• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

St. Louis Couple Loses their AR15

jet57 said:
So that lawyer couple that brandished guns at peaceful protesters lost their AR15 -

St. Louis Cops Seize Gun That Couple Pointed At Black Lives Matter Protesters | HuffPost

Why didn't the article mention the handgun (other than couldn't find it) and only dwelled on the AR-15? Gotta go after that "assault weapon" maybe? If he was so big and bad and all why wasn't he arrested? He wasn't really brandishing other than that mob saw him armed. His wife on the other hand...


And apparently they are also a real pain for their neighbors. I knew that there was more to this than appeared. Stupid people with guns should be separated.
Click to expand...

It's such a good thing you know their neighbors and got all the first hand story.
Click to expand...
 
jet57 said:
I thought that you were going to yell about violating the second 'mendment! Why aren't you yelling about violating the second 'mendment?
Click to expand...

It violates the 2nd, 4th and 5th Amendments.
 
apdst said:
The protestors broke the law, the law abiding citizens get charged. Do the math.
Click to expand...

The protesters were brandishing an AR and threatening to shoot people on the street? They should get charged then.
 
iguanaman said:
The protesters were brandishing an AR and threatening to shoot people on the street? They should get charged then.
Click to expand...


They were brandishing weapons at demonstrators who were exercising their right to "peaceful assembly" as guaranteed in the Constitution. The lawyers were violating their Constitutional rights.

That sounds wild but it's what the District Attorney said.
 
RaleBulgarian said:
It’s you who has much to learn.

I don’t know where you got the mistaken idea that breaking and entering, by itself, is sufficient cause to consider someone a threat.

Regardless, the event that occurred wasn’t breaking and entering, it was trespassing, which again, by itself, doesn’t justify lethal force.

The folks who have the most to be concerned about are the McCloskey’s, namely for possible brandishing and assault charges.

Do your homework next time before posting.
Click to expand...

I did my homework. Did you?
Missouri has many laws that will ultimately protect the McCloskeys from criminal charges, including "stand your ground," the "castle doctrine" and open carry. No charges have been brought against them much to your disappointment.
 
swing_voter said:
They were brandishing weapons at demonstrators who were exercising their right to "peaceful assembly" as guaranteed in the Constitution. The lawyers were violating their Constitutional rights.

That sounds wild but it's what the District Attorney said.
Click to expand...

The DA is wrong.
The mob wasn't protesting on public streets but on private streets protected by NO TRESSPASSING signs located on the front wall of a gated community. They would need permission from the directors of the HOA, (Homeowners association) to protest. To my knowledge this was not given.
 
zsu2357 said:
There's a St Louis in Louisiana? There's no shame in getting things confused.
Click to expand...
There is (or was) a St. Louis, Louisiana, South of Baton Rouge (distant relatives once had a plantation near there, referenced in a letter) not that it really matters.
 
swing_voter said:
They were brandishing weapons at demonstrators who were exercising their right to "peaceful assembly" as guaranteed in the Constitution. The lawyers were violating their Constitutional rights.

That sounds wild but it's what the District Attorney said.
Click to expand...
It's also what the video showed.
 
trixare4kids said:
The DA is wrong.
The mob wasn't protesting on public streets but on private streets protected by NO TRESSPASSING signs located on the front wall of a gated community. They would need permission from the directors of the HOA, (Homeowners association) to protest. To my knowledge this was not given.
Click to expand...
They were not protesting there, they were passing through. Again, there is video.
 
Personally I think this DA is making a big stink over this to attempt to discourage others from doing the same using firearms to rightfully protect themselves and their property. She is promoting taking a knee to the mob. Well that may work in NY or California but it isn't going to work in Missouri.
 
jet57 said:
One I’ve noticed here is that the right is not doing much yelling about the 2nd amendment. I find that very interesting...
Click to expand...

Contrair. The guy showed a modicum of what he was doing, she didn't. And you can scream up and down about how peaceful those protesters were, but I saw the video too. Bunch of goons like that showed up outside of my house I'm not bring out cookies and lemonade.
 
NWRatCon said:
They were not protesting there, they were passing through. Again, there is video.
Click to expand...

Is that what trespassing is called now? Just passing through?

:lamo
 
apdst said:
It violates the 2nd, 4th and 5th Amendments.
Click to expand...

So the DA and the police and laws against brandishing weapons are all part of the evil leftist conspiracy to take your guns away.
 
zsu2357 said:
Contrair. The guy showed a modicum of what he was doing, she didn't. And you can scream up and down about how peaceful those protesters were, but I saw the video too. Bunch of goons like that showed up outside of my house I'm not bring out cookies and lemonade.
Click to expand...

People walking peacefully by their house. Nothing to be upset about. Did big gummit violate his second amendment rights?
 
vesper said:
Personally I think this DA is making a big stink over this to attempt to discourage others from doing the same using firearms to rightfully protect themselves and their property. She is promoting taking a knee to the mob. Well that may work in NY or California but it isn't going to work in Missouri.
Click to expand...

Her political background clearly shows she is part of the same mindset that gave us rioting, looting, and civil disorder
 
jet57 said:
The DA did his job, so did the officers. Louisiana is a red state, so they would know right?
Click to expand...

This is hilarious
 
Airyaman said:
In which "not peaceful" = "Stuff I don't agree with".
Click to expand...

That’s a big statement coming from the side saying speech is violence
 
TurtleDude said:
Her political background clearly shows she is part of the same mindset that gave us rioting, looting, and civil disorder
Click to expand...

:screwy :lamo Such unfounded nonsense.
 
jet57 said:
So the DA and the police and laws against brandishing weapons are all part of the evil leftist conspiracy to take your guns away.
Click to expand...

They were defending their property. There are laws against trespassing and for defending one's property.
 
apdst said:
They were defending their property. There are laws against trespassing and for defending one's property.
Click to expand...


Nobody was on their property.


The sidewalk and the street belongs to the neighborhood association. They don't own the sidewalk or the street.

If the neighborhood association doesn't want to press charges, there is no crime.
 
swing_voter said:
Nobody was on their property.


The sidewalk and the street belongs to the neighborhood association. They don't own the sidewalk or the street.

If the neighborhood association doesn't want to press charges, there is no crime.
Click to expand...

are you saying members of the group that owns the property cannot defend it? are you saying that there is no evidence that people who broke down a gate would not have damaged their property?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom