Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Missourians: Stand With The McCloskeys

doc, you're right on several counts. I don't care for how the McCloskeys have made their living. I'm sure they're being very careful about exposing their politics in order to garner the most support possible. But, that doesn't mean I believe they shouldn't have the rights of every other free American citizen.

As far as their neighbors and their statement, F*ck em. Who cares what they think or have to say. I don't. They're part of the BIG problems in our country today.

You are obviously not that bright. Lawyers love to fight. It is the primary function of their occupation. You have to like a lawyer with a pre-ban Colt AR-15 standing down a mob of Anarchists.

I don't have to like a lawyer that is for what I am against......what part don't you understand that they are for the shhitt that is going on...


I get it that you feel for them ….I don't....those people are hypocrites.....bob

If it weren't for the ramifications this case has on every homeowner, I wouldn't care.

But unfortunately, we have no choice but to defend these lowyers.

Well if the rioters come back to burn them out ..... they have their weapons .

Sure the McCloskeys have a right to defend themselves. They're left wing commies. They don't realize a damned thing. They told about how they were on the side of BLM after they experienced this. They learned nothing.

I am NOT on the side of BLM who are nothing more than terrorists and have ulterior motives rather than just supporting Blacks. I am NOT on the side of Blacks who want MORE rights than White folks or who want to kill Whites. I am NOT on the side of people who want reparations. I am NOT on the side of Whites who support BLM and engage in terrorism. I am NOT on the side of the government or police who support BLM terrorists or any of the above.

The McCloskeys will have plenty of support. From where I stand they can kiss my ass.

Furthermore...I'm not saying the mob didn't engage in further riotous or terroristic behavior, but if they did I didn't hear of it. However, Rich fu c ks successfully drive the mob out of THEIR yard, away from THEIR house and THEIR community, so they can loot and burn some poor or middle class house or neighborhood where people don't have access to unlimited legal representation to defend themselves from the pro-BLM local, state and fed government. Maybe they don't even have enough money to insure their three bedroom, two bath rancher after they been laid off due to the Chinese bs. Maybe they had to sell their guns to cover the huge medical bills after having COVID or whatever.

Good people everywhere have my support no matter how poor or how rich they are. From what little I can see, the McCloskey's ain't good people. How are the McCloskey's supporting THEIR community or the good people in other communities? Instead they are going on the TV sucking up to BLM terrorists and trying to slide from the system that they've been insiders of for years.

Fu ck 'em.

No they couldn’t “be any one of us” in the sense you’re talking about, unless you mean Licker of Beanbags, or EJ, or Piddler. Basically a great example of the left being the left and turning on one of their own. The situation they’re in, is one that any one of us could find ourselves in, that much is correct in a different way though.

None of us supported the machine that is responsible for fugging people over in the very situation he’s in. Now, because they did do what any one of us would’ve done, they want to play the victim. Why didn’t they fight for 2nd A rights prior to this instead of trying to take them away from folks like us? Why didn’t they stand with folks that respect law and order instead of these BLM savages before? Is it because he’s the one on the receiving end now? What about before when it was people like us that were victimized? Who did he choose to represent? Ever hear of lying in the bed you make?

Fug them and their fancy castle. Hope they enjoyed it while it lasted. They’re gonna see what it’s like to lose your hard work and creativity to a bunch of savages that have never worked or built a thing in their lives; but only take from those who do. Maybe afterwards, they’ll have a change of heart and come over to this side with an honest perspective. There’s a name for people like them during war time.

Florida Castle Doctrine.

