Leader

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Why did St Louis PD take the Mckloskeys AR

Collapse

300x250 Mobile

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Why did St Louis PD take the Mckloskeys AR

    WTH is going on down there in St Louis. A lot of the left already hate the police. Taking a firearm away from people defending themselves?

    Want to get the right to start hating the police?

  • #2
    Why is everybody so silent on this topic? It's a relevant discussion to be having right now... it's right up there with de-fund the police, stand down orders, and everything else going on. If you can't defend the public, which you obviously can't, people need to defend themselves and they can't do that if you are going to disarm them every time they do.

    Why do I carry a gun? Because I can't throw rocks at 1300 FPS.

    Comment


    • #3
      Talk to the elected DA. Talk to the citizens who allowed Red
      Flag laws. Talk to the judge.
      Now go home and get your shine box!

      Comment


      • #4
        You know, at some point you have to take responsibility for executing those orders. "I was just doing my job" has been used by many over the years... and it was wrong then as well as now. We'll see how this plays out in court but where will you draw the line?
        Why do I carry a gun? Because I can't throw rocks at 1300 FPS.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by ProLEOCiv View Post
          Why is everybody so silent on this topic? It's a relevant discussion to be having right now... it's right up there with de-fund the police, stand down orders, and everything else going on. If you can't defend the public, which you obviously can't, people need to defend themselves and they can't do that if you are going to disarm them every time they do.
          Originally posted by ProLEOCiv View Post
          You know, at some point you have to take responsibility for executing those orders. "I was just doing my job" has been used by many over the years... and it was wrong then as well as now. We'll see how this plays out in court but where will you draw the line?
          YOU have and WE have absolutely no idea what information and/or evidence the St Louis officers have that would make the apply for AND receive a search warrant from a JUDGE which allowed them to seize the weapon . The agency has given no indication WHY the did so.

          CCCSD was correct in telling you to ask the PEOPLE who have those answers.
          Since some people need to be told by notes in crayon .......Don't PM me with without prior permission. If you can't discuss the situation in the open forum ----it must not be that important

          My new word for the day is FOCUS, when someone irritates you tell them to FOCUS

          Comment


          • #6
            Not all the facts are out in the public about this so my assumptions are just assumptions, but.......

            It so far appears to be a DA driven enforcement action. The LOCAL law enforcement agency seems to appear to not have been involved in getting the warrant and the execution thereof. Meaning the local DA probably used their DA Investigators to conduct the seizure. DA Investigators work directly for the DA (meaning the DA is their boss) and not the county sheriff and or the local police department. Typically the DA is personally involved in the hiring and selecting of their DA Investigators. Loyal to the DA are the Investigators who get selected for those positions and you can infer whatever you would like in that comment.

            Why was only the AR seized? Not sure if that is correct but all the news articles I have read say only the AR was seized. If this is a case of the couple using firearms as an assault or intimidation or brandishing then all their weapons should have been seized. Especially the two weapons that were used in the "assault" (handgun and AR).

            When the rule of law breaks down just as we are seeing in this country then you will see this type of behavior over and over, which eventually leads to anarchy. Because ultimately the police will be in fear of doing anything because what was law one day is politically incorrect today and now will get the officer arrested and charged (think the Rayshard Brooks case).

            Don't blame the police on this case. Even if it was the local police, we must adhere to a judge's order, it is required. Thus one of many reasons we are given qualified immunity, example would be, if we were ordered to execute a flawed order that later is discovered had no basis for an enforcement action, we would be immune. Baring illegal use of force, an officer has to treat a judge's order as "God's word."

            Bottom line, there maybe more to the story than what we are hearing about. Maybe the couple illegally owned the firearm and that is why only the AR was seized. Also, it may not have been the locals who conducted the execution of the warrant. And a judge issued an order and it must be adhered to. That is why we have a right to defend our selves in a court setting with a jury. If anything was done unconstitutionally then it will be discovered most likely in the court setting. It sucks, but sometimes cases go to trial that never should have started in the first place.

