Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Daily Mail)   Missouri lawyer couple who brandished an AR-15 and a handgun at protesters now say the protesters broke down their mansion gate and claim they were 'in fear of our lives' and were told they 'would be killed'   (dailymail.co.uk) divider line
    More: Followup  
•       •       •

3915 clicks; posted to Main » on 29 Jun 2020 at 9:30 PM (6 days ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

 
6 days ago  
139 votes:
FTA,: In a separate interview he said: 'I really thought it was storming the Bastille, that we would be dead and the house would be burned',

Bullshiat. If you thought the revolution had reached that point you would have stuffed your money in your pockets and ran out the back door on your stubby little legs. Your guns would have just slowed you down and you would have dropped them. If this was Bastille (and it may yet go there with this being 2020) you wouldn't be farking around on your lawn as the mob approached

You were looking to confront unarmed protestors who wanted absolutely nothing to do with you. Your precious wrought iron gate triggered you that much? The entire crowd was recorded and that footage is admissible. Go press vandalising and trespassing charges.

Their first amendment right to  protest their government is sacred. Walking down your "private street" just isn't that farking important. Go fark yourself and your low rent gun moll larper wife.
 
6 days ago  
112 votes:
They reference the storming of the Bastille, casting themselves as the wealthy monarchy finally being targeted for abusing the rest of their society.
They are *almost* self-aware.

Also, their story?

Fark user imageView Full Size
 
6 days ago  
95 votes:
If a black man in North St Louis had pointed a gun at a bunch of white people walking by, how do you suppose this would have turned out?
 
6 days ago  
86 votes:
They're not sorry for what they did, and they're not even sorry you were offended.

They're only sorry they got caught.
 
6 days ago  
82 votes:

Megathuma: They reference the storming of the Bastille, casting themselves as the wealthy monarchy finally being targeted for abusing the rest of their society.
They are *almost* self-aware.

Also, their story?

[Fark user image image 254x254]


They are quite self aware. If they had really felt endangered they would have fled or locked themselves inside. Had the "mob" armed they would have died right there on their farking mansion.

They knew they were safe. They knew they could pull this shiat.
 
6 days ago  
67 votes:
Idk a lot about handguns, but judging by the pose marshmallow barbie is standing in and holding that gun, were she to pull the trigger not only would she likely miss wildly, but the kick would probably send the gun straight to her face.
 
6 days ago  
64 votes:
I can only say if anyone points a gun at you, like that nice middle aged woman, shoot them dead if you can.
 
6 days ago  
59 votes:

pedrop357: Other than some shiatty trigger discipline, they did nothing wrong.


Wow. Poor trigger discipline with a cell phone has killed how many unarmed people without consequence? How many range accidents killed people because of poor firearm control and trigger discipline? They are lethal instruments and waving them around is an immediate lethal threat. A cop would have shot them instantly if it was in their direction. So yeah, they did nothing wrong other than endanger everyone in front of the muzzle of that gun with potential instant death.
 
6 days ago  
43 votes:

WastrelWay: I guess the mainstream media will tell us this is fake.

[i.dailymail.co.uk image 850x686]
You know, you can stand on your front porch with a gun to warn off people if you want. If you have to fire the gun at them, that's different.


TFA:

A livestream of the incident shows the protesters walking through an open, intact gate

So I guess the Daily Mail is now part of your far-left MSM now. Also, the entire crown just hopped over the top half of that gate one by one, seeing as the bottom half looks undamaged.
 
6 days ago  
37 votes:

pedrop357: edmo: If a black man in North St Louis had pointed a gun at a bunch of white people walking by, how do you suppose this would have turned out?

Did they number in the dozens while trespassing in a gated community and making threats?


Maybe you're not catching on. I'll spell it out.

Switch the colors of all involved, and St Louis SWAT would have shown up and gunned them down. Questions?
 
6 days ago  
37 votes:
Here's my unqualified guess as to what happened:

Two well-off white people saw a group of black folk in the distance and brandished their firearms in order to intimidate and attempt to show superiority.  That's it.
 
6 days ago  
35 votes:
Did the protesters say something threatening like "we came unarmed...this time"?
 
6 days ago  
33 votes:
Narrator: "They're lying."
 
6 days ago  
30 votes:

WastrelWay: I guess the mainstream media will tell us this is fake.

[i.dailymail.co.uk image 850x686]
You know, you can stand on your front porch with a gun to warn off people if you want. If you have to fire the gun at them, that's different.


It's probably real, but here's the tricky thing:
Fark user imageView Full Size

It's not the gate to their mansion like the article says. It's the gate to their street.

At any rate, I literally do not give two shiats if the couple were within their rights or not. Don't go outside and brandish guns at strangers. Literally nothing good has ever come from that, as they're learning right now.
 
6 days ago  
28 votes:
It's goddamn amazing to me that, in the middle of a nationwide protest over how our supposed rights are arbitrarily and unfairly skewed against some people, people are saying "no, see, they were within their rights to threaten those protestors with guns," and think they're making a valid point.
 
6 days ago  
26 votes:
Oh bull farking schitt. Their mansion has no gate. They live on a gated street and the protesters did go through the gate to that street.

As for feeling threatened for their lives, yeah, I can see that. They both look like a couple of pearl clutchers. But, if they felt threatened for their lives then why did they both go outside? The safest place for them to be in a situation like that is inside, behind walls. So, no, they did not feel threatened. They most likely went outside because they wanted to try and intimidate the protesters. In short they were the ones threatening. 

And, in Missouri, brandishing a weapon in a threatening gesture to scare or intimidate someone is against the law. The only reason they are claiming they felt threatened is because they know they f*cked up and committed a crime. So they are claiming that their lives were threatened so as to justify what they did. And sadly, given that they are white and wealthy they will probably get away with it, too, because their lawyer is going to go on and on and on and on and on about how the protesters went onto a private street, and most likely they will have a jury of their peers (white, non-poor) who will sympathize with them.

Yeah, yeah, I get it, the protesters should not have gone onto that private street. But what the couple did, especially that c*unt, who pointed that pistol directly at protesters while she had her finger on the f*cking trigger, was much worse, the more so because in Missouri you cannot use deadly force to protect your property. They are extremely lucky that the protest was of a peaceful nature.
 
6 days ago  
23 votes:
I'm no metallurgical expert, but I think it would take a concerted effort to do this kind of damage to a wrought-iron gate:

Fark user imageView Full Size


The protesters don't look heavy enough to have been able to bend it like that. The McCloskeys certainly do.

If the couple has any brains, they already had a security camera pointed at the gate. I'm guessing some of the video will have been conveniently erased.
 
6 days ago  
23 votes:
Brandishing is a crime. I hope they get charged.
 
6 days ago  
23 votes:
I guess the mainstream media will tell us this is fake.

i.dailymail.co.ukView Full Size

You know, you can stand on your front porch with a gun to warn off people if you want. If you have to fire the gun at them, that's different.
 
6 days ago  
21 votes:
The looked more drunk than pissed off.  Imagine all the laws these two lowlifes have broken.  You wanna break laws, become a lawyer.  Hopefully this event will cause them nothing but grief.
 
6 days ago  
20 votes:

WastrelWay: I guess the mainstream media will tell us this is fake.

[i.dailymail.co.uk image 850x686]
You know, you can stand on your front porch with a gun to warn off people if you want. If you have to fire the gun at them, that's different.


You know the article also states that the protestor footage shows the gate being open and not broken and there is no footage of someone breaking the gate...
 
6 days ago  
19 votes:
When I first saw this, I thought they were in front of a courthouse or office building before I realized it was their house (if you want to call something like that a "house"). 

Lawyerin' sure does pay well in America, I suppose.
 
6 days ago  
19 votes:

Murflette: Idk a lot about handguns, but judging by the pose marshmallow barbie is standing in and holding that gun, were she to pull the trigger not only would she likely miss wildly, but the kick would probably send the gun straight to her face.


Idk if you can find the photo in this article but there's one photo of Suburbia Bonnie  with her finger engaged on the trigger. NRA spokesmodel material.

Yeah, I get it, it's legal to act like an asshole in front of your Castle with your sidearm. Hooray.
 
6 days ago  
19 votes:
Other than some shiatty trigger discipline, they did nothing wrong.
 
6 days ago  
18 votes:
WastrelWay: I guess the mainstream media will tell us this is fake.

Fark user imageView Full Size


Here is footage from video of the actual protest:

Fark user imageView Full Size


If you go to Google street view (intersection of Porland Place and Kingshighway Boulevard) you can see it is the same gate, the top image taken from behind the gate and looking at the North side of Pershing Place) and the bottom image looking in from outside the gate.

In the protest video that gate is in fact intact. And have you done any sort of work iron fencing or iron gates? That stuff is pretty darned strong. It would take significant force, such as with a sledgehammer, to basically bend a gate half like that. So, do you still think that the protesters broke the gate to get inside when in fact the gate was actually open? Or perhaps this pair of lawyers did it after the fact to make it look like the protesters were in fact "storming the Bastille"?
 
6 days ago  
18 votes:

I_told_you_so: This is one of those two wrongs situations. Protesters are not entitled to go on private property and threaten residents just by their numbers, and the home owners shouldn't be brandishing firearms. I can't necessarily fault the home owners.


The mayor lives in there and earlier in the day she doxxed people on live television, so I'm willing to cut them a little slack if they wanted to go let her know how they felt about that.
 
6 days ago  
16 votes:
Also, I'd like to add: for as much as people insist that the proliferation in guns in America are to deter tyranny, it's sure weird how the only ones with guns in this story are the wealthy socialites that likened themselves to French nobility in the French revolution, brandishing them at protestors marching upon their mayor's house.
 
6 days ago  
16 votes:
"Police said Monday that the McCloskeys would not be charged"

Yeah, that is bullschitt. She pointed a pistol directly at people, and she had her f*cking finger on the trigger.
 
6 days ago  
16 votes:

yohohogreengiant: FTA,: In a separate interview he said: 'I really thought it was storming the Bastille, that we would be dead and the house would be burned',

Bullshiat. If you thought the revolution had reached that point you would have stuffed your money in your pockets and ran out the back door on your stubby little legs. Your guns would have just slowed you down and you would have dropped them. If this was Bastille (and it may yet go there with this being 2020) you wouldn't be farking around on your lawn as the mob approached

You were looking to confront unarmed protestors who wanted absolutely nothing to do with you. Your precious wrought iron gate triggered you that much? The entire crowd was recorded and that footage is admissible. Go press vandalising and trespassing charges.

Their first amendment right to  protest their government is sacred. Walking down your "private street" just isn't that farking important. Go fark yourself and your low rent gun moll larper wife.



when the 1% hops in a plane and flies to their overseas homes in Europe, etc, then you'll know they are truly afraid.

otherwise, they are just playing for the sympathy vote.
 
6 days ago  
15 votes:
outside their $1.5million mansion in to a well-to-do St. Louis neighborhood.

Police said Monday that the McCloskeys would not be charged


The American justice system in a nutshell, folks.
 
6 days ago  
15 votes:
Utter bullshiat. The existing evidence doesn't back up their spurious claims, and we've seen some of that evidence already.

No, you're looking at two morons who just realized that they've committed a felony and have thrown themselves on the court of public opinion in an effort to convince folks that they shouldn't be charged.
 
6 days ago  
15 votes:

js34603: yohohogreengiant: Megathuma: They reference the storming of the Bastille, casting themselves as the wealthy monarchy finally being targeted for abusing the rest of their society.
They are *almost* self-aware.

Also, their story?

[Fark user image image 254x254]

They are quite self aware. If they had really felt endangered they would have fled or locked themselves inside. Had the "mob" armed they would have died right there on their farking mansion.

They knew they were safe. They knew they could pull this shiat.

Private property is like, a myth anyway. You can't own property man, if these racial justice freedom fighters want to protest in your yard, it is your duty and obligation as an ally to run inside and lock yourself up and hope they don't need to destroy anything of yours to achieve racial equality.


Except they didn't protest in their yard, they protested on the sidewalk.
 
6 days ago  
15 votes:
Utter bullshiat.

Arrest the asshats, or admit you favor white elites over mixed protestors, Mayor Lyda Krewson, you farking biatch.
 
6 days ago  
14 votes:
They won't be charged.  If I point a gun at anyone in any circumstance and don't open fire, I'm being charged.
 
6 days ago  
14 votes:
They're both lawyers.  They lie for a living and get well paid for it.
 
6 days ago  
13 votes:

ColonelCathcart: Waiting for a mob to break in is a terrible idea from a tactical perspective. You have no visibility or control over the situation once they are inside.


Your takes just keep getting worse and worse.  A fortified position with windows (for visibility) and doors (to bottleneck attackers) is now harder to defend than an open position in which the number of potential attackers is greater the the number of rounds in your mag?

Are you brain damaged?  Where did you get your tactical training?  George Armstrong Custer University?
 
6 days ago  
13 votes:

ColonelCathcart: Mock26: WastrelWay: You know, you can stand on your front porch with a gun to warn off people if you want.

Section 571.030, Revised Statutes of Missouri, A person commits the offense of unlawful use of weapons, except as otherwise provided by sections 571.101 to 571.121, if he or she knowingly:

(4)  Exhibits, in the presence of one or more persons, any weapon readily capable of lethal use in an angry or threatening manner; or

Check the other provisions and castle doctrine and stand your ground and "reasonable person in fear of their life" loophole...

Pretty sure no charges will be filed other than for the rioters and trespassers.


LOL.  You mean the peaceful people who walked through an open gate onto a street that, while possibly private, didn't belong to the people pointing the guns?  Could you BE more full of shiat?

I say we check the easement status.  It's possible that street was actually public property.  Rich assholes constantly gate off streets they don't actually own to keep out "those people".
 
6 days ago  
13 votes:
That gate leads into a historic housing district and that street is, in fact, according to city maps, a public thoroughfare. Just because there is a gate on your block, the street isn't your property. The gate is there to limit vehicular traffic.
 
6 days ago  
13 votes:

State_College_Arsonist: [Fark user image 595x414]

That's a fair call in my book.  The protests of late have a marked tendency for violence and destruction, so when the mob is at your door, an AR-15 is definitely appropriate.


Oh look, a liar...back from the dead.
 
6 days ago  
13 votes:

WastrelWay: I guess the mainstream media will tell us this is fake.

[i.dailymail.co.uk image 850x686]
You know, you can stand on your front porch with a gun to warn off people if you want. If you have to fire the gun at them, that's different.


Damn right it's fake.

Fark user imageView Full Size


Christ, what assholes.
 
6 days ago  
13 votes:
They didn't bring guillotines. This time.
 
6 days ago  
12 votes:
Where was all this concern and pearl-clutching from the Trumper crowd when those cops in Chicago broke into Bobby Rush's office to chill and have snacks? Oh wait, he's black and a Democrat and the perps were likely Trump supporters too, so it was totally cool with them.
 
6 days ago  
12 votes:

ColonelCathcart: MattytheMouse: WastrelWay: I guess the mainstream media will tell us this is fake.

[i.dailymail.co.uk image 850x686]
You know, you can stand on your front porch with a gun to warn off people if you want. If you have to fire the gun at them, that's different.

It's probably real, but here's the tricky thing:
[Fark user image image 850x566]
It's not the gate to their mansion like the article says. It's the gate to their street.

At any rate, I literally do not give two shiats if the couple were within their rights or not. Don't go outside and brandish guns at strangers. Literally nothing good has ever come from that, as they're learning right now.

So...stay inside and let them come in or destroy your property from the outside? Is that your advice?


YES.

Oh my Dog, how is running outside to meet a bunch of protestors that you think mean you harm--they didn't--not an incredibly bad idea?

If the protestors were there to do damage--they didn't--the home owners are millionaires. They could easily replace facades and resod their lawns. I know this, because they've owned the house since the 80s and they're well-known in the area for having previously restored the house.

You can replace windows. You can't replace a life.

At any rate, if the protestors had broken inside--again, they didn't--then sure... By all means, get your guns. But as I've reiterated numerous times already, that didn't happen, so them running outside with their guns was a really, really, really dumb thing to do.
 
6 days ago  
12 votes:

I_told_you_so: This is one of those two wrongs situations. Protesters are not entitled to go on private property and threaten residents just by their numbers, and the home owners shouldn't be brandishing firearms. I can't necessarily fault the home owners.


They have a right to protect their lives and property, but based on what they are saying they would have actually had to go into the house, grab their guns, and then come back out to confront the crowd.  Why come back out at all?  It's the needless confrontation that's idiotic.  They made the situation much less safe for everyone including themselves.  Just stay inside, hug your guns, and hope that nothing serious happens.
 
6 days ago  
12 votes:
This is one of those two wrongs situations. Protesters are not entitled to go on private property and threaten residents just by their numbers, and the home owners shouldn't be brandishing firearms. I can't necessarily fault the home owners.
 
6 days ago  
12 votes:
The police officially labeled them "victims." And really, If you can't trust the police, then who... If you can't trust the police, then who... If you can't...

I'm sorry guys, there's a cop in full riot gear trying to bash my head in right now, I'll get back to you.

Tear gas, really? I'm on the toilet!
 
6 days ago  
12 votes:

PaulRB: Somebody actually pays these people to be lawyers?

I should be surprised, but people also voted for Trump.


They're ambulance chasers.  If you don't get paid, they don't get paid. They take their cut first off the top.
 
6 days ago  
12 votes:
Several years ago, I was on a jury in a terroristic threatening case. The crime. A guy pointed a rifle at his ex-wife.

Everything on the planet is being recorded these days.  Was this scene recorded?
 
6 days ago  
12 votes:

Jake Havechek: They're both lawyers.  They lie for a living and get well paid for it.


Gotta wonder if this was Phelps westboro kind of trolling, but I'm tired and can't really see the angle for that.

Nah, they're rich, white, privileged, and eager to show off their firearm accessories. I hope we have a future that will replay these images and collectively shiat on these two's memory
 
6 days ago  
12 votes:
Somebody actually pays these people to be lawyers?

I should be surprised, but people also voted for Trump.
 
6 days ago  
11 votes:
Fark user imageView Full Size


That's a fair call in my book.  The protests of late have a marked tendency for violence and destruction, so when the mob is at your door, an AR-15 is definitely appropriate.
 
6 days ago  
11 votes:
These assholes don't know when to shut up. I guess they're eyeing some $$$ from griftworld where it flows endlessly. Meanwhile from TFA:

"McCloskey claims they acted when protesters broke down the gates to get inside the private property but a livestream from a protesters should the gate open and them walking inside where they were immediately confronted by McCloskey with a rifle "

Fark user imageView Full Size
 
6 days ago  
10 votes:
If they seriously thought their lives were in danger, they'd have holed up in their panic room.
A house like this? Yeah, it has a panic room.
Fark user imageView Full Size


You know who else whines like a little baby when some protestors protest legally outside his residence?
Fark user imageView Full Size

this worthless fatass.
 
6 days ago  
10 votes:

pedrop357: Other than some shiatty trigger discipline, they did nothing wrong.


i.kym-cdn.comView Full Size
 
6 days ago  
10 votes:
Here are some comparisons, from the intersection of Portland Place/Pershing Place and Kingshighway Boulevard. There are two pedestrian and one automobile gate onto Portland Place and from Google street view you can tell that it is the northernmost pedestrian gate.

The first image shows the street view looking West through the gate down Portland Place and shows a screen capture taken from the video taken by one of the protesters. Note the tree in the background. It is the same tree.

Fark user imageView Full Size


The second image shows a picture of the gate that was supposedly damaged gate, looking East down Pershing Place from Portland place, and shows a Google street view screen capture looking East down Portland Place. Note the light pole.

Yeah, maybe it is likely that the protesters decided to destroy the gate, but if so it seems extremely unlikely they did it while they went through the gate onto Portland Place. They may have done it while leaving, but that is not what the lawyers claimed, and it seems unlikely that the protesters would march back out the same way they came in, past two armed lunatics, when there are two more places to exit this private street.
 
