Now I've seen everything: St Louis couple comes out of their house and points guns at protesters marching in front of their street

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

If it were me I would have stayed in my home and if I felt unsafe would have called the police.

I don't see the reason to debate back and forth should you or should you not have a gun--that's moot anyways considering they already had guns. However, lordy pointing a gun at people like they did IDK it looked like they probably use a course on proper gun ownership at the least; you don't just go pointing at people like that.

I was reading a story where a protester mentioned "Organizers and clergy were actively warning people prior to entering the street that there was a couple with guns and if you weren't comfortable with that, do not enter the street," "Organizers and clergy were also moving the crowd along and encouraging everyone to not give them the time of day." Additionally two videos show: "there is a heated, often profane, back and forth between the protesters and the McCloskeys."

If it were me protesting I'm wouldn't take the bet that this couple was out and ready, I'd be avoiding the situation and not entering the street. That does NOT at all excuse this couple but it sounds like they were known to be a certain way and I wouldn't want to personally put myself in that situation.

 

[3 MEN AND A BOAT]

If it were me I would have stayed in my home and if I felt unsafe would have called the police.
........
If it were me protesting I'm wouldn't take the bet that this couple was out and ready, I'd be avoiding the situation and not entering the street.

These two sentiments describe myself as well. I would avoid confrontation if possible.

 

[bcla]

Unfortunately you'll get a lot of generalizations of people. It's not a one-sized fits all. Our country has 330ish million people. Be assured we are a varied enough bunch. Some people have guns for this some for that and other reasons too. The way you posed the question is more like a closed yes or no related to safety of one's own home but that is not the only reason people own guns here thus the varied and often heated responses you'll see from people.

In my area the gun violence you see is largely gang related which is probably not what you're going to hear most about. I don't know how many in my metro are carrying guns (legal or illegally) but the ones who are often using it for deadly means aren't maybe what you'd think given what you might see on the news elsewhere.

I’ve been in areas where I thought that it wasn’t a good situation, but never where I wished I had a gun. I’ve tried it before. Kind of fun blasting holes through paper, but any thoughts of ever using one in self defense was a childhood fantasy.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

I’ve been in areas where I thought that it wasn’t a good situation, but never where I wished I had a gun. I’ve tried it before. Kind of fun blasting holes through paper, but any thoughts of ever using one in self defense was a childhood fantasy.

Some of the protesters had guns though they did not point them at the couple. I don't know their reasons for having guns with them.

I can't say I'm presently thinking about self defense personally speaking but I do know a few who do, I know a few who do hunting, a few who do target practice (so hobby),etc. Admittedly I don't live right near gangs so I couldn't tell you if I did if I would feel differently; that's me being honest but at this point I'm a bit adverse to even holding a gun. That's not to say we haven't had some gun violence in my area but it is not the gangs that I spoke of earlier.

 

[LongLiveRafiki]

No. There are some people who do legitimately need guns, but most people have them because it makes them feel like big strong people to have multiple weapons they probably won't ever use and really just proves they are scared of a lot of stuff.

No, most people have guns for... a large variety of reasons. Sure, there are wannabe tough guys out there and those who own guns out of fear, but that's really not "most" gun owners.

I would be terrified my children or their friends would get hold of them somehow.

Responsible gun owners have safeguards in place to prevent kids and guests from accessing their weapons. Things like a gun safe, lock box hidden in an out of reach location, or trigger or cable locks that prevent the gun from firing. As parents and gun owners, DH and I have also spent a lot of time teaching our kids about gun safety, to assume any gun is loaded and to stay away (should they ever come across a gun at someone else's house), and that they are not toys or something to show off to friends. They have no idea where our guns are (which are hidden, out of reach, and locked), and fully understand that they can be deadly weapons. I'm a vet and just about every vet I know also owns guns and uses similar safeguards along with discussions with their children (yes, that's something we talk and share tips about).

No. Literally no "average citizen" NEEDS a gun. I'd say residents need a gun in VERY few, select instances (like, if you are a farmer and need to protect your animals from predators, maybe). No one living in a gated community, or a non gated community, for that matter NEEDS a gun.

It's about fear and insecurity and a desire to appear powerful, mostly. I can't even imagine a life where I feel like I need a gun to protect myself from some imaginary constant threat. No wonder so many people have high blood pressure.

Sure, most people don't NEED a gun. But your statement that "It's about fear and insecurity and a desire to appear powerful, mostly" is not true.

