texasfishingforum.com logo
Main Menu
Advertisement
Affiliates
Advertisement
Newest Members
OlePhart11, Rick P, Raphie, mills_fishes_anywhere, KoreanFishMonger69
119196 Registered Users
Top Posters(All Time)
TexDawg 119,869
Bigbob_FTW 95,490
John175☮ 85,933
Pilothawk 83,278
Bob Davis 82,700
Mark Perry 72,525
Derek 🐝 68,322
JDavis7873 67,416
Forum Statistics
Forums59
Topics1,039,218
Posts13,961,130
Members144,196
Most Online39,925
Dec 30th, 2023
Print Thread
Page 2 of 11 1 2 3 4 10 11
Re: St. Louis couple [Re: hopalong] #13626691 07/11/20 08:58 AM
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 75,759
banker-always fishing Offline
Pumpkin Head
Offline
Pumpkin Head
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 75,759
Originally Posted by hopalong
how many were arrested for criminal trespass?






Excellent point! hmmm


[Linked Image][Linked Image]

IGFA World Record Rio Grande Cichlid. Lake Dunlap.

John 3:16

Sinner's Prayer. God forgive me a sinner. I accept Jesus Christ as my Savior !
Re: St. Louis couple [Re: hopalong] #13626710 07/11/20 10:06 AM
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 119,869
TexDawg Online Content
Top Dawg
Online Content
Top Dawg
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 119,869
Originally Posted by hopalong
how many were arrested for criminal trespass?



None is my guess

Re: St. Louis couple [Re: Canino] #13626745 07/11/20 11:54 AM
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 6,784
T
Ted Dyer Offline
TFF Celebrity
Offline
TFF Celebrity
T
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 6,784
Originally Posted by Canino
They had every right to defend themselves and their property. They also obviously had zero clue about handling firearms. They covered each other several times within just a couple of minutes. Their lack of education and lack of training showed they are not exactly responsible gun owners.

They wouldn't be in this situation if they had used more defensive tactics - that is, kept their weapons in a ready position and stayed put close to the front door, or maybe at the house corners, while issuing short, loud commands for the criminals to leave the property. They should not have engaged unless there was an imminent and specific threat.

Instead they were wandering around out in the yard and yelling arguments back-and-fourth at the crowd while waving their firearms around.

I'm sure they'll be able to articulate in court that they believed they were in danger, and I'm about 95% sure they'll be found not guilty. And they should be found not guilty. But I also believe they brought this on themselves because they did not handle the situation correctly at all.

thumb


flagtexas
Courage - knowing something will hurt and still doing it.
Stupidity - knowing something will hurt and still doing it.

That’s why life is difficult
Re: St. Louis couple [Re: Canino] #13626838 07/11/20 02:03 PM
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 11,999
lakeforkfisherman Offline
Elliptical Mechanic
Offline
Elliptical Mechanic
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 11,999
Originally Posted by Canino
They had every right to defend themselves and their property. They also obviously had zero clue about handling firearms. They covered each other several times within just a couple of minutes. Their lack of education and lack of training showed they are not exactly responsible gun owners.

They wouldn't be in this situation if they had used more defensive tactics - that is, kept their weapons in a ready position and stayed put close to the front door, or maybe at the house corners, while issuing short, loud commands for the criminals to leave the property. They should not have engaged unless there was an imminent and specific threat.

Instead they were wandering around out in the yard and yelling arguments back-and-fourth at the crowd while waving their firearms around.

I'm sure they'll be able to articulate in court that they believed they were in danger, and I'm about 95% sure they'll be found not guilty. And they should be found not guilty. But I also believe they brought this on themselves because they did not handle the situation correctly at all.

I agree with this. Especially, the lady was mishandling the pistol. Several times she swept it behind her husbands head. She should have kept the pistol downward like he did with the rifle. I too think they’ll be able to prove their right to protect, but this may not have gone this far had they shown better weapon handling.


LET’S GO BRANDON!!!
Re: St. Louis couple [Re: hopalong] #13626937 07/11/20 03:41 PM
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 4,761
2
2014NITROZ-7 Offline
TFF Team Angler
Offline
TFF Team Angler
2
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 4,761
Originally Posted by hopalong
how many were arrested for criminal trespass?


Come on Hop,you know they were just a mob of peaceful protesters. Seriously, when was the last time peaceful means breaking down a gate to private property? I wonder how this would go over if were to occur to Peeeelousi's neighborhood.