6 days ago  
10 votes:

Skleenar: State_College_Arsonist: [Fark user image 595x414]

That's a fair call in my book.  The protests of late have a marked tendency for violence and destruction, so when the mob is at your door, an AR-15 is definitely appropriate.

GATE LIVES MATTER.

If the protesters weren't murderous thugs intent on pillage, they would have opened the gate like these polite people:

[Fark user image 850x477]


Okay, now that's interesting. When did this:
Fark user imageView Full Size


Become this:

Fark user imageView Full Size
 
6 days ago  
10 votes:

edmo: pedrop357: edmo: If a black man in North St Louis had pointed a gun at a bunch of white people walking by, how do you suppose this would have turned out?

Did they number in the dozens while trespassing in a gated community and making threats?

Maybe you're not catching on. I'll spell it out.

Switch the colors of all involved, and St Louis SWAT would have shown up and gunned them down. Questions?


Isn't that the exact same thing people on Fark said about the white people with guns in Minnesota that didn't get arrested? That if they were black they'd have been summarily executed by the police?

And then during the BLM protests there were in fact black people protesting with guns and they weren't summarily executed despite people particularly here swearing that would happen just like you are now?

Anyway my question is how do you get chili stains out of a dress shirt? It's got the red tomato plus a little grease, I can't get it out for the life of me, and I really like this shirt.
 
6 days ago  
10 votes:

Megathuma: They reference the storming of the Bastille, casting themselves as the wealthy monarchy finally being targeted for abusing the rest of their society.
They are *almost* self-aware.

Also, their story?

[Fark user image 254x254]


the biggest chicken shiats on the planet reside in the richest 1% circles.

they even prefer the little people's kids fight in their wars overseas.
 
6 days ago  
9 votes:

State_College_Arsonist: [Fark user image image 595x414]

That's a fair call in my book.  The protests of late have a marked tendency for violence and destruction, so when the mob is at your door, an AR-15 is definitely appropriate.


Seems the height of privilege to think you're entitled to break down someone's gate and trespass on private property without consequences just because you're a special little snowflake.

These idiots need to realize not every place is Seattle. Let you voice be heard on public property and businesses and homeowners, and if you choose not to, don't go crying if you reminded you're not entitled forcibly enter private property.

Still bad trigger discipline though.
 
6 days ago  
9 votes:

MattytheMouse: WastrelWay: I guess the mainstream media will tell us this is fake.

[i.dailymail.co.uk image 850x686]
You know, you can stand on your front porch with a gun to warn off people if you want. If you have to fire the gun at them, that's different.

It's probably real, but here's the tricky thing:
[Fark user image 850x566]
It's not the gate to their mansion like the article says. It's the gate to their street.

At any rate, I literally do not give two shiats if the couple were within their rights or not. Don't go outside and brandish guns at strangers. Literally nothing good has ever come from that, as they're learning right now.


Ah, exactly what I was wondering.  So it is actually a community gate.

The way the woman was pointing her gun at people was absolutely against all firearm safety rules.  At the very minimum she should lose her license for that.  Someone could have easily been killed.  FFS, it's not a pointing device.  He wasn't much better.  If he'd have accidentally shot his wife this would have been something special.  So 2020.
 
6 days ago  
9 votes:

Cythraul: Megathuma: They reference the storming of the Bastille, casting themselves as the wealthy monarchy finally being targeted for abusing the rest of their society.
They are *almost* self-aware.

Also, their story?

[Fark user image image 254x254]

Storming the Bastille?   Wasn't that place a prison? So... their mansion is a prison?


You be the judge, I guess. Looks more like a posh private mental institution to me.


Fark user imageView Full Size
 
6 days ago  
9 votes:
FTFA:

"But a livestream from a protestor showed the gate open and them walking inside where they were immediately confronted by McCloskey with a rifle"


/some corrections assumed from the Fails shiatty copy editing.
 
6 days ago  
9 votes:

WastrelWay: I guess the mainstream media will tell us this is fake.

[i.dailymail.co.uk image 850x686]
You know, you can stand on your front porch with a gun to warn off people if you want. If you have to fire the gun at them, that's different.


No.. no you can't.  Well you can't point it at them at any rate.
 
6 days ago  
9 votes:

PaulRB: The looked more drunk than pissed off.  Imagine all the laws these two lowlifes have broken.  You wanna break laws, become a lawyer.  Hopefully this event will cause them nothing but grief.


correction:

These two looked more drunk than pissed off.  Imagine all the laws these two lowlifes have broken.  You wanna break laws, become a lawyer.  Hopefully this event will cause them nothing but grief.
 
5 days ago  
8 votes:

way south: Apparently they were pro-blm lefties that supported these marches.
Up until the mob came for them. It's probably safe to assume they don't support it as much now.

[Fark user image image 850x478]


Also, they're not "pro-blm lefties".  That screenshot supposedly showing that they donate to ActBlue was a lie pushed by (surprise, surprise) some Turning Point USA tool.  It's a screenshot of some guy in Michigan who works for a hospital and just so happens to have the same name.

Fark user imageView Full Size


Fark user imageView Full Size



In reality, they're....are you sitting down for this?  They're Trumphumpers.

Fark user imageView Full Size
 
5 days ago  
8 votes:

bigbadideasinaction: yohohogreengiant: Murflette: Idk a lot about handguns, but judging by the pose marshmallow barbie is standing in and holding that gun, were she to pull the trigger not only would she likely miss wildly, but the kick would probably send the gun straight to her face.

Idk if you can find the photo in this article but there's one photo of Suburbia Bonnie  with her finger engaged on the trigger. NRA spokesmodel material.

Yeah, I get it, it's legal to act like an asshole in front of your Castle with your sidearm. Hooray.

Funny, the fark NRA fellatio squad haven't come down hard on her. I wonder why she's automatically deemed responsible and not a thug?


For the same reason they didn't say shiat about the killing of a CCW holder in Minnesota.
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
6 days ago  
8 votes:

middlewaytao: Public road, public sidewalk.

https://twitter.com/IamShaneMorris/sta​tus/1277509594051416070


a_room_with_a_moose: The St. Louis Street Department (whatever the hell that is - where I come from, we just have Public Works Departments) is reporting that it is a private street.

https://www.channel3000.com/st-louis-c​ouple-pulls-firearms-on-protesters-cut​ting-through-their-private-street/


Looks to me like some rich assholes who live on the Mayor's street decided to get together an "declare" their street (and the access street Lake Ave.) "private" without having the actual authority to do so.  Like so many rich assholes do in so many other places.  Put up a gate and a sign, and if someone asks, make a campaign contribution.

If you look at the entrance to Lake Ave on street view, there's a cute little sign declaring it private, while a few yards beyond, there's a big city-owned construction sign because the city is paying to resurface it. So yeah... not private property, and DEFINITELY not owned by the two human Hostess Cakes with guns.
 
6 days ago  
8 votes:

yohohogreengiant: Murflette: Idk a lot about handguns, but judging by the pose marshmallow barbie is standing in and holding that gun, were she to pull the trigger not only would she likely miss wildly, but the kick would probably send the gun straight to her face.

Idk if you can find the photo in this article but there's one photo of Suburbia Bonnie  with her finger engaged on the trigger. NRA spokesmodel material.

Yeah, I get it, it's legal to act like an asshole in front of your Castle with your sidearm. Hooray.


Is it? You think a black or brown person in the  'hood would not get shot buy the cops for doing the same?
 
6 days ago  
8 votes:
Gosh, if only the protesters had guns then everybody would have been safe.  Self defense and all.
 
6 days ago  
7 votes:

GrinzGrimly: Seems the height of privilege to think you're entitled to break down someone's gate and trespass on private property without consequences just because you're a special little snowflake.


They didn't break down the gate.

Fark user imageView Full Size
 
6 days ago  
7 votes:

MattytheMouse: ColonelCathcart: MattytheMouse: WastrelWay: I guess the mainstream media will tell us this is fake.

[i.dailymail.co.uk image 850x686]
You know, you can stand on your front porch with a gun to warn off people if you want. If you have to fire the gun at them, that's different.

It's probably real, but here's the tricky thing:
[Fark user image image 850x566]
It's not the gate to their mansion like the article says. It's the gate to their street.

At any rate, I literally do not give two shiats if the couple were within their rights or not. Don't go outside and brandish guns at strangers. Literally nothing good has ever come from that, as they're learning right now.

So...stay inside and let them come in or destroy your property from the outside? Is that your advice?

YES.

Oh my Dog, how is running outside to meet a bunch of protestors that you think mean you harm--they didn't--not an incredibly bad idea?

If the protestors were there to do damage--they didn't--the home owners are millionaires. They could easily replace facades and resod their lawns. I know this, because they've owned the house since the 80s and they're well-known in the area for having previously restored the house.

You can replace windows. You can't replace a life.

At any rate, if the protestors had broken inside--again, they didn't--then sure... By all means, get your guns. But as I've reiterated numerous times already, that didn't happen, so them running outside with their guns was a really, really, really dumb thing to do.


Waiting for a mob to break in is a terrible idea from a tactical perspective. You have no visibility or control over the situation once they are inside.

I'm sorry, but I have to politely disagree with the waiting part.

I do agree that pulling out a weapon is a bad idea, but it's way worse to let something bad happen.

/never underestimate the stupidity of people in large numbers and it only takes one idiot to make a mob of people violent
//this applies to *all* mobs
 
6 days ago  
7 votes:

waxbeans: cyberspacedout: I'm no metallurgical expert, but I think it would take a concerted effort to do this kind of damage to a wrought-iron gate:

[Fark user image image 850x686]

The protesters don't look heavy enough to have been able to bend it like that. The McCloskeys certainly do.

If the couple has any brains, they already had a security camera pointed at the gate. I'm guessing some of the video will have been conveniently erased.

Look at that damage. The fence gave quicker than the lock?
LOL.


Also, as I already said, apparently the entire crowd also hopped over the broken gate one at a time.

But has already been stated, there is video of them going through an unbroken gate.
 
6 days ago  
7 votes:

nitefallz: They won't be charged.  If I point a gun at anyone in any circumstance and don't open fire, I'm being charged.


They are both wealthy lawyers.  It would be a welcome surprise if they are actually charged.
 
6 days ago  
7 votes:
I bet they say a lot of things. And I've been a lot of it's not true. And they could he get well paid for saying those things.

But in the end there are couple of whiny babies who wanted to feel tough.
 
6 days ago  
7 votes:

Murflette: Idk a lot about handguns, but judging by the pose marshmallow barbie is standing in and holding that gun, were she to pull the trigger not only would she likely miss wildly, but the kick would probably send the gun straight to her face.


Also, it looks like homeboy is planning to hip-fire his AR-15 into the crowd.
 
6 days ago  
7 votes:

PreMortem: I can only say if anyone points a gun at you, like that nice middle aged woman, shoot them dead if you can.


I concur.
 
6 days ago  
6 votes:

GrinzGrimly: Seems the height of privilege to think you're entitled to break down someone's gate and trespass on private property without consequences just because you're a special little snowflake.


Neither of which happened.  The street is not private, and nobody broke down a gate to get onto it.

Please try again later.
 
6 days ago  
6 votes:
Getting away with painting your guns at unarmed protestors, that's white privileged IRL. Yeah and they know it
 
6 days ago  
6 votes:

GrinzGrimly: State_College_Arsonist: [Fark user image image 595x414]

That's a fair call in my book.  The protests of late have a marked tendency for violence and destruction, so when the mob is at your door, an AR-15 is definitely appropriate.

Seems the height of privilege to think you're entitled to break down someone's gate and trespass on private property without consequences just because you're a special little snowflake.

These idiots need to realize not every place is Seattle. Let you voice be heard on public property and businesses and homeowners, and if you choose not to, don't go crying if you reminded you're not entitled forcibly enter private property.

Still bad trigger discipline though.


I think we've pretty throughly established that the protesters didn't break down the gate.
 
6 days ago  
6 votes:

State_College_Arsonist: [Fark user image 595x414]

That's a fair call in my book.  The protests of late have a marked tendency for violence and destruction, so when the mob is at your door, an AR-15 is definitely appropriate.


That is not the gate during the protest.

This is:

Fark user imageView Full Size
 
6 days ago  
6 votes:

Prank Call of Cthulhu: State_College_Arsonist: That's a fair call in my book.  The protests of late have a marked tendency for violence and destruction, so when the mob is at your door, an AR-15 is definitely appropriate.

Protip: If you have n bullets, as long as there are at least n+1 determined mob members, your ass is grass.


Who volunteers to go first? You?
 
6 days ago  
6 votes:
i just can't get over the lady being barefoot.

i HATE wearing shoes. now that i live in FL and don't deal with snow i NEVER wear shoes unless i'm in a public business where it's required/polite to do so. i run and exercise without shoes. i pick beach bars/restaurants for dinner based on if they require shoes...

BUT if i'm expecting a tornado, or fleeing a hurricane, or hiking in the jungle around venomous snakes, i damn sure wear shoes. sturdy, thick-soled boots even.

if these assholes sincerely thought they were seconds away from needing to literally kill other people, and physically run for their very lives over uncertain terrain, she would DEFINITELY have put on shoes. and not strappy sandals or heels either.

being barefoot proves she was just cosplaying as a tough old broad. and doing a VERY shiatty job of it.
 
6 days ago  
6 votes:
I reiterate: the protest was headed to the mayor's house.

The mayor lives in a gated area. That, alone, tells you something about them.

No, these idiot need to be arrested and charged with assault with a deadly weapon, because they *did* point them.
 
6 days ago  
6 votes:

Mock26: WastrelWay: I guess the mainstream media will tell us this is fake.

[Fark user image 850x686]

Here is footage from video of the actual protest:

[Fark user image 850x477]

If you go to Google street view (intersection of Porland Place and Kingshighway Boulevard) you can see it is the same gate, the top image taken from behind the gate and looking at the North side of Pershing Place) and the bottom image looking in from outside the gate.

In the protest video that gate is in fact intact. And have you done any sort of work iron fencing or iron gates? That stuff is pretty darned strong. It would take significant force, such as with a sledgehammer, to basically bend a gate half like that. So, do you still think that the protesters broke the gate to get inside when in fact the gate was actually open? Or perhaps this pair of lawyers did it after the fact to make it look like the protesters were in fact "storming the Bastille"?


Of course, there is the possibility that some protesters broke the gate on the way out, as petty revenge for getting an AR and a Walther pulled on them by pink grimace and Hamburgler's girlfriend.
 
6 days ago  
6 votes:

Fireproof: waxbeans: cyberspacedout: I'm no metallurgical expert, but I think it would take a concerted effort to do this kind of damage to a wrought-iron gate:

[Fark user image image 850x686]

The protesters don't look heavy enough to have been able to bend it like that. The McCloskeys certainly do.

If the couple has any brains, they already had a security camera pointed at the gate. I'm guessing some of the video will have been conveniently erased.

Look at that damage. The fence gave quicker than the lock?
LOL.

Also, as I already said, apparently the entire crowd also hopped over the broken gate one at a time.

But has already been stated, there is video of them going through an unbroken gate.


Sounds like trespassing either way.
 
6 days ago  
6 votes:

WastrelWay: You know, you can stand on your front porch with a gun to warn off people if you want.


Section 571.030, Revised Statutes of Missouri, A person commits the offense of unlawful use of weapons, except as otherwise provided by sections 571.101 to 571.121, if he or she knowingly:

(4)  Exhibits, in the presence of one or more persons, any weapon readily capable of lethal use in an angry or threatening manner; or
 
6 days ago  
6 votes:
People who demonstrate so blatantly that they have no business handling guns should be forced to always wear mittens in public. We obviously can't take their guns because reasons, but we need to do something to get people like that to start thinking. I think sentenced to mittens would work because it would be inconvenient, somewhat embarrassing during the summer, will prevent them from getting all shooty-bangbang because Ooga Booga Scary Brown People and is a little less harsh than my original plan to start making examples out of such kidults.

My original plan was to just cut their index fingers odd, but someone pointed out that's something the Saudi crime family tends to do and we've already let far too much of their old-world stink foul up our "government".
 
6 days ago  
6 votes:

Megathuma: They reference the storming of the Bastille, casting themselves as the wealthy monarchy finally being targeted for abusing the rest of their society.
They are *almost* self-aware.

Also, their story?

[Fark user image image 254x254]


Storming the Bastille?   Wasn't that place a prison? So... their mansion is a prison?
 
6 days ago  
6 votes:

edmo: If a black man in North St Louis had pointed a gun at a bunch of white people walking by, how do you suppose this would have turned out?


Did they number in the dozens while trespassing in a gated community and making threats?
 
5 days ago  
5 votes:

Uncontrolled_Jibe: yohohogreengiant: Jake Havechek: They're both lawyers.  They lie for a living and get well paid for it.

Gotta wonder if this was Phelps westboro kind of trolling, but I'm tired and can't really see the angle for that.

Nah, they're rich, white, privileged, and eager to show off their firearm accessories. I hope we have a future that will replay these images and collectively shiat on these two's memory

So, a future where they would have been killed?


No, they weren't killed or even assaulted. Just stop it with that shiat. In this timeline these privileged entitled farks got to point their firearms at unarmed protestors, knowing all the time that they were going to get away with it.

I want them to live their long privileged lives and see these images of them and their self righteous gun toting bullshiat shat on by the public at large. So far so good. They've been elevated to memehood.

Also. Having organized and protested myself, the first and lasting realization a protestor who engages in civil disobedience makes, is that they will be subjected to the law, often prosecuted beyond reason, and if you're Black, your life quite possibly forfeit if a cop should decide to take it, with no recourse and often with the cop walking without even a disciplining.

Read the last sentence. That's where those protestors were when Ken and Karen, full knowing that they were never going to be prosecuted decided to drunkenly point their firearms at them from their front yard.
 
6 days ago  
5 votes:

mindset zero: a_room_with_a_moose: mindset zero: Z-clipped: mindset zero: It looks like a side gate that leads into the complex. Once they pushed their way in it was private property.

Whether the street and sidewalk are actually private seems to be in question.  The city maintains the street, and it's listed as public in the zoning records.  One Streets Dept worker has reportedly claimed it's a private street to the press.  The community is historic, and not gated.  You can drive right in via Lake Ave.

What is NOT in question is the fact that the dipshiats who pulled guns on people are NOT the owners of the sidewalk and had no right to "defend" it. So yeah, the couple DID do something wrong.  Something feloniously wrong in fact, to people who simply walked through an open gate and weren't threatening them at all- they were almost certainly on their way to the Mayor's residence to protest.

They do have a right to be on their property with weapons. Period.

Them pointing at people is not really cool.


Oh it's not cool?  Really?  Could you be any more obvious in your attempt to play down a felony?

Same with criminal trespass and destruction of property for the protesters.

I already told you that trespassing has not necessarily even occurred.  There is considerable question as to the status of the street and sidewalk.

As for destruction of property, IF there is video of someone destroying the gate, by all means, hold that person accountable for it.  If not, good luck charging anyone.  IF there's a security camera on the gate and the Human Twinkies don't turn it over, they did it themselves.
 
6 days ago  
5 votes:

Dictatorial_Flair: vrax: MattytheMouse: WastrelWay: I guess the mainstream media will tell us this is fake.

[i.dailymail.co.uk image 850x686]
You know, you can stand on your front porch with a gun to warn off people if you want. If you have to fire the gun at them, that's different.

It's probably real, but here's the tricky thing:
[Fark user image 850x566]
It's not the gate to their mansion like the article says. It's the gate to their street.

At any rate, I literally do not give two shiats if the couple were within their rights or not. Don't go outside and brandish guns at strangers. Literally nothing good has ever come from that, as they're learning right now.

Ah, exactly what I was wondering.  So it is actually a community gate.

The way the woman was pointing her gun at people was absolutely against all firearm safety rules.  At the very minimum she should lose her license for that.  Someone could have easily been killed.  FFS, it's not a pointing device.  He wasn't much better.  If he'd have accidentally shot his wife this would have been something special.  So 2020.

Missouri does not issue gun licenses. You can take an assault rifle into a Denny's if you want to and the worst that's likely to happen is they'll tell you to leave. Well, as long as you're white.


