Artillery?
Exaggeration is one of the tools of those who seek to spread misinformation.
Some people don’t like masks not being mandated. Others reject the Castle Doctrine. But the law is the law.
Figure of speech. Good grief.
But it did let you avoid answering the question.
It is spreading misinformation to suggest that herd immunity before a vaccine is an advisable way through the pandemic.
The gate had been left open and was unbroken at the time of the incident. Later in the day the gate was broken (no one knows how).
The justice protestors saw an open gate and a street that passed through to their destination. Unfamiliar with the area, they did not realize it was a private street.
Care to provide any documentation of this claim? I am relying on the investigation and conclusions of the district attorney.
BTW, Vance, now that you’ve seen the photos, would you agree that those individuals with the guns were not merely standing on their porch and were in fact pointing guns in a dangerous manner? And thus your statement was misinformed?
I answered your questions. Will you respond to mine?
Peace,
Chris
EDIT: Joel Currier of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch watched a recording of the entire incident from start to finish. Here is his account in relevant part:
Although the McCloskeys have displayed photos of a crumpled gate as evidence the protesters broke it down, the feed shows the gate is intact. It was not clear when it was damaged.
The first few protesters who enter the private neighborhood swerve away from the McCloskey house to walk in the street.
Immediately, Brown’s feed captures Mark McCloskey under a massive portico on the east side of his mansion. “Hey!” he can be heard shouting. “Private neighborhood! Get the hell out of my neighborhood!”
None of the protesters are on his property — even the disputed triangle.
Brown zooms in on McCloskey, who is wearing a pink Brooks Brothers polo shirt, and narrates: “Y’all see? On my live feed … he got his rifle.”
Mark McCloskey shouts, “Get out! Get out! Get out! Private property!”
A chant builds: “Whose streets? Our streets!”
Moments later, Patricia McCloskey can be seen in her front yard in her bare feet with a silver handgun, waving it at the protesters.
“We’re gonna move, calm down!” someone yells.
“Put that gun away,” someone else yells.
She comes closer to Brown, pointing the gun left and right. “Go!” she yells. “Go!”
One of the protesters yells, “We got kids in here! We got children!”
A chant builds: “Eat the rich!” She keeps pointing the gun.
“Why are you threatening?” someone asks.
“You need to calm down!” someone else says.
“Put your goddamn gun down!” someone yells.
“You’re a coward, bitch!” a woman yells.
“Nobody wants to hurt you,” another woman yells.
About 13 minutes go by with the McCloskeys on their front lawn in bare feet and protesters mocking them or asking them why they are threatening them with weapons.
The protest moves on to its destination: Mayor Lyda Krewson’s house.
1 Like
I watched much of the video too. I am sure there are many videos. Some will not show relevant information.
Remember the young man who was vilified by CNN in a confrontation with an American Indian based on a video? A more complete review of the story led to a $200 million lawsuit. A successful lawsuit.
There is a lot of “spin” in the media trying to present threats and burning and looting as peaceful protesting.
Fortunately, the governor has promised a pardon should the activist DA be successful
I hope an angry crowd doesn’t come on your property and start shouting “Eat the rich.”
“‘We’re gonna burn your house, this is gonna be my bedroom, my living room and bathroom after you’re dead,’” Mark cited as an example.
You don’t think the protesters are going to share the incriminating videos, do you?
The did make a mistake in the way they used the firearms. The proper procedure would have been to point them forward and down at the ground, ready to be raised. But they are lawyers, not security experts, who were being threatened by an angry mob.
I don’t recall saying they did not leave the porch. If they had not left the porch, they could have been outflanked with those wanting to take over their house going around the corners.
The couple states they had the safeties on.
No, I am not misinformed.
One person, taunting, after they were incited by that ridiculous couple.
-
You clearly did not read my last post carefully. The video I cited was a recording of the entire incident.
-
According to that video, the McCliskeys were on their lawn, pointing loaded guns in a menacing fashion at the justice protesters almost as soon as they entered the neighborhood. At that point the justice protesters had not said anything to the McCloskeys.
AFTER the McCloskeys pointed guns, some of the protesters engaged in banter with them.
Because of the chronology, the contents of that banter are therefore completely irrelevant to whether the McCloskeys were justified in pointing loaded guns at them.
This means they have no excuse for not knowing and/or not complying with the criminal statutes regarding the handling of guns.
Are you gaslighting us? Or do you really not remember what you wrote? Allow me to refresh your memory.
You asked us to judge their behavior based on the statement that they were standing on their porch. Your omission of their approaching the protesters and menacing them with pointed, loaded guns was a patently material omission.
Peace,
Chris
2 Likes
No single video could possibly record the entire incident.
I read your post.
Multiple angles would be needed. Multiple captures of sound would be needed too.
The Castle Doctrine means this is not a criminal act.
Only an activist DA would try to pretend it is.
What specific statute do you think was broken? Please cite it.
I cited a statute earlier when asked.
Do you really want to expend so much effort in a vain attempt to defend that silly pair?
It could have been any of us.
Protecting one’s home does nothing make a person silly.
Persecuting a person for defending his home makes one look unwise.
Do you really want to be stripped of such rights?
When your home is made of marble… never mind. 
You, maybe. If they had just stayed inside with their mouths shut and their guns…
As far as the available video evidence shows, no one ever stepped on their property. In particular, no one stepped on it before the McCloskeys approached the justice marchers while menacing them with pointed, loaded guns.
<irony_alert>
Don’t believe what your lying eyes show you and what your lying ears tell you! Somewhere out there (but I know not where, sorry) is evidence that overturns what you just saw and heard!
</irony_alert>
Then why were members of the mob cited for trespassing?
Are you trying to say that private property jointly owned by neighbors means the property is no longer covered by the Castle Doctrine? That an owner of a duplex, for example, has no rights if a gang of Hell’s Angels camps out and makes threats on a lawn shared in common with another person?
And why are you basing your view on one video shot by one member of the mob?
I see you did not watch videos very carefully.
As has been noted multiple times in this very thread, the justice marchers did not realize the entire neighborhood, including its street, were considered private property. They were cited for being present on the neighborhood street.
How is it that you think this is even remotely relevant, Vance? The justice marchers did not camp out; they were walking through the neighborhood on its street. Most importantly, they did not even speak to the McCloskeys prior to being menaced with loaded guns.
Videos don’t lie.
Why do you keep insisting that I should not believe video evidence?
There seems to be no amount of evidence or reasoning that will prevent you from making conjectures that directly contradict all the available evidence. Maybe we should move on to some other topic.
Because it appears you are trying to say that private property owned by multiple parties is not covered by the Castle Doctrine.
But, again, your reliance on a single video to contain all the facts is not justifiable.