Forums59
Topics1,039,700
Posts13,969,068
Members144,214
|
Most Online39,925 Dec 30th, 2023
|
|
Re: St. Louis couple
[Re: hopalong]
#13626691
07/11/20 08:58 AM
|
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 75,864
banker-always fishing
Pumpkin Head
|
Pumpkin Head
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 75,864 |
how many were arrested for criminal trespass?
Excellent point!
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: 119,956
TexDawg
Top Dawg
|
Top Dawg
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 119,956 |
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: 6,796
Ted Dyer
TFF Celebrity
|
TFF Celebrity
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 6,796 |
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.
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: 12,001
lakeforkfisherman
Elliptical Mechanic
|
Elliptical Mechanic
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 12,001 |
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: 4,766
2014NITROZ-7
TFF Team Angler
|
TFF Team Angler
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 4,766 |
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
Flippin-Out
TFF Team Angler
|
TFF Team Angler
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
redskeet100
Extreme Angler
|
Extreme Angler
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,683 |
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: 22,582
lconn4
TFF Guru
|
TFF Guru
Joined: Dec 2012
Posts: 22,582 |
If they'd had green laser sights on their weapons they could of made the protesters dance.
|
|
Re: St. Louis couple
[Re: Kicker16]
#13627012
07/11/20 05:11 PM
|
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 41,122
CCTX
mapquest
|
mapquest
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 41,122 |
Essss Esssss Essss EEE EEEE EEEEE Effff Effff Effff EEE EEEE EEEEE Teetee Teetee Teee why why why why Safety Dance!
|
|
Re: St. Louis couple
[Re: lakeforkfisherman]
#13627066
07/11/20 06:40 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 14,119
BassFever
TFF Guru
|
TFF Guru
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 14,119 |
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: 4,261
Canino
TFF Team Angler
|
TFF Team Angler
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 4,261 |
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: 14,119
BassFever
TFF Guru
|
TFF Guru
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 14,119 |
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: 11,587
txmasterpo
TFF Guru
|
TFF Guru
Joined: Nov 2012
Posts: 11,587 |
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.
|
|
Re: St. Louis couple
[Re: Flippin-Out]
#13627086
07/11/20 07:02 PM
|
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 121,172
hopalong
Pescador Loco
|
Pescador Loco
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 121,172 |
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: 14,119
BassFever
TFF Guru
|
TFF Guru
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 14,119 |
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?
|
|
Moderated by banker-always fishing, chickenman, Derek 🐝, Duck_Hunter, Fish Killer, J-2, Jacob, Jons3825, JustWingem, Nocona Brian, Toon-Troller, Uncle Zeek, Weekender1
|