quote:

Originally posted by 1s1k:

quote:

Originally posted by Balzé Halzé:
Oh for F's sake. Enough of this high-horse bullshit. We get it. They're not gun folks. Who gives a shit? That's not the point even in the least.

And I don't think they used any poor judgment. Not at all. Not considering the situation they were in at that exact moment with the shit they just witnessed in St. Louis with the cops doing absolutely nothing.

I applaud them. Even if they are stinking Democrats.

Totally agree. Considering one of the BLM/Antifa protestors killed someone two blocks from their house the night before and of course no one saw anything. By them showing everyone that they weren't going to put up with the b.s. I think it showed the country that most people, even ultra liberal democrats were sick of the nonsense.

I think the fact that they were democrats made the point hit home even more as they couldn't be passed off as some gun loving Trump supporters ready to fire on black people (the crowd was 90% white).

Here, here. They did what I'd hope anyone would do when threatened and their firearms skills are all but irrelevant to that conversation.

As to them being charged for a crime, that should be a real shit show.

quote:

Originally posted by Balzé Halzé:

Wow. Never would've expected that.

It is sort of a surprise, but it isn't uncommon to see people with means, corporations(including law firms), banks, etc. contribute on both sides to hedge bets. But they will often give a lot more to the side they want to win. It would be interesting to see what they have contributed to the Democrats.


.

quote:

Originally posted by TigerDore:

quote:

Originally posted by jljones:
If this is an actual question...

Yes, it is real question and thanks for answering. But doesn't a search warrant have to be connected to a crime?



.

No, it doesn’t have to be directly tied to a crime. A lot of people seem to have a false idea of what a search warrant is or what it is capable of. It very much can be a fishing expedition, it just has to be a fishing expedition with probable cause (more likely than not) attached.

Search warrants even have a block that says “things that are used to commit crimes” as one of the things that are listed on the warrant. An easy example off the top of my head are paperwork warrants. A bank has papers belonging to the federal reserve. The federal reserve asks nicely for the papers, which the bank is required to turn over. The banks legal staff hasn’t been getting laid so he refuses because he’s having a bad day. The treasury can get a search warrant for the forms. No crime committed. That’s just an easy example.

In this case, it stinks to high heaven. And anyone with an IQ above the mid 30s sees this for what it is

quote:

Originally posted by ZSMICHAEL:
I figure I better watch John Wayne movies before the left condemns his films.

It's getting closer:

https://www.foxnews.com/entert...e-john-wayne-exhibit


USC's School of Cinematic Arts announces plan to remove John Wayne exhibit

The University of Southern California's School of Cinematic Arts announced its decision on Friday to remove a John Wayne exhibit from its main building.

Assistant Dean of Diversity and Inclusion Evan Hughes explained the school's decision in a memo shared on Twitter.

"I am writing to update you on plans for the Wayne exhibit, located in the main building of the School of Cinematic Arts Complex. Conversations about systemic racism in our cultural institutions along with the recent global, civil uprising by the Black Lives Matter Movement require that we consider the role our School can play as a change maker in promoting antiracist cultural values and experiences. Therefore, it has been decided that the Wayne Exhibit will be removed," the statement begins.

Hughes said the school is "grateful" to students who expressed their thoughts on the topic. He also confirmed that material from the exhibit will be moved to the Cinematic Arts Library archives "where other artifacts and papers of influential Hollywood figures reside for the purpose of research and scholarship."

According to the Los Angeles Times, students protested the Wayne exhibit in the fall of last year, arguing that the school would be "endorsing white supremacy" if they kept it.

Wayne attended USC in the 1920s and was a member of the football team.

The decision comes a little over two weeks after California Democrats in Orange County called for the renaming of the John Wayne Airport. The resolution, which was passed, asks the county's board of supervisors to restore the name to Orange County Airport.

Demands for Wayne's name and likeness to be removed from various places across the country cite the late actor's 1971 interview with Playboy in which he was quoted saying he believes in white supremacy.

The late icon's youngest son, Ethan Wayne, released a statement following theairaprot controversy, stating that his father "did not support 'white supremacy' in any way."

Ethan went on to say his deceased father "believed that responsible people should gain power without the use of violence."

quote:

Originally posted by jljones:

No, it doesn’t have to be directly tied to a crime. ...

Thanks



.

quote:

Originally posted by TigerDore:

quote:

Originally posted by jljones:

No, it doesn’t have to be directly tied to a crime. ...

Thanks



.

You bet, man

quote:

Originally posted by TigerDore:

The University of Southern California's School of Cinematic Arts announced its decision on Friday to remove a John Wayne exhibit from its main building.

Assistant Dean of Diversity and Inclusion Evan Hughes explained the school's decision in a memo shared on Twitter.

"I am writing to update you on plans for the Wayne exhibit, located in the main building of the School of Cinematic Arts Complex. Conversations about systemic racism in our cultural institutions along with the recent global, civil uprising by the Black Lives Matter Movement require that we consider the role our School can play as a change maker in promoting antiracist cultural values and experiences. Therefore, it has been decided that the Wayne Exhibit will be removed," the statement begins.