Yeah, I was forgetting where we were talking about.  These people are a great example of why having no requirements to own a firearm is a bad idea.
 
6 days ago  
5 votes:

mindset zero: a_room_with_a_moose: mindset zero: Z-clipped: mindset zero: It looks like a side gate that leads into the complex. Once they pushed their way in it was private property.

Whether the street and sidewalk are actually private seems to be in question.  The city maintains the street, and it's listed as public in the zoning records.  One Streets Dept worker has reportedly claimed it's a private street to the press.  The community is historic, and not gated.  You can drive right in via Lake Ave.

What is NOT in question is the fact that the dipshiats who pulled guns on people are NOT the owners of the sidewalk and had no right to "defend" it. So yeah, the couple DID do something wrong.  Something feloniously wrong in fact, to people who simply walked through an open gate and weren't threatening them at all- they were almost certainly on their way to the Mayor's residence to protest.

They do have a right to be on their property with weapons. Period.

Them pointing at people is not really cool.

Them pointing their guns at people is more than "not cool", it is a crime, under Missouri code.

Then prosecute them for it. (Probably will be thrown out, guy is a lawyer)

Same with criminal trespass and destruction of property for the protesters.


It is by no means established that the street is actually private. It appears to be maintained by the city. As to the destruction of the gate, let's see the security footage.

I hope the couple is charged. They give responsible gun owners a bad name. Not to mention, the pitcher of Bloody Mary's in the background would imply they weren't sober while waiving their guns around.
 
6 days ago  
5 votes:

mindset zero: It looks like a side gate that leads into the complex. Once they pushed their way in it was private property.


Whether the street and sidewalk are actually private seems to be in question.  The city maintains the street, and it's listed as public in the zoning records.  One Streets Dept worker has reportedly claimed it's a private street to the press.  The community is historic, and not gated.  You can drive right in via Lake Ave.

What is NOT in question is the fact that the dipshiats who pulled guns on people are NOT the owners of the sidewalk and had no right to "defend" it. So yeah, the couple DID do something wrong.  Something feloniously wrong in fact, to people who simply walked through an open gate and weren't threatening them at all- they were almost certainly on their way to the Mayor's residence to protest.
 
6 days ago  
5 votes:

The knight who says EkiEkiPoontang: Protip: If you have n bullets, as long as there are at least n+1 determined mob members, your ass is grass.


Rarely true in practice. Key is: 'determined'.
Also caliber selection. With a big bullet you'll get more than a few twofers. Mobs make it easy. Still maintaining 1:1 round:mobmembercalmed ratio is optimistic.
It's really all about games theory. The mob never knows how many rounds person has.
If I knew the person only had one round left, I'd just push you forward, than take his stuff. But there is no telling.


Welcome to Fark, [Totally Legit Account]!  Tell me, sir or madam.... how did you find out about this exclusive new website, Fark dot com, and how have your first five days here been so far?
 
6 days ago  
5 votes:

dstanley: Mock26: WastrelWay: I guess the mainstream media will tell us this is fake.

[Fark user image image 850x686]

Here is footage from video of the actual protest:

[Fark user image image 850x477]

If you go to Google street view (intersection of Porland Place and Kingshighway Boulevard) you can see it is the same gate, the top image taken from behind the gate and looking at the North side of Pershing Place) and the bottom image looking in from outside the gate.

In the protest video that gate is in fact intact. And have you done any sort of work iron fencing or iron gates? That stuff is pretty darned strong. It would take significant force, such as with a sledgehammer, to basically bend a gate half like that. So, do you still think that the protesters broke the gate to get inside when in fact the gate was actually open? Or perhaps this pair of lawyers did it after the fact to make it look like the protesters were in fact "storming the Bastille"?

[Fark user image 422x750]

*snert*


So the street the protesters went through the gate to walk on was, in fact, a public street and not private property at all.
 
6 days ago  
5 votes:
Yeah, those gates were intact while Ken&Karen put their drinks down and pointed guns at the protesters. Protesters who were walking PAST their house to get to the mayor's home.  You want to know when that gate was broken? After those douches threatened a bunch of pissed off protesters is when. Probably on the way out, from the inside it looks like. I doubt the lawyers did it, even they aren't that dumb, but they provoked that response.
 
6 days ago  
5 votes:

wage0048: Narrator: "They're lying."


It doesn't matter.

As long as they make up a story that stupid people want to believe then it's going to FWD:FWD:FWD:FWD: it's way all over the Internet.

Truthiness
 
6 days ago  
5 votes:
Holy crap, I cannot stop laughing. I just now noticed that on Google maps someone marked their home as a business, and they are calling it Ken and Karen's! Now that is farking hilarious!

Fark user imageView Full Size
 
6 days ago  
5 votes:
 
6 days ago  
5 votes:

ColonelCathcart: Skleenar: ColonelCathcart: I do agree that pulling out a weapon is a bad idea, but it's way worse to let something bad happen.

Well, in this case, they may be disbarred and are being investigated for assault, so i'd say something bad did happen.  Because they were frightened idiots.

Bad idea is not illegal.

Disbarred for what exactly? Being frightened assholes? That's not illegal.

Pretty sure you gotta do something illegal related to your job, or a serious crime unrelated to your job.


In the State of Missouri brandishing your firearm in a threatening manner is illegal.
 
6 days ago  
5 votes:

PastryChef: That gate leads into a historic housing district and that street is, in fact, according to city maps, a public thoroughfare. Just because there is a gate on your block, the street isn't your property. The gate is there to limit vehicular traffic.


I was listening to a podcast today from St. Louis and on it was a former city Councilman of the City, and he made it sound like that the issue was very grey as to whether or not it was legal for these people to have declared them private streets so many years ago. And apparently these are a holdover of the days of segregation, that the streets were made private to keep people of color from moving in or in fact actually going down the street. So there may not be any actual "proof of sale" or whatever to show that these streets are in fact owned by the residents of the street. They could very well be private based on tradition only. Hopefully this protest will bring the matter before the courts. 

Personally I want to know who does maintenance on these streets and how is it paid for, because if the residents do not contract out to the city for street and sidewalk maintenance and if it is paid for through their regular tax dollars then I do believe that they cannot legally proclaim it a private street. But, it has been a very, very long time since I looked into a similar issue, and it was for a different state, so what I learned from that might not apply here.
 
6 days ago  
5 votes:
Protip: If you have n bullets, as long as there are at least n+1 determined mob members, your ass is grass.


Rarely true in practice. Key is: 'determined'.
Also caliber selection. With a big bullet you'll get more than a few twofers. Mobs make it easy. Still maintaining 1:1 round:mobmembercalmed ratio is optimistic.
It's really all about games theory. The mob never knows how many rounds person has.
If I knew the person only had one round left, I'd just push you forward, than take his stuff. But there is no telling.
 
6 days ago  
5 votes:

jjwars1: vrax: MattytheMouse: WastrelWay: I guess the mainstream media will tell us this is fake.

[i.dailymail.co.uk image 850x686]
You know, you can stand on your front porch with a gun to warn off people if you want. If you have to fire the gun at them, that's different.

It's probably real, but here's the tricky thing:
[Fark user image 850x566]
It's not the gate to their mansion like the article says. It's the gate to their street.

At any rate, I literally do not give two shiats if the couple were within their rights or not. Don't go outside and brandish guns at strangers. Literally nothing good has ever come from that, as they're learning right now.

Ah, exactly what I was wondering.  So it is actually a community gate.

The way the woman was pointing her gun at people was absolutely against all firearm safety rules.  At the very minimum she should lose her license for that.  Someone could have easily been killed.  FFS, it's not a pointing device.  He wasn't much better.  If he'd have accidentally shot his wife this would have been something special.  So 2020.

License? Where do you live where your need a license to own or possess a gun?


Ah, I see that Missouri doesn't have any licensing requirements.  Never mind.  I guess she should just have her gun confiscated then since she's obvious unfit to own one.
 
6 days ago  
5 votes:
Sounds like bullshiat that they're trying to use to counter the fact that they should be charged with several hundred counts of brandishing and assault with a deadly weapon.
 
6 days ago  
5 votes:

ColonelCathcart: I do agree that pulling out a weapon is a bad idea, but it's way worse to let something bad happen.


Well, in this case, they may be disbarred and are being investigated for assault, so i'd say something bad did happen.  Because they were frightened idiots.
 
6 days ago  
5 votes:

MattytheMouse: Skleenar: State_College_Arsonist: [Fark user image 595x414]

That's a fair call in my book.  The protests of late have a marked tendency for violence and destruction, so when the mob is at your door, an AR-15 is definitely appropriate.

GATE LIVES MATTER.

If the protesters weren't murderous thugs intent on pillage, they would have opened the gate like these polite people:

[Fark user image 850x477]

Okay, now that's interesting. When did this:
[Fark user image image 850x477]

Become this:

[Fark user image image 850x686]


Ya that is suspicious, and considering they are grifting ambulance chasers...I wouldn't put it past them to play up the story.
 
6 days ago  
5 votes:

Boojum2k: Mrtraveler01: js34603: yohohogreengiant: Megathuma: They reference the storming of the Bastille, casting themselves as the wealthy monarchy finally being targeted for abusing the rest of their society.
They are *almost* self-aware.

Also, their story?

[Fark user image image 254x254]

They are quite self aware. If they had really felt endangered they would have fled or locked themselves inside. Had the "mob" armed they would have died right there on their farking mansion.

They knew they were safe. They knew they could pull this shiat.

Private property is like, a myth anyway. You can't own property man, if these racial justice freedom fighters want to protest in your yard, it is your duty and obligation as an ally to run inside and lock yourself up and hope they don't need to destroy anything of yours to achieve racial equality.

Except they didn't protest in their yard, they protested on the sidewalk.

Not according to the video. The protesters were actually in the yard.

The couple are seen in front of their front door, which is about one hundred feet and 90 degrees from the wall separating the property from the street.


See, but this doesn't matter to the spickle-flecked posters in this thread. None of it matters as one person said because they're rich and white.
 
6 days ago  
5 votes:

pedrop357: Other than some shiatty trigger discipline, they did nothing wrong.


They did nothing right, either.
 
6 days ago  
5 votes:

MattytheMouse: WastrelWay: I guess the mainstream media will tell us this is fake.

[i.dailymail.co.uk image 850x686]
You know, you can stand on your front porch with a gun to warn off people if you want. If you have to fire the gun at them, that's different.

It's probably real, but here's the tricky thing:
[Fark user image image 850x566]
It's not the gate to their mansion like the article says. It's the gate to their street.

At any rate, I literally do not give two shiats if the couple were within their rights or not. Don't go outside and brandish guns at strangers. Literally nothing good has ever come from that, as they're learning right now.


So...stay inside and let them come in or destroy your property from the outside? Is that your advice?
 
6 days ago  
5 votes:

PaulRB: Somebody actually pays these people to be lawyers?



Not anymore.
 
6 days ago  
5 votes:

Mrtraveler01: Except they didn't protest in their yard, they protested on the sidewalk.


Meh, they were kind of trespassing. That is clearly some rich person's front yard, even if it was accessible.

Fark user imageView Full Size

/fugly house too
 
6 days ago  
5 votes:

C18H27NO3: Here's my unqualified guess as to what happened:

Two well-off white people saw a group of black folk in the distance and brandished their firearms in order to intimidate and attempt to show superiority.  That's it.


They are now trying to claim that actually the black people there were perfectly well behaved and posed no threat and they totally support Black Lives Matter but it was the white Antifas there that threatened to kill them.

Their brandishing of weapons was so effective it not only protected their home but all the other houses in the neighborhood that were not vandalized or otherwise damaged.
 
6 days ago  
5 votes:

cyberspacedout: I'm no metallurgical expert, but I think it would take a concerted effort to do this kind of damage to a wrought-iron gate:

[Fark user image 850x686]

The protesters don't look heavy enough to have been able to bend it like that. The McCloskeys certainly do.

If the couple has any brains, they already had a security camera pointed at the gate. I'm guessing some of the video will have been conveniently erased.


Was that a community gate or was that a gate that directly accesses their property?  Do we know?
 
6 days ago  
5 votes:
I don't believe them at all. There's no way peaceful protestors like these would ever damage property or threaten people.

Unless it turns out they did damage properly and threaten people. In which case, those people deserved it for being white and rich.
 
6 days ago  
5 votes:
I started carrying a gun after an attempted mugging a few years ago. Since then my muggings have been much more prosperous.
 
5 days ago  
4 votes:

way south: Alphax: They were under no threat.  They were the threat.

In your opinion.
If hundreds of people show up on your mansion's lawn shouting "eat the rich" then you might quickly change that opinion.

We just had a shooting at a protest in Kentucky where one of the protesters turned a gun on his own.  We've had regular shootouts at the CHOP, the last of which sounds more like an execution than an accident. Stories of "peaceful" mobs going nuts and torching buildings are quite common.

These two might have been financially backing the protests. That doesn't mean they're unaware of what happens in them.


Except they were never on their lawn and never shouting "eat the rich," AND the two of them lied about the crowd smashing the gate, as the footage shows them going through it undamaged.
 
6 days ago  
4 votes:

mindset zero: Z-clipped: mindset zero: It looks like a side gate that leads into the complex. Once they pushed their way in it was private property.

Whether the street and sidewalk are actually private seems to be in question.  The city maintains the street, and it's listed as public in the zoning records.  One Streets Dept worker has reportedly claimed it's a private street to the press.  The community is historic, and not gated.  You can drive right in via Lake Ave.

What is NOT in question is the fact that the dipshiats who pulled guns on people are NOT the owners of the sidewalk and had no right to "defend" it. So yeah, the couple DID do something wrong.  Something feloniously wrong in fact, to people who simply walked through an open gate and weren't threatening them at all- they were almost certainly on their way to the Mayor's residence to protest.

They do have a right to be on their property with weapons. Period.

Them pointing at people is not really cool.


Them pointing their guns at people is more than "not cool", it is a crime, under Missouri code.
 
6 days ago  
4 votes:

maxandgrinch: WastrelWay: I guess the mainstream media will tell us this is fake.

[i.dailymail.co.uk image 850x686]
You know, you can stand on your front porch with a gun to warn off people if you want. If you have to fire the gun at them, that's different.

It would easier to PULL the gate to make it bend at a fulcrum, than to push it with minimal traction and the chance of goring yourself when the metal does bend?

Perhaps the gate was pulled on from the inside?  Security cameras must be around in a high end 'hood like that.


Since video shows protestors walking through the gate undamaged, I'm leaning towards the lawyer damaged the gate himself, and got his security footage pulled so it can't be used against him.  Because there's no way there's not a camera on that gate.  Since no footage has come forward showing protestors did the damage, I'm sticking with that till it does.
 
6 days ago  
4 votes:
I could be mistaken but i get the impression if the moron with the Ar-15  had kept his mouth shut the protestors would have passed through and  gone on there way and  no harm would have been done .   Sometimes its just best to keep your mouth shut and don't start shiat.
 
6 days ago  
4 votes:
Second picture.

Fark user imageView Full Size
 
6 days ago  
4 votes:

Skleenar: Mock26: WastrelWay: I guess the mainstream media will tell us this is fake.

[Fark user image 850x686]

Here is footage from video of the actual protest:

[Fark user image 850x477]

If you go to Google street view (intersection of Porland Place and Kingshighway Boulevard) you can see it is the same gate, the top image taken from behind the gate and looking at the North side of Pershing Place) and the bottom image looking in from outside the gate.

In the protest video that gate is in fact intact. And have you done any sort of work iron fencing or iron gates? That stuff is pretty darned strong. It would take significant force, such as with a sledgehammer, to basically bend a gate half like that. So, do you still think that the protesters broke the gate to get inside when in fact the gate was actually open? Or perhaps this pair of lawyers did it after the fact to make it look like the protesters were in fact "storming the Bastille"?

Of course, there is the possibility that some protesters broke the gate on the way out, as petty revenge for getting an AR and a Walther pulled on them by pink grimace and Hamburgler's girlfriend.


How do you know they went out the same way? There are two other entrances to this private street, one much closer to their home than the gate that the supposedly smashed. The protesters came in via the gate by the arrow on the right side of the picture. They were confronted by the couple by the arrow in the middle. We can presume that since they were marching to the Mayor's house that they lived to the left (west) of the lawyer's house. The protesters could have left by Lake Ave or at the gate at that is off the map to the west.

Fark user imageView Full Size


Hmm, something does not seem right here. From the article:

"Mark McCloskey told KMOV-TV that a mob rushed toward the home as the family was having dinner outside, claiming that the protesters smashed through gates on their private street that are marked with 'No Trespassing' and 'Private Street' signs."

Given the distance between their house and the gate there is no way they could have seen anyone tearing down the gate. They did claim that they were having dinner outside, but if so then they would have had to have been down on the sidewalk or in the street to actually be able to see the gate as the protesters supposedly broke it. But as has been shown by the video footage the protesters did not in fact break the gate.
 
6 days ago  
4 votes:

NephilimNexus: outside their $1.5million mansion in to a well-to-do St. Louis neighborhood.

Police said Monday that the McCloskeys would not be charged

The American justice system in a nutshell, folks.


Holy shiat!  I cannot believe that place is so cheap.  If you moved that here to Palo Alto it would be like $10-20m.
 
6 days ago  
4 votes:

quiotu: I had to check to see what exactly Missouri's gun laws were. Honestly I wasn't sure what I was expecting, Missouri's gun laws are pretty much nonexistent other than 'buy and own and conceal whatever you want within federal guidelines'.

It doesn't paint a better picture that these two look like they forgot their zombie apocalypse cosplay. If they were holding the guns any worse, they'd be pointing them at each other.


(4)  Exhibits, in the presence of one or more persons, any weapon readily capable of lethal use in an angry or threatening manner;


*571.030.  Unlawful use of weapons
 
6 days ago  
4 votes:

Mrtraveler01: js34603: yohohogreengiant: Megathuma: They reference the storming of the Bastille, casting themselves as the wealthy monarchy finally being targeted for abusing the rest of their society.
They are *almost* self-aware.

Also, their story?

[Fark user image image 254x254]

They are quite self aware. If they had really felt endangered they would have fled or locked themselves inside. Had the "mob" armed they would have died right there on their farking mansion.

They knew they were safe. They knew they could pull this shiat.

Private property is like, a myth anyway. You can't own property man, if these racial justice freedom fighters want to protest in your yard, it is your duty and obligation as an ally to run inside and lock yourself up and hope they don't need to destroy anything of yours to achieve racial equality.

Except they didn't protest in their yard, they protested on the sidewalk.


Not according to the video. The protesters were actually in the yard.

The couple are seen in front of their front door, which is about one hundred feet and 90 degrees from the wall separating the property from the street.
 
6 days ago  
4 votes:
They better have some proof that they were facing imminent danger as that in most states brandishing a weapon without cause is a felony.

Wait, they are from Missouri? Nevermind, they should have gone ahead and started shooting just for the sport of it.
 
6 days ago  
4 votes:

cyberspacedout: I'm no metallurgical expert, but I think it would take a concerted effort to do this kind of damage to a wrought-iron gate:

[Fark user image image 850x686]

The protesters don't look heavy enough to have been able to bend it like that. The McCloskeys certainly do.

If the couple has any brains, they already had a security camera pointed at the gate. I'm guessing some of the video will have been conveniently erased.


Look at that damage. The fence gave quicker than the lock?
LOL.
 
6 days ago  
4 votes:

js34603: I don't believe them at all. There's no way peaceful protestors like these would ever damage property or threaten people.

Unless it turns out they did damage properly and threaten people. In which case, those people deserved it for being white and rich.


Racism and classism are A-OK on Fark.

Change either adjective and see how long a time out is.
 
6 days ago  
4 votes:
Boogaloo story
 
6 days ago  
4 votes:

luna1580: Jake Havechek: They're both lawyers.  They lie for a living and get well paid for it.

not just lawyers, personal injury lawyers!

these two made millions selling strangers as tragic victims, no matter if they ever had any physical injuries at all...

why would we believe a single word out of their mouths? they lost their personal integrity in a TRAGIC slip-n-fall long, long ago.


