On 7/4/2020 at 5:07 PM, stevenl said:

Except for the others living in that neighborhood.

You are missing the point. This isn't about the protestors. Or the anti-protestors. It's about supporting the mad king. 

The handgun Mrs. MCloskey brandished was "inoperable". Makes sense as she was handling it like it was a cigarette lighter.

 

 

Police execute search warrant at home of St. Louis couple who pulled guns on protesters on private street

 

ST. LOUIS — Authorities executed a search warrant at the St. Louis mansion of a white couple whose armed defense of their home during a recent racial injustice protest drew widespread attention, their attorney confirmed Saturday.

 

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

 

https://www.chicagotribune.com/midwest/ct-st-louis-couple-guns-mccloskey-20200711-ftugrobotzc3lkf26a6wdhlwqm-story.html

 

 

 

 

The McCloskey's sound like awesome neighbors. This was not the first time they pulled a gun.

 

Portland Place couple who confronted protesters have a long history of not backing down

 

The McCloskeys have filed at least two “quiet title” suits asserting squatter’s rights on land they’ve occupied openly and hostilely — their terms — and claimed as their own. In an ongoing suit against Portland Place trustees in 2017, the McCloskeys say they are entitled to a 1,143-square-foot triangle of lawn in front of property that is set aside as common ground in the neighborhood’s indenture.

 

It was that patch of green protesters saw when they filed through the gate. Mark McCloskey said in an affidavit that he has defended the patch before by pointing a gun at a neighbor who had tried to cut through it.

 

https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/metro/portland-place-couple-who-confronted-protesters-have-a-long-history-of-not-backing-down/article_281d9989-373e-53c3-abcb-ecd0225dd287.html

 

 

 

 

 

My favorite part of this article, detailing the rennovation of the property - the sidewalk in question is visible in the article's first picture - is the Louis XIII homme-debout (“standing man”) armoire, so named because, during the Reign of Terror, a gentleman could hide inside one. 

 

Evidently it remained unused during the BLM reign of terror march?

 

 

A decades-long renovation returns a Midwestern palazzo to its original glory

 

When attorneys Mark and Patty McCloskey bought their home in February of 1988, it was the color of cigarette ashes. Still dirty from the days when St. Louis lay under a blanket of coal smoke, the home’s Carthage marble facing “had quarter-inch-thick carbon on it in some places,” Mark says. The two Carrara marble urns out front, copies of a pair at the Vatican, had turned black, obscuring Neptune and his attending dolphins.

 

The McCloskeys have had fun seeking out objects original to the house as well as filling it with their own antiques, including a rare 1560 stipo a bambocci carved wooden cabinet made in Genoa and a Louis XIII homme-debout (“standing man”) armoire, so named because, during the Reign of Terror, a gentleman could hide inside one. 

 

https://www.stlmag.com/design/a-decades-long-renovation-returns-a-midwestern-palazzo-to-it/

 

On 6/29/2020 at 5:29 PM, Phulublub said:

And for trespass, a property owner has the right to shoot a trespasser?  Proportionate response?  I think not.

 

PH

Somebody can use deadly force in Texas to stop criminal mischief...you can not shoot them for trespassing however you can shoot them for criminal mischief at night

On 7/11/2020 at 4:56 PM, mtls2005 said:

Portland Place couple who confronted protesters have a long history of not backing down

The McCloskeys have filed at least two “quiet title” suits asserting squatter’s rights on land they’ve occupied openly and hostilely — their terms — and claimed as their own. In an ongoing suit against Portland Place trustees in 2017, the McCloskeys say they are entitled to a 1,143-square-foot triangle of lawn in front of property that is set aside as common ground in the neighborhood’s indenture.

It was that patch of green protesters saw when they filed through the gate. Mark McCloskey said in an affidavit that he has defended the patch before by pointing a gun at a neighbor who had tried to cut through it.

