St. Louis Couple Draws Weapons To Protect Home: ‘We Were All Alone Facing an Angry Mob’
“A mob of at least 100 smashed through the historic wrought iron gates of Portland Place, destroying them, rushed towards my home where my family was having dinner outside and put us in fear of our lives.”
A couple in St. Louis made the rounds on social media on Sunday night after video showed them drawing their guns on a mob of protesters heading to Mayor Lyda Krewson’s home.
Further context shows that the protesters were trespassing on a private street when the St. Louis couple pulled out their guns to defend their home
pic.twitter.com/RDRaGOydGW— Daily Caller (@DailyCaller) June 29, 2020
The protesters headed to Krewson’s house “to demand her resignation after she released names and addresses of residents who suggested defunding the police department.”
The man held the rifle while the woman held a smaller gun. Pictures show the woman pointing the gun at the protesters.
An armed couple came out of their house and pointed guns toward BLM protesters in the Central West End #KrewsonResign #CloseTheWorkhouse #DefundPolice pic.twitter.com/owD4WDGVCL
— Laurie Skrivan (@LaurieSkrivan) June 29, 2020
The protesters broke through the gated community on their way to Krewson’s house. From KMOV4:
The homeowner reached out to News 4 Monday morning saying he was havinf [sic] dinner with his family outside of his home when the crowd smashed through wrought iron gates on Portland Place.
“A mob of at least 100 smashed through the historic wrought iron gates of Portland Place, destroying them, rushed towards my home where my family was having dinner outside and put us in fear of our lives,” he said. “This is all private property. There are no public sidewalks or public streets. We were told that we would be killed, our home burned and our dog killed. We were all alone facing an angry mob.”
These people have every right to defend their property. But my dear friend Dana Loesch points out that if you have guns you need to know how to use them.
The wife has no trigger discipline and she’s holding the gun all wrong. Also, you do not point your weapon at a target unless you would shoot said target.
The best point Dana made is that the “one top responsibility when you’re armed is de-escalation.”
But Dana also mentioned that it’s “weak sauce to act like marching through residential neighborhoods isn’t an escalation of tactics we’ve seen the past month where daytime protests diminish into nighttime riots (and sometimes in broad daylight, too) with businesses looted and burned, people attacked, and threats of going to people’s homes — this all coupled with Democrats’s new ‘defund the police’ policy.”
Missouri recognizes the castle doctrine:
Physical (non-deadly) force is considered justified when a person reasonably believes it’s necessary to defend themselves or someone else from an unlawful use of force by someone else. It may also be used if a person believes it’s necessary to prevent someone from committing theft, tampering or property damage.
Deadly force may be justified under the law if a person reasonably believes it’s required to protect themselves or someone else from physical injury, death or forcible felony. It may also be used against someone who illegally enters a dwelling or vehicle.
That brings us to what are known as “stand your ground” and “castle doctrine” laws. These laws, which vary by state, detail when a person has a duty to retreat and when they’re legally allowed to stay and fight, even if leaving the situation is an option.
Each state has its own version of a castle doctrine. Missouri’s law:
Missouri law recognizes the castle doctrine. That means that if someone comes into your home with the intention of harming you or someone else, you have the legal right to stay and use deadly force to prevent an attack. However, in Missouri, people also have no duty to retreat from their vehicles, any property they own or anywhere they’re entitled to be.
There’s another situation in which a person may be legally within their rights to use force against someone to protect themselves or others. That’s if they can provide evidence that they were suffering from a psychological condition known as battered spouse syndrome. Long-term domestic violence victims sometimes develop battered spouse syndrome — also known as battered woman syndrome (BWS). They believe that they’re unable to leave their abuser. Sometimes they lash out physically because they think they have no other choice. In reality, they often don’t.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
“These people have every right to defend their property. But my dear friend Dana Loesch points out that if you have guns you need to know how to use them.”
Who cares? We are no longer living in a world where we have the luxury of scolding people for improper firearm discipline. These people were being invaded by a violent mob as demonstrated by the fact that the mob broke down the gates to the subdivision.
I bet they call their magazines clips.
Maybe, and maybe this will convince them to go out and get some firearms training. But considering the circumstances I don’t think trigger discipline is the real problem here.
This is the next phase of the revolution. After taking away the ability of the police to defend you, now they will try and take away the ability of the people to protect themselves and their property. It’s part of the plan.
