eventually need to reload because even if he killed 1 person with each bullet he would not have enough in that magazine. Yes, you can overrun guns with sheer manpower, the Russians did it in ww2, protestors have overrun military before, it happened in the french revolution. Guns are effective but if you have enough people then you can overrun guns.
What would be like a scene from Marvel would be 2 people managing to take down a group of over 100 people. Like, are you kidding? Every marvel movie is basically just a small group of 3-12 people taking on an entire army. The only real exception to that is avengers civil war.
@truck555 I don't actually think all protesters are peaceful, I just dont think that all protestors are rioters either, I see police attacking both the violent rioters and the peaceful protestors, in Minneapolis they admitted to slashing innocent protestors tires. I'm want truly violent rioters to be punished by the law, but I refuse to give even an inch on the first amendment, which is under attack by this administration, Trump seemingly wants to kill the first amendment.
Please answer me this, who is the leader of BLM? Who is this Marxist mastermind?
Eh, both sides of this political mess are trying to start a war, democrat and republican news outlets are constantly trying to divide and demonize the country. I think this story is an example of that, doesn't matter how small the issue is (I genuinely think this shouldny be big news, it was a small event that had a good ending but everyone treating it like it's a war crime while actual war criminals walk the streets) both sides pick the most extreme and opposing positions they can find and then they act like the other side is being paid to have such an extreme view. They're both paid to have such extreme views, neither side is innocent, they both want civil war, vote third party!
@Truck555 also, I agree that the home owners had the right to bear arms, especially since it's their property, but it's not really defending their property if they aren't being attacked. If you want to argue that they were going to do something to this couple then you need evidence because America is innocent until proven guilty. Personally I dont think either the protestors or the home owners were really in the wrong (except whoever broke the gate, he/she needs to be fined), I think both sides were a little scared but the only illegal actions on either side were the broken gate and the trespassing, and trespassing is not a serious offence in my opinion.
Lol you call me stupid? You really think anyone would start running towards guns when their people are getting gunned down?
Technically they can be overrun. But no one is gonna risk getting shot. Every human has this powerful instict called the fear for their life. If they start coming at them they would shoot and kill 5-6 and that would be enough to scatter them and leave em running. They are not gonna keep charging thinking "well one of us will get em". This is how police handle riots in 3rd world countries regularly and those rioters are a lot more dangerous than these amateurs. Even when the police are outnumbered they fire warning shots and if still threatened they shoot a few people and that sets them off.
And what do you have, 2 cases where they actually overran them one of them being trained soldiers? Lol please these idots aren't soldiers they dont have that type of motive, they are just angry disorganized idiots. They would run like the punks they are. The 2 did right here.
@startinfitness soldiers do it, so yes, I think there are people who will run towards gun fire when their allies are being gunned down. We have many examples, from stories of soldiers on the front lines, to civilians uprisings that have overthrown governments and their private military. I'm not saying these protestors would do that because as far as I can tell they weren't organized for a violent purpose, but you asked if anyone would.
Generally soldiers have a strategy and they won't directly run into the fire. Thats that movie shit. Even the way they depict ancient battles is incorrect. They didn't just run into spears and into each others swords. There were formations , defensive shields and a lot of strategy.
In this case if 2 people started firing, especially with what the husband here is holding , theyd just scatter into all directions.
Ah yes, the fear for your life, I remember all the stories of ww2 where the soldiers ran for their lives the moment they got shot at, it's impossible to stay composed while being shot at, everyone knows this. Police and military are somewhat different because they are trained and can call for reinforcements, this was an untrained couple thay couldnt call for any backup.
I gave 2 examples but there are literally tons of them, you piss a large of people off enough and they will turn on you. Further, while I agree these protestors aren't soldiers, neither is the couple, tbh if the crowd charged, I think they would both drop the guns and flee, if they tried to fire then I doubt they would hit anything, let alone kill a single protestor.
Correct, they are nothing but angry disorganized punks lol too many Republicans trying to label them as violent gang members and terrorists in my opinion. I wouldn't say they did right but I wouldn't say they did wrong either, and likewise the only thing I think the crowd did wrong was breaking the gate. This is clearly a crowd of angry college kids, not violent criminals who are shooting and robbing people.
