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

[JackOfNoTrades]

The democrat party Circuit Attorney in St. Louis ordered the police to take the guns from the couple who stood up to the terrorists of the democrat party.......antifa and black lives matter....

This is how they did it in Germany in the 1930s....

The question to ask? Did the democrat party Circuit Attorney call the black lives matter and antifa terrorists herself, to let them know the couple is without guns....or did she use a cut out to do it....?

Law enforcement officials in St. Louis have allegedly served a warrant on the St. Louis couple who recently defended their home when a large mob of angry demonstrators allegedly trespassed onto their private property.

Fox News host Shannon Bream tweeted: “BREAKING: Warrant reportedly served on St. Louis couple who stood outside their home with weapons as protesters approached. We’re told weapon(s) seized. We’ve got the warrant and pictures for you at 11p – PLUS, Missouri @AGEricSchmitt joins us LIVE…”

Warrant Served On St. Louis Couple Who Defended Private Property, Rifle Confiscated | The Daily Wire

www.dailywire.com

Oh shit. File this under there's more to the story than the right wing wants to admit. Already posted on an earlier thread. Always more to the story.

Court record shows St. Louis couple pulled gun before

The McCloskeys and the trustees of Portland Place are involved in a three-year legal dispute over a small piece of property

www.ksdk.com

 

[Lewdog]

Lewdog writes:

"You should do more research into the couple... you'll be surprised what you'll find. For example they tried to claim "squatter's rights" on the same part of the neighborhood taking control of it rather than it being a shared community space, and he held a NEIGHBOR at gun point who was crossing it. The neighbor was not trespassing, nor a threat, yet he pulled the gun on him for being there. Mark McCloskey was also fined a couple years ago by the local court for filing too many frivolous lawsuits. There is more and more coming out."

===

I am not interested in the past, only THIS particular event under scrutiny.

Your reply makes it clear you don't have all the facts of the case, wait for the completer police report.

The past matters when it comes to grabbing your gun, especially when you get caught doing so on your neighbor without a valid reason.

 

[Mac-7]

They tried to claim squatter's rights on it. It is a community area for the neighborhood and even if it is at night, he is showing a pattern of proclivity to grab his gun at the drop of a hat.

What you mean is there is an ongoing lawsuit

 

[Lewdog]

They tried to claim squatter's rights on it. It is a community area for the neighborhood and even if it is at night, he is showing a pattern of proclivity to grab his gun at the drop of a hat.

What you mean is there is an ongoing lawsuit

Oh, and you know why they took his Ar-15 and not her hand gun?

 

[Mac-7]

The past matters when it comes to grabbing your gun, especially when you get caught doing so on your neighbor without a valid reason.

the past does not matter when a violent mob is threatening your home

the couple had every right to brandish a weapon to keep the looters away

but if the cops were doing their job - meaning if the democrat mayor allowed the cops to do their job - no threat of fource would be necessary

the problem here is derelection of duty by the democrats

 

[Mac-7]

Oh, and you know why they took his Ar-15 and not her hand gun?

Reports are that the handgun was not there

why does that matter to you?

the city has no right to grab either weapon

 

[Lewdog]

The past matters when it comes to grabbing your gun, especially when you get caught doing so on your neighbor without a valid reason.

the past does not matter when a violent mob is threatening your home

the couple had every right to brandish a weapon to keep the looters away

but if the cops were doing their job - meaning if the democrat mayor allowed the cops to do their job - no threat of fource would be necessary

the problem here is derelection of duty by the democrats

Do you know why they took his AR and not her handgun?

 

[Lewdog]

Oh, and you know why they took his Ar-15 and not her hand gun?

Reports are that the handgun was not there

why does that matter to you?

the city has no right to grab either weapon

It is because they told the police it is inoperable and has been for some time. So this couple that felt threatened for their lives had her out in front of the protesters threatening them with a gun they said they knew would not fire... So either they were not as threatened as they are saying, or they are beyond stupid. It all matters.

 

[freyasman]

The Founders imbued its citizens with the right to bare arms in order that they be able to stand up against the unjust force of an out of control government.

Mindless, ignorant assfucks such as yourself call that being a lawless anarchist.

So a government is out of control and would be using unjust force if it is lawfully determined to arrest a citizen. You are indeed a lawless anarchist since you have essentially stated that you are above the law and detest the idea of consent of the governed.

When you intend to murder law enforcement officers if you believe they are going to arrest you that’s not standing up against the unjust force of an out of control government it’s murder.

If you want to stand up against the unjust force of an out of control government find some similar Paranoid conspiracy theorists join their militia and start your revolution. Dont threaten to murder cops for doing what they are authorized and expected to do.