Have you noticed a pattern of where these "making a stand for freedom" GOP types do some sort of grandstanding move, like these two, they end up drawing attention to themselves in a way that ends up being to their own detriment?  Like clerk who worked for a local gov't and posted an insult about Michele Obama, and then on closer look (sorry Seth) a long-running embezzlement scheme was uncovered?  Or someone making a fuss about Democrats and voter fraud drew attention to his district which was discovered to be a big time offender in GOP perpetrated voter fraud? 

Maybe the thing to learn here is that when somebody does a glaringly stupid stunt you'll find other stupid, and possibly criminal things they did as well.

 

 

An off topic post about Portland, Oregon has been removed.

 

A post in violation of fair use policy has been removed:

 

14) You will not post any copyrighted material except as fair use laws apply (as in the case of news articles). Please only post a link, the headline and the first three sentences.
 

Apparently there is an open investigation into "the couple". And no, it's not about a fashion crime (GUILTY).

 

While they or he, clearly committed at least one felony, and probably a few misdemeanors, can't see them being charged. Hint: they're white.

 

The right-wing neo-facists got their panty's in a bunch when word slipped about a possible indictment. tucker carlson was ranting about this before he went "on vacation".

 

 

 

 

Not sure this is a good idea...

 

 

St. Louis couple charged for pulling guns at protest

 

ST. LOUIS — St. Louis’ top prosecutor told The Associated Press on Monday that she is charging a white husband and wife with felony unlawful use of a weapon for displaying guns during a racial injustice protest outside their mansion.

 

Circuit Attorney Kim Gardner announced the charges against Mark and Patricia McCloskey, who are both personal injury attorneys in their 60s. They also face a misdemeanor charge of fourth-degree assault.

 

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/07/20/st-louis-couple-charged-guns-373517

 

 

 

 

14 minutes ago, mtls2005 said:

Not sure this is a good idea...

 

 

St. Louis couple charged for pulling guns at protest

 

ST. LOUIS — St. Louis’ top prosecutor told The Associated Press on Monday that she is charging a white husband and wife with felony unlawful use of a weapon for displaying guns during a racial injustice protest outside their mansion.

 

Circuit Attorney Kim Gardner announced the charges against Mark and Patricia McCloskey, who are both personal injury attorneys in their 60s. They also face a misdemeanor charge of fourth-degree assault.

 

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/07/20/st-louis-couple-charged-guns-373517

 

 

 

 

I guess you wait till they bust the doors down before you defend yourself. 

 

On 6/30/2020 at 5:49 AM, Phulublub said:

So what was the point of pointing the guns?  For a bit of fun?  Or as a threat that they might shoot someone? 

 

My faculties that are as operational as they need to be; but thanks for your concern.

 

PH

deterrence, and it worked, the mob backed off, deciding there was easier prey to be had

35 minutes ago, scammed said:

deterrence, and it worked, the mob backed off, deciding there was easier prey to be had

Proof of other "prey" is ?

They were on the way PAST the house to another destination if you read the article, but hey what have facts to do with your theory?

Edited July 21, 20205 yr by RJRS1301

31 minutes ago, RJRS1301 said:

Proof of other "prey" is ?

They were on the way PAST the house to another destination if you read the article, but hey what have facts to do with your theory?

they carried on to next victim in line cause this victim was armed and willing to defend.

this is the only way to meet bullies such as the mob,

the mob attacks because they have numerical superiority

 

Edited July 21, 20205 yr by scammed

5 minutes ago, scammed said:

they carried on cause they met resistance

No their plan was to protest to attempt to get the mayor to resign, unlike your invalid theory. Read the article first.

Edited July 21, 20205 yr by RJRS1301

2 minutes ago, scammed said:

they carried on to next victim in line cause this victim was armed and willing to defend

Devoid of facts.

2 minutes ago, RJRS1301 said:

No their plan was to protest to attempt to get the mayor to resign, until your invalid theory. Read the article first.

why did they invade this citizens property ?

1 minute ago, scammed said:

why did they invade this citizens property ?

Read the article and try basic comprehension . It is not that difficult, expounding an invalid theory does nothing to create credibility for you.

 

5 minutes ago, RJRS1301 said:

Read the article and try basic comprehension . It is not that difficult, expounding an invalid theory does nothing to create credibility for you.