            Comment


            • Iowa #1603
              Iowa #1603 commented
              Editing a comment
              I read that they had given the handgun to their lawyer. The lawyer denies he has the weapon.

          • #7
            Another thing to think about and CCCSD touched on.

            The McKloskey's are died in the wool liberals. Your quintessential upper middle class white woke couple who votes for leftwing liberals and pats themselves on the back after doing so. And they think that doing so proves they are not racist and are doing their part in helping the social justice warrior. I would even bet everything I own, that they themselves voted for this DA that is now destroying their lives.

            Lesson now learned, this is what happens when you help these anarchists take over by voting for their Marxist agenda. They adhere to political correctness and not the constitution or rule of law. Meaning there is no standard and there is no foundation on which anyone can stand.

            This is why the people who voted for this agenda deserve to receive this type of outcome. So don't blame the cops, blame the people who voted this idiot DA into office. Which ironically was the McKloskey's. Do I feel bad for them? Yea, but you get what you vote for.

            Comment


            • #8
              According to KMOV in St. Louis, link below, "the search warrant was executed because Circuit Attorney Kim Gardner “sought weapons held by Mr. and Mrs. McCloskey during June 28, 2020 in defense of themselves and their home at time of the march.”

              The warrants being sought now are being sought by St. Louis Police Chief John Hayden. So, it's the St. Louis Police Department asking for warrants for a couple who, from everything we can see in videos, were defending themselves and their property.

              https://www.kmov.com/news/st-louis-p...6d141c507.html

              I agree with you on some other things you bring up, the Rayshard Brooks case is a complete pooch screw... from the officer's firing to the charges. I saw the video and if you turn and fire anything, whether it be a taser or gun, at a police officer, they can defend themselves.

              As for their political disposition, according to FEC filings, they donated to both D and R about equally until 2012 when the majority of their donations have been to Rs, including Trump. So, not your quintessential upper middle class woke couple. They even said in interviews that the police were apologetic and said they were just doing their jobs.

              Don't expect people to give you a pass because you are "Just doing your job." History doesn't bode well for people who use that line. If you are using that excuse to trample peoples' rights, and it remains to be seen if that's the case here, you should find another line of work.
              Last edited by ProLEOCiv; 07-14-2020, 10:39 PM.
              Why do I carry a gun? Because I can't throw rocks at 1300 FPS.

              Comment


              • #9
                Originally posted by ProLEOCiv View Post
                According to KMOV in St. Louis, link below, "the search warrant was executed because Circuit Attorney Kim Gardner “sought weapons held by Mr. and Mrs. McCloskey during June 28, 2020 in defense of themselves and their home at time of the march.”

                The warrants being sought now are being sought by St. Louis Police Chief John Hayden. So, it's the St. Louis Police Department asking for warrants for a couple who, from everything we can see in videos, were defending themselves and their property.

                https://www.kmov.com/news/st-louis-p...6d141c507.html

                I agree with you on some other things you bring up, the Rayshard Brooks case is a complete pooch screw... from the officer's firing to the charges. I saw the video and if you turn and fire anything, whether it be a taser or gun, at a police officer, they can defend themselves.

                As for their political disposition, according to FEC filings, they donated to both D and R about equally until 2012 when the majority of their donations have been to Rs, including Trump. So, not your quintessential upper middle class woke couple. They even said in interviews that the police were apologetic and said they were just doing their jobs.

                Don't expect people to give you a pass because you are "Just doing your job." History doesn't bode well for people who use that line. If you are using that excuse to trample peoples' rights, and it remains to be seen if that's the case here, you should find another line of work.
                Hey Clownshoes. You don’t come into MY House and tell me how to do MY job. You aren't “pro LE”, you’re just another self righteous ***** trying to convince everyone you are smarter than them when it’s obvious you aren’t.