Title XLVI
CRIMES
Chapter 776
JUSTIFIABLE USE OF FORCE
View Entire Chapter

776.013 Home protection; use or threatened use of deadly force; presumption of fear of death or great bodily harm.—
(1) A person who is in a dwelling or residence in which the person has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and use or threaten to use:
(a) Nondeadly force against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or herself or another against the other’s imminent use of unlawful force; or
(b) Deadly force if he or she reasonably believes that using or threatening to use such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony.
(2) A person is presumed to have held a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another when using or threatening to use defensive force that is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm to another if:
(a) The person against whom the defensive force was used or threatened was in the process of unlawfully and forcefully entering, or had unlawfully and forcibly entered, a dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle, or if that person had removed or was attempting to remove another against that person’s will from the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle; and
(b) The person who uses or threatens to use defensive force knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry or unlawful and forcible act was occurring or had occurred.
(3) The presumption set forth in subsection (2) does not apply if:
(a) The person against whom the defensive force is used or threatened has the right to be in or is a lawful resident of the dwelling, residence, or vehicle, such as an owner, lessee, or titleholder, and there is not an injunction for protection from domestic violence or a written pretrial supervision order of no contact against that person; or
(b) The person or persons sought to be removed is a child or grandchild, or is otherwise in the lawful custody or under the lawful guardianship of, the person against whom the defensive force is used or threatened; or
(c) The person who uses or threatens to use defensive force is engaged in a criminal activity or is using the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle to further a criminal activity; or
(d) The person against whom the defensive force is used or threatened is a law enforcement officer, as defined in s. 943.10(14), who enters or attempts to enter a dwelling, residence, or vehicle in the performance of his or her official duties and the officer identified himself or herself in accordance with any applicable law or the person using or threatening to use force knew or reasonably should have known that the person entering or attempting to enter was a law enforcement officer.
(4) A person who unlawfully and by force enters or attempts to enter a person’s dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle is presumed to be doing so with the intent to commit an unlawful act involving force or violence.
(5) As used in this section, the term:
(a) “Dwelling” means a building or conveyance of any kind, including any attached porch, whether the building or conveyance is temporary or permanent, mobile or immobile, which has a roof over it, including a tent, and is designed to be occupied by people lodging therein at night.
(b) “Residence” means a dwelling in which a person resides either temporarily or permanently or is visiting as an invited guest.
(c) “Vehicle” means a conveyance of any kind, whether or not motorized, which is designed to transport people or property.
History.—s. 1, ch. 2005-27; s. 4, ch. 2014-195; s. 1, ch. 2017-77.

It’s hard for me to feel sorry for these folks. They support the people trying to harm them and their property. They support the local DA that’s trying to put them in jail. Doesn’t look like they are getting much help from their liberal neighbors either. Hasbeen

I would bet YOUR last dollar the McCloskey's employed 100's of local tradesmen rebuilding their home. All of the tradesmen are probably good people. You need to own your jealousy.

Say what you want but he proved his point and the anarchists left the area. Case closed.

kwg

How does that make them “good people”? What ever help they hired wasn’t due to charity for the workers. It was because it would benefit them.

If any one here has ever watched the movie “ A clockwork Orange” they’ll understand the reference I’m making. You’re seeing it played out today in real life. These situations are bizarre.

You need to own the horse shixt you're shoveling. Good for them if they did. They look more like people who would employ illegals though and not pay them jack shixt. I have nothing against rich folks for being rich. The McCloskey's have an awesome house. It's not what I'd want even if I won the lottery though. Just not my thing, but I can appreciate it for what it is. They have a right IMO, to protect it and themselves. Any "duty to retreat" state is insane IMO. IMO they did nothing wrong. They're part and parcel of the system that would prosecute most of the people here down to their last dollar though.

They used the "justice" system to make the money it took to build that mansion in that gated community- - - - -now that same system not only refuses to help them defend it, their good buddy the DA is about to bend them over a barrel for defending themselves. Karma's a Beeyotch! I'll bet their homeowners' insurance probably has a "riot or insurrection" exemption clause, also! Lock and load, folks- - - - - -you're on your own! Mama better upgrade from that little peashooter she was carrying to a long-magazine Remington 870 or a Mossberg 500!

I think I fall on the side of I don't care what they did to get their money, they used their second amendment rights and should not have to pay thousands of dollars in legal fees from an over zealous city prosecutor using her position as a chance to harass law abiding citizens she doesn't like.

I support the idea there should be no charges, no investigation and that I should not have to wait for someone to kick my door down before I can consider them a threat to me.

You can’t nuance your way out of this one. “Time to Walk the Talk”

I support that as the law of the land and furthermore support no dual tier justice system. People like the McCloskeys represent a lot of what we're trying to do away with by supporting Trump.

F u ck off pissant.

They're BLM supporters ? If so fuuck em. It's too bad they weren't killed and their house burned to the ground.