"When injustice becomes law, resistance becomes duty."

-Unknown

 

[Mac-7]

It is because they told the police it is inoperable and has been for some time.

You must be joking

the cops would never accept that excuse

they would grab the gun they came for no matter what

 

[Mac-7]

So either they were not as threatened as they are saying, or they are beyond stupid. It all matters.

The word you are looking for is “desperate”

the democrats in st louis failed to protect them so they had to protect themselves

 

[Lewdog]

It is because they told the police it is inoperable and has been for some time.

You must be joking

the cops would never accept that excuse

they would grab the gun they came for no matter what

Nope, but they later asked for it to make sure and their lawyer turned it over.

McCloskeys’ lawyer transfers their handgun to police

The lawyer for the McCloskeys, Al Watkins, plans to transfer the couple’s handgun to police in front of his office on Forsyth Boulevard.

fox2now.com

 

[Shelzin]

They tried to claim squatter's rights on it. It is a community area for the neighborhood and even if it is at night, he is showing a pattern of proclivity to grab his gun at the drop of a hat.

What you mean is there is an ongoing lawsuit

Oh, and you know why they took his Ar-15 and not her hand gun?

Because they already had the hand gun. Liar.

 

[Mac-7]

Nope, but they later asked for it to make sure and their lawyer turned it over.

Just admit you were wrong and move along

 

[Shelzin]

Nope, but they later asked for it to make sure and their lawyer turned it over.

Just admit you were wrong and move along

He can't do that... He has smartened up a bit and no longer is saying "used lethal force"

 

[Lewdog]

Nope, but they later asked for it to make sure and their lawyer turned it over.

Just admit you were wrong and move along

They took the AR-15 on a search warrant FRIDAY, and the couple told police the handgun was inoperable. The cops later asked for it to make sure and it was turned over Saturday afternoon. If you read the link you'd see that. Calling someone a liar when they provide a link proving it, just makes you look like a fool.

"ST. LOUIS – The lawyer for the McCloskeys, Al Watkins, transferred the couple’s handgun to police in front of his office on Forsyth Boulevard Saturday afternoon. "

McCloskeys’ lawyer transfers their handgun to police

The lawyer for the McCloskeys, Al Watkins, plans to transfer the couple’s handgun to police in front of his office on Forsyth Boulevard.

fox2now.com

 

[freyasman]

I am an anarchist and an Outlaw.
I do what I do of my own free will and and not even the Gods and Goddesses I honor and am oathed to command me.
A criminal violates laws to benefit himself. I ignore laws because there is no authority over me but my own honor and my duty to my tribe that I have freely chosen.
I will live this way until I die, and I know that I will die bloody.

Come and stop me if you have the balls.

 

[Shelzin]

Nope, but they later asked for it to make sure and their lawyer turned it over.

Just admit you were wrong and move along

They took the AR-15 on a search warrant FRIDAY, and the couple told police the handgun was inoperable. The cops later asked for it to make sure and it was turned over Saturday afternoon. If you read the link you'd see that. Calling someone a liar when they provide a link proving it, just makes you look like a fool.

"ST. LOUIS – The lawyer for the McCloskeys, Al Watkins, transferred the couple’s handgun to police in front of his office on Forsyth Boulevard Saturday afternoon. "

McCloskeys’ lawyer transfers their handgun to police

The lawyer for the McCloskeys, Al Watkins, plans to transfer the couple’s handgun to police in front of his office on Forsyth Boulevard.

fox2now.com

OH no... I'm still calling you a liar per your education.

And.. I don't care if they were good people or not. WE established that a while ago. All this they are squatters and what not mean nothing to what happened.

 

[Sunsettommy]

Lewdog writes:

"You should do more research into the couple... you'll be surprised what you'll find. For example they tried to claim "squatter's rights" on the same part of the neighborhood taking control of it rather than it being a shared community space, and he held a NEIGHBOR at gun point who was crossing it. The neighbor was not trespassing, nor a threat, yet he pulled the gun on him for being there. Mark McCloskey was also fined a couple years ago by the local court for filing too many frivolous lawsuits. There is more and more coming out."

===

I am not interested in the past, only THIS particular event under scrutiny.

Your reply makes it clear you don't have all the facts of the case, wait for the completer police report.

The past matters when it comes to grabbing your gun, especially when you get caught doing so on your neighbor without a valid reason.

No, since that is a SEPARATE incident, has no bearing on this one, you should realize it will not be admissible in court if it goes that far. The current charges levied against him doesn't include past events, it only on the THIS specific event.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

"When injustice becomes law, resistance becomes duty."

Are you doing the armed resistance thing yet? If so what is the name of the militia you joined?