Gun rights

At RNC, St. Louis Couple Rips Democrats: No One in Mob Charged — Just us

Patricia and Mark McCloskey, the St. Louis couple menaced at their home by a massive mob of trespassing Black Lives Matter protesters, issued a stark warning at Monday night’s Republican National Convention about what life under Democrat rule look like if Joe Biden becomes president. Here is a partial transcript: PATRICIA MCCLOSKEY: What you saw happen to us could just as easily happen to any of you who are watching from quiet neighborhoods around our country, and that’s what we want to speak to you about tonight. MARK MCCLOSKEY: Whether it’s defunding the police, ending cash bail so criminals can be released back out on the streets the same day to riot again, or encouraging anarchy on our streets, it seems as if Democrats no longer view the government’s job as protecting honest citizens from criminals, but rather protecting criminals from honest citizens. Not a single person in the out-of-control mob you saw at our house was charged with a crime. But you know who was? We were. They’ve actually charged us with a felony for daring to defend our home. On top of that, consider this: The liberal activist leading a mob to our neighborhood stood outside of our home with a bullhorn screaming, “You can’t stop the revolution!” Just weeks later, that same activist won the Democrat nomination to hold a seat in the U.S. House of Representatives. The radicals are not content just marching in the streets. They want to walk the halls of Congress. They want power. This is Joe Biden’s party. These are the people who will be in charge. Patricia then warns about the changes Biden has promised to make that will destroy peaceful and safe suburbs: PATRICIA MCCLOSKEY: They’re not satisfied with spreading the chaos and violence in our communities. They want to abolish the suburbs all-together by ending single-family home zoning. This forced rezoning would bring crime, lawlessness and low-quality apartments into thriving suburban neighborhoods. President Trump smartly ended this government overreach, but Joe Biden wants to bring it back. The couple became somewhat famous in late June when video was released on social media of them standing in front of their house holding firearms. Patricia held a handgun. Mark held a semi-automatic rifle. While the mob of about a hundred taunted and threatened them with murder and rape, the couple warned the hostile group they were trespassing — which they were. Worse still, the mob broke down a security gate to gain access to the private road in front of the McCloskey’s Renaissance palazzo-style residence, a place of pride for the two attorneys, who spent years and untold amounts of money restoring and renovating it. Outnumbered 50-to-1, the McCloskeys had every right in the world to be out there brandishing guns. At the time, the left-wing terrorists in Antifa and Black Lives Matter were ravaging countless cities. Riots, assaults, arson, looting, and mayhem was widespread. It still is. “[W]hen I saw that mob coming through the gate with their rage and their anger, I thought that we would be overrun in a second,” Mark told the Fox News Channel’s Tucker Carlson just days after the incident. “By the time I was out there with my rifle, the people were 20 or 30 feet from my front wall. I’ve got a low wall that separates my house from my front yard. And so, I was literally afraid that within seconds they would surmount the wall, and come into the house, kill us, burn the house down and everything that I had worked for and struggled for for the last 32 years.” “I saw it all going up in flames, and my life destroyed in an instant,” he added. “And I did what I thought I had to do to protect my hearth, my home and my family.” McCloskey was invited to appear on CNNLOL just so he could be smeared as a racist. But that was only the beginning of the persecution faced by the McCloskeys, a very public persecution deliberately designed to intimidate all Americans. The McCloskeys were made examples of by the left in the hopes we would all be afraid to defend our homes and families from these demonic marauders, these socialist revolutionaries who are nothing less than the Democrats’ and the media’s own personal Brownshirts. Although the mob had trespassed and vandalized, had essentially broken and entered, and many of their faces were caught and broadcast on social media, St. Louis Circuit Attorney Kim Gardner, a Democrat, did not charge a single one them with anything. Instead, with the corporate media and the organized left cheering her on, she went after the McCloskeys. Gardner received and executed a search warrant of their home, which reportedly resulted in the confiscation of the firearms necessary to protect themselves should the mob return — which it did after Democrats and CNN painted a target on their backs. And then Gardner charged the couple with “felony unlawful use of a weapon.” “It is illegal to wave weapons in a threatening manner — that is unlawful in the city of St. Louis,” Gardner said in a statement. Apparently it is not illegal in St. Louis — or in any Democrat-run city — to break down doors and threaten people on their own property. The state attorney general, a Republican, stepped in and had the obscene, unlawful, politically-motivated charges dismissed. Click here to watch the McCloskeys speech:

