Rifle used by couple to stop democrat party terrorists confiscated....expect to see the protestors attack...

[Faun]

They were NOT on that couple's property, and YES you are not supposed to point a loaded gun with your finger on the trigger unless there is an immediate lethal threat.

You are just making up stuff to fit your argument

the couple have every right to brandish weapons to protect their home from looters

and yes, a mob of thugs is a threat

A "thug" is a "violent person," especially a criminal.

What violence did those protesters commit...?

Destroying property

What property did they destroy?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Considering THEY DIDN'T USE LETHAL FORCE.

They kind of did. Pointing a gun right at someone is application of deadly force, which is why they might be in trouble.

Negative... They threatened lethal force. They did not USE lethal force. They were trespassing. They are allowed to threaten anything they want. Get off their property.

They may have committed a 4th degree assault...

​

Assault in the fourth degree.

​

1. A person commits the offense of assault in the fourth degree if: ​

​

(3) The person purposely places another person in apprehension of immediate physical injury;​

​

​

ON THEIR OWN PROPERTY? *laughs*

Oh wait... Are you talking about the "protesters" ... That makes sense.

The protesters were not on their property.

View attachment 362146

Private "street." That street is not that home owner's property.

Yes it's their private property

 

[bigrebnc1775]

But not the property of that homeowner. Post a link to the Missouri law which allows a homeowner to threaten lethal force to protect someone else's property...

Thy were on the property of the homeowners (the McCloskeys)

Nope, they were on the sidewalk and in the street.

they were on private property
The sidewalk and street was private property

 

[protectionist]

I don't have to. Someone else made the claim they broke it down. The onus to prove a claim falls upon the person making the claim, not the person challenging that claim be proven.

You never learn, do ya, gramps?

But this is a case where the McCloskeys are being portrayed as the villians, and the city making the claim that they should not have shown their weapons, As such, the weapon was confiscated.
So the burden of proof is on the city, or whoever made the claim to the city. Get it, puppy ?

So now we go back to my challenge. You prove the protestors didn't break the gate.

 

[Quasar44]

They were NOT on that couple's property, and YES you are not supposed to point a loaded gun with your finger on the trigger unless there is an immediate lethal threat.

You are just making up stuff to fit your argument

the couple have every right to brandish weapons to protect their home from looters

and yes, a mob of thugs is a threat

A "thug" is a "violent person," especially a criminal.

What violence did those protesters commit...?

Destroying property

What property did they destroy?

They smashed down his gates and trespassed on his property
He should have only pointed the guns to the sky to diffuse tensions

 

[Quasar44]

The wife walked towards them .this is bad judgement

 

[bigrebnc1775]

They were NOT on that couple's property, and YES you are not supposed to point a loaded gun with your finger on the trigger unless there is an immediate lethal threat.

You are just making up stuff to fit your argument

the couple have every right to brandish weapons to protect their home from looters

and yes, a mob of thugs is a threat

A "thug" is a "violent person," especially a criminal.

What violence did those protesters commit...?

Destroying property

What property did they destroy?

Destruction of property does not negate the fact the rioters were trespassing
and FYI the original gate was replaced with a new gate because the original gate had been destroyed

 

[Quasar44]

I personally would have stayed inside with my AR

 

[Quasar44]

They were NOT on that couple's property, and YES you are not supposed to point a loaded gun with your finger on the trigger unless there is an immediate lethal threat.

You are just making up stuff to fit your argument

the couple have every right to brandish weapons to protect their home from looters

and yes, a mob of thugs is a threat

A "thug" is a "violent person," especially a criminal.

What violence did those protesters commit...?

Destroying property

What property did they destroy?

Destruction of property does not negate the fact the rioters were trespassing
and FYI the original gate was replaced with a new gate because the original gate had been destroyed

They will burn the house down

 

[Flash]

The wife walked towards them .this is bad judgement

The BLM terrorists walked towards her and some of them were making some pretty threatening statements.

 

[Quasar44]

The wife walked towards them .this is bad judgement

The BLM terrorists walked towards her and some of them were making some pretty threatening statements.

Yes !!!
A pistol is useless against a mob
She needed an AR

 

[Mac-7]

What violence did those protesters commit...?

on that particular day?

They broke down a gate and swarmed onto private property

but on previous days during the same riot they looted and burned buildings just blocks away

 

[Flash]

They were NOT on that couple's property, and YES you are not supposed to point a loaded gun with your finger on the trigger unless there is an immediate lethal threat.

You are just making up stuff to fit your argument

the couple have every right to brandish weapons to protect their home from looters

and yes, a mob of thugs is a threat

A "thug" is a "violent person," especially a criminal.

What violence did those protesters commit...?

Destroying property

What property did they destroy?

They smashed down his gates and trespassed on his property
He should have only pointed the guns to the sky to diffuse tensions

Sometimes you just have to get somebody's attention and showing them you are serious.

If the BLM assholes didn't want to get a gun pointed at them then they should have stayed at home and watched reruns of Sanford and Sons.

 

[irosie91]

Regularly? Yeah... you are going to have to show stats because that is totally untrue.

Are you kidding?

the lib mobs have been setting fires in democrat cities across America for weeks

I Hear that claim a lot. Iterations of “American cities have been burning for weeks”. Which cities actually experienced protest caused arson and when?

give me the names of the people who murdered more than 10 million Kulaks.
OH!!! you can't-----those people must have
survived.

 

[Mac-7]

What property did they destroy?

St. Louis police identify businesses damaged, broken into

ST LOUIS, MO – JUNE 2: A 7Eleven is seen damaged after being set on fire during riots and looting overnight on June 2, 2020 in St Louis, Missouri. Four police officers were reportedly shot in…

fox2now.com

 

[Faun]

Considering THEY DIDN'T USE LETHAL FORCE.

They kind of did. Pointing a gun right at someone is application of deadly force, which is why they might be in trouble.

Negative... They threatened lethal force. They did not USE lethal force. They were trespassing. They are allowed to threaten anything they want. Get off their property.

They may have committed a 4th degree assault...

​

Assault in the fourth degree.

​

1. A person commits the offense of assault in the fourth degree if: ​

​

(3) The person purposely places another person in apprehension of immediate physical injury;​

​

​

ON THEIR OWN PROPERTY? *laughs*

Oh wait... Are you talking about the "protesters" ... That makes sense.

The protesters were not on their property.

View attachment 362146

Private "street." That street is not that home owner's property.

Yes it's their private property

From your link ... Andes Walker: "I think..."

 

[Flash]

The wife walked towards them .this is bad judgement

The BLM terrorists walked towards her and some of them were making some pretty threatening statements.

Yes !!!
A pistol is useless against a mob
She needed an AR

It is hard to argue with success. They made the BLM terrorists retreat from their property without having to fire a shot.

 

[Faun]

What property did they destroy?

View attachment 362156

I asked for what property was destroyed by the protesters who were going to the mayor's house; and you idiotically post a burnt down building with zero evidence that any of those protesters were involved.

 

[Desperado]

They were morons. Like the snowflakes on this board they were mad about people protesting because white people are of course the real victims. In response they attempted to intimidate with a firearm. Their best defense is that they are too cowardly to intimidate anyone. No one was on their property. Certainly not threatening them.

And what would you have done in their place? Surrender your Home?

 

[Mac-7]

The wife walked towards them .this is bad judgement

She’s lib who thought the democrats would not let the Only Black Lives Matter but down her home

but then descovered she was wrong