National Protest and 'disband the cops' discussion (please review page 1)

[ThunderHorse]

Yes.

To a point.

Was there any precedent to believe that the group (raging?) was going to attempt to enter their home on camera and in the middle of the afternoon to cause them harm?

No.

Those two with their buffoonish posing did nothing but cause undue tension; especially the way she kept sweeping the crowd.

Don't really need to rehash this one, as I've a few posts on this. Under Missouri's castle doctrine your lawn falls under it and there is also no duty to retreat.

So then we add to the numerous nights of violence and arson that preceded that harassment and intimidation within a private neighborhood I'm siding with the home owner. For example- Photos: 4 Police officers shot, buildings looted, fires set in downtown St. Louis riot

 

[Ooh-Rah]

...sigh...

The guy in this video lost me when he suggested that the police tampered with her weapon just to charge her; his referencing Joseph Goebbels sealed the deal.

if there were as many conspiracies around ever corner as the internet tends to believe, they’d have to come up with a new definition of the term.

 

[DA SWO]

...sigh...

The guy in this video lost me when he suggested that the police tampered with her weapon just to charge her; his referencing Joseph Goebbels sealed the deal.

if there were as many conspiracies around ever corner as the internet tends to believe, they’d have to come up with a new definition of the term.

Crime lab admits they tampered with the pistol to make it functional. It was a prop, and the AR was unloaded.

 

[Ooh-Rah]

Don't really need to rehash this one, as I've a few posts on this. Under Missouri's castle doctrine your lawn falls under it and there is also no duty to retreat.

Agreed, they had no duty to retreat. However, they were not in danger of great bodily harm at that time, and they came out of their home to engage these people.

 

[Florida173]

Agreed, they had no duty to retreat. However, they were not in danger of great bodily harm at that time, and they came out of their home to engage these people.

How could you possibly know this?

 

[Ooh-Rah]

How could you possibly know this?

I missed the memo that said tresspassing is a reasonable reason to fear for your life in the middle of an afternoon. Again, they left their house to engage these people....they were looking for trouble; of course they were charged.

Had this group of protesters started banging on their windows or tried to enter their home, sure....engage. But this was just silly theatrics and they end up looking like the d-bags who go to Starbucks or Chipotle in full kit....because they can.

To be clear, I don’t want to see them charged for anything, it will set precedent for future cases, but they used zero common sense and failed situational awareness 101

 

[Raksasa Kotor]

I missed the memo that said tresspassing is a reasonable reason to fear for your life in the middle of an afternoon.

You're kidding, right?

 

[medicchick]

Agreed, they had no duty to retreat. However, they were not in danger of great bodily harm at that time, and they came out of their home to engage these people.

Antagonizing vs defending, I get what you are saying. By all means arm up but you don't need to escalate a situation before anything happens directly to you.

 

[Ooh-Rah]

You're kidding, right?

LOL. 100%

I lost track of my post, obviously didn’t mean to word it that way; thanks for catching it.

 

[Mad boomer]

Looking for work? get into security. Demand is extremely high in the affluent regions within the metropolitan areas. I get regular calls for security and protection details from around the nation. As Police forces are defunded, reduced and crime is rising, the wealthy and powerful among us are contracting for protection. Ask around and stay in the loop with companies and groups in your areas. Most are looking for retired Police personnel. Business I anticipate will boom after the election whomever wins. It will be a windfall for the qualified as the body count rises. Private security is growing rapidly. I encourage you to get your state Guard cards and firearms qualifications in order now before the election.

 

[compforce]

Had this group of protesters started banging on their windows or tried to enter their home, sure....engage.

They live in a gated community. The streets and the gates are communal private property, owned by all of the homeowners in the community. Tearing down the gates to get on the private street is going through the outer defense perimeter of their property. At what point can they defend it?

Do they have to wait until the house door is breached? Do they have to wait until the protesters were in the house and banging on the door to the room that they are physically in? How far outside the room can they go?

What if the protesters stand in the street and throw incendiaries or fireworks at the house without actually setting foot on the lawn? Can they engage then? What about if the protesters stand outside the gate on a public street and shoot at their car in the driveway with small arms? Why or why not?

 

[Ranger Psych]

Being honest, I've proned out a motherfucker wearing my AR for pulling into my driveway. Granted, there was some backstory to it, but I didn't know them from joe and didn't even know them in my life other than for the last 5 minutes I knew them.

They were trespassing. I was concerned for my wife and daughter.

These were a husband and wife who have been hearing riots and ruckus that's not common, and now all of a sudden you have a mob who's caused property damage and are trespassing.

Would I have drawn down on them, if not worse?

 

[SaintKP]

Even if they made a fool of themselves I believe they were in the right, context is important. It was a private and gated community and there had been extreme violence on going throughout St. Louis at the time.


Personally I prefer the classic but effective sitting on the front porch with the shotgun strat to effectively get the message across.

 

[AWP]

They should be charged with "misdemeanor range theatrics." Conviction: Guilty. Sentencing: A lifetime of memes with no parole.
(gavel cracks)
All rise!

 

[Marauder06]

As a free citizen, we SHOULD be the first line of defense for our lives, rights, and property. I think they made the right call, and a brave one, to stand on their property with their weapons after a violent mob broke into their neighborhood, especially given the nationwide context.

The problem I wrestle with is the indiscriminate pointing of the firearm, especially by the wife. By all means, carry the weapon. But the only time you should point it at someone is when the lawful use of deadly force is called for, which did not appear to be the case. And if it ever becomes the case, stop pointing and start shooting (and I'm glad that didn't happen in this case).

And the handgun was some kind of prop???? Weird...

Given my EXTREMELY limited knowledge of applicable law, I think trespassing charges are warranted against the protesters,--ALL of them--and some kind of charges are warranted, perhaps only against the wife, for something assault-related. Given the circumstances, maybe all of it could be handled via community service.

 

[Florida173]

and some kind of charges are warranted, perhaps only against the wife, for something assault-related. Given the circumstances, maybe all of it could be handled via community service.

Even if the gun had been previously rendered inoperable for previous court proceedings? Either way, charge her with a misdemeanor and let them get in with their lives.

 

[Cookie_]

Even if the gun had been previously rendered inoperable for previous court proceedings? Either way, charge her with a misdemeanor and let them get in with their lives.

I'm not sure that waving around an inoperable firearm is any different (legally) than waving around a working one.

 

[Marauder06]

Even if the gun had been previously rendered inoperable for previous court proceedings? Either way, charge her with a misdemeanor and let them get in with their lives.

Again, no legal expert here, but I think that's still a crime, even if it's a fake weapon.

 

[medicchick]

Even if the gun had been previously rendered inoperable for previous court proceedings? Either way, charge her with a misdemeanor and let them get in with their lives.

If she'd been shot it would be self defense even though it was inop because they could claim "fear for their lives". How could anyone tell it didn't work? It is still a real firearm, just like one that jams is.

IANAL but I did serve on a grand jury for 4 months...lol

 

[Florida173]

I'm not sure that waving around an inoperable firearm is any different (legally) than waving around a working one.

Well plenty different legally. Difference between a felony and a misdemeanor. Doesn't matter really. Will probably get thrown out because of police mishandling, and if not, pardon by the governor as he's already suggested.