Nah if the crowd charged ( which means a couple of knuckelheads would go at them and the rest follow, unlike any organized troupe) the couple would fire and they would run. 100%.
And for every example you give there are 100 cases where the opposite happened. Overrunning gunmen is extremely, extremely unlikely. Its more likely that every one of them gets killed than them overrunning them. Simply due to the reason that they are humans and not robots.
Of course ir would be unorganized, this crowd is clearyly not organized and not violent which is a point I want to make, which is why it is highly unlikely they would have attacked in any scenario, this idea that they would have attacked if the couple was unarmed is simply bullshit that has 0 evidence supporting it. The group didn't have a violent purpose. If we hypothetically say the group was organized for violence then we'd expect that they would have rushed in there before the couple armed themselves.
Okay? I'm not saying it's common or easy to overrun guns with sheer manpower and will, I'm showing that it's possible, because you said it is impossible. Please stop changing the subject simply because you were proven wrong and don't want to admit it.
With that said, I need to address the second half of your last paragraph, why do you think it is more likely that every one of them gets killed rather than overruning the couple?
I ask because I want to know your reasoning, please actually explain instead of saying "guns op".
Now, I'd like to hear your answer but Im going to continue anyways, it's not more likely that they'd get gunned down, like I said there were over 100 protestors there, that gun presumably has 30 round magazine at max, it's very doubtful this untrained guy has an extended magazine, and lets say his wife has 12 bullets, if they need to reload then they're basically dead, unless they defend each other during reloads then they will almost definitely be overrun when they reload, and since they're untrained they will not think about that at all. Quick maths, 30+12=42, they have 42 bullets per magazine, so even if they kill 2 protestors with every bullet (passes through the first guy and hits a second), thats 84 kills, since there are over 100 protestors there, it is actually very unlikely that this untrained couple manages to gun them all down xD maybe if they had a mounted machine gun that rips through people like paper, and unlimited ammo like a fucking rambo movie, but with the guns they have they would most likely be fucked if the group had violent intentions. Even if we assume only 20 people rush them, then we need to make a guess as to whether or not this couple could shoot 20 targets in 10 seconds, thats 2 targets per second and neither of them have much training or practice, I don't think they could, in my opinion an untrained person lacks the accuracy to land that many shots consecutively.
Ofcourse these are humans, don't be a jackass, as I pointed out, HUMANS HAVE DONE THIS BEFORE, GIVEN THE RIGHT CIRCUMSTANCES IT IS POSSIBLE FOR HUMANS TO OVERCOME FEAR OF DEATH. You dense motherfucker, they don't need to be robots when humans are capable of overcoming fear and doing insane things, as we've seen many times throughout history. I'm not saying this is common but it can happen, but this idea that they must be robots if they are able to overcome a fear of death, is a false dichotomy, plain and simple.
Lol stay mad those protestors would scream and run when they start shooting they wouldn't overrun them. Ita not a math equation, its human nature. Humans are scared of death and they would run and act illogocal. Thats why they would get gunned down if they started firing.
And im not changing the subject. In this scenario it literally is impossible. We are both just stating other cases and hypothetical scenarios. In this case , they would have killed the protestors if they had charged. End of the story. And the argument is that whether or not the couple were in the right. They are in the right. They did the right thing and scared those losers off.
If they had charged, they would be dead.
I don't need a gun, I'd beat the BLM rioters senseless with my Sai.
Black people need to educate themselves, and get real jobs, and stop being criminals, and then they'll be treated equally. Until then, they aren't "equal" just because they exist.
Everyone was Created Equal, but if you are lazy or a criminal you don't have the same rights as someone who is not a criminal.
When criminals die while committing a crime, their blood is on their own hands, the same moral principle that voids an insurance contract if you die while committing a crime should be applied here.
Here's a picture of the gate these "peaceful" protesters smashed in to get onto the property in the first place:
All these fucking retarded women on here saying they were just peacefully protesting, there's a reason they kept it peaceful and that's because they would have gotten SHOT if they turned violent.
One can only hope that these duped leftist women are never at the tender mercies of the goons for whom their hearts bleed. Because they WOULD be raped viciously. We know it, and they ought to wise up.