 

Report: Nearly 5 Million First-Time Gun Buyers in 2020

The National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) reported that there have been nearly five million first time gun buyers thus far in 2020. On August 24, 2020, NSSF contrasted the number of National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) checks from January 1, 2020, through July, 2020, with the number of checks from January 1, 2019, through July 2019. After adjusting for checks that were tied to concealed carry permits or other ends, other than sales, they ascertained that the number of checks for sales was 12.1 million. NSSF then surveyed retailers and found that “40 percent of sales were conducted to purchasers who have never previously owned a firearm.” Forty percent of 12.1 million is 4,840,000, or nearly five million sales. NSSF senior vice president of general counsel Larry Keane commented on the new gun buyers, saying: This is a tectonic shift in the firearm and ammunition industry marketplace and complete transformation of today’s gun-owning community. These first-time buyers represent a group of people who, until now, were agnostic regarding firearm ownership. “That’s rapidly changing, and these Americans are taking hold of their God-given right to keep and bear arms and protect themselves and their loved ones,” Keane said.

This is great news!  Good for these folks exercising their 2nd Amendment rights to protect themselves and their families from all the craziness going on out there.  For more, click on the text above.

Missouri governor says pardon likely if St. Louis homeowners charged

Missouri Gov. Mike Parson says he is prepared to exercise his pardon powers if prosecutors bring criminal charges in the case of a St. Louis couple who brandished firearms at a group of protesters outside their home. Parson, a Republican, told a St. Louis radio station Friday that he thinks a pardon is “exactly what would happen” if Mark and Patricia McCloskey are hit with charges in the June 28 incident captured on video and seen by millions. He later added that based on what he knows about the case, “I don’t think they’re going to spend any time in jail.” The McCloskeys, who are both attorneys, displayed guns as Black Lives Matter protesters walked onto the private street where they live. The protesters were headed to the home of St. Louis Mayor Lyda Krewson. State prosecutor Kim Gardner launched an investigation, saying, “we will not tolerate the use of force against those exercising their First Amendment rights.” St. Louis police seized a rifle from the couple’s home pursuant to a search warrant. Parson told 97.1 FM the McCloskeys “did what they legally should do,” according to The Hill newspaper. “A mob does not have the right to charge your property,” he said, according to the paper. “They had every right to protect themselves.” Parson linked to the interview on Twitter and added the comment, “We will not allow law-abiding citizens to be targeted for exercising their constitutional rights.” Gardner has not disclosed whether she intends to file charges, but several leading Republicans — including President Trump, Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., and Parson — have criticized her for even deciding to investigate the couple. Parson cited Missouri’s “castle doctrine” law that justifies lethal force for those protecting their homes. Hawley is seeking a U.S. Department of Justice investigation of Gardner. A spokeswoman for Gardner declined comment, citing the ongoing investigation.

This is playing out exactly as we predicted.  This self-serving, anti-gun, pro-criminal, liberal Democrat St. Louis City prosecutor Kim Gardner (D) has bitten off more than she can chew.  Sure, she’s getting her 15 mins of fame, and adoration from the criminal community.  But, she’s failing at her job.  So, kudos to Gov. Mike Parson (R-MO) for basically saying he’ll pardon the McCloskeys if any charges are brought against them, and to Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) for asking the DOJ to investigate Ms. Gardner.  After all, she FAILED to do her job when cops arrested 35 rioters during the post-George Floyd riots in St. Louis.  She just let them all go, without bringing any charges….which is her flipping job!  Instead, she’s going after law-abiding gun owners who were rightfully exercising their 2nd Amendment rights in protecting their home from the mob.

Gregg Jarrett: Armed couple who defended St. Louis home when threatened shouldn’t be prosecuted