Re: St. Louis couple [Re: Kicker16] #13626940 07/11/20 03:43 PM
Joined: Feb 2015
Posts: 4,724
F
Flippin-Out Offline
TFF Team Angler
Offline
TFF Team Angler
F
Joined: Feb 2015
Posts: 4,724
Well, I understand they are actually liberals. They must be somewhat confused liberals given that they apparently concluded that having firearms for personal protection was a good idea. With little firearms knowledge, you get what you get. I admit they didn't have the look of experienced firearms handlers, and that doesn't do our cause any good. He's an attorney; you'd think he would have at least read the code on it.

Re: St. Louis couple [Re: Tallgrass05] #13626943 07/11/20 03:49 PM
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,683
R
redskeet100 Offline
Extreme Angler
Offline
Extreme Angler
R
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,683
Originally Posted by Tallgrass05
They were not protecting anything, and she pointed her pistol at people with her finger on the trigger. And he should be charged with wearing a pink polo shirt.


You are obviously very delusional. They tore down the iron gate to the neighborhood, said they were going to kill their dogs, them and burn their house down. So yeah, they weren't protecting anything.

Re: St. Louis couple [Re: Kicker16] #13626973 07/11/20 04:24 PM
Joined: Dec 2012
Posts: 22,542
L
lconn4 Online Content
TFF Guru
Online Content
TFF Guru
L
Joined: Dec 2012
Posts: 22,542
If they'd had green laser sights on their weapons they could of made the protesters dance.

[Linked Image]


A good rule of angling philosophy is not to interfere with another fisherman's ways of being happy, unless you want to be hated.
Zane Grey, Tales of Fishes, 1919

https://vimeo.com/73372194
https://vimeo.com/72859045

Re: St. Louis couple [Re: Kicker16] #13627012 07/11/20 05:11 PM
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 40,983
C
CCTX Online Content
mapquest
Online Content
mapquest
C
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 40,983
Essss Esssss Essss
EEE EEEE EEEEE
Effff Effff Effff
EEE EEEE EEEEE
Teetee Teetee Teee
why why why why

Safety Dance!

[Linked Image]


[Linked Image]
Re: St. Louis couple [Re: lakeforkfisherman] #13627066 07/11/20 06:40 PM
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 14,084
B
BassFever Online Content
TFF Guru
Online Content
TFF Guru
B
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 14,084
Originally Posted by lakeforkfisherman
Originally Posted by Canino
They had every right to defend themselves and their property. They also obviously had zero clue about handling firearms. They covered each other several times within just a couple of minutes. Their lack of education and lack of training showed they are not exactly responsible gun owners.

They wouldn't be in this situation if they had used more defensive tactics - that is, kept their weapons in a ready position and stayed put close to the front door, or maybe at the house corners, while issuing short, loud commands for the criminals to leave the property. They should not have engaged unless there was an imminent and specific threat.

Instead they were wandering around out in the yard and yelling arguments back-and-fourth at the crowd while waving their firearms around.

I'm sure they'll be able to articulate in court that they believed they were in danger, and I'm about 95% sure they'll be found not guilty. And they should be found not guilty. But I also believe they brought this on themselves because they did not handle the situation correctly at all.

I agree with this. Especially, the lady was mishandling the pistol. Several times she swept it behind her husbands head. She should have kept the pistol downward like he did with the rifle. I too think they’ll be able to prove their right to protect, but this may not have gone this far had they shown better weapon handling.



If you break down the gate to my house. You better be ready to meet your maker. I'm not a trained marksman or fighter. Just an average joe with gun that goes BOOM. You're a bunch of idiots if you think the home owners were at fault.

Last edited by BassFever; 07/11/20 06:40 PM.
Re: St. Louis couple [Re: BassFever] #13627071 07/11/20 06:51 PM
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 4,251
C
Canino Offline
TFF Team Angler
Offline
TFF Team Angler
C
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 4,251
Originally Posted by BassFever
Originally Posted by lakeforkfisherman
Originally Posted by Canino
They had every right to defend themselves and their property. They also obviously had zero clue about handling firearms. They covered each other several times within just a couple of minutes. Their lack of education and lack of training showed they are not exactly responsible gun owners.

They wouldn't be in this situation if they had used more defensive tactics - that is, kept their weapons in a ready position and stayed put close to the front door, or maybe at the house corners, while issuing short, loud commands for the criminals to leave the property. They should not have engaged unless there was an imminent and specific threat.

Instead they were wandering around out in the yard and yelling arguments back-and-fourth at the crowd while waving their firearms around.

I'm sure they'll be able to articulate in court that they believed they were in danger, and I'm about 95% sure they'll be found not guilty. And they should be found not guilty. But I also believe they brought this on themselves because they did not handle the situation correctly at all.