@Curmudgeon They love it, bro. Deep down they hate themselves and want to be punished. They think they deserve it. That's why they chase after it. It's like a self-destructive impulse. That's what happens when you internalize all the self-loathing that is pushed on white kids in school these days. They genuinely despise themselves. All the way.
Thought: This may wise up the erstwhile duped urban liberals, of which Mark McCloskey and his wife were and hopefully no longer are.
"We call that the Red Pill. There’s a pretty good chance this guy’s donations to ActBlue are kaput."
Thanks for the link
"the majority of McCloskey's political donations since 2012 have gone to Republicans, including many contributions to U. S. President Donald Trump's 2016 campaign."
(Reminder: Donald Trump has also donated to Democratic politicians.)
a metal fence is a barrier that was crossed, making it not peaceful. Too many of these protests result in property damage as well as injured people. the people were guarding their property. If people are going to protest, they should do it peacefully... I don't recall MLK doing this. These are often not peaceful protests and doesn't take much to pollute the concept of BLM /Antifa or even appearance the protest is associated with destruction/violence in peoples minds, as many other videos have shown. I'm not saying all protests are dangeous, but just wait til it shows in your hood and you'll find out.
Just wait though until this group shows up and the odds are not in their favor.
p. s. I saw a lot of people of various colors at the gun range the other day.
Oh my gosh, I saw that on Tucker and it made me so angry. Arrest those f*ckers who do that, I would have shot them for breaking into private property. This is what happens when mental illness is upheld by the state because it hurts normal people. These dumbasses should be going for the mayor like what CHAZ did but instead they're going for anyone who's white, churches, and white statues (even though some of them were against slavery, lol, proves that these BLM people are low-IQ and failed school).
you realize that they were passing that house correct? any judge would have locked you up-the VISUAL evidence in no way shap or form supports this clown's claim... none.
@Sabretooth Were you one of the "protestors" lol
nah... it's just that i can still trust my eyes. the video doesn't collaborate his story.
@Sabretooth I don't care if they were breathing the same air, those losers deserve to be locked up, they're a nuisance to society.
just because they're black.
@Sabretooth Oh really? You haven't seen BLM people are mostly white? These are entitled white kids from the suburbs. And the lawyer actually mentioned that his black clients called him up to apologize for that disturbance.
I've seen blacks try to stop violent white protesters. I've seen reports showing that right wing white supremacists infiltrate groups like antifa. But that's not relevant to THIS story. We see a white couple with guns threating peaceful black unarmed protesters who had no interest in them.
@Sabretooth Yeah they can "threaten" all they want, why are these people even coming to these people's houses anyways? If you want to protest do it in the public streets, not in residential places. These same people also "protested outside the mayor of seattle (Jenny Durkan) residence, and yeah people get scared if there are a bunch people appraoching your house. And you have to right to defend your property. These people are sick and did awful things like kill their own, deface statues, loot, etc. so hell yeah, i would be ready to shoot. I rather die with dignity (by the state) then die by a mob attack, that's shameful.
the mayor made them targets by giving out their information-publicly-that's why there were there. and you'd still go to prison due to the lack of calibrating evidence. confederate states that celebrate racism and treason? but you can't prove the other allegations. we can all clearly see that there was no mob attack.
@Sabretooth they broke their gate and barged in you dumbass.
The couple was legally right and legally wrong. The protesters weren't on their property. They were on a private street, but the residence have no say on what happens on a private street. Only the owner of the street does. They were within their rights to have guns on their property. They were not in their rights to point those weapons at the protesters as there was no proof of them trespassing on their actual property nor any threats of danger. Had one of those protesters been shot, the couple would've been in the wrong.
Don't shoot the messenger, either. This just all comes down to legalities. And, legally, the couple would not have had a right to discharge their guns. They also were not legally within their right to point the gun at the protesters (as that technically is a sign violence and fear instigating). But they were not wrong in having them while still standing on their property.
don't all the residents own the street in the gated community.
It does as they were trespassing and threatening. How would you feel if a white mob of rioters surrounded your home?