 

"protesters damaged a wrought-iron gate at an entrance to the wealthy neighborhood."

 

that means in plain english that the mob used force to make it into the citizens property,

the mob was counting on numerical superiority to deter retaliation for damaged property,

while the citizen was counting on his firearm to deter further attacks towards him or his property.

 

the question we haev to ask is: why did the mob intrude on the property in the first place ? why did they use force to invade ?

Edited July 21, 20205 yr by scammed

43 minutes ago, scammed said:

"protesters damaged a wrought-iron gate at an entrance to the wealthy neighborhood."

Nope.

 

Disproven, keep up or move aside.

 

And stop with the "mob" nonsense. Flagrant disinformation may be welcome on AutoAdmit or the Daily stormer, but not here, I would hope.

 

 

1 hour ago, mtls2005 said:

Nope.

 

Disproven, keep up or move aside.

 

 

 

 

disproven by you ? where is your evidence ?

24 minutes ago, scammed said:

disproven by you ? where is your evidence ?

 

Rread earlier posts in this thread. 

 

Let's go to the video...

 

https://www.ksdk.com/article/news/local/video-shows-gate-was-intact-when-cwe-couple-pointed-guns-at-protesters/63-14a1582a-9372-4494-b8ee-41d5d4d71b61

 

Of course, you should feel free to "prove it".

 

 

10 minutes ago, mtls2005 said:

 

Rread earlier posts in this thread. 

 

Let's go to the video...

 

https://www.ksdk.com/article/news/local/video-shows-gate-was-intact-when-cwe-couple-pointed-guns-at-protesters/63-14a1582a-9372-4494-b8ee-41d5d4d71b61

 

Of course, you should feel free to "prove it".

 

 

"there is a portion of the gate that is broken",

and the mob broke into their private property.

Edited July 21, 20205 yr by scammed

3 minutes ago, scammed said:

"there is a portion of the gate that is broken",

 Sure, if you think so.

 

3 minutes ago, scammed said:

and the mob broke into their private property.

No, there was no mob, and the peaceful protesters did not break into private property.

 

I think you've been scammed.

 

 

9 minutes ago, mtls2005 said:

 Sure, if you think so.

 

No, there was no mob, and the peaceful protesters did not break into private property.

 

I think you've been scammed.

 

 

a video shows one of the leaders telling the mob to enter the private property,

at this point in time the video show the right gate was intact,

the video you posted from the aftermath show the right gate was broken,

so the destruction happened in between that interval.

the reporter you posted clearly states it was private property,

hens the mob had already commit crime and was trespassing

before the citizens armed them self and went out to deter them

 

Edited July 21, 20205 yr by scammed

5 hours ago, scammed said:

"protesters damaged a wrought-iron gate at an entrance to the wealthy neighborhood."

 

that means in plain english that the mob used force to make it into the citizens property,

the mob was counting on numerical superiority to deter retaliation for damaged property,

while the citizen was counting on his firearm to deter further attacks towards him or his property.

 

the question we haev to ask is: why did the mob intrude on the property in the first place ? why did they use force to invade ?

You do occupy another reality , 

Invade as opposed to enter ( illegal entry) interesting language you use

 

Edited July 21, 20205 yr by RJRS1301

An off topic troll post and inflammatory image have been removed

Common sense prevails

Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt filed briefings in support of a St. Louis couple charged for brandishing their guns at civil rights protesters outside their mansion last month, claiming self defense.

 

https://www.foxnews.com/us/missouri-ag-governor-criticize-stlouis-prosecutor

On 7/21/2020 at 1:38 PM, RJRS1301 said:

You do occupy another reality , 

Invade as opposed to enter ( illegal entry) interesting language you use

From Merriam-Webster.

 

Examples of invade in a Sentence

The troops invaded at dawn.

When tourists invade, the town is a very different place.

The cancer eventually invaded the brain.

 

Perhaps also if interest:

Examples of evade in a Sentence

Reality evaded the poster after watching MSM.