I agree with this. Especially, the lady was mishandling the pistol. Several times she swept it behind her husbands head. She should have kept the pistol downward like he did with the rifle. I too think they’ll be able to prove their right to protect, but this may not have gone this far had they shown better weapon handling.



If you break down the gate to my house. You better be ready to meet your maker. I'm not a trained marksman or fighter. Just an average joe with gun that goes BOOM. You're a bunch of idiots if you think the home owners were at fault.


I don't think they're at fault for the incident, and you'll note I called the crowd "criminals". But their lack of training and education about firearms caused them to take certain actions that led to charges against them.

They could have taken very similar but less overtly aggressive actions, been in a better position to defend themselves, and had no charges.

Re: St. Louis couple [Re: Canino] #13627076 07/11/20 06:55 PM
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 14,084
B
BassFever Online Content
TFF Guru
Online Content
TFF Guru
B
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 14,084
Originally Posted by Canino
Originally Posted by BassFever
Originally Posted by lakeforkfisherman
Originally Posted by Canino
They had every right to defend themselves and their property. They also obviously had zero clue about handling firearms. They covered each other several times within just a couple of minutes. Their lack of education and lack of training showed they are not exactly responsible gun owners.

They wouldn't be in this situation if they had used more defensive tactics - that is, kept their weapons in a ready position and stayed put close to the front door, or maybe at the house corners, while issuing short, loud commands for the criminals to leave the property. They should not have engaged unless there was an imminent and specific threat.

Instead they were wandering around out in the yard and yelling arguments back-and-fourth at the crowd while waving their firearms around.

I'm sure they'll be able to articulate in court that they believed they were in danger, and I'm about 95% sure they'll be found not guilty. And they should be found not guilty. But I also believe they brought this on themselves because they did not handle the situation correctly at all.

I agree with this. Especially, the lady was mishandling the pistol. Several times she swept it behind her husbands head. She should have kept the pistol downward like he did with the rifle. I too think they’ll be able to prove their right to protect, but this may not have gone this far had they shown better weapon handling.



If you break down the gate to my house. You better be ready to meet your maker. I'm not a trained marksman or fighter. Just an average joe with gun that goes BOOM. You're a bunch of idiots if you think the home owners were at fault.

That's not what I was saying.

I don't think they're at fault for the incident, and you'll note I called the crowd "criminals". But their lack of training and education about firearms caused them to take certain actions that led to charges against them.

They could have taken very similar but less overtly aggressive actions, been in a better position to defend themselves, and had no charges.



People broke into THEIR property. They DON'T have to do anything but protect themselves. They are not trained police officers. Just home owners trying to protect their property.

Re: St. Louis couple [Re: Kicker16] #13627080 07/11/20 07:00 PM
Joined: Nov 2012
Posts: 11,570
T
txmasterpo Offline
TFF Guru
Offline
TFF Guru
T
Joined: Nov 2012
Posts: 11,570
I would have just waited inside and shot them dead if they came in actually.....in Texas....don't know Missouri law and that it was a search warrant rather than arrest warrant is odd....I don't care enough to go look.


http://www.trccovers.com

"I am large, I contain multitudes."

Walt Whitman
Re: St. Louis couple [Re: Flippin-Out] #13627086 07/11/20 07:02 PM
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 121,172
hopalong Offline
Pescador Loco
Offline
Pescador Loco
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 121,172
Originally Posted by Flippin-Out
Well, I understand they are actually liberals. They must be somewhat confused liberals given that they apparently concluded that having firearms for personal protection was a good idea. With little firearms knowledge, you get what you get. I admit they didn't have the look of experienced firearms handlers, and that doesn't do our cause any good. He's an attorney; you'd think he would have at least read the code on it.



they are both attys specializing in civil rights cases is what I heard reported.

go figure.

Re: St. Louis couple [Re: txmasterpo] #13627089 07/11/20 07:05 PM
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 14,084
B
BassFever Online Content
TFF Guru
Online Content
TFF Guru
B
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 14,084
Originally Posted by txmasterpo
I would have just waited inside and shot them dead if they came in actually.....in Texas....don't know Missouri law and that it was a search warrant rather than arrest warrant is odd....I don't care enough to go look.



And they said something about burning their house down. Would you just wait inside for that?

Page 2 of 11 1 2 3 4 10 11
Previous Thread
Index
Next Thread

© 1998-2022 OUTDOOR SITES NETWORK all rights reserved USA and Worldwide
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.3