I heard the news that a couple pointed guns at protesters in St. Louis, but I found it was mistranslated into Japanese....
807704
@keage This is the local coverage: https://outline.com/xbdBBJ ridiculous.
807730
@33MHz Any rights Krewson may have had in waving a gun to defend her home are cancelled out with leaking personal information of citisens sans consent on a public broadcast. That’s wildly inappropriate and grounds for a beefy lawsuit. Just my 2c.
/@keage
808446
@kabuku just point of clarification, Krewson didn't make her presence known to the protestors that day. The conflict was when they entered the private street, a neighbor came out with guns and told them to leave.
808454
@kabuku appears the protestors told them to put their guns away, and walked past. The neighbors waved the guns in their faces, pointed them at them, yelled to get out a bit.
808455
@33MHz gotcha. I was under the mistaken impression that Krewson was out there channeling Rambo or something. :P
808458
@Kabuku @33MHz now I am under the opinion that our Elected officials shouldn’t live on private streets for this very reason. Nothing screams elite more than private neighborhood
808533
@j_r_snook i was sort of alluding to this earlier with my question because I agree. I understand public officials sometimes have inherent danger involved in their constituencies, but mansions in gated communities is just taxpayer bilking IMO.
/@33MHz
808535
@keage I have several acquaintances that were at the protest. They said it was surreal. The couple are lawyers who have a small firm here.
807760
@Wife Thanks for giving me additional informations. These lawyers should know that pointing guns can easily escalate things. // @33MHz
808106
@keage the street was private property and the mob made threats against the owners and their dog. The law is on the couple’s side
808335
@j_r_snook @keage "private street" doesn't mean people can't walk in. The owners made threats too. I don't think you can point a gun at people without repercussions, if there's public pressure.
808338
@33MHz @keage that’s the definition of private; you can’t. If the protest were on the public street one over, it would be a different story. But legally in this case there’s no difference between the street, lawn or inside of the house.
808348
@j_r_snook afaik a single person can't prevent people using a private road like this. "A private road can be used by the general public and is open to all who wish to use it, but it primarily benefits those at whose request it was established."
808355
@j_r_snook Think: Grace & Peace is on a private street, and the tenants across from it illegally weld the gate shut to prevent homeless accessing the church.
808357
@j_r_snook though I'm not sure about the technical here.. Like, is gated community diff from private road? eh? But regardless, even on your own property you can probably get in trouble with the law for pointing guns at people.
808359
@33MHz yeah I think G&P have fought that under the basis that Clara is a public road with no accessibility from Delmar foot traffic-wise.
808372
@j_r_snook another: all those kids trick-or-treating in Luke's neighborhood. Someone standing out there with a gun wouldn't have a leg to stand on saying they can't trick-or-treat there.
808373
@33MHz So if protesters came down Clara; those homeowners would be in the wrong for brandishing weapons (note the word brandish. Open carry is legal in Missouri)
808374
@j_r_snook Depends what they do with those guns.
808377
@j_r_snook "Exhibits, in the presence of one or more persons, any weapon readily capable of lethal use in an angry or threatening manner"
808380
@33MHz Missouri also has stand your ground laws. That means the defendant is not obligated to retreat before using deadly force, especially on private property.
808384
@j_r_snook not at play; no one used deadly force.
808385
@j_r_snook afaik protestors weren't on their property.
808387
@j_r_snook but I'm not sure it would matter, because of the above.
808389
@33MHz Missouri might not require you to give warning before you use deadly force either; but the couple clearly did so I think they got all of their bases covered
808388
@j_r_snook they didn't use deadly force, and deadly force wasn't warranted. There was no threat.
808390
808399
@j_r_snook Being allowed to use your weapon to defend yourself in fear of your life doesn't allow you to threaten people. It is just as likely to go the other way.
808404
@33MHz state of emotion might be irrelevant under Missouri Castle doctrine. The jury will decide
808410
@j_r_snook They were angry. They weren't scared.
808405
@33MHz castle doctrine can be used on trespassing. Also trespassing individuals of 100-500 could be seen as a threat.
808403
@j_r_snook But ofc it goes both ways. What did the protestors do? Who knows.
808360
808441
cookie jar (l)

@j_r_snook Where I used to live, residential alleys are considered private if the city did not establish them. However, public waste management, LEOs, and other public service vehicles travel on them …

Read on Longpo.st

@33MHz @keage public repercussion is already happening. Gardner will most likely try to indite them on a grand jury
808356