                Here’s a Shinebox for you.
                Last edited by CCCSD; 07-15-2020, 02:12 PM.
                Now go home and get your shine box!

                Comment


                • #10
                  Actually, I am very Pro LE... just like I'm very Pro 2A and I lean conservative on many things. I do volunteer work with my local PD as well but being Pro LE doesn't mean not criticizing things I think are wrong or can be improved.
                  Why do I carry a gun? Because I can't throw rocks at 1300 FPS.

                  Comment


                  • #11
                    Originally posted by ProLEOCiv View Post
                    According to KMOV in St. Louis, link below, "the search warrant was executed because Circuit Attorney Kim Gardner “sought weapons held by Mr. and Mrs. McCloskey during June 28, 2020 in defense of themselves and their home at time of the march.”

                    The warrants being sought now are being sought by St. Louis Police Chief John Hayden. So, it's the St. Louis Police Department asking for warrants for a couple who, from everything we can see in videos, were defending themselves and their property.

                    https://www.kmov.com/news/st-louis-p...6d141c507.html

                    I agree with you on some other things you bring up, the Rayshard Brooks case is a complete pooch screw... from the officer's firing to the charges. I saw the video and if you turn and fire anything, whether it be a taser or gun, at a police officer, they can defend themselves.

                    As for their political disposition, according to FEC filings, they donated to both D and R about equally until 2012 when the majority of their donations have been to Rs, including Trump. So, not your quintessential upper middle class woke couple. They even said in interviews that the police were apologetic and said they were just doing their jobs.

                    Don't expect people to give you a pass because you are "Just doing your job." History doesn't bode well for people who use that line. If you are using that excuse to trample peoples' rights, and it remains to be seen if that's the case here, you should find another line of work.
                    I think you need to change your screen name............a PRO LEO Civ you are NOT


                    Originally posted by ProLEOCiv View Post
                    Actually, I am very Pro LE... just like I'm very Pro 2A and I lean conservative on many things. I do volunteer work with my local PD as well but being Pro LE doesn't mean not criticizing things I think are wrong or can be improved.
                    Yea Ok................If you say so.


                    Like I said earlier..............If you want to know the answer to your original question you need to ask the people who were involved not a bunch of random people who MIGHT or MIGHT NOT be police officers at some place far removed from the incident.

                    And you don't need to preach to people who actually do the job.......and actually know what procedure are.
                    Last edited by Iowa #1603; 07-15-2020, 12:15 PM.
                    Since some people need to be told by notes in crayon .......Don't PM me with without prior permission. If you can't discuss the situation in the open forum ----it must not be that important

                    My new word for the day is FOCUS, when someone irritates you tell them to FOCUS

                    Comment


                    • #12
                      Originally posted by ProLEOCiv View Post
                      According to KMOV in St. Louis, link below, "the search warrant was executed because Circuit Attorney Kim Gardner “sought weapons held by Mr. and Mrs. McCloskey during June 28, 2020 in defense of themselves and their home at time of the march.”

                      The warrants being sought now are being sought by St. Louis Police Chief John Hayden. So, it's the St. Louis Police Department asking for warrants for a couple who, from everything we can see in videos, were defending themselves and their property.

                      https://www.kmov.com/news/st-louis-p...6d141c507.html

                      I agree with you on some other things you bring up, the Rayshard Brooks case is a complete pooch screw... from the officer's firing to the charges. I saw the video and if you turn and fire anything, whether it be a taser or gun, at a police officer, they can defend themselves.

                      As for their political disposition, according to FEC filings, they donated to both D and R about equally until 2012 when the majority of their donations have been to Rs, including Trump. So, not your quintessential upper middle class woke couple. They even said in interviews that the police were apologetic and said they were just doing their jobs.

                      Don't expect people to give you a pass because you are "Just doing your job." History doesn't bode well for people who use that line. If you are using that excuse to trample peoples' rights, and it remains to be seen if that's the case here, you should find another line of work.
                      So according to the article in which you linked to, the search warrants were done because of the decree given by the Circuit Attorney Kim Gardner. The chief got involved because he had to.