They were not rioting. It was peaceful. Also, they were trespassing, but not on that couple's specific property. Therefore, holding the gun was fine. Pointing it at the protesters were not. The rights of homeowners with their property does not extend to any street in the state, including private ones.
they stayed off the couples property because they had guns. They were previously threatening too
That's an assumption. You don't know why they stayed off the property. If I had to guess, I would say they stayed off because it wasn't the street. The couple wasn't standing out there the entire time. Even at the beginning when they weren't there, the protesters never crossed onto the property. Please don't make things up to fit your narrative. That's how misinformation is spread. And they were not previously threatening.
I'm with you sis
I agree of someone was shot then they should have been punished, but I think they don't need to be punished for waving the guns around. The worst punishment I would give would be reckless endangerement, and I would be hesistant to give that because I can somewhat understand why they would be afraid, even if I don't agree with them. I think using guns to threaten people like that was stupid and reckless, but I don't think they wanted to hurt anybody, so at worst I think they should get a small fine to tell them to be safer with their guns, at least take a gun safety course if you're going to do something stupid like that, guy pointed a presumably loaded weapon at his wife multiple times, because he's untrained and has no idea what he's doing.
Trespassing perhaps, but how is it threatening? They organized a peaceful protest that went through the parts of town that usually hide away from the realities of the world. They live in a gated community and they ignore the rest of the society, they ignore the problems the city has, this protest was, to my understanding, meant to hold up a light to these rich people who gate themselves off from the poor society. It was meant to show them that they are affected by what is happening to poor people too. Regardless they didn't really surround the home they marched through the area in an unorganized fashion. How was the crowd threatening the couple? And do you have evidence that the guns were what protected the couple? I still highly doubt that those two entitled rich fucks could stop a crowd of angry, violent, thugs, which is why I think they're very lucky this was just a crowd of college kids trying to make a statement. If this crowd was actually violent, the guns wouldn't have stopped the crowd at all, in fact if the crowd was violent then the crowd would most likely have had guns too. If they didn't have guns then they could have used this guys guns to threaten the mayor, if that's what they wanted to do. The fact is that this was just a protest, a delinquent/rebellious protest, sure, but far from violent.
Please give evidence that the protesters were white people were fresh from torching black neighborhoods xD
@devilman666 Well as I pointed out in my comment this had nothing to do with the couple so them going out there was confrontational in and of itself. This is not to mention them waving guns around at people without practicing safe gun handling which is quite frankly a very big deal.
I would be completely fine with someone in the crowd pulling their own gun and shooting both of those couple to death over that. Pointing your gun at someone especially with your finger on the trigger gives the other party a justifiable cause for self defense.
@Soteris you are correct, they could have stayed inside their homes, video taped, and sued over damages. Them going outside was confrontational and dangerous as neither of them had gun safety training, in my opinion they were more of a danger to themselves, and everyone around them, than the protestors were a danger to anybody. However that is a problem throughout the USA, here in my country, Canada, we force anyone who wants access to a gun to go through proper safety training, similar to getting a drivers license.
I wouldn't be okay with that, that couple was being reckless but they didn't deserve to be murdered for that, I don't think anybody deserves to get murdered. I like to think that even the worst people can change. I don't think that would be self defence, because while the couple was being reckless and stupid and endangering everyone around them, they had no intention to cause injury or death.
@devilman666 I dont think anyone deserves to be murdered either but I do hold people who own guns to a higher standard. The classic "with power comes responsibilities" comes to mind. The fact that they could get shot based on mishandling that power I think is just natural.
@devilman666 that the problem right now, we pander to these antifa and blm fascists and they get bolder. We need to stand up to them
@American_Centurion alright, this is propoganda that you heard from fox news that you are parroting. How are we "pandering" to antifa and blm? How is antife/blm fascist? What evidence do you have that pandering will make them bolder/more aggressive? How do you think we need stand up to them (like we need to debate them? Or just shoot them all dead? "Standing up the them" is very vague)? And why do you think standing up to them will fix the problem?
@American_Centurion please answer each of those questions, because if you can't then you are just mindlessly spreading misinformation.
@devilman666 Chicago at the weekend?
@devilman666 Well the whole point of guns is to protect yourself no? If you make yourself the threat to another persons life because you can't handle the gun responsibly I dont think you got much room to complain when THEY actually use their right to protect themselves properly.
@American_Centurion well you didn't answer any of my questions, and I don't unserstand what "chicago at the weekend", even means.