Malcolm X once observed: “I don’t even call it violence when it’s in self-defense; I call it intelligence.” A St. Louis couple — Mark and Patricia McCloskey — recently chose to arm themselves for self-defense after a mob entered their property and allegedly threatened their lives. They insist they were acting justifiably and … yes … intelligently. They were also acting lawfully — as long as they were in fear and reasonably believed that the force of weapons they displayed was necessary to defend themselves from an imminent threat of harm. That is the law. As a logical extension of the Second Amendment right to bear arms, Missouri embraces a well-known common-law principle called the Castle Doctrine. The state’s expansive interpretation permitted the McCloskeys to use physical force to defend themselves and their home while on their own property, without requiring them to first retreat. There is some case law in Missouri that suggests that the couple would not have been permitted to shoot solely in defense of their property. However, the McCloskeys neither fired their weapons nor claimed they were protecting merely their land. Indeed, they say that several members of the mob were armed and vowed to set their home ablaze and murder them. If true, the couple was completely entitled under the law to brandish (and potentially use) physical force in self-defense. Patricia McCloskey told Sean Hannity on his Fox News show: “[They said] they were going to kill us. They were going to come in there. They were going to burn down the house. They were going to be living in our house after I was dead.” The McCloskeys explained that they first called 911 but no police arrived. They were left to defend themselves. Mark McCloskey told KSDK-TV that “the only thing that stopped the crowd was my rifle.” How is it possible, then, that St. Louis Circuit Attorney Kimberly Gardner is investigating the McCloskeys but not the mob that allegedly knocked down a wrought-iron gate and knowingly trespassed (signs were posted) on the McCloskey’s property? This is backward. Repeated threats of physical harm uttered by the mob would constitute an assault under the law. Yet, Gardner appears to be poised to charge the homeowners with assault over their right to defend against an alleged assault. Legally, this is not just senseless, but insane. It is well-established that a person is allowed to threaten force if he or she is threatened. The perpetrators do not suddenly become helpless victims when they are averted. The idiocy of Gardner’s reasoning was explained to Fox News by Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt, who stated that Gardner “has a record of making politically motivated decisions not based on the law.” No kidding. Schmitt called Gardner’s record in prosecuting violent crime “abysmal.” As chief prosecutor, Gardner cares more about defending criminals than helping victims. To her, justice is an antiquated bromide. This should come as no surprise, since Gardner’s 2016 election was funded, in part, by considerable cash funneled through a Super PAC backed financially by far-left billionaire George Soros. Gardner’s tenure has been notable only for the slew of lawsuits against her for allegedly ignoring public records requests. (Gardner appears to believe that the public is not allowed to read public records.) Her low conviction rate in prosecutions has brought solace and smiles to criminals. In a statement, Gardner called the mob “peaceful protestors who were met by guns and a violent assault.” There are two inconvenient problems with her remarks. First, Gardner has completely ignored or dismissed the evidence of the trespass and the McCloskey’s chilling account of the mob’s threats of arson and murder. Second, by publicly declaring the couple guilty of assault, she has demolished any presumption of innocence for the accused. The Constitution protects free speech, assembly and peaceful protests. These are cherished rights. But the First Amendment does not give license to demonstrators to transform themselves into criminals who engage in acts of threatened violence or other lawless conduct. The riots, looting, assaults, and murders that have escalated out of control in many cities across America in the aftermath of the George Floyd tragedy are not an excuse under the law to victimize innocent people and destroy property. Late last week, authorities armed with a search warrant seized the rifle that Mark McCloskey was shown holding the night of June 28. His wife’s pistol was already in the possession of their attorney. The seizure, together with Gardner’s statement, leaves little doubt that the McCloskeys will soon be facing criminal charges by an elected prosecutor who seems determined to abuse her power by capitulating to the demands of the mob. Gardner can’t possibly prevail if charges are brought. But I suspect that is not her objective. Prosecution of the McCloskeys serves a political nostrum. It would conform perfectly to the prevailing orthodoxy of liberal outrage that no one is now permitted to question without being condemned and/or canceled. We are told we must all recognize and affirm that disagreement, however well-reasoned, is no longer tolerated. Ideological purity must be elevated, as dissent is suffocated, we are told. The civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr. was a legendary proponent of nonviolence. But he was not an absolutist. King well understood the moral and legal necessity of self-defense in a society that is not always civilized. King made this clear when he wrote: “The principle of self-defense, even involving weapons and bloodshed, has never been condemned, even by Gandhi.” Kimberly Gardner is not condemning self-defense as much as she is canceling it for purely political reasons driven by self-interest and self-promotion. She has no business being a government prosecutor if she harbors such contempt for the law.