They advertise here in St. Louis. I'm sure their business is taking a big hit with this dumbasd stunt.
 
6 days ago  
4 votes:

C18H27NO3: Here's my unqualified guess as to what happened:
Two well-off white people saw a group of black folk in the distance and brandished their firearms in order to intimidate and attempt to show superiority.  That's it.


They've probably been cowering in their mansion for weeks now, waiting for the rioters to come.
And they let these two graduate from law school.
 
6 days ago  
4 votes:

js34603: I don't believe them at all. There's no way peaceful protestors like these would ever damage property or threaten people.

Unless it turns out they did damage properly and threaten people. In which case, those people deserved it for being white and rich.


Right?   Marie Antoinette's beheading was a total Injustice.
 
6 days ago  
4 votes:
So that's why they had that pitcher of bloody Mary's in the back. For the bastille. I see.
 
6 days ago  
4 votes:
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
5 days ago  
3 votes:
The two of them pointed loaded fire arms at anyone passing. Anyone. Assault is making someone fear for their safety. Raising an arm to strike someone is "assault." (Battery is following through on your assault.) Assault with a deadly weapon is a separate crime. Terroristic Threatening is also a crime. They were not threatened by anyone in the crowd that passed.

I was on a jury in which a man was charged with terroristic threatening because he pointed his rifle at his ex-wife and daughter and threatened to shoot them in order to get them off his front porch. That his ex-wife and daughter were haranguing him did not mitigate the crime.
 
5 days ago  
3 votes:

WelldeadLink: (we don't know what the material is)


Probably enameled monkey metal sold to rich dipshiats as "Hand crafted, fire-forged metal, wrought into traditional old-world designs by top masters," sand-cast in India, sold for a 5,000% markup and installed with a couple 50-cent lag bolts.
 
5 days ago  
3 votes:

way south: In your opinion.
If hundreds of people show up on your mansion's lawn shouting "eat the rich" then you might quickly change that opinion.


Well, I'm not a coward.
 
5 days ago  
3 votes:

Alphax: They were under no threat.  They were the threat.


In your opinion.
If hundreds of people show up on your mansion's lawn shouting "eat the rich" then you might quickly change that opinion.

We just had a shooting at a protest in Kentucky where one of the protesters turned a gun on his own.  We've had regular shootouts at the CHOP, the last of which sounds more like an execution than an accident. Stories of "peaceful" mobs going nuts and torching buildings are quite common.

These two might have been financially backing the protests. That doesn't mean they're unaware of what happens in them.
 
5 days ago  
3 votes:
Fark user imageView Full Size

Note: the preacher at my church sent me that one.
 
5 days ago  
3 votes:

the money is in the banana stand: .

Pointing a firearm at trespassers after they fail to heed verbal cues to leave your private property under threat of action is not brandishing. What you are suggesting then is that the only course of action you are allowed to take with a firearm in such a position is to shoot someone with intent to kill them. Is that what you wanted to happen?


Isn't a lady in jail for firing a warning shot? Apparently, when in fear for your life, murder is the only thing you can legally do. At least in that case.
 
5 days ago  
3 votes:
Missouri is a "Castle Law State" and the couple were in their rights to defend their property. The mob of "peaceful protesters" had no right to be there, and at that point the only peaceful protester might be a dead one.

Fark user imageView Full Size
 
6 days ago  
3 votes:

Z-clipped: Mock26: I am not defending the couple in the least big.


Oh I know.  I was just trying to be helpful.


Fark user imageView Full Size


/Gary is my pandemic spirit animal
//Nothing but respect for Gary!
 
6 days ago  
3 votes:

Z-clipped: and the streets are, according to public zoning, public thoroughfares.


So it isn't even privately maintained? Geez, I thought "entitled", but it doesn't even begin to describe it.
 
6 days ago  
3 votes:
You know it'd be a lot easier to make the case they were overreacting if people hadn't been farking burning down buildings left and right for weeks...
 
6 days ago  
3 votes:

middlewaytao: Public road, public sidewalk.

https://twitter.com/IamShaneMorris/sta​tus/1277509594051416070


Uh, that is the location of City Hall. The people were protesting at Mayor's private residence, which is not at city hall, or at 107 North Seventh Ave. Portland Place is about 4.5 miles away from the address listed in that Tweet.

Fark user imageView Full Size
 
6 days ago  
3 votes:

pedrop357: Other than some shiatty trigger discipline, they did nothing wrong.


might want to look up the criminal offenses of the state of Missouri:
2005 Missouri Revised Statutes - § 571.030. - Unlawful use of weapons--exceptions--penalties.
571.030. 1. A person commits the crime of unlawful use of weapons if he or she knowingly:
(1) Carries concealed upon or about his or her person a knife, a firearm, a blackjack or any other weapon readily capable of lethal use; or
(2) Sets a spring gun; or
(3) Discharges or shoots a firearm into a dwelling house, a railroad train, boat, aircraft, or motor vehicle as defined in section 302.010, RSMo, or any building or structure used for the assembling of people; or
(4) Exhibits, in the presence of one or more persons, any weapon readily capable of lethal use in an angry or threatening manner; or
(5) Possesses or discharges a firearm or projectile weapon while intoxicated; or
 
6 days ago  
3 votes:

deadsanta: Yeah, those gates were intact while Ken&Karen put their drinks down and pointed guns at the protesters. Protesters who were walking PAST their house to get to the mayor's home.  You want to know when that gate was broken? After those douches threatened a bunch of pissed off protesters is when. Probably on the way out, from the inside it looks like. I doubt the lawyers did it, even they aren't that dumb, but they provoked that response.


Also, there are two other ways off of this private street, out the gate at the West end of the street and where Portland Place intersects with another street. It does not make sense that the protesters would exit out the same way past a home where they know there are two armed lunatics. Much smarter and safer to leave by another exit.
 
6 days ago  
3 votes:

Z-clipped: dstanley: Mock26: WastrelWay: I guess the mainstream media will tell us this is fake.

[Fark user image image 850x686]

Here is footage from video of the actual protest:

[Fark user image image 850x477]

If you go to Google street view (intersection of Porland Place and Kingshighway Boulevard) you can see it is the same gate, the top image taken from behind the gate and looking at the North side of Pershing Place) and the bottom image looking in from outside the gate.

In the protest video that gate is in fact intact. And have you done any sort of work iron fencing or iron gates? That stuff is pretty darned strong. It would take significant force, such as with a sledgehammer, to basically bend a gate half like that. So, do you still think that the protesters broke the gate to get inside when in fact the gate was actually open? Or perhaps this pair of lawyers did it after the fact to make it look like the protesters were in fact "storming the Bastille"?

[Fark user image 422x750]

*snert*

So the street the protesters went through the gate to walk on was, in fact, a public street and not private property at all.


No. Mr. Snert pinned the wrong street.
 
6 days ago  
3 votes:

ColonelCathcart: Mock26: WastrelWay: You know, you can stand on your front porch with a gun to warn off people if you want.

Section 571.030, Revised Statutes of Missouri, A person commits the offense of unlawful use of weapons, except as otherwise provided by sections 571.101 to 571.121, if he or she knowingly:

(4)  Exhibits, in the presence of one or more persons, any weapon readily capable of lethal use in an angry or threatening manner; or

Check the other provisions and castle doctrine and stand your ground and "reasonable person in fear of their life" loophole...

Pretty sure no charges will be filed other than for the rioters and trespassers.


I did, and there is no exception for people walking down your street, even if it is a private street. You have to feel that your life has to be in imminent danger in order to lawfully pull a firearm on someone. And these two lawyers have already blatantly lied about the protesters destroying the gate to get onto a private street and sidewalk so their credibility about feeling like their lives were in danger is questionable. Then there is the fact that there is no actual evidence that anyone attempted to set foot on their property and there is plenty of evidence showing that the protesters stayed on the sidewalk and street. And, because I am certain you will bring it up, castle doctrine in Missouri does not apply to protecting personal property so you cannot use deadly force just because someone sets foot on your property or because you think they might. It all comes down feeling that your life is in imminent danger, and that is a thin defense to use when the protesters did not do anything violent, stayed peaceful, were not displaying any weapons, did not set foot on or attempt to set foot on their property, and in fact walked right on past their home. At worst the protesters could be charged with trespassing, and, Yes, I checked, trespassing is not an exemption for brandishing a firearm (in other words, you cannot pull a gun on someone just for trespassing).
 
6 days ago  
3 votes:
So, it was not actually a case of an angry mob of people entering someone's sacred castle, but some people walking by it along the private street? And these fine people were protecting not their sacred private property rights, but selflessly standing for the rights of the whole gated community?

Wow.
They are obviously victims, unsung heroes, protectors of the Realm. But wait, why do they seem to be betrayed by their neighbors? Why weren't there more well-armed knights and dames getting out of their castles to help them?I think they should find a better community, which will not abandon them in times of peril and move there.
 
6 days ago  
3 votes:

ColonelCathcart: Waiting for a mob to break in is a terrible idea from a tactical perspective


ColonelCathcart: How big are your bullets and how stacked is the enemy?


Either you've watched too many cop action movies or you haven't been able to see enough of them for awhile. Jonesing for shooting isn't healthy.
 
6 days ago  
3 votes:

edmo: pedrop357: edmo: If a black man in North St Louis had pointed a gun at a bunch of white people walking by, how do you suppose this would have turned out?

Did they number in the dozens while trespassing in a gated community and making threats?

Maybe you're not catching on. I'll spell it out.

Switch the colors of all involved, and St Louis SWAT would have shown up and gunned them down. Questions?


I have been told Whataboutism is not welcome on Fark.
 
6 days ago  
3 votes:

Murflette: Idk a lot about handguns, but judging by the pose marshmallow barbie is standing in and holding that gun, were she to pull the trigger not only would she likely miss wildly, but the kick would probably send the gun straight to her face.


It's also pointed at her husband's head in one of the photos from TFA. And yes, her finger is on the trigger.

Also, I can't stop laughing at Marshmallow Barbie, so well done.
 
6 days ago  
3 votes:

dstanley: Mock26: WastrelWay: I guess the mainstream media will tell us this is fake.

[Fark user image image 850x686]

Here is footage from video of the actual protest:

[Fark user image image 850x477]

If you go to Google street view (intersection of Porland Place and Kingshighway Boulevard) you can see it is the same gate, the top image taken from behind the gate and looking at the North side of Pershing Place) and the bottom image looking in from outside the gate.

In the protest video that gate is in fact intact. And have you done any sort of work iron fencing or iron gates? That stuff is pretty darned strong. It would take significant force, such as with a sledgehammer, to basically bend a gate half like that. So, do you still think that the protesters broke the gate to get inside when in fact the gate was actually open? Or perhaps this pair of lawyers did it after the fact to make it look like the protesters were in fact "storming the Bastille"?

[Fark user image 422x750]

*snert*


Uh, you might want to read the farking article:

"Armed homeowners, Patty and Mark McCloskey, stand in front their house along Portland Place and confront protesters marching to St. Louis Mayor Lyda Krewson's house on Sunday"

PORTLAND PLACE.

Your pin drop is on Carriage Lane, one street South of the Portland Place and the gate in question.

Fark user imageView Full Size
 
6 days ago  
3 votes:

Prank Call of Cthulhu: State_College_Arsonist: That's a fair call in my book.  The protests of late have a marked tendency for violence and destruction, so when the mob is at your door, an AR-15 is definitely appropriate.

Protip: If you have n bullets, as long as there are at least n+1 determined mob members, your ass is grass.


How big are your bullets and how stacked is the enemy?
 
6 days ago  
3 votes:

Skleenar: ColonelCathcart: I do agree that pulling out a weapon is a bad idea, but it's way worse to let something bad happen.

Well, in this case, they may be disbarred and are being investigated for assault, so i'd say something bad did happen.  Because they were frightened idiots.


Bad idea is not illegal.

Disbarred for what exactly? Being frightened assholes? That's not illegal.

Pretty sure you gotta do something illegal related to your job, or a serious crime unrelated to your job.
 
6 days ago  
3 votes:

State_College_Arsonist: That's a fair call in my book.  The protests of late have a marked tendency for violence and destruction, so when the mob is at your door, an AR-15 is definitely appropriate.


Protip: If you have n bullets, as long as there are at least n+1 determined mob members, your ass is grass.
 
6 days ago  
3 votes:

State_College_Arsonist: [Fark user image 595x414]

That's a fair call in my book.  The protests of late have a marked tendency for violence and destruction, so when the mob is at your door, an AR-15 is definitely appropriate.


GATE LIVES MATTER.

If the protesters weren't murderous thugs intent on pillage, they would have opened the gate like these polite people:

Fark user imageView Full Size
 
6 days ago  
3 votes:

waxbeans: cyberspacedout: I'm no metallurgical expert, but I think it would take a concerted effort to do this kind of damage to a wrought-iron gate:

[Fark user image image 850x686]

The protesters don't look heavy enough to have been able to bend it like that. The McCloskeys certainly do.

If the couple has any brains, they already had a security camera pointed at the gate. I'm guessing some of the video will have been conveniently erased.

Look at that damage. The fence gave quicker than the lock?
LOL.


I'm assuming the gate was open when the damage was done. Otherwise, both sides would be wrecked.
 
6 days ago  
3 votes:

Mock26: WastrelWay: You know, you can stand on your front porch with a gun to warn off people if you want.

Section 571.030, Revised Statutes of Missouri, A person commits the offense of unlawful use of weapons, except as otherwise provided by sections 571.101 to 571.121, if he or she knowingly:

(4)  Exhibits, in the presence of one or more persons, any weapon readily capable of lethal use in an angry or threatening manner; or


Check the other provisions and castle doctrine and stand your ground and "reasonable person in fear of their life" loophole...

Pretty sure no charges will be filed other than for the rioters and trespassers.
 
6 days ago  
3 votes:

Megathuma: Cythraul: Megathuma: They reference the storming of the Bastille, casting themselves as the wealthy monarchy finally being targeted for abusing the rest of their society.
They are *almost* self-aware.

Also, their story?

[Fark user image image 254x254]

Storming the Bastille?   Wasn't that place a prison? So... their mansion is a prison?

You be the judge, I guess. Looks more like a posh private mental institution to me.


[Fark user image image 634x412]


Doesn't look very Prison / Fortess like to me.  A better comparison they could have used would have been the march on Versailles.

Stupid rich people, not knowing their history.
 
6 days ago  
3 votes:

State_College_Arsonist: [Fark user image image 595x414]

That's a fair call in my book.  The protests of late have a marked tendency for violence and destruction, so when the mob is at your door, an AR-15 is definitely appropriate.


Sidewalk, door, same difference right?
 
6 days ago  
3 votes:

Jake Havechek: They're both lawyers.  They lie for a living and get well paid for it.


not just lawyers, personal injury lawyers!

these two made millions selling strangers as tragic victims, no matter if they ever had any physical injuries at all...

why would we believe a single word out of their mouths? they lost their personal integrity in a TRAGIC slip-n-fall long, long ago.
 
6 days ago  
3 votes:
the death penalty is the new "get off my lawn"'
this is what happens when you defund the police or get rid of them.

it is time to refund the police.
 
6 days ago  
3 votes:

yohohogreengiant: Megathuma: They reference the storming of the Bastille, casting themselves as the wealthy monarchy finally being targeted for abusing the rest of their society.
They are *almost* self-aware.

Also, their story?

[Fark user image image 254x254]

They are quite self aware. If they had really felt endangered they would have fled or locked themselves inside. Had the "mob" armed they would have died right there on their farking mansion.

They knew they were safe. They knew they could pull this shiat.


Private property is like, a myth anyway. You can't own property man, if these racial justice freedom fighters want to protest in your yard, it is your duty and obligation as an ally to run inside and lock yourself up and hope they don't need to destroy anything of yours to achieve racial equality.
 
6 days ago  
3 votes:
I'm guessing this is about as legit a take of what happened as those from Trader Joe's Karen and Bow & Arrow Man.
 
6 days ago  
3 votes:

WastrelWay: I guess the mainstream media will tell us this is fake.

[i.dailymail.co.uk image 850x686]
You know, you can stand on your front porch with a gun to warn off people if you want. If you have to fire the gun at them, that's different.


Ok so maybe they did damage some property. But those people are rich so it makes it ok.

But I still maintain they didn't threaten anyone, peaceful protestors would never do that. However if it later turns out they did threaten them, they deserved it.
 
6 days ago  
3 votes:

pedrop357: Other than some shiatty trigger discipline, they did nothing wrong.


😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆

Exactly. Laws apply to everyone.
And we all have inalienable rights.

😆😆😆😆🤔😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😂😂🤔🙃💀💀💀💀💀💀💀
 
6 days ago  
3 votes:
Fark user imageView Full Size


I stole'd it!
 
6 days ago  
3 votes:

Murflette: Idk a lot about handguns, but judging by the pose marshmallow barbie is standing in and holding that gun, were she to pull the trigger not only would she likely miss wildly, but the kick would probably send the gun straight to her face.


I call her Colonel Mustard Stain
 
5 days ago  
2 votes:

pedrop357: scotchcrotch: I think in the near future, flashing one's opulence will become more of a risk than benefit.

Unless you're rich enough to afford security, perhaps you don't have to flaunt every buck you made.

Then go for those that can afford security- The Kardashians of the world needed to go a decade ago.

I don't think so comrade.  We're coming into the "fark around and find out" phase of things and more people than you realize are armed and not going to put up with too much more of this mob violence bullshiat.

Don't trespass, vandalize, rape, burn, loot, or murder and things will work out a lot better for you.


I can just picture you in Boston, back on December 16, 1773, "Hey guys, if you just put the tea down and get off the ships things will work out a lot better for you." Or maybe, on March 6, 1770, "You know, if they had just stayed at home and not causes such a fuss those 5 people would still be alive today."
 
5 days ago  
2 votes:

scotchcrotch: pedrop357: scotchcrotch: pedrop357: scotchcrotch: I think in the near future, flashing one's opulence will become more of a risk than benefit.

Unless you're rich enough to afford security, perhaps you don't have to flaunt every buck you made.

Then go for those that can afford security- The Kardashians of the world needed to go a decade ago.

I don't think so comrade.  We're coming into the "fark around and find out" phase of things and more people than you realize are armed and not going to put up with too much more of this mob violence bullshiat.

Don't trespass, vandalize, rape, burn, loot, or murder and things will work out a lot better for you.

Ok, so then they'll shoot someone and go to trial for murdering a protester.

If someone is doing any of the above, they're not a protester.  Threatening people will get you shot and you may not even be around to see if they face any consequences (they most likely will not).

It'll be a huge story and whether they were in the right or not, their lived will be ruined.  They'll have to slip into anonymity and you can't exactly go incognito in a mansion.

That'll show'm!

Doubtful.  It's not illegal to shoot someone who tries to hurt or kill you or burn your house down because you dare to "flaunt" your wealth.  If they live in a mansion, they can afford more guns and may be able to easily afford to hire security.

If you took a second to research Missouri law you'd realize you're wrong.

You cant use deadly force to protect property in MO.


I'd LOVE to see how the state would justify prosecuting someone for defending themselves from a mob of people trying to hurt them or burn their house down.  Regardless of the law, someone who has decided to attack me or burn my house down will be shot and I will take my chances with any prospective jury.
 
5 days ago  
2 votes:

waxbeans: HoratioGates: You can't even give them credit for handling it well assuming they thought they were about to be murdered.  If the mob is descending on your house you break out some windows and fire from inside.

???
What
????
If you are going to shoot, shoot to kill. Can't do that with an obstructed view. You wait till you see the whites of their beady eyes.


Riiiiight, which is exactly why are military teaches soldiers to just stand out in the open when they fight and to never ever seek cover.

/Sarcasm
//Obviously
///Duh
 
5 days ago  
2 votes:

Z-clipped: pedrop357: A'isha P.: mindset zero: What is a easement Alex.

If you would describe a piece of property with an easement as having "multiple public and private" owners on a record document, I really hope you don't work in a records office someplace.