I’m sorry my question posed an issue as that was not my intent. Just was curious as I can’t wrap my head around that. I do understand recreational and hunting purposes for sure. I was really just thinking about it all and wondering if the majority felt they needed that protection. Clearly most don’t.

Thanks for the input.

Never apologize for seeking out knowledge. Roughly 30% of adults in the US own guns and roughly 42% of US households have guns, so they are a lot more prevalent than most people realize. The reasons for owning a gun are varied- from protection, hunting, sport, collectors, and more, with most gun owners having multiple reasons for owning a gun. Among the gun owners I know, most don't carry regularly and are more into the hunting and sport groups with the added bonus of home protection should the unlikely situation ever arise. So yeah, protection can be a factor for many gun owners, but it's not like the majority of them are living in fear that they're going to be attacked. While there certainly are people who live in cities and own guns out of fear, they are far from the majority. A larger percentage of people who live in rural areas own guns than people who live in big cities.

 

[dsnymnkyuncle]

No. Literally no "average citizen" NEEDS a gun. I'd say residents need a gun in VERY few, select instances (like, if you are a farmer and need to protect your animals from predators, maybe). No one living in a gated community, or a non gated community, for that matter NEEDS a gun.

It's about fear and insecurity and a desire to appear powerful, mostly. I can't even imagine a life where I feel like I need a gun to protect myself from some imaginary constant threat. No wonder so many people have high blood pressure.

You are examining this backwards. It is true nobody in a gated community needs a gun but the attitude that demands a gated community also demands a gun

 

[bcla]

Some of the protesters had guns though they did not point them at the couple. I don't know their reasons for having guns with them.

It's an open carry state, so legally responding to them simply on the basis of having an exposed firearm is not a legal basis to claim fear. I've been following a lot of these protests and counter protests and there are quite a few cases where there have been guns, including by protesters, counter protesters, and some claiming that they're civilian volunteers there to keep the peace. There have been very few cases where anyone pointed a gun at anyone.

 

[dsnymnkyuncle]

The crux of this may be figure out tomorrow. The historic aspect is convincing. The attorney appears to be an outright liar (I hate to say that about an attorney) and claim that there is no private property inside the gate and that people were 'up in his face' and he was directly threatened with a gun. The interview was a fluff piece and Annie Allred should be ashamed. "The entire neighborhood is privately owned and managed, which means the entire street is considered private property." We have enough fact free reporting.

McCloskey: Everything inside the Portland Place gate is private property. There is nothing public in Portland Place. Being inside that gate is like being in my living room. There is no public anything in Portland Place. It is all private property... We were threatened with our lives, threatened with a house being burned down, my office building being burned down, even our dog's life being threatened. It was, it was about as bad as it can get. https://www.ksdk.com/article/news/l...otest/63-eeb61c07-4adc-4df0-a7d0-000d40a89e78

MEANWHILE:

Portland Place and Westmoreland Place in St. Louis are historic neighborhoods, closed to vehicle through traffic... but open to pedestrian traffic.

I know this, because they're under the National Register of Historic Places.

npgallery.nps.gov/AssetDetail/NR…
Basically, some historic neighborhoods have gates that are designed to prevent cars from cruising through. However, the sidewalks and roads are, "public thoroughfares accessible via pedestrian gate" -- which is literally the opposite of private property.
If you'd like to walk around the sidewalks of Westmoreland Place or Portland Place in St. Louis, you're more than welcome to do so. It's not trespassing, nor is it private property...
While I appreciate all the arguments about the right to defend your property, the people were on a public sidewalk.
...roads and sidewalks are maintained by the city, and therefore... *drumroll*... PUBLIC.

I know this, because zoning is public record...



https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1277502087094571008.html

 

[dsnymnkyuncle]

I see a possible bad descision, but I wasn’t there and I don’t know exactly how the protesters where behaving. With everything that’s going on right now, how would someone know if these are legal protestors or if they are those looking to riot, loot, and cause destruction?

By watching the video?
Asking the police and/or the private security?
By getting a direct answer from the City on responsibility and ownership of the road and sidewalk?
Maybe asking if they did riot, or loot or cause destruction?

 

[cobright]

Arrested for what.? She has the right to defend her property from trespassers whether people "like" how she did it or not.

Nowhere is it legal to shoot someone for trespassing.
It's called self-defense, you can point a gun to defend yourself, or another person, from grievous injury or death. And in most places you can use force, including armed force, to 'arrest' someone who is in the commission of a felony. Beyond that... you don't just get to go Thunderdome because you don't like a big group of people walking through your neighborhood.