Agreed 100%!!  Thanks to Gregg Jarrett for that spot-on legal analysis.  Gregg is a former defense attorney and adjunct law professor. He is the author of the No. 1 New York Times best-selling book “The Russia Hoax: The Illicit Scheme to Clear Hillary Clinton and Frame Donald Trump.” His latest book is the New York Times bestseller “Witch Hunt: The Story of the Greatest Mass Delusion in American Political History“

Trump may intervene in case of St. Louis couple wielding guns at protesters, Missouri governor said

The governor of Missouri says President Trump has promised to “do everything he could within his powers” to shield a St. Louis couple who wielded guns at protesters in their gated community from prosecution, even as an attorney for the client says charges are imminent. Gov. Mike Parson said he spoke to Trump Tuesday and was reassured that the president– who previously has retweeted a photo of the couple, Mark and Patricia McCloskey holding up guns in front of their house in the June 28 incident–“understands the situation in Missouri.” “He understands the situation in St. Louis and how out of control it is for a prosecutor to let violent criminals off and not do their job and try to attack law-abiding citizens,” Parson said at a press conference. “The conversation I had with the President, said that he would do everything he could within his powers to help with this situation,” Parson added. Parson and Trump’s conversation comes days after police served a search warrant at the McCloskey’s home in the upscale Central West End neighborhood of St. Louis, in the same area where the city’s Democratic mayor, Lyda Krewson, lives. Nearly 500 protesters marching for racial equality and against police brutality were headed towards Krewson’s residence during the June 28 incident, after she read off the names and addresses of individuals petitioning to defund the police. Mark and Patricia McCloskey came out of their house, brandished their guns, and demanded the protesters leave because they were trespassing. The couple later told Fox News’ Sean Hannity that they were fearful that the protesters would “kill us” and “burn down the house.” Police seized the rifle that Mark was holding in the now-viral video of the incident, while a handgun that Patricia was holding was turned over to St. Louis Police Saturday by the couple’s attorney Albert Watkins. The handgun had been in Watkins’s possession as evidence that it was inoperable when she pointed it at protesters “in defense of themselves and their home at [the] time of the march,” Watkins told Fox News. Watkins says he anticipates state charges against the couple “as early as today,” he said on Wednesday, but views Trump’s interest in the case as a positive. “The President has been restrained to date and has been kept up to date in virtually real time,” Watkins said, “His support behind the scenes was vital to permitting local police to step back from prior directives to be ‘hands off’ protesters. “The support of the Executive Office appears to have motivated The Governor to garner a heightened degree of appreciation for implications and rights at risk in this situation,” Watkins said. Parson shared an article about the McCloskeys on Facebook Tuesday with the caption “Missourians have the right to protect their homes.” In a separate post, Parson lambasted city prosecutors, saying it’s “appalling” that they are “targeting the McCloskey’s for defending their home.”

Exactly! And well said, Governor.  This is what happens when you have anti-gun, liberal Democrat nazis like this local St. Louis Circuit Attorney Kim Gardner (D) in power.  They go after law-abiding gun owners, like the McCloskeys, who are just trying to protect their family and their home.  Instead, Ms. Gardner should be going after these protestors who, by contrast, BROKE the law and jumped the gate (almost tore it down) of this gated community and harassed homeowners, etc.  But, don’t hold your breath, folks.  This is the same city attorney who, after the riots in St. Louis following the George Floyd death, released the 35 or so rioters.  The cops arrested them for violence and vandalism, etc..and she just turned them loose.  In case you’re wondering..  Yes, she’s a black, Democrat female.  We’ll let you decide if that’s relevant in today’s racially charged environment.

Intrusion Suspect Shot Dead While Allegedly Trying to Enter Home

An intrusion suspect who allegedly tried to make entry into a Springfield, Missouri, home Friday night died after being shot by the homeowner. Ozarks First reports that the incident occurred around 11:00 p.m. Friday night. Springfield Police Lieutenant Chad McIntyre indicates that the suspect was allegedly breaking into the home when he was shot. KY3 identified the deceased suspect as 36-year-old Kenneth L. Clay. He was shot by homeowner David R. Jones, who says Clay allegedly shot first, striking him in the foot. Jones then returned fire, killing Clay.

Yet another great example of the need to own a firearm!

Gun sales surge 80% in May, says research firm

Gun sales surged in May as shops reported an uptick in interest and demand amid national protests after the Memorial Day killing of George Floyd and as the COVID-19 pandemic wreaked havoc and stoke fear across the country. “Almost, you couldn’t even keep up with it. That’s how crazy it was,” said Joe Hawk, owner of Guns & Roses in New Jersey. “After Memorial Day, it spiked again. It just went crazy again.” Small Arms Analytics & Forecasting, a private research firm, estimated that more than 1.7 million guns were sold in May, an 80% jump from May 2019. “Yet again, firearms sales have surged in unprecedented ways,” said Jurgen Brauer, the group’s chief economist. The stock prices for several gunmaking companies, including Sturm, Ruger & Co., jumped Monday. Larry Hyatt, owner of Hyatt Guns in Charlotte, North Carolina, said the gun demand prompted by COVID-19 was already straining suppliers. “Then you have this looting and rioting causing another demand, and it’s really putting pressure on inventory,” Mr. Hyatt said. Gun sales typically increase during presidential election years and during periods of national unrest, including after mass shootings, but Mr. Hyatt said the confluence of factors is unique.

