St. Louis Couple Who Waved Guns At BLM Protesters Face Suspension Of Their Law Licenses

[Mac1958]

Predictable outcome of the talk radio-fueled rage, frustration and paranoia that gave us Trumpism.

Hell, they may have been perfectly normal people at one time.

 

[struth]

Those are your words not the state’s

They pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor and even that was unjust

According to ABC News “Because the charges are misdemeanors, the McCloskeys do not face the possibility of losing their law licenses and can continue to own firearms.”

And yet here are libs making up new rules as they go along

they can’t be disbarred…a suspension isn’t disbarment

though i think it’s unwarranted

 

[struth]

They did. They were walking past the house. they kept walking. Eventually Jimmy and Tammy Faye took their penis extensions and went back inside

you ignored the part where they broke into the private community. They had every right to fear for their safety, it was completely reasonable

 

[Doc7505]

You can't use your Second Amendment rights to block someone's First Amendment rights.

All rights are equal. Most would say the First Amendment is the most important right of all. It's what we practice on usmessageboard

Trespass and destruction of property triggered the action by the lawyer and that is proved factual by the photos'. The right to protest is covered by the First Amendment and the Castle Law protects home owners from mobs trespassing and destroying private property.
Rioting by mobs is not covered under the 1St Amendment.

https://qm.news/dont-tread-on-me-private-property-castle-doctrine-in-st-louis/

**********​

St. Louis Police Cite Nine Rioters for Trespassing at McCloskey Home | Headline USA

(Headline USA) Nine protesters have been issued trespassing summonses for marching onto a private St. Louis street in June, a demonstration that prompted a couple armed with guns to confront the demonstrators while defending their home. Mark and Patricia McCloskey were both charged in July with...

headlineusa.com

**********​

Recent Riots are Not Protected by the First Amendment - San Diego News Desk

Written by Susan James There has been a lot of discussion of late regarding the First Amendment and what it entails. According to the Constitution, the First Amendment may be summarized by the following according to the Legal Information Institute. The First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution...

www.sandiegonewsdesk.com

**********​

threats-of-violence-against-individuals

www.law.cornell.edu

**********​

Vandalism Is Violence: Destructive Riots Are Not ‘Just Property Damage’

“People are not objects; broken windows and burnt cars are simply not commensurate with the violence of state-sanctioned murder,” wrote Columbia University Ph.D. R.H. Lossin. “Plateglass windows don’t bleed... They just break, and then, at some point, they are replaced by identical sheets of...

fee.org

 

[Mac-7]

Predictable outcome of the talk radio-fueled rage, frustration and paranoia that gave us Trumpism.

This is the predictable outcome of democrat authorities shirking their duty and allowing mobs of ruffians to run wild in the streets

There were no cops present to keep order so individual citizens felt they had to protect themselves

 

[struth]

This is the predictable outcome of democrat authorities shirking their duty and allowing mobs of ruffians to run wild in the streets

There were no cops present to keep order so individual citizens felt they had to protect themselves

more the shirking their duties. These brownshirts were funded in part by dems.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

This is the predictable outcome of democrat authorities shirking their duty and allowing mobs of ruffians to run wild in the streets

There were no cops present to keep order so individual citizens felt they had to protect themselves

When actually they were just confused and unethical and were committing crimes.

 

[EMH]

And you're so excited you just can't hide it, huh? Don't bother trying to cover that Chinese flag tattoo with long sleeves; we can smell it on you from miles away. This couple ought to be awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom.

They are part of the legal profession, and the legal profession tells you what to think....

Like

Do not allow any evidence to be presented, and claim in refusing to hear the case that there is no evidence, which you conveniently did not allow to be presented....

 

[JusticeHammer]

Apparently the problem is that you are delusional.

Is he a Dem? Then he would be delusional.

 

[JusticeHammer]

They were standing outside.

*eyeroll*

If blm idiots are on my property I will be out in my yard armed also.

 

[JusticeHammer]

I am sure that was brought before the court. Didn't work.

Court probably had alot of stupid libs in it.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Mark McCloskey is seeking the Republican nomination for the U.S. Senate

Another racist Republican.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Oops, no. They were menacing people that were no threat to them. Or maybe you haven't read the news in about a year

For most on the racist right, being black alone is a threat and ‘justification’ for assault.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

Protecting their home and themselves against goons threatening them. What's the problem here?

Most people who perceive a threat do not leave the relative protection and safety of their home to go to where the threat is. That's not a defensive move, it's an offensive one.

 

[Whodatsaywhodat.]

There are many pictures where they pointed their firearms at the protesters.

Wow, did they give them stitches?

 

[Whodatsaywhodat.]

Most people who perceive a threat do not leave the relative protection and safety of their home to go to where the threat is. That's not a defensive move, it's an offensive one.

Their front yard is their home . Moron. God.

 

[lantern2814]

Most people who perceive a threat do not leave the relative protection and safety of their home to go to where the threat is. That's not a defensive move, it's an offensive one.

Their home doesn’t end at the front door retard.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

guilt of what? did they fire a weapon? shoot at someone? what crime was commited?

St. Louis couple who flashed guns at protesters plead guilty to misdemeanors, forfeit firearms​

Mark and Patricia McCloskey were charged with felonies last year after they were recorded brandishing guns at protesters and previously pleaded not guilty.

June 17, 2021, 1:04 PM PDT / Updated June 17, 2021, 1:27 PM PDT​

​

By Doha Madani​

​

The Missouri couple who were recorded last summer brandishing firearms at protesters outside their St. Louis home pleaded guilty to misdemeanor charges Thursday as part of a plea deal.​

​

Mark and Patricia McCloskey were issued fines and ordered to forfeit the firearms they were photographed with, which will now be destroyed, according to their attorney Joel Schwartz. Prior to the hearing Thursday, the couple had pleaded not guilty and were set to go to jury trial later this year.​

​

Mark McCloskey, a St. Louis lawyer who announced he was running for Senate last month, was charged with unlawful use of a firearm and tampering with physical evidence. He pleaded guilty to a lesser charge of fourth-degree assault and ordered to pay a $750 fine.​

Couple Mark and Patricia McCloskey draw guns at protesters in St. Louis on June 28, 2020.Lawrence Bryant / Reuters file​

​

Patricia McCloskey was also initially charged with the two felonies, but pleaded guilty to second-degree harassment and ordered to pay a $2,000 fine.​

​

The couple's guns were previously seized by police and they agreed to not to seek their return as part of the deal, Schwartz said. The court denied a request to donate the guns to charity.​

"There's been ongoing negotiations," Schwartz said. "We came up with this resolution and the McCloskey are very happy with it and ready to move on with their lives and concentrate on his run for Senate."​

​

Speaking from the courthouse steps after the hearing Thursday, Mark McCloskey said, “I'd do it again.”​

 

[Crepitus]

Protecting their home and themselves against goons threatening them. What's the problem here

Nobody was threatening them, they were the ones brandishing weapons, an act usually considered to be threatening.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

breaking and entering is a crime ..you have EVERY right to protect your property.....

LOL no one broke & entered onto their property.