@devilman666 18 black people murdered by black men last weekend in 24 hours in Chicago alone.
@American_Centurion okay... so chicago is a high crime area, who would've guessed? That literally just reflects badly on Chicago, even if you had statistics like that in every city, I'd like to see you try to prove that those murders were comitted by BLM or Antifa activists. Fact of the matter is you can't, all you can do is say "black on black violence is a problem, therefore antifa and BLM is the problem", and that's not an argument, that's a fallacy.
@devilman666 point is the black on black murder rate has gone through the roof since the blm riots started and no protests for that as though those black lives don't matter
@American_Centurian please provide evidence thaf black on black murder rate has "gone through the rood since the blm riots started".
1: They were not forced to do anything.
2: What they did is literally illegal according to the local law.
3: They, especially the woman, had basically no concept of gun safety. The moment where she pointed a gun at someone with the finger on the trigger is haunting.
You do not point the gun at someone unless you actually intend to shoot them much less have the finger on the trigger. Threatening like they did is a big NO NO. If anything the people in the crowd they were pointing their guns at was in full right to pull their own gun and shoot them both dead for doing such a reckless action that endangered the lives of everyone in the crowd.
actually pointing a gun at someone who is threatening you is the best way to avoid having to shoot them believe me I learned that lesson the hard way 3 years ago.
Any self defense expert will tell you otherwise, a lowered gun invites attack then you have no choice but shoot
you can't run when surrounded
What a spineless beta you are. The couple are legally in the right. And they did the right thing anyway . guns are the only way to scare off a mob.
You are just a pansy and would have gotten killed by the mob because you are a softboii
I am a black man and I am a supporter of the Black LIves Matter movement sweeping the country. I have even gone to protests.
I see no issue here with what these homeowners did.
The moment you smash through gates you are entering someone's private property. At that point you are trespassing and breaking the law. They did not seek a BLM protest with guns drawn. They were eating dinner to find a crowd chanting outside their home.
Normally, this might be viewed as a bit extreme. But we live in the context of a country that has seen burning buildings, molotov cocktails thrown, statues torn down, buildings defaced, and guns drawn in autonomous zones.
These homeowners had no way of knowing what the intentions of the protesters were. I see no problem here with them grabbing their guns and trying to protect property they spent decades trying to restore.
People here are stupid.
"I don't see any threatening in the video". Of course not, they started videoing once the white people came out with the guns. On any normal mainstream media outlet they'd avoid showing any threatening behaviour of the BLM anyway, never mind "The Young Turks" who are heavily liberal and are lying fucks, like many of the liberals here.
Look at the couple, they're not trailer trash. They're not the kinds of people to come out wielding guns for no reason. BLM aren't all peaceful protesters either.
You don't have to point guns at anyone to "stand guard". These people were out of line and should have their guns taken away before they hurt someone. But whatever. Its sad that rich white people feel like they need to murder poor people because they appear to be threatening to take some of the advantage that was unavailible to them.
Of course, if the threat was real you'd think some of the out-of-view neighbors would at least have vandalized houses.. but alas that doesn't appear to be the caee. Most likely explanation is it was a couple of racists doing a racism.
Yes you do. You would have gotten killed by the protesters dumbass.
What? So everyone else in the neighborhood who didn't point guns at the protestors died when the scary black people who we decent white folk know can't stop themselves from being violent showed up? Why isn't the murder of the entire neighborhood except one brave couple a bigger story? Fucking idiot..
Yes, plenty of people who didn't have guns did get assaulted and some died, dumbass. This couple didn't because they had guns. The others probably had guns too.
Why dont you click on google and type in looting/rioting 2020 grandpa? You will see what happens when people dont have guns.
And who are you calling "we white folks"? Im not white and i have seen enough protests and riots to know what really happens. You white treehuggers need to sit down and shut up.
People all over the country died. Its smart of them to get guns, not doing so is the stupid thing to do.
If a mob of people shows up at your house and you have guns you dont take those guns to stand guard? What kind of a beta make are you?
What if they kill you and rape your wife? You wouldn't do shit? Its a normal human thing to defend tourself , you weak cuck.