Indeed..  For more, click on the text above.

Florida man shoots, kills home intruder who was attacking his wife, police say

A Florida man in his 70s fatally shot a home intruder who busted through the glass front door and began attacking his wife on Tuesday, investigators said. Deputies arrived at the Panama City home around 6:05 a.m. and found 31-year-old Nathan Jerrell Edwards laying on the floor dead and a handgun on the counter, the Bay County Sheriff’s Office said. “The husband stated he felt he could not physically stop the intruder, so he went upstairs to get his firearm,” the sheriff’s office said. “He shot the firearm multiple times, ending the threat.” The husband, whom deputies did not name, said he was standing outside when Edwards walked up to his driveway and approached him in a threatening manner. Witnesses told deputies that Edwards was “acting erratically,” screaming and swearing. He went into his home through the garage to get away from Edwards, according to deputies, but Edwards followed and pounded on the door to the house. He shattered the large glass panel in the front door and entered the house. Edwards then knocked the man’s wife to the floor, got on top of her and was beating her, the husband told deputies. The husband said he shot Edwards, who was pronounced dead at the scene. The man’s wife was treated at a local hospital for her injuries. Edwards, who was from Georgia, was staying nearby in a short-term rental residence.

Just another story showing the importance of owning a firearm for personal protection.  This poor man was no match for the younger thug beating his wife.  And, if he had called 911, the cops wouldn’t have made it in time.  So, he did what he had to do, and earned the praise of the local sheriff, as well he should.

Appeals court reinstates California law requiring background checks for ammo purchases

A federal appeals court reinstated a California background-check requirement for ammunition purchases this week after another court had deemed the law unconstitutional and a violation of the Second Amendment. U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez in San Diego called the regulations “onerous and convoluted,” but the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco disagreed and granted the state’s request to stay the order, according to the National Rifle Association (NRA). “This means that the same restrictions that have been previously in effect regarding ammunition in California are back for the time being,” the NRA said in a statement. California became the first state in the U.S. to require background checks for ammunition purchases when the law took effect in July 2019. Ammunition sales jumped 300 percent last June before the regulations took effect. Voters originally approved the measure in 2016. Benitez had ruled in favor of the California Rifle & Pistol Association, which asked him to halt the background checks with a preliminary injunction. “The experiment has been tried. The casualties have been counted. California’s new ammunition background-check law misfires and the Second Amendment rights of California citizens have been gravely injured,” Benitez wrote in his 120-page opinion.

Federal judge tosses California law requiring background checks for ammunition

A federal judge blocked a California gun law on Thursday that required people to undergo a background check before purchasing ammunition. U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez in San Diego called the regulations “onerous and convoluted,” adding that they violate a citizen’s Second Amendment rights, the Associated Press reported. Benitez ruled in favor of the California Rifle & Pistol Association, which had asked him to halt the background checks with a preliminary injunction. “The experiment has been tried. The casualties have been counted. California’s new ammunition background check law misfires and the Second Amendment rights of California citizens have been gravely injured,” Benitez wrote in his 120-page opinion. “Criminals, tyrants, and terrorists don’t do background checks,” he added. “The background check experiment defies common sense while unduly and severely burdening the Second Amendment rights of every responsible, gun-owning citizen desiring to lawfully buy ammunition.” Benitez reportedly claimed the law blocked legitimate sales to law-abiding citizens, about 16 percent of the time. He also ruled that California’s ban on importing ammo from outside the state violates federal interstate commerce laws. California became the first state in the country to require background checks for ammo purchases when the law took effect back in July. Ammunition sales jumped 300 percent in June before the regulations took effect. Voters originally approved the measure back in 2016. The state attorney general’s office told the AP it is reviewing the decision but did not immediately say if it would appeal the decision or not.

Kudo to Judge Benitez for this outstanding decision.  It’s a HUGE victory for law-abiding gun owners in California.  The whole background check for purchasing ammo is beyond ridiculous on so many levels.  Excellent!!     🙂