I've was a competitive shooter from high school until about 10 years ago and watching these two bozos made me cringe. You can't rush out from behind your locked doors to engage a crowd and then with a straight face claim you needed that gun out for self defense.

I honestly think Karen & Clyde here saw this as an opportunity for publicity.

 

[cobright]

McCloskey: Everything inside the Portland Place gate is private property. There is nothing public in Portland Place. Being inside that gate is like being in my living room.

This is such a spurious argument. Even conceding that the road was private property, gated communities are private, and that the protesters were trespassing, there are several distinctions when it comes to self defense even on private property.

For one thing, a private street, owned by a community coop is not the same thing as a stranger on your personal home property.

But even on one's personal home property the law makes distinctions about the proper use of force differently within one's home (an occupied dwelling), that home's curtilage, or unoccupied out-buildings. That's why when someone shoots a stranger inside their own home we usually give them a pass, but if they have to exit their house to throw shots or plug someone through their door (two cases from right down the road from me in MI) we look at it a little closer.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

It's an open carry state, so legally responding to them simply on the basis of having an exposed firearm is not a legal basis to claim fear. I've been following a lot of these protests and counter protests and there are quite a few cases where there have been guns, including by protesters, counter protesters, and some claiming that they're civilian volunteers there to keep the peace. There have been very few cases where anyone pointed a gun at anyone.

I live by the border of MO so yes I know they are open carry. That doesn't change that I don't know why the protesters were choosing to carry guns. I'm not privy to their thoughts. You mentioned you never had a feeling of needing a gun for defense. My comment was in response to that and I specifically stated that the protesters didn't point a gun at the couple.

My comment simple said "Some of the protesters had guns though they did not point them at the couple. I don't know their reasons for having guns with them." By them I meant the protesters. That's all I was referring to.

 

[DLgal]

You are examining this backwards. It is true nobody in a gated community needs a gun but the attitude that demands a gated community also demands a gun

Well yeah, that is a good point.

 

[Starwarsfan2]

Any cop who feels that way should turn in their badge.

Most of them are, if they can find any other job to pay the bills. They are in a no win situation.

 

[Starwarsfan2]

They probably also don't want to be reformed at all. If it was decided that a full staff and pay were to stay, but all cops had to go to mandatory retraining and have superiors checking that they were following all procedure on a regular basis, with the possibility of dock of salary or loss of hours if issues were found, do you think most cops would be okay with that plan? My guess is no, because they do not want to be told what to do, and they do not want to fix what is broken.

I have said it before, I will say it again. You are clearly labelling an entire nation of police officers as corrupt based on a few incidents. Are all the protesters rioters and looters, because I have seen some of them do it, so they must all be of the same mindset. See how you don't agree with that last statement? But you are judging all based on the few.

 

[bcla]

I live by the border of MO so yes I know they are open carry. That doesn't change that I don't know why the protesters were choosing to carry guns. I'm not privy to their thoughts. You mentioned you never had a feeling of needing a gun for defense. My comment was in response to that and I specifically stated that the protesters didn't point a gun at the couple.

My comment simple said "Some of the protesters had guns though they did not point them at the couple. I don't know their reasons for having guns with them." By them I meant the protesters. That's all I was referring to.

I'm just saying that it's not all that unusual. In many places guns are a way of life and not necessarily a political statement.

 

[Heather07438]

Guns and emotionally overwrought people make a dangerous combo,
especially if they've never handled a gun before
The husband said his wife 'knows nothing about guns.' Is that true?
Is that even legal? In Missouri can you just grab somebody else's gun and wave it around even if you have no license or experience? No wonder some people feel under constant threat.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

I'm just saying that it's not all that unusual. In many places guns are a way of life and not necessarily a political statement.

Where in God's green earth did I say anything about it being political? Ugh why does everyone reduce things to "it's political" even when no one said a darn thing about it. Where did I say guns weren't a way of life for some people? You are reading whatever you want out of my words which I don't appreciate. I'm moving on in the discussion respectfully.

 

[3 MEN AND A BOAT]

By watching the video?
Asking the police and/or the private security?
By getting a direct answer from the City on responsibility and ownership of the road and sidewalk?
Maybe asking if they did riot, or loot or cause destruction?

Maybe I could’ve worded it better, but I was meaning at that moment, how would the homeowner know?

 

[Skywalker]

White privilege is what I see when I look at her pointing a gun at a crowd of people with her finger on the trigger...


View attachment 505202

Can we stop with the knee-jerk casual racism please...