Hughes said the school is "grateful" to students who expressed their thoughts on the topic. He also confirmed that material from the exhibit will be moved to the Cinematic Arts Library archives "where other artifacts and papers of influential Hollywood figures reside for the purpose of research and scholarship."

According to the Los Angeles Times, students protested the Wayne exhibit in the fall of last year, arguing that the school would be "endorsing white supremacy" if they kept it.

Wayne attended USC in the 1920s and was a member of the football team.

The decision comes a little over two weeks after California Democrats in Orange County called for the renaming of the John Wayne Airport. The resolution, which was passed, asks the county's board of supervisors to restore the name to Orange County Airport.

Demands for Wayne's name and likeness to be removed from various places across the country cite the late actor's 1971 interview with Playboy in which he was quoted saying he believes in white supremacy.

The late icon's youngest son, Ethan Wayne, released a statement following the airaprot controversy, stating that his father "did not support 'white supremacy' in any way."

Ethan went on to say his deceased father "believed that responsible people should gain power without the use of violence."

"Demand for racism is high but the supply is low".

quote:

Originally posted by 12131:
Come on now, everyone here knows the only reason this happened is because Kim Gardner is a . . . commie. Commies hate private gun ownership, and they will make up any excuses to grab your guns.

Guns for me, but not for thee. A common theme among authoritarians.

Didn't see this posted here yet:




Link to original video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SsAB_IKIJNk

Boss

quote:

Originally posted by TigerDore:

quote:

Originally posted by chellim1:
As suggested by the McCloskey's attorney, I do
think she intends to charge them....

What will they be charged with, self-defense, protection of private property, failure to allow a criminal mob to take over their private neighborhood?
.

*571.030. Unlawful use of weapons — exceptions — penalties. — 1. A person commits the offense of unlawful use of weapons, except as otherwise provided by sections 571.101 to 571.121, if he or she knowingly:
...
(4) Exhibits, in the presence of one or more persons, any weapon readily capable of lethal use in an angry or threatening manner; or
***
— exceptions —
5. Subdivisions (3), (4), (5), (6), (7), (8), (9), and (10) of subsection 1 of this section shall not apply to persons who are engaged in a lawful act of defense pursuant to section 563.031.

https://revisor.mo.gov/main/On...71.030&bid=33874&hl=

quote:

Originally posted by Boss1:
Didn't see this posted here yet:

I really like Colion Noir, but I disagree with him continuing to refer to that group as protestors. The moment they broke down that gate, they became rioters. When then they threatened to murder the McCloskeys and burn their home, they became even more volatile criminals. They aren't protestors.


.

quote:

Originally posted by chellim1:

*571.030. Unlawful use of weapons — exceptions — penalties...

Thanks.



.

563.031 section 2, subsection 2-3 seem to show no crime was committed. You know, the whole leg to stand on thing......

Subsection 2 also puts the burden on the state to prove.

^^^ I agree.
But... Kim Gardner is an activist with intent to bring down the "White power structure".
The McCloskey's, in her mind, are guilty of being white and rich... and standing up to the "mostly peaceful" protesters.

quote:

Originally posted by chellim1:
^^^ I agree.
But... Kim Gardner is an activist with intent to bring down

Fascist whack job with no checks/balances except the court system, which we hope does its job for these people. Still it is going to cost them a fortune. People of lesser means would be bankrupted by this satanic pile of wasted DNA.


.

quote:

Originally posted by TigerDore:

quote:

Originally posted by Balzé Halzé:

Wow. Never would've expected that.

It is sort of a surprise, but it isn't uncommon to see people with means, corporations(including law firms), banks, etc. contribute on both sides to hedge bets. But they will often give a lot more to the side they want to win. It would be interesting to see what they have contributed to the Democrats.


.

At least one of their donations has now gone to a gun control fund.

I can't see their actions doing anything positive for firearms owners, and the publicity generated is negative.

A couple of ambulance-chasing personal injury lawyers overreacted to a crowd passing their house on the way somewhere else. Yes, private property, but it wasn't remotely the "storming of the Bastille" that McCloskey claimed (while he was pointing his rifle at his wife).

Not really heroes. More like rich privileged dumbasses.

https://www.stltoday.com/news/...83-0b90369825a6.html

quote:

Originally posted by sns3guppy:

At least one of their donations has now gone to a gun control fund.

I can't see their actions doing anything positive for firearms owners, and the publicity generated is negative.

A couple of ambulance-chasing personal injury lawyers overreacted to a crowd passing their house on the way somewhere else. Yes, private property, but it wasn't remotely the "storming of the Bastille" that McCloskey claimed (while he was pointing his rifle at his wife).

Not really heroes. More like rich privileged dumbasses.

They didn't overreact at all. Not a single little bit. And frankly, you're god damned clueless. Your attitude is the problem. Not theirs.

quote:

Originally posted by sns3guppy:


Yes, private property, but it wasn't remotely the "storming of the Bastille" that McCloskey claimed

Have you seen this picture?

quote:

Originally posted by Balzé Halzé:
And frankly, you're god damned clueless. Your attitude is the problem. Not theirs.

COOL IT

Yeah, sure. You got it. I'm cool.