Things getting real in St. Louis - Armed Lawyer couple keeps BLM at bay

[DispositionMatrix]

Long-form video:

They did not "invade the home." They did invade a private street, presumably paid for by an association. Seems as if people that rich would have armed security to keep their private street private, preventing middle-aged Ken and Barbie from muzzle sweeping everyone else and each other.

 

[drgrant]

I see a problem with Middle-age Ken and Barbie pointing firearms at people who did not appear to be attacking them or their house. Firearms are for defense of life. When you point a firearm at someone, allegedly you have identified a mortal threat and already have made the decision to fire. Without a specific threat having been identified, it would have been better practice to have had the firearms at low-ready, better still to have had the rifle slung and the pistol in a holster, and better still not to have gone outside of the house at all. I hold that view despite not at all being in the fudd camp that seeks to call "brandishing" every time someone even touches a holstered firearm or holds one. Held firearms do not necessarily concern me, but middle-aged Ken and Barbie were demonstrating textbook brandishing.

I don't. I honestly wish they shot most of them.

 

[enbloc]

Maybe they thought the house was the Governor's Mansion...?

 

[Racenet]

For not waving a firearm around at unarmed people and my wife?

 

[DispositionMatrix]

Besides her choice in firearms I have absolutely no problem with this. From the picture of the estate they jumped the fence and were far into their properly. If they didn't come out I bet the damage done by protestors to the house wouldn't even make it into the news.

_If_ that's true, it does differ from the protesters having simply invaded a private street owned/managed by an association. But technically it would still simply be trespassing.

 

[drgrant]

I'll go ahead and touch the third rail here: this is what you get when you live in states that don't require training to have guns.

You haven't been muzzle swept by a fat guy with a freshly minted LTC, apparently.

 

[LoginName]

I was trying to figure out if this house was right on the street - or if maybe there were people actually ON the property itself.

I went digging around on Google maps to try and find an overhead view but couldn't find it, then I found this story:

St. Louis pair point guns at activists marching to demand mayor resign

Husband and wife, Mark and Patricia McCloskey could be seen aiming the guns at demonstrators who walked by their property in St. Louis at around 6pm on Sunday.

www.dailymail.co.uk

If you look at this pic:

I think it's pretty clear that the "protestors" were ON THE PROPERTY - not "walking by on the street" as the media a-holes are trying to portray the incident.

If you look at the pics - the guy and his wife are on the brick piazza on the front of the house - which looks to be facing what appears to be private road or a driveway.

The pics also show "protestors" pointing rifles at them. Pretty sure the media is - AS USUAL - lying about what really happened here.

The whole neighborhood (94 homes), is recorded in the National register of Historic Places

Portland and Westmoreland Places - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Front entrance...

Google Maps

Find local businesses, view maps and get driving directions in Google Maps.

www.google.com

Some of other the homes in that neighborhood make the lawyers place look like the guest house by comparison...











Question is, since it's on the Nation Register of Historic Places 'where does the right to public access begin and end'?

 

[Picton]

You haven't been muzzle swept by a fat guy with a freshly minted LTC, apparently.

I have, actually, but his shirt wasn't tucked into his pleated khakis. And he had shoes on.

ETA: I committed a grievous libel against Mr McCloskey. His khakis were not pleated. My apologies to him.

 

[DispositionMatrix]

I'll go ahead and touch the third rail here: this is what you get when you live in states that don't require training to have guns.

And before some of you get your knickers in a twist, NO, I'm NOT defending the MA licensing scheme. What I am saying is that absent such a scheme, you're going to get unschooled people handling firearms. It's something we should all expect if we're advocating for more access to firearms: many of the people owning them are not going to have any level of training or mindset to use them. I'm not surprised at Barbie and Ken, and because I'm knowledgeable about firearms I'd give them a wide berth and then, later, a friendly phone call with the number of a firearms trainer.

I was a well-trained rifle handler and a decently-trained pistol handler even before I bought my first firearm around 1996. It'd be nice if that was the norm, but it's not. I doubt many US gunowners would read the post I've quoted and have the slightest clue what you're talking about, and that's its own problem. Not a problem I think should be fixed by compulsory state-mandated training, but it's a problem.

I might have mentioned a carrot rather than stick approach to this nationally before--very heavily incentivizing but not mandating training. It would have a knock-on effect of taking _some_ of the wind out of the sails of the firearm prohibition juggernaut.

 

[Picton]

The whole neighborhood (94 homes), is recorded in the National register of Historic Places
....

Question is, since it's on the Nation Register of Historic Places 'where does the right to public access begin and end'?

Nothing. There's no right. Being on the National Registry does nothing at all about public access: it's still your house, just like any other.

 

[Supermoto]

Nothing. There's no right. Being on the National Registry does nothing at all about public access: it's still your house, just like any other.

Not only is it your house, it is your street and sidewalk. They are all private property

 

[PappyM3]

I wasn't there obviously but in the video it doesn't look like an Antifa mob throwing molotovs, it looks like people marching by.

Except that’s not the case. Look at the picture calsdad posted. They had to have broken down the couple’s gate and were well within their property.

She kept pointing the gun at her husband!

Well that’s between her and her husband.

 

[Picton]

Not only is it your house, it is your street and sidewalk. They are all private property

Well, not the sidewalk. Right? Isn't there a right-of-way? I'm not sure how that works for people with self-funded sidewalks in front of their homes.

 

[enbloc]

The whole neighborhood (94 homes), is recorded in the National register of Historic Places

Sounds like they saved the whole neighborhood...

 

[Supermoto]

Well, not the sidewalk. Right? Isn't there a right-of-way? I'm not sure how that works for people with self-funded sidewalks in front of their homes.

no, there is no right of way.

