Missouri couple greet marching protesters with guns

When the Protesters broke down the front gate, that would be comparable to someone breaking down your front door. It was on private property and trespassers were not allowed. Whether any of us believe it to be a non-issue or not, by law, it is trespassing. This has already been hashed out and according to Missouri law because they live in a private gated community and pay an HOA fee, the streets, including the gates are considered as part of the McCloskeys property.

We can dissect it or whatever, but what I believe it came down to and why the Grand Jury handed down the indictment was because the McCloskeys pointed their weapons at the intruders. The next thing that has to be considered is does this come under Missouri's Castle Doctrine law? I don't know. Wording of the law is everything and states word their Castle Doctrine law differently from one another. Here in Pennsylvania, the answer would be 'yes.'

The Governor of Missouri has stated that if the McCloskeys are found guilty, he will pardon them.
Who needs criminals when you've got the likes of the McCloskey's and governors as mentioned above.

With neighbours like the McCloskey's, I'd be far more concerned over my own safety and my children's safety than I would my safety seeing a gang of protestors walking by.
 
Last edited:
I can't help but get the impression that those who live their daily lives around guns are scared of their own shadows, and look for any excuse in the book to grandstand with them.
if I was in their spot at the same time all of this was going on, I would have fired my gun a few times warning shots. I never saw any peaceful protesters in the crowd of looters , also protesters are only allowed to protest in the area, that their protest permit, say they can protest in, plus they have to have insurance in case there is any damage or injuries, I bet your life , that they had no permits, for any of the so called protests in the country, mark55.
 
if I was in their spot at the same time all of this was going on, I would have fired my gun a few times warning shots. I never saw any peaceful protesters in the crowd of looters , also protesters are only allowed to protest in the area, that their protest permit, say they can protest in, plus they have to have insurance in case there is any damage or injuries, I bet your life , that they had no permits, for any of the so called protests in the country, mark55.

^^^ Yup. A prime example of a gun owner who shouldn't own a gun because he never grew up.
"I can't help but get the impression that those who live their daily lives around guns are scared of their own shadows, and look for any excuse in the book to grandstand with them."
 
if I was in their spot at the same time all of this was going on, I would have fired my gun a few times warning shots. I never saw any peaceful protesters in the crowd of looters , also protesters are only allowed to protest in the area, that their protest permit, say they can protest in, plus they have to have insurance in case there is any damage or injuries, I bet your life , that they had no permits, for any of the so called protests in the country, mark55.
Do you live in the U.S.?
 
One of the homeowners guns should have been a paintball gun and used it to shoot every loud-mouth threatening protester for identification by the police. :)
 
'''

This is similar to road rage. If everytime someone "slights" you, you go to the ultimate solution and under those circumstances, you may not always come out on the winning side.

Think I posted this back when it happened, but had anyone in the crowd been carrying legally, it could've ended permanently for this couple. Don't brandish a gun unless you're prepared for someone to shoot in self-defense. They're hopefully on their way to being convicted felons and will lose their right to possess firearms.
 
if I was in their spot at the same time all of this was going on, I would have fired my gun a few times warning shots. I never saw any peaceful protesters in the crowd of looters , also protesters are only allowed to protest in the area, that their protest permit, say they can protest in, plus they have to have insurance in case there is any damage or injuries, I bet your life , that they had no permits, for any of the so called protests in the country, mark55.


You shouldn't own a gun according to the gun safety class I took. Super irresponsible to fire warning shots at people who aren't even on your property; no one was on the McCloskey's property per numerous videos of the incident. I'm guessing that's where the evidence tampering charge comes into play. Plus the people were walking down the street on their way to a location a block away. They weren't protesting in front of the McCloskey's home, were just walking by but stopped when the couple came out acting fools.
 
they were on private property , plus breaking and entering through the gate, is just like going thru the front door in a gated community . I am guessing that you have no brain, or you are just too blind to see, and I think that you probably flunked your gun class.
As a responsible gun owner, I'm generally not in favor of gun control. But - just as not everyone should drive, not everyone should own a gun. You are a poster child for gun restrictions.
And, by the way, TV cop shows are not good sources for learning.
 
Last edited:
As I mentioned previously, 911, what a sad state of affairs it is when a disposable iron gate trumps human life, regardless of doctrines, the second amendment, and all the rest of the foolishness surrounding the ownership and use of guns in the USofA, and my stance on what I think of the couple hasn't changed, I still think they're a couple of prize dullards.
Aunt Marg, though I agree with you, I don't think this was really about the broken gate. Who cares about a gate? It was the fact that the protestors were illegally marching inside a gated community. The gates are there ostensibly to protect the residents. No one is supposed to be able to enter without being cleared by a guard at the gatehouse. This means having a pass showing that you are a resident, having a "frequent visitor" pass, or by a phone call to the gatehouse from a resident who is expecting a visitor. It is true that it's not a public thoroughfare.

However, this certainly doesn't excuse the way the McCloskeys behaved. Their stupidity with their guns could have created a tragic outcome.
 