You're going to have to work on your reading comprehension, trump supporter. At no point did I say people shouldn't have guns. I'm saying you don't point them at people unless you are definitely going to shoot them. Because by pointing a gun at someone you have given them sufficient reason to believe their life is under immanent threat of ending and thus they are justified whatever means they have at their disposal to defend themselves.
Unless you're suggesting that rich people pointing guns at people can be trusted to use priper discretion which at least is consistent with you gullible trump trash.
Im no trump supporter. Why do some of you guys think people must belong to a certain group or support a certain president if we disagree?
"Because by pointing a gun at someone you have given them sufficient reason to believe their life is under immanent threat of ending and thus they are justified whatever means they have at their disposal to defend themselves."
I find it hillarious that you can see that when guns get involved but not with a mob of people. Guns can kill you and so can a mob of people.
Substitute guns in your own sentence with a mob of people shouting at you. Same shit.
It's definitely not the same shit. A mob killing you takes work. A gun takes no work and can even happen accidentally. If you don't see the difference between several people making the collective conscious decision to take each step towards a victim, versus the microseconds it takes to squeeze a trigger, then you're definitely a trump supporter.
I think assuming im a trump supporter based on your own self made criteria makes you delusional lol. Anyway it doesn't take long for a mob to kill you. You can die from 30 seconds of stomping.
I understand that. But if you're really that frightened and self centered that you don't see them as civilized people, then you should shoot them all immediately upon pointing the gun at them. And if you're not going to shoot them, don't point a gun at them. The moment you point a gun at someone it doesn't matter who you are. You have decided to threaten death, and if someone wants to beat your ass to death in self defense, thats just something you should have seen coming.
that is the most retarded logic I have ever seen.
" But if you're really that frightened and self centered that you don't see them as civilized people"
you are already wrong. you don't need to be frightened or self centered to not see mobs as civilized people, MOBS are not civilized people. study mob psychology and you would understand. and if you lived in a country where mob justice/mob violence exits, which I did then you would know.
to get defensive is the NORMAL human response. a person would have to be incredibly stupid not to get defensive.
" you should shoot them all immediately upon pointing the gun at them" that's even dumber. why should you shoot while holding a gun in defense? there are levels to this. if you can get an enemy to back off without shooting them than that's great. you shouldn't immediately fire. imagine if all cops and soldiers had your logic.
" You have decided to threaten death, and if someone wants to beat your ass to death in self defense, thats just something you should have seen coming. "
wrong. I didn't decide to threaten death , they did. im just defending myself. they are the aggressor, the aggressor doesn't get to claim self defense. don't be an idiot protecting the bullies. people have a right to defend themselves. and you don't immediately go 0 to 100 and shoot people. you threaten them and they will step away 99% of the time, that's how it works.
you are a person who has very little experience with confrontation and it shows.
Dont act like youve seen logic before. You're making up arguments for me because you can't figure out how to explain why you should be allowed to point guns at people without them feeling threatened. It's fine, though. You trust yourself but don't trust others. Insecurity is a common trait among trump supporters, so you aren't alone.
okay, i understand you are too stupid to converse with. you may have a lot in common with mr trump.
Don't act like you are capable of understanding anything. You're at least smart enough to know you are stupid. You want everyone to trust you when you point guns at them and understand that you're just a frightened idiot who is definitely too scared to pull the trigger, but needs everyone to act like they fear and respect him because his dad or teachers never did or whatever. But that's just not the way the world works. You become a valid threat to anyone besides yourself, you get dropped. That's the way it is. You don't like it don't become a threat just because you're scared.
lol right, people start swinging AFTER someone pulls out a gun. ahhahhha , cool story bro.
This BLM shit is out of control, hatred and polization is at an all time high, never in my life have I seen a situation on the verge of exploding and starting a war. They want the whites to sit back and eat shit and kiss their asses. The whites can only take so nuch. These people are using racism as a damn patsy, to blame other races for their failures as a race. Passing the buck on responsibility. We have been financing them since the 1960s we will never get done paying them back. They even blame racism for a higher death rate from COVID19. These suck ass white liberals are only helping create the monster that will consume us all. Racism will never end with them, until they are in complete control and the whites are the slaves. We better hang together or we will hang separately.
