Originally Posted by Lex Luthor:
The protesters were understandably upset that the mayor chose to publicly announce the names and addresses of people who wrote to her complaining about the tactics used by the police force. It was an act of blatant intimidation by the mayor.
Was it a smart move for them to march to her house? No.
Were they justified in entering a gated community? No.
Does that give the McCloskeys the right to come running out of their house, point their weapons at them, and threaten to kill them? No.
This is what the St. Louis Circuit Attorney had to say about it:
Seems reasonable to me.
I'm sorry, People coming on my property threatening to kill my dog are not peaceful. I'll blow a hole through your kneecap before you touch my dogs. :-) [Reply]
Originally Posted by eDave:
I kinda did. Look gentlemen, they will get their shit back. But hopefully after some freaking classes or something.
Here's the deal though, for realz. I'd have been worse than them. Hence why big Dave don't own a gun. I can work the nunchucks pretty good though. Have a pair in my car and by my bedside (octagons with a fancy dragon motive).
Originally Posted by alanm:
I'm sorry, People coming on my property threatening to kill my dog are not peaceful. I'll blow a hole through your kneecap before you touch my dogs. :-)
They weren't on the McCloskey's property. If they had been, my position would be different. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Lex Luthor:
They weren't on the McCloskey's property. If they had been, my position would be different.
They don’t have to be in McClosky’s property for McCloskys to be able to use self defense. Say they owned a condo. People are marching down the hallway. They start pounding on the door of McClosky’s condo yelling that they are going to break in and kill them. Legally do the McClosky’s have the right to open the door while bearing arms? In this country, generally, yes. In New York and some other states, maybe not because there is the potential to retreat.
But Missouri is a stand your ground state, if I’m correct. As such, they have every right to come outside and stop intruders from coming onto their property. Can they have firearms? The law generally requires one to be ‘reasonable’. Considering: the damage crowds had done to nearby properties (In St Louis); the crowds breaking down barriers to public entry; the number of people there; and the repeated threats from the crowd to kill the McCloskys, I think that the answer is very much ‘yes’. [Reply]
Originally Posted by alanm:
I'm sorry, People coming on my property threatening to kill my dog are not peaceful. I'll blow a hole through your kneecap before you touch my dogs. :-)
Originally Posted by GloryDayz:
I think those poor-ass bitches were just mad that, unlike that couple, they're all useless failures and live in shitholes.
Their all college drop outs who owe thousands of dollars they can't repay wasted on useless courses that don't apply in the real world. They would have been better off using the $$ they borrowed on a tech course they would have been using now. Probably earning upward over $50.000 a yr. OR joining the Military and getting there college paid for free. All I can say is their Mom failed them. Any one of them with a Dad would have had there ass kicked a few times. [Reply]