Aunt Marg, though I agree with you, I don't think this was really about the broken gate. Who cares about a gate? It was the fact that the protestors were illegally marching inside a gated community. The gates are there ostensibly to protect the residents. No one is supposed to be able to enter without being cleared by a guard at the gatehouse. This means having a pass showing that you are a resident, having a "frequent visitor" pass, or by a phone call to the gatehouse from a resident who is expecting a visitor. It is true that it's not a public thoroughfare.

However, this certainly doesn't excuse the way the McCloskeys behaved. Their stupidity with their guns could have created a tragic outcome.
I 100% agree with you, Sunny, and by no means was I attempting to relay that it's okay to enter a private gate-guarded community in the manner in which the protestors did.
 
Do you ask because he says 'if I was in their spot..........' Just curious :unsure:
The reason that I asked was when the poster stated, "if I was in their spot at the same time all of this was going on, I would have fired my gun a few times warning shots." really caught me off guard.

In Pennsylvania, it is illegal to discharge a weapon when the shooter is within 200 yards of a residence. If you care to fact check me, you can find it in Title 34 of the Pennsylvania Criminal Code. I apologize, but I have forgotten the scilicet number. I know this law because I have had to use it in the past. Some people think that because they own a piece of property that they can set up a target in the backyard and fire away.

I had a case where 2 high school boys, aged 16, were shooting daddy's .22 rifle out the upstairs bedroom window at a street light. According to them, they had fired 8 rounds before striking the light and causing it to shatter. Two of the shots went through a home's downstairs window some 275 feet away and hitting the family's pet dog, which did survive. The investigation only took less than a day to solve who the shooter was. Kids like to brag about such things, so when we asked for help from the local school, we received 3 or 4 calls leading us to the shooters.

I couldn't imagine anyone living in the U.S. and being a responsible gun owner not knowing that it's illegal, or at least, not a good idea to discharge a weapon when living in a development.
 
The reason that I asked was when the poster stated, "if I was in their spot at the same time all of this was going on, I would have fired my gun a few times warning shots." really caught me off guard.

In Pennsylvania, it is illegal to discharge a weapon when the shooter is within 200 yards of a residence. If you care to fact check me, you can find it in Title 34 of the Pennsylvania Criminal Code. I apologize, but I have forgotten the scilicet number. I know this law because I have had to use it in the past. Some people think that because they own a piece of property that they can set up a target in the backyard and fire away.

I had a case where 2 high school boys, aged 16, were shooting daddy's .22 rifle out the upstairs bedroom window at a street light. According to them, they had fired 8 rounds before striking the light and causing it to shatter. Two of the shots went through a home's downstairs window some 275 feet away and hitting the family's pet dog, which did survive. The investigation only took less than a day to solve who the shooter was. Kids like to brag about such things, so when we asked for help from the local school, we received 3 or 4 calls leading us to the shooters.

I couldn't imagine anyone living in the U.S. and being a responsible gun owner not knowing that it's illegal, or at least, not a good idea to discharge a weapon when living in a development.
here we go again. just think how ignorant you look, when you see the light , of the situation, going on in their part (of a no trespassing zone), neighborhood . your law will change, when the circumstances change. all of the rioting in their area changed it. now they are protecting their property, some people wait until the low life, are breaking into their house, this may be too late , to have good outcome. I think, you need to turn, your gun in to the police, they will need it, when they get defunded, by the BLM gang. by the way, look up, blm , it stands for Bowel, Lower Movement. mark55.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
here we go again. just think how ignorant you look, when you see the light , of the situation, going on in their part (of a no trespassing zone), neighborhood . your law will change, when the circumstances change. all of the rioting in their area changed it. now they are protecting their property, some people wait until the low life, are breaking into their house, this may be too late , to have good outcome. I think, you need to turn, your gun in to the police, they will need it, when they get defunded, by the BLM gang. by the way, look up, blm , it stands for Bowel, Lower Movement. mark55
When you filled out your paperwork for your gun purchase, how did you answer the question about mental illness?
 
here we go again. just think how ignorant you look, when you see the light , of the situation, going on in their part (of a no trespassing zone), neighborhood . your law will change, when the circumstances change. all of the rioting in their area changed it. now they are protecting their property, some people wait until the low life, are breaking into their house, this may be too late , to have good outcome. I think, you need to turn, your gun in to the police, they will need it, when they get defunded, by the BLM gang. by the way, look up, blm , it stands for Bowel, Lower Movement. mark55
Perhaps you are unaware that 911 is a former State Trooper, I can‘t imagine you would knowingly
disrespect his decades of service by calling him ignorant.
 
Looking at the two notes #177 and #192, both of them written by Mark55, there is an astonishing difference in the writing style. While I disagree 100% with the ideas in both notes, the first one is at least comprehensible; the second one sounds deranged. Either he has been heavily hitting the bottle, is on some mind-twisting drug, or is mentally ill.

Any one of these explanations provides the best defense of strict gun control laws that I can imagine! This person is boasting about brandishing and firing a gun at a group of unarmed, nonviolent protestors walking down the street. Now, there's a reassuring thought! 😳
 
Back
Top