Now the people who support BLM ignored the fact that BLM burns places down and loves to loot and riot and they are doing the same thing with this situation. Defending these terrorists who went to the home of these people to terrorize them. I think the only charges that should be filed should be against the protesters. They broke the gate that is destruction of property then they were harrassing these people on their private property. Yes the couple pulled guns but the protesters also threatened to kill their dog. They also busted through the gate which put these people in fear.
did you see the footage of peaceful protesters walking calmly a long line of white supremecists all brandishing assault rifles and automatic weapons? point is you can find what ever you want to find and ignore the rest if all you want to do is talk in an echo chamber
I haven't saw the footage of them breaking down the gate to get in either.
@BurnHollywoodBurn and adding perspective doesn't add to the conversation? i wasn't condoning any actions of the looters but making the point that both sides jump on such stories to try to incite blind hatred of the other. if you can't see that then fine, think what you like but do so on your own post in future
@BurnHollywoodBurn Do they own the whole gated community? Did they have to point (brandish - usually illegal) their guns at anybody? Was anybody walking towards them?
They had the option to stay indoors. They had the option to stand outside with their weapons pointed at the ground. They had the option to call the police. They didn't take any of those options.
No, no! As you say, they didn't "own the whole gated community". No they did not have the right to point (brandish) weapons at people, and the protesters were also entitled to carry firearms (which seems ridiculous to me, but that's the local law). The "rioters" broke a gate, they didn't hurt anyone.
@goaded Yea and if they had shot the scumbag protesters they would face charges but guess what? They would never find them guilty it would be a mistrial because at least 1 or 2 people on the jury would identify with this couple. You wanna fuck with somebody on their own property? Then you get what is coming to you.
They had the right to do this. However the wife needs serious firearm discipline, both do really, but the husband never once put his finger on the trigger and deliberately aimed it at anyone. The wife did have her finger on the trigger and deliberately aimed at individuals and she approach them which is a threat itself. The mod was apparently 200-500 strong so imagine that approaching your house and on to of that broke in throw a gate that says private property, no trespassing.
The mob was there illegally, and the home owners would had had the right to defend themselves if the felt threatened.
The mob, which was armed as well, broke through a gate onto private property and then entered. These people weren't armed when they first came out but when they saw that the mob was armed they went and got their guns. I think that they showed incredible restraint
1. The right to peaceably assemble/protest does not include trespassing on private property.
2. The lady is is serious need of firearm training.
3. If the cops are not present or refusing to respond, you will have more of this and probably a lot of bloodshed.
Good because this way motherfuckers are gonna learn to stop terrorizing people.
Most Helpful Opinions
They weren't peacefully protesting they were illegally trespassing on her property. And she's not innocent not by any means she had her finger on the trigger ready to shoot those protestors and she practices law and sits on the Missouri bar association's ETHICS panel of all things. How fucked up is that. So two wrongs don't make a right in this situation. And since they were on her property she had every right to defend herself her husband and her property. However these two dumb fucktards did something that is considered illegal in my state. They went outside with their guns ready to shoot the protestors instigating the situation even more. Unless they carry a gun owners license then what they did was highly illegal. They can not be outside with their weapons ready to shoot people. That in itself is a violent and dangerous act. Also the law states you can NOT shoot someone unless they physically enter your home (with both feet inside your premesis). For the life of me how this psycho bitch is on the ethics board of law is beyond my recognition and understanding. But those protestors could had acted violent at any minute you and I don't know if they would had or not so don't assume. Yes she had a right to defend herself and her husband but she was clearly wrong in all of that. And those protestors had no business trespassing and being on her property illegally.
depends where I live and in many states stand your ground laws say you can be outside armed and point your gun to deter at anyone threatening you.
See every state is different with their laws. And since I'm not a lawyer and I don't live in Missouri I don't know what the laws are and what laws they had broken but from the video (and not going by what the moron rambling on about for over 10 minutes is spewing) it looks like they definitely broke a few laws themselves
And also the fucked up media won't show the pictures of the broken gate by the protestors and they never stated it was on private property. That's how the fucked up media lies their heads off. They withhold vital evidence pertaining to this case to make the BLM look better
They were def. peacefully protesting
Answerer, and asker, don't let the right wing media, fool you
You fucking retards
@asshole_ Since when is trespassing on someone else's property peacefully protesting? To me that's just looking to instigate violence