That "record document" isn't binding or authoritative the way you think is.

Oh look, it's Fark's resident example of the Dunning-Kruger Effect, here with more bald assertions of how he thinks the world is/ought to be.

Roses are red, violets are blue
Some people don't think it be like it is, but it do.


I wonder if he got his degree here:

Fark user imageView Full Size
 
5 days ago  
2 votes:

Boo_Guy: I_told_you_so: This is one of those two wrongs situations. Protesters are not entitled to go on private property and threaten residents just by their numbers, and the home owners shouldn't be brandishing firearms. I can't necessarily fault the home owners.

The mayor lives in there and earlier in the day she doxxed people on live television, so I'm willing to cut them a little slack if they wanted to go let her know how they felt about that.


YOU'RE willing to cut them a little slack?  Who the hell are you?
 
5 days ago  
2 votes:

mindset zero: A'isha P.: mindset zero: Z-clipped: mindset zero: Z-clipped: mindset zero: They are INSIDE a gated community.

NO THEY ARE NOT.  This neighborhood is HISTORIC and not gated.  There's a gate blocking one street entrance, but the actual access street that the residents use is ungated and the streets are, according to public zoning, public thoroughfares.

mindset zero: The housing management company that runs the gated community maintains the streets.

Then why is the city repaving them?  Evidence that contradicts everything you're saying has already been posted in the thread.  Please make with some proof of your claims or STFU.

Mock26: I am not defending the couple in the least big.

Oh I know.  I was just trying to be helpful.

https://www.stlmag.com/history/archite​cture/private-streets-of-st-louis/

That link doesn't say what you think it does.  These streets are closed to automobile traffic like many others in St. Louis. It is NOT A GATED COMMUNITY.  The homeowners DO NOT own the streets or sidewalks.  Their gate is just a more posh version of a Schoemehl pot.

[assets.bwbx.io image 850x637]

You can stubbornly insist over and over on your idiotic generalizations, but it won't make you right. The fact is, the assholes in TFA did not have the legal standing to do what they did, and since these closed streets have been hotly contested for a number of reasons for a long time, they may have inadvertently brought their own gates down for good.

Here save you some time.

St. Louis City Counselor Julian K. Bush affirmed that Portland, as well as several other streets in the West End, are indeed private.

"They are owned by the property owners, and the owners pay for them, the street repairs and maintenance," Bush said Monday.

Can I borrow that Gary meme?


https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.stlto​day.com/news/local/columns/joe-hollema​n/portland-place-where-couple-pointed-​guns-at-protesters-has-long-been-home-​to-wealthy-st/article_1764a072-9403-5b​1a-a452-ba5609608d56.amp.html

That's not what the public records for Portland Place show.  It is both public and private.

[Fark user image image 425x318]


In the public access section, the "restricted" box is marked, not the "no public access" box.

[Fark user image image 425x91]

The note on the records shows that the specified restrictions are only on through vehicular traffic, and say nothing about pedestrian traffic.

[Fark user image image 425x147]

You see that x marked private.


Which refers to the ownership of the structures, which is why the x next to Occupied in the same section is also marked.

If Portland Place is both publicly and privately owned, as described in the record, and the houses are privately owned, as marked in the record, guess what that leaves to be publicly owned?
 
5 days ago  
2 votes:

A'isha P.: mindset zero: Z-clipped: mindset zero: Z-clipped: mindset zero: They are INSIDE a gated community.

NO THEY ARE NOT.  This neighborhood is HISTORIC and not gated.  There's a gate blocking one street entrance, but the actual access street that the residents use is ungated and the streets are, according to public zoning, public thoroughfares.

mindset zero: The housing management company that runs the gated community maintains the streets.

Then why is the city repaving them?  Evidence that contradicts everything you're saying has already been posted in the thread.  Please make with some proof of your claims or STFU.

Mock26: I am not defending the couple in the least big.

Oh I know.  I was just trying to be helpful.

https://www.stlmag.com/history/archite​cture/private-streets-of-st-louis/

That link doesn't say what you think it does.  These streets are closed to automobile traffic like many others in St. Louis. It is NOT A GATED COMMUNITY.  The homeowners DO NOT own the streets or sidewalks.  Their gate is just a more posh version of a Schoemehl pot.

[assets.bwbx.io image 850x637]

You can stubbornly insist over and over on your idiotic generalizations, but it won't make you right. The fact is, the assholes in TFA did not have the legal standing to do what they did, and since these closed streets have been hotly contested for a number of reasons for a long time, they may have inadvertently brought their own gates down for good.

Here save you some time.

St. Louis City Counselor Julian K. Bush affirmed that Portland, as well as several other streets in the West End, are indeed private.

"They are owned by the property owners, and the owners pay for them, the street repairs and maintenance," Bush said Monday.

Can I borrow that Gary meme?


https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.stlto​day.com/news/local/columns/joe-hollema​n/portland-place-where-couple-pointed-​guns-at-protesters-has-long-been-home-​to-wealthy-st/article_1764a072-9403-5b​1a-a452-ba5609608d56.amp.html

T ...


That document is not authoritative as to who owns the property or whether it's public or private.  It is a nomination form for the area to be added to the Register of Historic Places.
 
5 days ago  
2 votes:

mindset zero: Z-clipped: mindset zero: Z-clipped: mindset zero: They are INSIDE a gated community.

NO THEY ARE NOT.  This neighborhood is HISTORIC and not gated.  There's a gate blocking one street entrance, but the actual access street that the residents use is ungated and the streets are, according to public zoning, public thoroughfares.

mindset zero: The housing management company that runs the gated community maintains the streets.

Then why is the city repaving them?  Evidence that contradicts everything you're saying has already been posted in the thread.  Please make with some proof of your claims or STFU.

Mock26: I am not defending the couple in the least big.

Oh I know.  I was just trying to be helpful.

https://www.stlmag.com/history/archite​cture/private-streets-of-st-louis/

That link doesn't say what you think it does.  These streets are closed to automobile traffic like many others in St. Louis. It is NOT A GATED COMMUNITY.  The homeowners DO NOT own the streets or sidewalks.  Their gate is just a more posh version of a Schoemehl pot.

[assets.bwbx.io image 850x637]

You can stubbornly insist over and over on your idiotic generalizations, but it won't make you right. The fact is, the assholes in TFA did not have the legal standing to do what they did, and since these closed streets have been hotly contested for a number of reasons for a long time, they may have inadvertently brought their own gates down for good.

Here save you some time.

St. Louis City Counselor Julian K. Bush affirmed that Portland, as well as several other streets in the West End, are indeed private.

"They are owned by the property owners, and the owners pay for them, the street repairs and maintenance," Bush said Monday.

Can I borrow that Gary meme?


https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.stlto​day.com/news/local/columns/joe-hollema​n/portland-place-where-couple-pointed-​guns-at-protesters-has-long-been-home-​to-wealthy-st/article_1764a072-9403-5b​1a-a452-ba5609608d56.amp.html


That's not what the public records for Portland Place show.  It is both public and private.

Fark user imageView Full Size



In the public access section, the "restricted" box is marked, not the "no public access" box.

Fark user image

The note on the records shows that the specified restrictions are only on through vehicular traffic, and say nothing about pedestrian traffic.

Fark user imageView Full Size
 
5 days ago  
2 votes:

Z-clipped: mindset zero: Z-clipped: mindset zero: They are INSIDE a gated community.

NO THEY ARE NOT.  This neighborhood is HISTORIC and not gated.  There's a gate blocking one street entrance, but the actual access street that the residents use is ungated and the streets are, according to public zoning, public thoroughfares.

mindset zero: The housing management company that runs the gated community maintains the streets.

Then why is the city repaving them?  Evidence that contradicts everything you're saying has already been posted in the thread.  Please make with some proof of your claims or STFU.

Mock26: I am not defending the couple in the least big.

Oh I know.  I was just trying to be helpful.

https://www.stlmag.com/history/archite​cture/private-streets-of-st-louis/

That link doesn't say what you think it does.  These streets are closed to automobile traffic like many others in St. Louis. It is NOT A GATED COMMUNITY.  The homeowners DO NOT own the streets or sidewalks.  Their gate is just a more posh version of a Schoemehl pot.

[assets.bwbx.io image 850x637]

You can stubbornly insist over and over on your idiotic generalizations, but it won't make you right. The fact is, the assholes in TFA did not have the legal standing to do what they did, and since these closed streets have been hotly contested for a number of reasons for a long time, they may have inadvertently brought their own gates down for good.


Here save you some time.

St. Louis City Counselor Julian K. Bush affirmed that Portland, as well as several other streets in the West End, are indeed private.

"They are owned by the property owners, and the owners pay for them, the street repairs and maintenance," Bush said Monday.

Can I borrow that Gary meme?


https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.stlt​o​day.com/news/local/columns/joe-hollema​n/portland-place-where-couple-pointed-​guns-at-protesters-has-long-been-home-​to-wealthy-st/article_1764a072-9403-5b​1a-a452-ba5609608d56.amp.html
 
5 days ago  
2 votes:

A'isha P.: way south: Apparently they were pro-blm lefties that supported these marches.
Up until the mob came for them. It's probably safe to assume they don't support it as much now.

[Fark user image image 850x478]

Also, they're not "pro-blm lefties".  That screenshot supposedly showing that they donate to ActBlue was a lie pushed by (surprise, surprise) some Turning Point USA tool.  It's a screenshot of some guy in Michigan who works for a hospital and just so happens to have the same name.

[Fark user image 425x188]

[Fark user image 425x331]


In reality, they're....are you sitting down for this?  They're Trumphumpers.

[Fark user image 425x257]


Good for them.  Nice to see them giving that much support.
 
5 days ago  
2 votes:

mindset zero: Z-clipped: mindset zero: They are INSIDE a gated community.

NO THEY ARE NOT.  This neighborhood is HISTORIC and not gated.  There's a gate blocking one street entrance, but the actual access street that the residents use is ungated and the streets are, according to public zoning, public thoroughfares.

mindset zero: The housing management company that runs the gated community maintains the streets.

Then why is the city repaving them?  Evidence that contradicts everything you're saying has already been posted in the thread.  Please make with some proof of your claims or STFU.

Mock26: I am not defending the couple in the least big.

Oh I know.  I was just trying to be helpful.

https://www.stlmag.com/history/archite​cture/private-streets-of-st-louis/


That link doesn't say what you think it does.  These streets are closed to automobile traffic like many others in St. Louis. It is NOT A GATED COMMUNITY.  The homeowners DO NOT own the streets or sidewalks.  Their gate is just a more posh version of a Schoemehl pot.

assets.bwbx.ioView Full Size


You can stubbornly insist over and over on your idiotic generalizations, but it won't make you right. The fact is, the assholes in TFA did not have the legal standing to do what they did, and since these closed streets have been hotly contested for a number of reasons for a long time, they may have inadvertently brought their own gates down for good.
 
5 days ago  
2 votes:
Just want to point out that that appears to be a real Colt AR15, not some bushmaster pos

No point, just want the gun
 
5 days ago  
2 votes:

way south: If hundreds of people show up on your mansion's lawn shouting "eat the rich" then you might quickly change that opinion.


If hundreds of people show up on my lawn shouting "eat the rich" then my two guns with what? 20 bullets between them? 30? I'm not an ammosexual, so not only don't I know how many rounds those guns might hold, I can't be arsed enough to care. Anyway, if there's hundreds of folks trying to eat me, then my few bullets ain't gonna take me off the menu.

Of course, since I'm not a blithering idiot, I wouldn't have been out there in the first place, waving my Tactical Penis Compensator around in what I might imagine to be a both threatening and masculine manner. Since I'm not a total pants-wetting pussy who cringes at the sight of anyone darker than a paper grocery sack, the last thing I would have done would be to go to the panic room, open the gun safe, get the guns, load them, and then trot outside barefoot in capri pants. Instead, I'd have grabbed some bottled water (not the San P. in the glass bottles, but the Deer Park I stole from the law office to give to the cleaning staff and the "ethnic" grandkids when they visit), and a blanket, and headed out to the lawn. Slap the blanket down on the grass, put the water bottles out for the protestors to take, and then point at the nearest two and say, "Hey. You and you, why don't you sit down here with me and tell me what it is you're protesting about." The only frightening thing about the protestors is all those phones they're holding. You know, a lot of people don't know it, but those things can take video and upload it instantly to the internet, thus turning an incompetent gun waver with bad trigger discipline into an instant figure of worldwide ridicule. But no, there I am talking to the protestors and listening to them and HOLY shiat, WHAT DID I JUST DO? THAT'S RIGHT, MOTHERFARKER, I JUST GOT SOME SWEET FREE PUBLICITY. I'm now a farking pillar of the community. A hero. Look at that rich white motherfarker there, talking to the protestors and hearing them out, why can't we all be like him? Hey is he a lawyer? Shiat, I'm going to use his services next time I'm in trouble. Fark, I'd hand out business cards too.

But Johnny Package and Muffy Imeasy there...I guess that was too hard for them to figure out.
 
5 days ago  
2 votes:

way south: Wenchmaster: cyberspacedout: I'm no metallurgical expert, but I think it would take a concerted effort to do this kind of damage to a wrought-iron gate:

[Fark user image 850x686]

The protesters don't look heavy enough to have been able to bend it like that. The McCloskeys certainly do.

If the couple has any brains, they already had a security camera pointed at the gate. I'm guessing some of the video will have been conveniently erased.

That gate appears to have been bent:
- inward
- while already open

Causing that sort of damage by pushing on a closed gate is more difficult than pulling from outside. From outside, a closed gate such as this would be easier to damage by bracing your feet against the middle of the gate and heaving backwards on the top. Pushing it in as shown in the picture would require more than BFMI (brute force and massive ignorance) to accomplish. Any such damage would have visible evidence on both leaves of the gate as well. Any marginally-competent investigator would be able to determine how the damage happened fairly quickly.

I didn't see it in TFA- did a 9-1-1 call transcript surface?

As posted upthread, the lawyers in TFA probably thought they were finally going to get their chance to realize their paranoid wet dreams of gunning down a mob of bloodthirsty poors/colored people. Now that the initial sexual rush has faded, they're trying desperately to cover their mind-bogglingly stupid actions using the Jimbo and Ned defense.

I imagine a lot of wealthy white people are beginning to realize their fantasies of riding out societal collapse from the comfort of their walled compounds are not particularly realistic. Two middle-aged office workers will not be able to defend their little castle from any group of determined enemies, regardless of how many guns they have. Fixed fortifications do have their uses in some circumstances, but they're vulnerable to siege tactics.

Sadly, the shiatweasels in TFA are unlikely to face any consequences from their racis ...

Apparently they were pro-blm lefties that supported these marches.
Up until the mob came for them. It's probably safe to assume they don't support it as much now.

[Fark user image image 850x478]


Their statement is complete bullshiat.  Here, for example, is video showing that they were yelling at black BLM protesters.  Oh, and that the protesters were staying off their property and on the sidewalk.  And since the protesters were just walking past their house to get to the mayor's house, the "mob" is less crowded-up than the line for the teacup ride at Disneyland.

During the off-season.
 
5 days ago  
2 votes:

Wenchmaster: cyberspacedout: I'm no metallurgical expert, but I think it would take a concerted effort to do this kind of damage to a wrought-iron gate:

[Fark user image 850x686]

The protesters don't look heavy enough to have been able to bend it like that. The McCloskeys certainly do.

If the couple has any brains, they already had a security camera pointed at the gate. I'm guessing some of the video will have been conveniently erased.

That gate appears to have been bent:
- inward
- while already open

Causing that sort of damage by pushing on a closed gate is more difficult than pulling from outside. From outside, a closed gate such as this would be easier to damage by bracing your feet against the middle of the gate and heaving backwards on the top. Pushing it in as shown in the picture would require more than BFMI (brute force and massive ignorance) to accomplish. Any such damage would have visible evidence on both leaves of the gate as well. Any marginally-competent investigator would be able to determine how the damage happened fairly quickly.

I didn't see it in TFA- did a 9-1-1 call transcript surface?

As posted upthread, the lawyers in TFA probably thought they were finally going to get their chance to realize their paranoid wet dreams of gunning down a mob of bloodthirsty poors/colored people. Now that the initial sexual rush has faded, they're trying desperately to cover their mind-bogglingly stupid actions using the Jimbo and Ned defense.

I imagine a lot of wealthy white people are beginning to realize their fantasies of riding out societal collapse from the comfort of their walled compounds are not particularly realistic. Two middle-aged office workers will not be able to defend their little castle from any group of determined enemies, regardless of how many guns they have. Fixed fortifications do have their uses in some circumstances, but they're vulnerable to siege tactics.

Sadly, the shiatweasels in TFA are unlikely to face any consequences from their racis ...


Apparently they were pro-blm lefties that supported these marches.
Up until the mob came for them. It's probably safe to assume they don't support it as much now.

Fark user imageView Full Size
 
5 days ago  
2 votes:
These protesters were on a mission and were not after these idiots. I wonder how many houses they walked by with those residents just looking out the window being undisturbed. If there's a mob outside my door, I get my guns and wait. First person that crosses the threshold unannounced and uninvited gets to see if my target shooting paid off. But a protest crossing near my yard is not cause for me to run out, barefooted in a mustard splattered shirt, waving a gun around and exacerbating an already unprecedented situation. Dumbasses.
 
5 days ago  
2 votes:

cyberspacedout: I'm no metallurgical expert, but I think it would take a concerted effort to do this kind of damage to a wrought-iron gate:

[Fark user image 850x686]

The protesters don't look heavy enough to have been able to bend it like that. The McCloskeys certainly do.

If the couple has any brains, they already had a security camera pointed at the gate. I'm guessing some of the video will have been conveniently erased.


That gate appears to have been bent:
- inward
- while already open

Causing that sort of damage by pushing on a closed gate is more difficult than pulling from outside. From outside, a closed gate such as this would be easier to damage by bracing your feet against the middle of the gate and heaving backwards on the top. Pushing it in as shown in the picture would require more than BFMI (brute force and massive ignorance) to accomplish. Any such damage would have visible evidence on both leaves of the gate as well. Any marginally-competent investigator would be able to determine how the damage happened fairly quickly.

I didn't see it in TFA- did a 9-1-1 call transcript surface?

As posted upthread, the lawyers in TFA probably thought they were finally going to get their chance to realize their paranoid wet dreams of gunning down a mob of bloodthirsty poors/colored people. Now that the initial sexual rush has faded, they're trying desperately to cover their mind-bogglingly stupid actions using the Jimbo and Ned defense.

I imagine a lot of wealthy white people are beginning to realize their fantasies of riding out societal collapse from the comfort of their walled compounds are not particularly realistic. Two middle-aged office workers will not be able to defend their little castle from any group of determined enemies, regardless of how many guns they have. Fixed fortifications do have their uses in some circumstances, but they're vulnerable to siege tactics.

Sadly, the shiatweasels in TFA are unlikely to face any consequences from their racist stupidityness. Any potential action by state or local authorities against them is likely to be bogged down in the courts for years, and the lawyers in question probably have the money to mitigate any penalties which do manage to get through litigation.

It would be nice if they both got convicted of felonies and thereby lose their rights to own or possess firearms. There should be some sort of literary term to describe that sort of thing. Melodic Karma, maybe?
 
5 days ago  
2 votes:

waxbeans: the money is in the banana stand: .

Pointing a firearm at trespassers after they fail to heed verbal cues to leave your private property under threat of action is not brandishing. What you are suggesting then is that the only course of action you are allowed to take with a firearm in such a position is to shoot someone with intent to kill them. Is that what you wanted to happen?

Isn't a lady in jail for firing a warning shot? Apparently, when in fear for your life, murder is the only thing you can legally do. At least in that case.


Warning shots are different, namely because indiscriminately firing in hopes of scaring off a would be intruder is different than targeting one and issuing verbal cues to leave your property or you will use force. Discharging your firearm away from your target could strike an unintended target. It is a pretty grey area still in my opinion as I believe warning shots to be justifiable in certain circumstances. I would rather exhaust all non-lethal options to have my would be attacker or trespasser leave before having to use deadly force. Restricting those options to simply shoot to kill or conceal your firearm does not leave a whole lot of room for rational decision making.
 