 

[mibro]

I wasn't there obviously but in the video it doesn't look like an Antifa mob throwing molotovs, it looks like people marching by.

There you go again.

Course, if I were him I'd have just put a tripod mount belt fed 30 cal on the roof and enjoyed a cigar- he certainly has the money for it.

Somebody's going to build a ferreal sentry gun pretty soon. Probably been done already. I've been thinking about it.

 

[enbloc]

Seriously looks like a slew of New England Public Libraries...

 

[SgtHal75]

Really? Seriously? You are going to eat your own for protecting themselves. Unreal.

Come off the ledge buddy!!!! It’s called joking switch to decaf

 

[LoginName]

Nothing. There's no right. Being on the National Registry does nothing at all about public access: it's still your house, just like any other.

The house and it's surrounding property understandably is private property.
I'm asking about the entire neighborhood/district

Not only is it your house, it is your street and sidewalk. They are all private property

Thanks, that's what I thought.
Reason I brought it up is because I've seen at least one person on Twitter claiming that since it's a historic district, there is some degree of legal public access allowed.

 

[Picton]

The house and it's surrounding property understandably is private property.
I'm asking about the entire neighborhood/district



Thanks, that's what I thought.
Reason I brought it up is because I've seen at least one person on Twitter claiming that since it's a historic district, there is some degree of legal public access allowed.

If so, it's local. I live in a "historic district;" it looks kinda like any other street, and is treated like any other street. If their community is gated, that has nothing to do with the NHD designation. The only thing that gets you is prestige and, in some places, tax reimbursements on home improvements in keeping with the original fabric of the house.

 

[DispositionMatrix]

I was trying to figure out if this house was right on the street - or if maybe there were people actually ON the property itself.

I went digging around on Google maps to try and find an overhead view but couldn't find it, then I found this story:

St. Louis pair point guns at activists marching to demand mayor resign

Husband and wife, Mark and Patricia McCloskey could be seen aiming the guns at demonstrators who walked by their property in St. Louis at around 6pm on Sunday.

www.dailymail.co.uk

If you look at this pic:

I think it's pretty clear that the "protestors" were ON THE PROPERTY - not "walking by on the street" as the media a-holes are trying to portray the incident.

If you look at the pics - the guy and his wife are on the brick piazza on the front of the house - which looks to be facing what appears to be private road or a driveway.

The pics also show "protestors" pointing rifles at them. Pretty sure the media is - AS USUAL - lying about what really happened here.

Nope, not clear. The protesters broke through a gate for the private street for the neighborhood, but the property in question does not appear to have its own front gate.

 

[Kevin_NH]

Somebody's going to build a ferreal sentry gun pretty soon. Probably been done already. I've been thinking about it.

Been done, published as an instructable, and released as open source

 

[mibro]

Been done, published as an instructable, and released as open source

Exactly. But that is a paintball sentry gun.

 

[LoginName]

Seriously looks like a slew of New England Public Libraries...

View attachment 369066View attachment 369076

What's amusing, is that Ken and Karens 'hovel' is assessed at (correction $1,150,000)... about what a 2-3 bedroom condo in Cambridge would cost.

Address and Property Information Search

 

[Lowbird]

View: https://twitter.com/ltc_angel/status/1277627852427575297?s=19

 

[cthorne98]

The comments on that article are amazing, make sure you open up the threads. This country is truly doomed.

Both Twitter and yahoo comments took a giant dump on them

I wasn't there obviously but in the video it doesn't look like an Antifa mob throwing molotovs, it looks like people marching by.

It was just a reminder to the crowd to keep on marching too

 

[calsdad]

I wasn't there obviously but in the video it doesn't look like an Antifa mob throwing molotovs, it looks like people marching by.



She kept pointing the gun at her husband!

My take on that is the wife is in a state of near panic. She's got a mob of would-be-rioters outside her house - and she knows damn well what could happen from that. Some of the pics show people in the crowd pointing guns at the couple who own the house. There's also a pic showing the wife point the pistol at people - while the husband is still back on the piazza. Which is a problem - because she's going a little rogue.

Quite frankly I think a hysterical woman is a definite liability in a situation like this. The husband is going to be forced to do something stupid - when the wife does something stupid. The rioters will perceive that the wife being unhinged - reveals that they're both weak - and therefore will take advantage.

The husband should have told the wife to STFU and stay in the basement. But then he'd have to live with that decision too.

Go look at ALL of the pics - including the one overhead shot I posted - it's pretty clear that there were people ON THE PROPERTY - and in fact if you look at the overhead pic it's clear they were also

Well, not the sidewalk. Right? Isn't there a right-of-way? I'm not sure how that works for people with self-funded sidewalks in front of their homes.

LOL.

And people wonder why we have a commie infestation problem - when they can't even understand what the words "private property" mean.

Seriously - what does the friggin sign say?


Furthermore - If it was PUBLIC way - then I'm pretty sure you're violating all sorts of "public access" statutes by putting a gate across it.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

Somehow I have completely missed the facts that would back up a 'not this shit again' statement. I'd be glad to be pointed in the correct direction.

MA applies other laws (assault), plus there is along history of suitability being applied just for letting the other party know you are armed. The charge would be assault, not brandishing. When discussing the law, it is best to deal in precision.

But, there no "brandishing" statute and the term does not appear in MGL. In some states mere display of a gun (brandishing) is a separately listed crime.

 

[cthorne98]

The wife should swap that pistol for at least a MP15-22 while home. The crowds won't know the diff visually and if she needs to shoot at least she *might* be able to hit one if them.

At least she could spray and pray for the first 10 rounds shame you cant get a 100 round mag for those.

 

[jct61765]

I don't. I honestly wish they shot most of them.

Eventually it's going to happen.