                      So on its face this case looks to be pretty awful for protecting one's self and property. However, not all the facts are out on this and the reasoning for the seizures. So try and withhold judgement until we know everything is my best rebuke to your critique on the officers involved.

                      Case in point, was the whole narrative that immediately came out about the McKloskey's being democrats and supporting the Black Lives Matter movement. I just read an article that came out today, where Mr. McKloskey totally shot that notion down and admitted to being a Republican. So, not all the facts are out and some of the information out is flawed.

                      Comment


                      • #13
                        That is why I posted the article, there was additional information there and we all agree that not all information is out there. In the interest of full disclosure, I have family that are retired LEOs and they have been pretty vocal about this and many other current events. I do understand that most LEOs are all about protecting and serving... and that means protecting rights.

                        I'm also looking at this through the lens of my military training... we were always taught that you can disobey an illegal order. What I hope not to see is another post-Katrina pooch screw with LEOs and National Guard violating peoples' 2A rights. If people ever needed the ability to defend themselves, it's now.
                        Why do I carry a gun? Because I can't throw rocks at 1300 FPS.

                        Comment


                        • #14
                          Blah blah blah...I’m a vet...blah blah...I like cops...blah...blah...Clownshoes.
                          Last edited by CCCSD; 07-15-2020, 02:13 PM.
                          Now go home and get your shine box!

                          Comment


                          • FNG41YR
                            FNG41YR commented
                            Editing a comment
                            Being your typical self as usual.

                          • CCCSD
                            CCCSD commented
                            Editing a comment
                            Children need not reply.

                          • retired1995
                            retired1995 commented
                            Editing a comment
                            I agree, children need not apply. There is no reason for children to learn anything except how to insult anyone who disagrees with their opinions and attack others rather than engage in productive dialogue. That way they can remain children forever, displaying rude and arrogant behavior at every opportunity.

                            I think only one shine box will be needed. The wannabe shock jock comedian suffering under delusions of adequacy can use that for a much needed career change.

                        • #15
                          Originally posted by ProLEOCiv View Post
                          That is why I posted the article, there was additional information there and we all agree that not all information is out there. In the interest of full disclosure, I have family that are retired LEOs and they have been pretty vocal about this and many other current events. I do understand that most LEOs are all about protecting and serving... and that means protecting rights.

                          I'm also looking at this through the lens of my military training... we were always taught that you can disobey an illegal order. What I hope not to see is another post-Katrina pooch screw with LEOs and National Guard violating peoples' 2A rights. If people ever needed the ability to defend themselves, it's now.
                          What indication is there that their rights were violated? Just because a firearm was seized in the course of a criminal investigation does not mean that their 2nd Amendment rights are being violated.

                          Let's not forget the 4th Amendment..."The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized." There WAS a search warrant issued, so we can assume (and this is all assumption, since nobody here, including you, have any first-hand information about the investigation, search warrant, or potential legal proceedings against them) that there was probable cause, support by oath or affirmation, provided to the issuing judge.

                          If a judge signs a search warrant, then serving that search warrant is not an "illegal order." Our system includes separation of powers for a reason and LE's role in that is to EXECUTE the law (which is why we are part of the EXECUTIVE branch of the government). If the prosecutor in this case lied to a judge to get that search warrant, then they should be held responsible for that...but that's not the fault of the officers who executed the warrant. When one branch decides to infringe upon the powers of the other branches, the system falls apart...it either all works or none of it does.
                          "He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you."
                          -Friedrich Nietzsche

                          Comment

                          MR300x250 Tablet

                          Collapse

                          What's Going On

                          Collapse

                          There are currently 5635 users online. 360 members and 5275 guests.

                          Most users ever online was 26,947 at 07:36 PM on 12-29-2019.

                          Welcome Ad

                          Collapse
                          Working...
                          X