5 days ago  
2 votes:

padraig: WastrelWay: I guess the mainstream media will tell us this is fake.

[i.dailymail.co.uk image 850x686]
You know, you can stand on your front porch with a gun to warn off people if you want. If you have to fire the gun at them, that's different.

That's still brandishing. And in Missouri, if I'm not mistaken, a good enough reason to shoot first.


Pointing a firearm at trespassers after they fail to heed verbal cues to leave your private property under threat of action is not brandishing. What you are suggesting then is that the only course of action you are allowed to take with a firearm in such a position is to shoot someone with intent to kill them. Is that what you wanted to happen?
 
5 days ago  
2 votes:

WastrelWay: I guess the mainstream media will tell us this is fake.

[i.dailymail.co.uk image 850x686]
You know, you can stand on your front porch with a gun to warn off people if you want. If you have to fire the gun at them, that's different.


That's still brandishing. And in Missouri, if I'm not mistaken, a good enough reason to shoot first.
 
5 days ago  
2 votes:
- If I have my gate to my backyard unlocked and you decide to enter it without my consent, you are trespassing.
- If I have my gate open to my backyard and you decide to enter it without my consent, you are trespassing
- If I don't even have a farking gate and you are in my  backyard without my consent, you are trespassing.
- If I don't even have a farking house and you are on my property without my consent, you're again, trespassing.
- If you live in a gated neighborhood and someone happens onto the property without consent, they are trespassing.
- The sidewalk, or the street in a private or gated community is not the same as a public street. By being there uninvited, without consent, and entering illegally, you are - trespassing.
- Depending where you live, trespassing can be dealt with in a myriad if ways. It is generally regarded however trespassing is both a bad thing and illegal. Trying to make anything other than that just makes you a turd.

Now, was it the best decision to walk out in the open and confront a crowd that has gained access to your property illegally not knowing if they are armed or not and when they outnumber you greatly, and not knowing their motives? No. Is it within their right to do so, absolutely. You could argue broadcasting you are armed makes you a target. You could also argue that broadcasting you are armed makes you a threat to be avoided. Considering the crowd did not attack them or apparently damage their property, looks like the gamble paid off. Me personally? I would have taken up a more tactical position in my home armed and call the cops and make it my life's mission every last asshole that decided to barge in was made an example of. Thankfully, none of the dipshiats escalated things and the homeowners didn't fire any shots. While I am sure it would be justifiable, it could have been avoided without incident.
 
5 days ago  
2 votes:

AeAe: Brandishing is a crime. I hope they get charged.


How is that brandishing when people are illegally on your property? If the protestors were marching in the city streets and they decided to do this, sure. I am sure this couple is probably pretty terrible, but the protestors were in the wrong here. No about of self-righteous bs makes trespassing acceptable.
 
5 days ago  
2 votes:

mindset zero: Streets in a gated community are private property


Even if they were you still can't point your gun at strangers walking down them.
 
6 days ago  
2 votes:

DigitalDirt: And apparently if your 🐖 your life is always in danger

Not quite sure what yo are saying, we are all in danger, but I don't have a gun loaded in my house, they are locked in a safe.
I grew up in a Police and drafted Vietnam Army family (grandfather and father).  We where a Quaker family, so violence is not what we were taught violence was thrust upon us.


Just saying the police narrative is they are in constant danger. Don't buy it.

/Mom was a cop
//Grew up terrified she be killed at work.
///Crime is actually rare.
//// the majority of people have a better chance of dying in a car accident than having a crime happened to them.
Ymmv.
Don't smoke crack.
Don't do drugs with ppl.
Don't touch under age girls.
Pay the child support.
Do try to scam people with less to loss than you.
Don't worry about being correct. Drop and leave before it gets violent.
 
6 days ago  
2 votes:

Z-clipped: mindset zero: a_room_with_a_moose: mindset zero: Z-clipped: mindset zero: It looks like a side gate that leads into the complex. Once they pushed their way in it was private property.

Whether the street and sidewalk are actually private seems to be in question.  The city maintains the street, and it's listed as public in the zoning records.  One Streets Dept worker has reportedly claimed it's a private street to the press.  The community is historic, and not gated.  You can drive right in via Lake Ave.

What is NOT in question is the fact that the dipshiats who pulled guns on people are NOT the owners of the sidewalk and had no right to "defend" it. So yeah, the couple DID do something wrong.  Something feloniously wrong in fact, to people who simply walked through an open gate and weren't threatening them at all- they were almost certainly on their way to the Mayor's residence to protest.

They do have a right to be on their property with weapons. Period.

Them pointing at people is not really cool.

Oh it's not cool?  Really?  Could you be any more obvious in your attempt to play down a felony?

Same with criminal trespass and destruction of property for the protesters.

I already told you that trespassing has not necessarily even occurred.  There is considerable question as to the status of the street and sidewalk.

As for destruction of property, IF there is video of someone destroying the gate, by all means, hold that person accountable for it.  If not, good luck charging anyone.  IF there's a security camera on the gate and the Human Twinkies don't turn it over, they did it themselves.


Streets in a gated community are private property
 
6 days ago  
2 votes:

mindset zero: They are INSIDE a gated community.


NO THEY ARE NOT.  This neighborhood is HISTORIC and not gated.  There's a gate blocking one street entrance, but the actual access street that the residents use is ungated and the streets are, according to public zoning, public thoroughfares.

mindset zero: The housing management company that runs the gated community maintains the streets.


Then why is the city repaving them?  Evidence that contradicts everything you're saying has already been posted in the thread.  Please make with some proof of your claims or STFU.

Mock26: I am not defending the couple in the least big.


Oh I know.  I was just trying to be helpful.
 
6 days ago  
2 votes:

a_room_with_a_moose: mindset zero: a_room_with_a_moose: mindset zero: Z-clipped: mindset zero: It looks like a side gate that leads into the complex. Once they pushed their way in it was private property.

Whether the street and sidewalk are actually private seems to be in question.  The city maintains the street, and it's listed as public in the zoning records.  One Streets Dept worker has reportedly claimed it's a private street to the press.  The community is historic, and not gated.  You can drive right in via Lake Ave.

What is NOT in question is the fact that the dipshiats who pulled guns on people are NOT the owners of the sidewalk and had no right to "defend" it. So yeah, the couple DID do something wrong.  Something feloniously wrong in fact, to people who simply walked through an open gate and weren't threatening them at all- they were almost certainly on their way to the Mayor's residence to protest.

They do have a right to be on their property with weapons. Period.

Them pointing at people is not really cool.

Them pointing their guns at people is more than "not cool", it is a crime, under Missouri code.

Then prosecute them for it. (Probably will be thrown out, guy is a lawyer)

Same with criminal trespass and destruction of property for the protesters.

It is by no means established that the street is actually private. It appears to be maintained by the city. As to the destruction of the gate, let's see the security footage.

I hope the couple is charged. They give responsible gun owners a bad name. Not to mention, the pitcher of Bloody Mary's in the background would imply they weren't sober while waiving their guns around.


They are INSIDE a gated community. That is the side gate by the main gate. Houses in a gated community are in the gate community. It is kinda of the point. The streets are also private propriety, The housing management company that runs the gated community maintains the streets.
 
6 days ago  
2 votes:

a_room_with_a_moose: mindset zero: Z-clipped: mindset zero: It looks like a side gate that leads into the complex. Once they pushed their way in it was private property.

Whether the street and sidewalk are actually private seems to be in question.  The city maintains the street, and it's listed as public in the zoning records.  One Streets Dept worker has reportedly claimed it's a private street to the press.  The community is historic, and not gated.  You can drive right in via Lake Ave.

What is NOT in question is the fact that the dipshiats who pulled guns on people are NOT the owners of the sidewalk and had no right to "defend" it. So yeah, the couple DID do something wrong.  Something feloniously wrong in fact, to people who simply walked through an open gate and weren't threatening them at all- they were almost certainly on their way to the Mayor's residence to protest.

They do have a right to be on their property with weapons. Period.

Them pointing at people is not really cool.

Them pointing their guns at people is more than "not cool", it is a crime, under Missouri code.


Then prosecute them for it. (Probably will be thrown out, guy is a lawyer)

Same with criminal trespass and destruction of property for the protesters.
 
6 days ago  
2 votes:
This thread is like a detective novel.  Except all the detectives have been smoking opium and only give a shiat about the optics.
 
6 days ago  
2 votes:
The mayor invited those people into the neighborhood.  Why else would she publish the names and home addresses of community organizers?

These Bastille references are really slaying me.  The next monument White Nationalists take down is going to be the Statue Of Liberty.
 
6 days ago  
2 votes:
As someone who owns an AK-47 rifle, I have a Bulgarian SLR-95 .  I only bought it because the bullets are so cheap and I wanted a target gun to have fun with.  My best friend bought a Ruger Mini-14 and the 223 ammo was more than twice as expensive.
I got off on a tangent, the point is never pull a gun on anyone unless you life is in danger.

Fark user imageView Full Size
 
6 days ago  
2 votes:

Mock26: Z-clipped: dstanley: Mock26: WastrelWay: I guess the mainstream media will tell us this is fake.

[Fark user image image 850x686]

Here is footage from video of the actual protest:

[Fark user image image 850x477]

If you go to Google street view (intersection of Porland Place and Kingshighway Boulevard) you can see it is the same gate, the top image taken from behind the gate and looking at the North side of Pershing Place) and the bottom image looking in from outside the gate.

In the protest video that gate is in fact intact. And have you done any sort of work iron fencing or iron gates? That stuff is pretty darned strong. It would take significant force, such as with a sledgehammer, to basically bend a gate half like that. So, do you still think that the protesters broke the gate to get inside when in fact the gate was actually open? Or perhaps this pair of lawyers did it after the fact to make it look like the protesters were in fact "storming the Bastille"?

[Fark user image 422x750]

*snert*

So the street the protesters went through the gate to walk on was, in fact, a public street and not private property at all.

No. Mr. Snert pinned the wrong street.


Portland, Lake and Westmoreland are all signedas being private property, but the city maintains them (and is apparently resurfacing Lake as we speak), and the zoning has them listed as public thoroughfares.

This is just rich assholes being rich assholes, and laying claim to things they don't own.
 
6 days ago  
2 votes:

thorpe: middlewaytao: Public road, public sidewalk.

https://twitter.com/IamShaneMorris/sta​tus/1277509594051416070

Well well well. That makes things quite different.


The St. Louis Street Department says otherwise:

https://www.channel3000.com/st-louis-​c​ouple-pulls-firearms-on-protesters-cut​ting-through-their-private-street/

Regardless, the couple still committed a felony, IMO, as they don't own the street and had no right to "defend" it.
 
6 days ago  
2 votes:

deadsanta: Yeah, those gates were intact while Ken&Karen put their drinks down and pointed guns at the protesters. Protesters who were walking PAST their house to get to the mayor's home.  You want to know when that gate was broken? After those douches threatened a bunch of pissed off protesters is when. Probably on the way out, from the inside it looks like. I doubt the lawyers did it, even they aren't that dumb, but they provoked that response.


See my post above yours. Someone went on to Google maps and tagger their home as a business called Ken & Karen's.
 
6 days ago  
2 votes:

edmo: pedrop357: edmo: If a black man in North St Louis had pointed a gun at a bunch of white people walking by, how do you suppose this would have turned out?

Did they number in the dozens while trespassing in a gated community and making threats?

Maybe you're not catching on. I'll spell it out.

Switch the colors of all involved, and St Louis SWAT would have shown up and gunned them down. Questions?


Yep, no comparison.
Different skin color? You'd have instant colander.

Behavior like this is actively stoked and supported by the president of the United States. We need him gone, ASAP.

Also, I really hate Android phones.
 
6 days ago  
2 votes:

PastryChef: That gate leads into a historic housing district and that street is, in fact, according to city maps, a public thoroughfare. Just because there is a gate on your block, the street isn't your property. The gate is there to limit vehicular traffic.


Thousands of troll accounts ITT just cried out, and were suddenly silenced.  I fear something terrible has happened.
 
6 days ago  
2 votes:

ColonelCathcart: Boojum2k: Mrtraveler01: js34603: yohohogreengiant: Megathuma: They reference the storming of the Bastille, casting themselves as the wealthy monarchy finally being targeted for abusing the rest of their society.
They are *almost* self-aware.

Also, their story?

[Fark user image image 254x254]

They are quite self aware. If they had really felt endangered they would have fled or locked themselves inside. Had the "mob" armed they would have died right there on their farking mansion.

They knew they were safe. They knew they could pull this shiat.

Private property is like, a myth anyway. You can't own property man, if these racial justice freedom fighters want to protest in your yard, it is your duty and obligation as an ally to run inside and lock yourself up and hope they don't need to destroy anything of yours to achieve racial equality.

Except they didn't protest in their yard, they protested on the sidewalk.

Not according to the video. The protesters were actually in the yard.

The couple are seen in front of their front door, which is about one hundred feet and 90 degrees from the wall separating the property from the street.

See, but this doesn't matter to the spickle-flecked posters in this thread. None of it matters as one person said because they're rich and white.


media1.giphy.comView Full Size


Won't somebody think of the poor, rich white people?
 
6 days ago  
2 votes:

AirForceVet: Utter bullshiat.

Arrest the asshats, or admit you favor white elites over mixed protestors, Mayor Lyda Krewson, you farking biatch.


Little hostile for a place you don't live.
Did you get teargassed downtown? Not my scene but it caused a stir.
 
6 days ago  
2 votes:

King Something: They're not sorry for what they did, and they're not even sorry you were offended.

They're only sorry they got caught.


But how in the livin' fark did they think they wouldn't be caught?! What....they thought us Black folks don't have camera phones?!  Everyone has a farkin camera phone! You can see the protesters in the camera phone video holding up their camera phones to record the two deplorable with guns as they marched by the house!  Sheesh!
 
6 days ago  
2 votes:
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
6 days ago  
2 votes:

pedrop357: edmo: If a black man in North St Louis had pointed a gun at a bunch of white people walking by, how do you suppose this would have turned out?

Did they number in the dozens while trespassing in a gated community and making threats?


Yeah edmo,was the black guy rich and was his house expensive?  Because that's this asshole's real concern.

Don't worry pedro... when the crowd comes back and guillotines this bourgeois douchenozzle, no property will be harmed.
 
6 days ago  
2 votes:
<p><BLOCKQUOTE>Holy shiat!  I cannot believe that place is so cheap.</BLOCKQUOTE></p><p> </p>
Have you ever been to StLouis? That's an asperational price.
 
6 days ago  
2 votes:

vrax: MattytheMouse: WastrelWay: I guess the mainstream media will tell us this is fake.

[i.dailymail.co.uk image 850x686]
You know, you can stand on your front porch with a gun to warn off people if you want. If you have to fire the gun at them, that's different.

It's probably real, but here's the tricky thing:
[Fark user image 850x566]
It's not the gate to their mansion like the article says. It's the gate to their street.

At any rate, I literally do not give two shiats if the couple were within their rights or not. Don't go outside and brandish guns at strangers. Literally nothing good has ever come from that, as they're learning right now.

Ah, exactly what I was wondering.  So it is actually a community gate.

The way the woman was pointing her gun at people was absolutely against all firearm safety rules.  At the very minimum she should lose her license for that.  Someone could have easily been killed.  FFS, it's not a pointing device.  He wasn't much better.  If he'd have accidentally shot his wife this would have been something special.  So 2020.


Hahaha, license.
 
6 days ago  
2 votes:
$1.5 million?  That's a 3 bedroom townhouse around here...
 
6 days ago  
2 votes:

vrax: MattytheMouse: WastrelWay: I guess the mainstream media will tell us this is fake.

[i.dailymail.co.uk image 850x686]
You know, you can stand on your front porch with a gun to warn off people if you want. If you have to fire the gun at them, that's different.

It's probably real, but here's the tricky thing:
[Fark user image 850x566]
It's not the gate to their mansion like the article says. It's the gate to their street.

At any rate, I literally do not give two shiats if the couple were within their rights or not. Don't go outside and brandish guns at strangers. Literally nothing good has ever come from that, as they're learning right now.

Ah, exactly what I was wondering.  So it is actually a community gate.

The way the woman was pointing her gun at people was absolutely against all firearm safety rules.  At the very minimum she should lose her license for that.  Someone could have easily been killed.  FFS, it's not a pointing device.  He wasn't much better.  If he'd have accidentally shot his wife this would have been something special.  So 2020.


License? Where do you live where your need a license to own or possess a gun?
 
6 days ago  
2 votes:
 
6 days ago  
2 votes:

NephilimNexus: outside their $1.5million mansion in to a well-to-do St. Louis neighborhood.

Police said Monday that the McCloskeys would not be charged

The American justice system in a nutshell, folks.


Break no laws, have/be a lawyer, don't get charged?

/the 2nd part helps, but isn't generally required
 
6 days ago  
2 votes:

I_told_you_so: This is one of those two wrongs situations. Protesters are not entitled to go on private property and threaten residents just by their numbers, and the home owners shouldn't be brandishing firearms. I can't necessarily fault the home owners.


Didn't a Lady to get in trouble for firing a warning shot?

You can shoot someone who's trespassing on your property.
shooting a trespasser is not the same thing as firing a warning shot or brandishing a firearm.

But your mileage may vary depending on how much Justice  is afforded you  by the justice system
 
6 days ago  
2 votes:

The Irresponsible Captain: They didn't bring guillotines. This time.


And some people told me that the guillotines thing did not apply. Here you go. A Farker saying next time there will be guillotines....
 
6 days ago  
2 votes:

Megathuma: They reference the storming of the Bastille, casting themselves as the wealthy monarchy finally being targeted for abusing the rest of their society.
They are *almost* self-aware.

Also, their story?

[Fark user image image 254x254]


Fark user imageView Full Size


FTFY
 
6 days ago  
2 votes:
I had to check to see what exactly Missouri's gun laws were. Honestly I wasn't sure what I was expecting, Missouri's gun laws are pretty much nonexistent other than 'buy and own and conceal whatever you want within federal guidelines'.

It doesn't paint a better picture that these two look like they forgot their zombie apocalypse cosplay. If they were holding the guns any worse, they'd be pointing them at each other.
 
6 days ago  
2 votes:
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
6 days ago  
2 votes:
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
6 days ago  
2 votes:
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
4 days ago  
1 vote:

chewielouie: lack of warmth: chewielouie: lack of warmth: maxandgrinch: WastrelWay: I guess the mainstream media will tell us this is fake.

[i.dailymail.co.uk image 850x686]
You know, you can stand on your front porch with a gun to warn off people if you want. If you have to fire the gun at them, that's different.

It would easier to PULL the gate to make it bend at a fulcrum, than to push it with minimal traction and the chance of goring yourself when the metal does bend?

Perhaps the gate was pulled on from the inside?  Security cameras must be around in a high end 'hood like that.

Since video shows protestors walking through the gate undamaged, I'm leaning towards the lawyer damaged the gate himself, and got his security footage pulled so it can't be used against him.  Because there's no way there's not a camera on that gate.  Since no footage has come forward showing protestors did the damage, I'm sticking with that till it does.

You assume way too much. What most likely happened was that protesters damaged the gate shortly after they were told to get out, that they were trespassing on private property.

I still don't see video to prove that.  Therefore, your idea has no weight to sway the jury.

lol, it certainly has more weight than your theory. Before mob ignored "Private Property" signs, gate was intact. Shortly after mob passed through gate it was damages.


You have less legs to stand on than, say, Tammy Duckworth.

Fitting. She would have something to say about trigger control, I should imagine.
 
5 days ago  
1 vote:

lack of warmth: chewielouie: lack of warmth: maxandgrinch: WastrelWay: I guess the mainstream media will tell us this is fake.

[i.dailymail.co.uk image 850x686]
You know, you can stand on your front porch with a gun to warn off people if you want. If you have to fire the gun at them, that's different.

It would easier to PULL the gate to make it bend at a fulcrum, than to push it with minimal traction and the chance of goring yourself when the metal does bend?

Perhaps the gate was pulled on from the inside?  Security cameras must be around in a high end 'hood like that.

Since video shows protestors walking through the gate undamaged, I'm leaning towards the lawyer damaged the gate himself, and got his security footage pulled so it can't be used against him.  Because there's no way there's not a camera on that gate.  Since no footage has come forward showing protestors did the damage, I'm sticking with that till it does.

You assume way too much. What most likely happened was that protesters damaged the gate shortly after they were told to get out, that they were trespassing on private property.

I still don't see video to prove that.  Therefore, your idea has no weight to sway the jury.


lol, it certainly has more weight than your theory. Before mob ignored "Private Property" signs, gate was intact. Shortly after mob passed through gate it was damages.
 
5 days ago  
1 vote:

pedrop357: Mock26: Z-clipped: pedrop357: A'isha P.: mindset zero: What is a easement Alex.

If you would describe a piece of property with an easement as having "multiple public and private" owners on a record document, I really hope you don't work in a records office someplace.

That "record document" isn't binding or authoritative the way you think is.

Oh look, it's Fark's resident example of the Dunning-Kruger Effect, here with more bald assertions of how he thinks the world is/ought to be.

Roses are red, violets are blue
Some people don't think it be like it is, but it do.

I wonder if he got his degree here:

[Fark user image 850x213]

If you two are done sucking each other's dicks, you'll see that that's not an official document from the local government, it's not from the tax assessor, recorder, any sort of surveying office or company, etc.  It's an application to be included in the National Register of Historic Places.


Fark user imageView Full Size
 
5 days ago  
1 vote:

pedrop357: scotchcrotch: I didn't see any video of protesters coming on their lawn, much less threaten to burn their house down.

The street was private property but not their property.

Funny, this started as you talking about people shouldn't flaunt their wealth and I responded to that broad comment with a similarly broad comment, now you want to come back to the original topic?


Focus.  Don't turn this into a debate over semantics.  Stay on course.

Focus my young Padwan.
 
5 days ago  
1 vote:

scotchcrotch: I didn't see any video of protesters coming on their lawn, much less threaten to burn their house down.

The street was private property but not their property.


Funny, this started as you talking about people shouldn't flaunt their wealth and I responded to that broad comment with a similarly broad comment, now you want to come back to the original topic?
 
5 days ago  
1 vote:

pedrop357: scotchcrotch: pedrop357: scotchcrotch: pedrop357: scotchcrotch: I think in the near future, flashing one's opulence will become more of a risk than benefit.

Unless you're rich enough to afford security, perhaps you don't have to flaunt every buck you made.

Then go for those that can afford security- The Kardashians of the world needed to go a decade ago.

I don't think so comrade.  We're coming into the "fark around and find out" phase of things and more people than you realize are armed and not going to put up with too much more of this mob violence bullshiat.

Don't trespass, vandalize, rape, burn, loot, or murder and things will work out a lot better for you.

Ok, so then they'll shoot someone and go to trial for murdering a protester.

If someone is doing any of the above, they're not a protester.  Threatening people will get you shot and you may not even be around to see if they face any consequences (they most likely will not).

It'll be a huge story and whether they were in the right or not, their lived will be ruined.  They'll have to slip into anonymity and you can't exactly go incognito in a mansion.

That'll show'm!

Doubtful.  It's not illegal to shoot someone who tries to hurt or kill you or burn your house down because you dare to "flaunt" your wealth.  If they live in a mansion, they can afford more guns and may be able to easily afford to hire security.

If you took a second to research Missouri law you'd realize you're wrong.

You cant use deadly force to protect property in MO.

I'd LOVE to see how the state would justify prosecuting someone for defending themselves from a mob of people trying to hurt them or burn their house down.  Regardless of the law, someone who has decided to attack me or burn my house down will be shot and I will take my chances with any prospective jury.


I didn't see any video of protesters coming on their lawn, much less threaten to burn their house down.

The street was private property but not their property.
 
5 days ago  
1 vote:

pedrop357: scotchcrotch: pedrop357: scotchcrotch: I think in the near future, flashing one's opulence will become more of a risk than benefit.

Unless you're rich enough to afford security, perhaps you don't have to flaunt every buck you made.

Then go for those that can afford security- The Kardashians of the world needed to go a decade ago.

I don't think so comrade.  We're coming into the "fark around and find out" phase of things and more people than you realize are armed and not going to put up with too much more of this mob violence bullshiat.

Don't trespass, vandalize, rape, burn, loot, or murder and things will work out a lot better for you.

Ok, so then they'll shoot someone and go to trial for murdering a protester.

If someone is doing any of the above, they're not a protester.  Threatening people will get you shot and you may not even be around to see if they face any consequences (they most likely will not).

It'll be a huge story and whether they were in the right or not, their lived will be ruined.  They'll have to slip into anonymity and you can't exactly go incognito in a mansion.

That'll show'm!

Doubtful.  It's not illegal to shoot someone who tries to hurt or kill you or burn your house down because you dare to "flaunt" your wealth.  If they live in a mansion, they can afford more guns and may be able to easily afford to hire security.


If you took a second to research Missouri law you'd realize you're wrong.

You cant use deadly force to protect property in MO.
 
5 days ago  
1 vote:

scotchcrotch: pedrop357: scotchcrotch: I think in the near future, flashing one's opulence will become more of a risk than benefit.

Unless you're rich enough to afford security, perhaps you don't have to flaunt every buck you made.

Then go for those that can afford security- The Kardashians of the world needed to go a decade ago.

I don't think so comrade.  We're coming into the "fark around and find out" phase of things and more people than you realize are armed and not going to put up with too much more of this mob violence bullshiat.

Don't trespass, vandalize, rape, burn, loot, or murder and things will work out a lot better for you.

Ok, so then they'll shoot someone and go to trial for murdering a protester.


If someone is doing any of the above, they're not a protester.  Threatening people will get you shot and you may not even be around to see if they face any consequences (they most likely will not).

It'll be a huge story and whether they were in the right or not, their lived will be ruined.  They'll have to slip into anonymity and you can't exactly go incognito in a mansion.

That'll show'm!


Doubtful.  It's not illegal to shoot someone who tries to hurt or kill you or burn your house down because you dare to "flaunt" your wealth.  If they live in a mansion, they can afford more guns and may be able to easily afford to hire security.
 
5 days ago  
1 vote:

scotchcrotch: I think in the near future, flashing one's opulence will become more of a risk than benefit.

Unless you're rich enough to afford security, perhaps you don't have to flaunt every buck you made.

Then go for those that can afford security- The Kardashians of the world needed to go a decade ago.


I don't think so comrade.  We're coming into the "fark around and find out" phase of things and more people than you realize are armed and not going to put up with too much more of this mob violence bullshiat.

Don't trespass, vandalize, rape, burn, loot, or murder and things will work out a lot better for you.
 
5 days ago  
1 vote:

WelldeadLink: "'It's interesting to me that the very people that are asking the mayor to resign for doxxing people have now put all my information all over the web, all over the world. Is there some hypocrisy there? Maybe I'm missing something."


They're following the Scientology play book - no bad tactics, only bad targets.
 
5 days ago  
1 vote:

Z-clipped: Easement is exactly why these streets cannot be considered fully private, and why the Pointy McGunnersons had no right to enforce ownership of the street and sidewalk.  They are in the middle of an urban area.  They are served by city and federal services on those streets.  They don't have the right to assume the intentions of, or block, potential visitors from the other houses in the neighborhood, and they DEFINITELY don't have the right to point guns at people walking past their residence.

The stated legal intention behind preserving these blocked streets all over St. Louis was to block vehicular traffic, not to make neighborhoods completely inaccessible to all outsiders.  If one of these protesters decides to pursue the incident legally, you can bet that the limits to the "private" nature of these streets will be made very clear, regardless of what some City Counselor has claimed to the media.


There are many types of easements, and not all allow members of the public to traipse through.

Given the amount of attention focused on this case, I would have expected to see proof of an easement or other actual legal documents showing that this is either public property or open to the public at large.
 
5 days ago  
1 vote:

Mock26: Z-clipped: pedrop357: A'isha P.: mindset zero: What is a easement Alex.

If you would describe a piece of property with an easement as having "multiple public and private" owners on a record document, I really hope you don't work in a records office someplace.

That "record document" isn't binding or authoritative the way you think is.

Oh look, it's Fark's resident example of the Dunning-Kruger Effect, here with more bald assertions of how he thinks the world is/ought to be.

Roses are red, violets are blue
Some people don't think it be like it is, but it do.

I wonder if he got his degree here:

[Fark user image 850x213]


If you two are done sucking each other's dicks, you'll see that that's not an official document from the local government, it's not from the tax assessor, recorder, any sort of surveying office or company, etc.  It's an application to be included in the National Register of Historic Places.
 
5 days ago  
1 vote:

lack of warmth: maxandgrinch: WastrelWay: I guess the mainstream media will tell us this is fake.

[i.dailymail.co.uk image 850x686]
You know, you can stand on your front porch with a gun to warn off people if you want. If you have to fire the gun at them, that's different.

It would easier to PULL the gate to make it bend at a fulcrum, than to push it with minimal traction and the chance of goring yourself when the metal does bend?

Perhaps the gate was pulled on from the inside?  Security cameras must be around in a high end 'hood like that.

Since video shows protestors walking through the gate undamaged, I'm leaning towards the lawyer damaged the gate himself, and got his security footage pulled so it can't be used against him.  Because there's no way there's not a camera on that gate.  Since no footage has come forward showing protestors did the damage, I'm sticking with that till it does.


You assume way too much. What most likely happened was that protesters damaged the gate shortly after they were told to get out, that they were trespassing on private property.
 
5 days ago  
1 vote:

pedrop357: A'isha P.: mindset zero: What is a easement Alex.

If you would describe a piece of property with an easement as having "multiple public and private" owners on a record document, I really hope you don't work in a records office someplace.

That "record document" isn't binding or authoritative the way you think is.


Oh look, it's Fark's resident example of the Dunning-Kruger Effect, here with more bald assertions of how he thinks the world is/ought to be.

Roses are red, violets are blue
Some people don't think it be like it is, but it do.
 
5 days ago  
1 vote:

mindset zero: A'isha P.: mindset zero: Z-clipped: mindset zero: Z-clipped: mindset zero: They are INSIDE a gated community.

NO THEY ARE NOT.  This neighborhood is HISTORIC and not gated.  There's a gate blocking one street entrance, but the actual access street that the residents use is ungated and the streets are, according to public zoning, public thoroughfares.

mindset zero: The housing management company that runs the gated community maintains the streets.

Then why is the city repaving them?  Evidence that contradicts everything you're saying has already been posted in the thread.  Please make with some proof of your claims or STFU.

Mock26: I am not defending the couple in the least big.

Oh I know.  I was just trying to be helpful.

https://www.stlmag.com/history/archite​cture/private-streets-of-st-louis/

That link doesn't say what you think it does.  These streets are closed to automobile traffic like many others in St. Louis. It is NOT A GATED COMMUNITY.  The homeowners DO NOT own the streets or sidewalks.  Their gate is just a more posh version of a Schoemehl pot.

[assets.bwbx.io image 850x637]

You can stubbornly insist over and over on your idiotic generalizations, but it won't make you right. The fact is, the assholes in TFA did not have the legal standing to do what they did, and since these closed streets have been hotly contested for a number of reasons for a long time, they may have inadvertently brought their own gates down for good.

Here save you some time.

St. Louis City Counselor Julian K. Bush affirmed that Portland, as well as several other streets in the West End, are indeed private.

"They are owned by the property owners, and the owners pay for them, the street repairs and maintenance," Bush said Monday.

Can I borrow that Gary meme?


https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.stlto​day.com/news/local/columns/joe-hollema​n/portland-place-where-couple-pointed-​guns-at-protesters-has-long-been-home-​to-wealthy-st/article_1764a072-9403-5b​1a-a452-ba5609608d56. ...


Easement is exactly why these streets cannot be considered fully private, and why the Pointy McGunnersons had no right to enforce ownership of the street and sidewalk.  They are in the middle of an urban area.  They are served by city and federal services on those streets.  They don't have the right to assume the intentions of, or block, potential visitors from the other houses in the neighborhood, and they DEFINITELY don't have the right to point guns at people walking past their residence.

The stated legal intention behind preserving these blocked streets all over St. Louis was to block vehicular traffic, not to make neighborhoods completely inaccessible to all outsiders.  If one of these protesters decides to pursue the incident legally, you can bet that the limits to the "private" nature of these streets will be made very clear, regardless of what some City Counselor has claimed to the media.
 
5 days ago  
1 vote:

A'isha P.: mindset zero: What is a easement Alex.

If you would describe a piece of property with an easement as having "multiple public and private" owners on a record document, I really hope you don't work in a records office someplace.


That "record document" isn't binding or authoritative the way you think is.
 
5 days ago  
1 vote:

A'isha P.: Which refers to the ownership of the structures, which is why the x next to Occupied in the same section is also marked.

If Portland Place is both publicly and privately owned, as described in the record, and the houses are privately owned, as marked in the record, guess what that leaves to be publicly owned?


That is not the relevant record to determine these things.
 
5 days ago  
1 vote:

A'isha P.: mindset zero: Z-clipped: mindset zero: Z-clipped: mindset zero: They are INSIDE a gated community.

NO THEY ARE NOT.  This neighborhood is HISTORIC and not gated.  There's a gate blocking one street entrance, but the actual access street that the residents use is ungated and the streets are, according to public zoning, public thoroughfares.

mindset zero: The housing management company that runs the gated community maintains the streets.

Then why is the city repaving them?  Evidence that contradicts everything you're saying has already been posted in the thread.  Please make with some proof of your claims or STFU.

Mock26: I am not defending the couple in the least big.

Oh I know.  I was just trying to be helpful.

https://www.stlmag.com/history/archite​cture/private-streets-of-st-louis/

That link doesn't say what you think it does.  These streets are closed to automobile traffic like many others in St. Louis. It is NOT A GATED COMMUNITY.  The homeowners DO NOT own the streets or sidewalks.  Their gate is just a more posh version of a Schoemehl pot.

[assets.bwbx.io image 850x637]

You can stubbornly insist over and over on your idiotic generalizations, but it won't make you right. The fact is, the assholes in TFA did not have the legal standing to do what they did, and since these closed streets have been hotly contested for a number of reasons for a long time, they may have inadvertently brought their own gates down for good.

Here save you some time.

St. Louis City Counselor Julian K. Bush affirmed that Portland, as well as several other streets in the West End, are indeed private.

"They are owned by the property owners, and the owners pay for them, the street repairs and maintenance," Bush said Monday.

Can I borrow that Gary meme?


https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.stlto​day.com/news/local/columns/joe-hollema​n/portland-place-where-couple-pointed-​guns-at-protesters-has-long-been-home-​to-wealthy-st/article_1764a072-9403-5b​1a-a452-ba5609608d56.amp.html

That's not what the public records for Portland Place show.  It is both public and private.

[Fark user image image 425x318]


In the public access section, the "restricted" box is marked, not the "no public access" box.

[Fark user image image 425x91]

The note on the records shows that the specified restrictions are only on through vehicular traffic, and say nothing about pedestrian traffic.

[Fark user image image 425x147]


What is a easement Alex.
 
5 days ago  
1 vote:

mindset zero: n the public access section, the "restricted" box is marked, not the "no public access" box.

[Fark user image image 425x91]

The note on the records shows that the specified restrictions are only on through vehicular traffic, and say nothing about pedestrian traffic.

[Fark user image image 425x147]


You see that x marked private.


It's actually not relevant to the point they think they're making.  It's a nomination form to be added to the Register of Historical Places.
 
5 days ago  
1 vote:

A'isha P.: mindset zero: Z-clipped: mindset zero: Z-clipped: mindset zero: They are INSIDE a gated community.

NO THEY ARE NOT.  This neighborhood is HISTORIC and not gated.  There's a gate blocking one street entrance, but the actual access street that the residents use is ungated and the streets are, according to public zoning, public thoroughfares.

mindset zero: The housing management company that runs the gated community maintains the streets.

Then why is the city repaving them?  Evidence that contradicts everything you're saying has already been posted in the thread.  Please make with some proof of your claims or STFU.

Mock26: I am not defending the couple in the least big.

Oh I know.  I was just trying to be helpful.

https://www.stlmag.com/history/archite​cture/private-streets-of-st-louis/

That link doesn't say what you think it does.  These streets are closed to automobile traffic like many others in St. Louis. It is NOT A GATED COMMUNITY.  The homeowners DO NOT own the streets or sidewalks.  Their gate is just a more posh version of a Schoemehl pot.

[assets.bwbx.io image 850x637]

You can stubbornly insist over and over on your idiotic generalizations, but it won't make you right. The fact is, the assholes in TFA did not have the legal standing to do what they did, and since these closed streets have been hotly contested for a number of reasons for a long time, they may have inadvertently brought their own gates down for good.

Here save you some time.

St. Louis City Counselor Julian K. Bush affirmed that Portland, as well as several other streets in the West End, are indeed private.

"They are owned by the property owners, and the owners pay for them, the street repairs and maintenance," Bush said Monday.

Can I borrow that Gary meme?


https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.stlto​day.com/news/local/columns/joe-hollema​n/portland-place-where-couple-pointed-​guns-at-protesters-has-long-been-home-​to-wealthy-st/article_1764a072-9403-5b​1a-a452-ba5609608d56.amp.html

That's not what the public records for Portland Place show.  It is both public and private.

[Fark user image image 425x318]


In the public access section, the "restricted" box is marked, not the "no public access" box.

[Fark user image image 425x91]

The note on the records shows that the specified restrictions are only on through vehicular traffic, and say nothing about pedestrian traffic.

[Fark user image image 425x147]


You see that x marked private.
 
5 days ago  
1 vote:

cyberspacedout: I'm no metallurgical expert, but I think it would take a concerted effort to do this kind of damage to a wrought-iron gate:


You definitely don't have much experience with bending wrought iron or steel (we don't know what the material is).
 
5 days ago  
1 vote:

planes: Missouri is a "Castle Law State" and the couple were in their rights to defend their property.


Castle law refers to the house and inside the house. Doesn't cover property outdoors.
 
5 days ago  
1 vote:

way south: It still goes to show that there's a point where people stop playing. Whatever their political view was before, it gave way to the basic need for security and shelter.


They were under no threat.  They were the threat.
 
5 days ago  
1 vote:

Ragin' Asian: These people are frauds. You can tell because they don't know about a forward grip or a front sight.


I don't think they're the standard boogaloo crowd. He probably owned a few guns because rich people can afford expensive toys, not because he planned to use them this way. The AR looked like it still had the dealer strap on it.

It still goes to show that there's a point where people stop playing. Whatever their political view was before, it gave way to the basic need for security and shelter. Because they were untrained the mob was far more likely to catch a bullet from them than an alt-right militia guy.
 
5 days ago  
1 vote:

middlewaytao: Public road, public sidewalk.

https://twitter.com/IamShaneMorris/sta​tus/1277509594051416070


Again, for all the derps missing it.
 
5 days ago  
1 vote:

the money is in the banana stand: .

Warning shots are different, namely because indiscriminately firing in hopes of scaring off a would be intruder is different than targeting one and issuing verbal cues to leave your property or you will use force. Discharging your firearm away from your target could strike an unintended target. It is a pretty grey area still in my opinion as I believe warning shots to be justifiable in certain circumstances. I would rather exhaust all non-lethal options to have my would be attacker or trespasser leave before having to use deadly force. Restricting those options to simply shoot to kill or conceal your firearm does not leave a whole lot of room for rational decision making.


I'm not taking a side. I'm pointing to instances that I'm aware that contradict some of the things said up thread.

Only opinion, I have on a personal level, is, I know I'd been arrested for doing what those people did.

The law is very variable. For me, I have no choice but, to wait, till it is clear I had no choice, but to shoot.

(Not that I own a gun. Because, the legal thresholds of acceptable use are stupid. )

But, I'm aware this is a matter of privilege. Ymmv.
As does mine.

/Brandishing a firearm  charges have a lot of leeway and discretion.
//It's nice to be rich/white/connected
 
5 days ago  
1 vote:
It is just stuff.  Why risk someone getting hurt.  Pack your pets in your car and leave.  Go stay in a hotel.  When it is over call the insurance company.  It is just not worth it.
 
5 days ago  
1 vote:

Mock26: middlewaytao: Public road, public sidewalk.

https://twitter.com/IamShaneMorris/sta​tus/1277509594051416070

Uh, that is the location of City Hall. The people were protesting at Mayor's private residence, which is not at city hall, or at 107 North Seventh Ave. Portland Place is about 4.5 miles away from the address listed in that Tweet.

[Fark user image 850x337]


City Hall isn't in the historic district described on the form.  City Hall is where the platting for the historic district was filed.
 
5 days ago  
1 vote:

Z-clipped: mindset zero: They are INSIDE a gated community.

NO THEY ARE NOT.  This neighborhood is HISTORIC and not gated.  There's a gate blocking one street entrance, but the actual access street that the residents use is ungated and the streets are, according to public zoning, public thoroughfares.

mindset zero: The housing management company that runs the gated community maintains the streets.

Then why is the city repaving them?  Evidence that contradicts everything you're saying has already been posted in the thread.  Please make with some proof of your claims or STFU.

Mock26: I am not defending the couple in the least big.

Oh I know.  I was just trying to be helpful.


https://www.stlmag.com/history/archit​e​cture/private-streets-of-st-louis/
 
5 days ago  
1 vote:

strathmeyer: mindset zero: Streets in a gated community are private property

Even if they were you still can't point your gun at strangers walking down them.


Did not say they could.

But you how this will play out if it even went to court. Dismissed. I am betting the lawyer will not mind now fighting that in court. Given the size of that house, I bet he is a pretty dam good one too. Their argument most likely. They busted down our gate, broke into private property, and we felt under duress and felt the need to protect our property.

Just really glad a gate was the worst of it. Could have turned out bad and then no one could have the funny memes about it.

Also the mayor seems like a asshole.
 
5 days ago  
1 vote:

the money is in the banana stand: AeAe: Brandishing is a crime. I hope they get charged.

How is that brandishing when people are illegally on your property? If the protestors were marching in the city streets and they decided to do this, sure. I am sure this couple is probably pretty terrible, but the protestors were in the wrong here. No about of self-righteous bs makes trespassing acceptable.


What ever.

Cut the 💩.
brandishing a firearm is a phony-baloney charge that cops and district attorneys use at their whim.
I'm not I'm not necessarily saying I agree or disagree with this but it does suffer from selective prosecution.


So, if it gets used on the above couple, meh, how many normal people got screwed by the same b.s. law.
 
6 days ago  
1 vote:

chookbillion: Mock26: chookbillion: Do you still have your baby in a display box?

What was the little brat's name again? For the LIFE of me I cannot remember.

I'm trying to find the photo but it may be gone with the last laptop.


I do not even remember the name of the little all star, else I could try to search for the image on my computer (thought like you, it might be gone with the old).
 
6 days ago  
1 vote:
Just reading the headline I knew exactly how this thread would turn out. No need to even read past the Weeners. It just all repeats from there. Gotta go, this echo just keeps ringing...
 
6 days ago  
1 vote:

mindset zero: Z-clipped: mindset zero: It looks like a side gate that leads into the complex. Once they pushed their way in it was private property.

Whether the street and sidewalk are actually private seems to be in question.  The city maintains the street, and it's listed as public in the zoning records.  One Streets Dept worker has reportedly claimed it's a private street to the press.  The community is historic, and not gated.  You can drive right in via Lake Ave.

What is NOT in question is the fact that the dipshiats who pulled guns on people are NOT the owners of the sidewalk and had no right to "defend" it. So yeah, the couple DID do something wrong.  Something feloniously wrong in fact, to people who simply walked through an open gate and weren't threatening them at all- they were almost certainly on their way to the Mayor's residence to protest.

They do have a right to be on their property with weapons. Period.

Them pointing at people is not really cool.


Them pointing weapons at people is called brandishing, and it is illegal in Missouri.
 
6 days ago  
1 vote:

Z-clipped: Mock26: Z-clipped: dstanley: Mock26: WastrelWay: I guess the mainstream media will tell us this is fake.

[Fark user image image 850x686]

Here is footage from video of the actual protest:

[Fark user image image 850x477]

If you go to Google street view (intersection of Porland Place and Kingshighway Boulevard) you can see it is the same gate, the top image taken from behind the gate and looking at the North side of Pershing Place) and the bottom image looking in from outside the gate.

In the protest video that gate is in fact intact. And have you done any sort of work iron fencing or iron gates? That stuff is pretty darned strong. It would take significant force, such as with a sledgehammer, to basically bend a gate half like that. So, do you still think that the protesters broke the gate to get inside when in fact the gate was actually open? Or perhaps this pair of lawyers did it after the fact to make it look like the protesters were in fact "storming the Bastille"?

[Fark user image 422x750]

*snert*

So the street the protesters went through the gate to walk on was, in fact, a public street and not private property at all.

No. Mr. Snert pinned the wrong street.

Portland, Lake and Westmoreland are all signedas being private property, but the city maintains them (and is apparently resurfacing Lake as we speak), and the zoning has them listed as public thoroughfares.

This is just rich assholes being rich assholes, and laying claim to things they don't own.


I agree with your last line. I am not defending the couple in the least big. In fact, I have "called them out" for lying about the gate being smashed.
 
6 days ago  
1 vote:

yohohogreengiant: Murflette: Idk a lot about handguns, but judging by the pose marshmallow barbie is standing in and holding that gun, were she to pull the trigger not only would she likely miss wildly, but the kick would probably send the gun straight to her face.

Idk if you can find the photo in this article but there's one photo of Suburbia Bonnie  with her finger engaged on the trigger. NRA spokesmodel material.

Yeah, I get it, it's legal to act like an asshole in front of your Castle with your sidearm. Hooray.


Funny, the fark NRA fellatio squad haven't come down hard on her. I wonder why she's automatically deemed responsible and not a thug?
 
6 days ago  
1 vote:

Z-clipped: mindset zero: It looks like a side gate that leads into the complex. Once they pushed their way in it was private property.

Whether the street and sidewalk are actually private seems to be in question.  The city maintains the street, and it's listed as public in the zoning records.  One Streets Dept worker has reportedly claimed it's a private street to the press.  The community is historic, and not gated.  You can drive right in via Lake Ave.

What is NOT in question is the fact that the dipshiats who pulled guns on people are NOT the owners of the sidewalk and had no right to "defend" it. So yeah, the couple DID do something wrong.  Something feloniously wrong in fact, to people who simply walked through an open gate and weren't threatening them at all- they were almost certainly on their way to the Mayor's residence to protest.


They do have a right to be on their property with weapons. Period.

Them pointing at people is not really cool.
 
6 days ago  
1 vote:

cyberspacedout: I'm no metallurgical expert, but I think it would take a concerted effort to do this kind of damage to a wrought-iron gate:

[Fark user image image 850x686]

The protesters don't look heavy enough to have been able to bend it like that. The McCloskeys certainly do.

If the couple has any brains, they already had a security camera pointed at the gate. I'm guessing some of the video will have been conveniently erased.


Security camera footage had identified a the vandal: a pudgy troll with a trained hambeast at his side.
 
6 days ago  
1 vote:

vrax: MattytheMouse: WastrelWay: I guess the mainstream media will tell us this is fake.

[i.dailymail.co.uk image 850x686]
You know, you can stand on your front porch with a gun to warn off people if you want. If you have to fire the gun at them, that's different.

It's probably real, but here's the tricky thing:
[Fark user image 850x566]
It's not the gate to their mansion like the article says. It's the gate to their street.

At any rate, I literally do not give two shiats if the couple were within their rights or not. Don't go outside and brandish guns at strangers. Literally nothing good has ever come from that, as they're learning right now.

Ah, exactly what I was wondering.  So it is actually a community gate.

The way the woman was pointing her gun at people was absolutely against all firearm safety rules.  At the very minimum she should lose her license for that.  Someone could have easily been killed.  FFS, it's not a pointing device.  He wasn't much better.  If he'd have accidentally shot his wife this would have been something special.  So 2020.


Missouri does not issue gun licenses. You can take an assault rifle into a Denny's if you want to and the worst that's likely to happen is they'll tell you to leave. Well, as long as you're white.
 
6 days ago  
1 vote:

waxbeans: DigitalDirt: As someone who owns an AK-47 rifle, I have a Bulgarian SLR-95 .  I only bought it because the bullets are so cheap and I wanted a target gun to have fun with.  My best friend bought a Ruger Mini-14 and the 223 ammo was more than twice as expensive.
I got off on a tangent, the point is never pull a gun on anyone unless you life is in danger.

[Fark user image image 850x338]

And apparently if your 🐖 your life is always in danger


Not quite sure what yo are saying, we are all in danger, but I don't have a gun loaded in my house, they are locked in a safe.
I grew up in a Police and drafted Vietnam Army family (grandfather and father).  We where a Quaker family, so violence is not what we were taught violence was thrust upon us.
 
6 days ago  
1 vote:

DigitalDirt: As someone who owns an AK-47 rifle, I have a Bulgarian SLR-95 .  I only bought it because the bullets are so cheap and I wanted a target gun to have fun with.  My best friend bought a Ruger Mini-14 and the 223 ammo was more than twice as expensive.
I got off on a tangent, the point is never pull a gun on anyone unless you life is in danger.

[Fark user image image 850x338]


And apparently if your 🐖 your life is always in danger
 
6 days ago  
1 vote:

nitropissering: Meanwhile, in a galaxy far far away.....

[Fark user image 850x260]


That's ridiculous. They're *with* the Empire, not against it.
 
6 days ago  
1 vote:

Mad_Radhu: [Fark user image 425x343]


6/28, don't forget the date, an old couple broke their own gate.
 
6 days ago  
1 vote:

strathmeyer: a_room_with_a_moose: The St. Louis Street Department (whatever the hell that is - where I come from, we just have Public Works Departments) is reporting that it is a private street.

https://www.channel3000.com/st-louis-c​ouple-pulls-firearms-on-protesters-cut​ting-through-their-private-street/

I'm confused about this whole private thing. I walk down private streets all the time. Does private mean they can shoot me?


Nope. The couple definitely committed a felony.
 
6 days ago  
1 vote:

a_room_with_a_moose: The St. Louis Street Department (whatever the hell that is - where I come from, we just have Public Works Departments) is reporting that it is a private street.

https://www.channel3000.com/st-louis-c​ouple-pulls-firearms-on-protesters-cut​ting-through-their-private-street/


I'm confused about this whole private thing. I walk down private streets all the time. Does private mean they can shoot me?
 
6 days ago  
1 vote:
Why were they wrong? I'm torn... ish. Their strategy was weird, but they managed to successfully fend off hostile entities. Don't be a dick. If you're a dick, say hello to my little friend.
 
6 days ago  
1 vote:

WastrelWay: I guess the mainstream media will tell us this is fake.

[i.dailymail.co.uk image 850x686]
You know, you can stand on your front porch with a gun to warn off people if you want. If you have to fire the gun at them, that's different.


It would easier to PULL the gate to make it bend at a fulcrum, than to push it with minimal traction and the chance of goring yourself when the metal does bend?

Perhaps the gate was pulled on from the inside?  Security cameras must be around in a high end 'hood like that.
 
6 days ago  
1 vote:

Murflette: Idk a lot about handguns, but judging by the pose marshmallow barbie is standing in and holding that gun, were she to pull the trigger not only would she likely miss wildly, but the kick would probably send the gun straight to her face.


I'm guessing they bought the guns really recently, and haven't even taken a trip to a gun range yet.
 
6 days ago  
1 vote:

middlewaytao: Public road, public sidewalk.

https://twitter.com/IamShaneMorris/st​a​tus/1277509594051416070


Well well well. That makes things quite different.
 
6 days ago  
1 vote:

Z-clipped: dstanley: Mock26: WastrelWay: I guess the mainstream media will tell us this is fake.

[Fark user image image 850x686]

Here is footage from video of the actual protest:

[Fark user image image 850x477]

If you go to Google street view (intersection of Porland Place and Kingshighway Boulevard) you can see it is the same gate, the top image taken from behind the gate and looking at the North side of Pershing Place) and the bottom image looking in from outside the gate.

In the protest video that gate is in fact intact. And have you done any sort of work iron fencing or iron gates? That stuff is pretty darned strong. It would take significant force, such as with a sledgehammer, to basically bend a gate half like that. So, do you still think that the protesters broke the gate to get inside when in fact the gate was actually open? Or perhaps this pair of lawyers did it after the fact to make it look like the protesters were in fact "storming the Bastille"?

[Fark user image 422x750]

*snert*

So the street the protesters went through the gate to walk on was, in fact, a public street and not private property at all.


The St. Louis Street Department (whatever the hell that is - where I come from, we just have Public Works Departments) is reporting that it is a private street.

https://www.channel3000.com/st-louis-​c​ouple-pulls-firearms-on-protesters-cut​ting-through-their-private-street/
 
6 days ago  
1 vote:

middlewaytao: Public road, public sidewalk.

https://twitter.com/IamShaneMorris/sta​tus/1277509594051416070


I know that when I have to solve a complex property or zoning matter, I immediately consult a twitter expert who posts a USGS survey and the lower left 1/4 of an index card.
 
6 days ago  
1 vote:
What was that cheap gate supposed to stop, anyway, aggressive Mormon missionaries and siding salesmen?
Pretty low-rent for a "mansion".
 
6 days ago  
1 vote:

ColonelCathcart: MattytheMouse: WastrelWay: I guess the mainstream media will tell us this is fake.

[i.dailymail.co.uk image 850x686]
You know, you can stand on your front porch with a gun to warn off people if you want. If you have to fire the gun at them, that's different.

It's probably real, but here's the tricky thing:
[Fark user image image 850x566]
It's not the gate to their mansion like the article says. It's the gate to their street.

At any rate, I literally do not give two shiats if the couple were within their rights or not. Don't go outside and brandish guns at strangers. Literally nothing good has ever come from that, as they're learning right now.

So...stay inside and let them come in or destroy your property from the outside? Is that your advice?


It's not just good advice... IT'S THE LAW (in a lot of places).
 
6 days ago  
1 vote:

nitropissering: The new American Gothic.

[Fark user image 741x928]


Whoops, forgot his ear, lol, oh well.
 
6 days ago  
1 vote:
If these two were the "bad neighbors" in a movie, they would be rejected for being too cartoony and not believably realistic.
 
6 days ago  
1 vote:

Mock26: Skleenar: Mock26: WastrelWay: I guess the mainstream media will tell us this is fake.

[Fark user image 850x686]

Here is footage from video of the actual protest:

[Fark user image 850x477]

If you go to Google street view (intersection of Porland Place and Kingshighway Boulevard) you can see it is the same gate, the top image taken from behind the gate and looking at the North side of Pershing Place) and the bottom image looking in from outside the gate.

In the protest video that gate is in fact intact. And have you done any sort of work iron fencing or iron gates? That stuff is pretty darned strong. It would take significant force, such as with a sledgehammer, to basically bend a gate half like that. So, do you still think that the protesters broke the gate to get inside when in fact the gate was actually open? Or perhaps this pair of lawyers did it after the fact to make it look like the protesters were in fact "storming the Bastille"?

Of course, there is the possibility that some protesters broke the gate on the way out, as petty revenge for getting an AR and a Walther pulled on them by pink grimace and Hamburgler's girlfriend.

How do you know they went out the same way? There are two other entrances to this private street, one much closer to their home than the gate that the supposedly smashed. The protesters came in via the gate by the arrow on the right side of the picture. They were confronted by the couple by the arrow in the middle. We can presume that since they were marching to the Mayor's house that they lived to the left (west) of the lawyer's house. The protesters could have left by Lake Ave or at the gate at that is off the map to the west.

[Fark user image 850x283]

Hmm, something does not seem right here. From the article:

"Mark McCloskey told KMOV-TV that a mob rushed toward the home as the family was having dinner outside, claiming that the protesters smashed through gates on their private street that are marked with 'No Trespassing' and 'P ...


My mistake. Wrong house. 

Damn. I either need more beers or I need to stop drinking for the night.
 
6 days ago  
1 vote:

SurelyShirley: Name this band

[Fark user image 600x478]


Nickelback.
 
6 days ago  
1 vote:

SurelyShirley: Name this band

[Fark user image image 600x478]


Fark user imageView Full Size
 
6 days ago  
1 vote:

ColonelCathcart: Prank Call of Cthulhu: State_College_Arsonist: That's a fair call in my book.  The protests of late have a marked tendency for violence and destruction, so when the mob is at your door, an AR-15 is definitely appropriate.

Protip: If you have n bullets, as long as there are at least n+1 determined mob members, your ass is grass.

How big are your bullets and how stacked is the enemy?


encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.comView Full Size


Abandon all hope.
 
6 days ago  
1 vote:
Fark user imageView Full Size


Fark user imageView Full Size
 
6 days ago  
1 vote:

Rhyno45: pedrop357: Other than some shiatty trigger discipline, they did nothing wrong.

Wow. Poor trigger discipline with a cell phone has killed how many unarmed people without consequence? How many range accidents killed people because of poor firearm control and trigger discipline? They are lethal instruments and waving them around is an immediate lethal threat. A cop would have shot them instantly if it was in their direction. So yeah, they did nothing wrong other than endanger everyone in front of the muzzle of that gun with potential instant death.


Remember that kid who accidentally killed her instructor by holding down the trigger?  Not really a trigger discipline thing, but truly farked up, none the less.
 
6 days ago  
1 vote:

jso2897: waxbeans: pedrop357: Other than some shiatty trigger discipline, they did nothing wrong.

😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆

Exactly. Laws apply to everyone.
And we all have inalienable rights.

😆😆😆😆🤔😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😂😂🤔🙃💀💀💀💀💀💀💀

All's equal, and the courts are on the level
and even the nobles are properly handled
after the cops have chased after and caught 'em
and the ladder of law has no top and no bottom.


And I bet you people think there's a law that says Walmart can force you to show you the receipt.

Walmart cannot force you to show receipt.
The only thing they can do is file trespassing charges on you if you fail to show a receipt.
charging trespassing charges against you is the only power Walmart has everything else is up to you.
You don't have to obey anything they say.
And the only thing they can do about it is ask you to leave.
 
6 days ago  
1 vote:

js34603: WastrelWay: I guess the mainstream media will tell us this is fake.

[i.dailymail.co.uk image 850x686]
You know, you can stand on your front porch with a gun to warn off people if you want. If you have to fire the gun at them, that's different.

Ok so maybe they did damage some property. But those people are rich so it makes it ok.

But I still maintain they didn't threaten anyone, peaceful protestors would never do that. However if it later turns out they did threaten them, they deserved it.


As a whole, America, does.
 
6 days ago  
1 vote:

Fireproof: WastrelWay: I guess the mainstream media will tell us this is fake.

[i.dailymail.co.uk image 850x686]
You know, you can stand on your front porch with a gun to warn off people if you want. If you have to fire the gun at them, that's different.

TFA:

A livestream of the incident shows the protesters walking through an open, intact gate

So I guess the Daily Mail is now part of your far-left MSM now. Also, the entire crown just hopped over the top half of that gate one by one, seeing as the bottom half looks undamaged.


*crowd, not crown
 
6 days ago  
1 vote:

waxbeans: pedrop357: Other than some shiatty trigger discipline, they did nothing wrong.

😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆

Exactly. Laws apply to everyone.
And we all have inalienable rights.

😆😆😆😆🤔😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😂😂🤔🙃💀💀💀💀💀💀💀


The second emoji progression is pretty great ngl.
 
6 days ago  
1 vote:
Also, "protestoes" sounds like something Mr. Burns would call people.
 
Displayed 290 of 290 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking




On Twitter




In Other Media