Given the situation, who in the world CARES?
I like clips that hold lots of bullets. 😉
clipazines
Magazines
Bullet holdin’ thingamajigs!
My thoughts exactly! God bless Dana, and yes, we all need to be continuously improving but using a public statement to in any way critisize americans exercising their rights is silly. Republicans have to do way better at messaging. We claim to support each other but then are first to criticize our own side for insignificant issues.
Pointing out the flaws in the response allows for others caught in similar circumstances to do better. Isn’t it better to be informed?
It is a distraction, and potentially invalidates what these people were experiencing. Instead of focusing on a violent mob people try to paint these people defending their home and family as the villians.
I think we should consider that just because she didn’t shoot doesn’t mean she wouldn’t have been justified in doing so. She may have been pointing the gun at protesters who were making threats. In which case, aiming at those she might have to shoot is perfectly reasonable. The fact that she did not may merely showed that the pointing got compliance from the mob, and that her gun handling (as flawed as it may have been) actually de-escalated the situation because it gained said compliance. Or she may have been justified in shooting but either couldn’t pull the trigger or was unsure of the rules concerning the use of lethal force.
Mobs are both violent and inherently unstable. They present a unique and volatile threat not posed by individuals nor by ordinary, peaceable large groups of people.
I would disagree… a “low ready” would be better. Pointing is problematic especially if the thing goes “boom”. If someone is specifically a danger then please lock on target and tell the thug to be somewhere else… with immediate cell phone call to cops.
They did well with calling 911. As for “peaceful” … sure… in the lexicon of the BLM. fortunately “castle doctrine” is in play and the local prosecutor needs to keep her “black privilege” in check.
No. Everyone has the right to arms and self-defense, but with that right comes the the responsibility to learn to use them safely and effectively — not to endanger anyone except those they intend to shoot. These people obviously hadn’t any understanding of the proper handling and use of arms, and were as much (if not more) of a threat to themselves and bystanders as to the thugs.
“you do not point your weapon at a target unless you would shoot said target.”
Clearly, they were prepared to shoot. And, pointing a gun is much more intimidating than just holding it. It kept the crowd moving and achieved the desired result.
The woman was handling that pistol like an idiot. She either has never been trained how to use one or was and didn’t care to remember the training. She is sweeping the muzzle all over the place, she has no control over it with one, loose and careless hand, it is the height of irresponsibility. If she was startled and a round had gone off, where the hell would it have gone?
I own firearms and I have never seen as much stupidity in my life as I have in the past few months.
If people do not want to be shot by this woman, then they can simply keep off her property and not threaten her. Blaming her for anything that followed would be blaming the wrong person.
Well, now that details about them have come out, they are just as much of the problem as the rioters are. They are liberal democrats that support the people we are against. And I mean ACTIVE liberal supports. They are eating their own.
The couple forgets that guns are not talismans. Still… it worked. Fortunately. The idea is to not only look like a hard target but be one.
She’s the mayor. Where were the police? Is she a “defund the police” mayor or something?
The woman in the picture is not the mayor. The crowd broke through the gate and marched down the private street to the mayor’s house. These people were just potential victims that lived along the street.
Okay, the article wasn’t that clear about that. But still, where were the police?
Probably protecting the Mayor’s house.
If that is so, then this was a good example for what I have been proposing regarding the effectiveness of a citizen show of arms in coordination with the police. In this case, they presented a deterrence channeling the mob to where the police might have been waiting for them.
Turns out this guy is a lawyer who specializes in suing the police. That may even be what he is yelling to the protestors?!?! If true, he is certainly not a high priority for the police.
Final word:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e9AQEHOZYB4
He called the police. They didn’t respond. In fact, they still haven’t responded even though threats have gone viral. He had to board up his downtown office too. Lots of Republican politicians sitting on their hands too.
That neighborhood needs to get organized. They certainly have the means.
More than likely the police (and the mayor) thought that the mob would respect the gates to the private subdivision. That’s why they put up gates in the first place instead of hiring guards. Besides, mobs never form or riot in their neighborhood. It’s unheard of. Mobs are supposed to stay in the ghetto and not disturb their betters.
I am confused by this story everywhere.
1) the mayor released (DOXed) the names, etc of the people who WANT to defund the police?
Am I reading that right? If so…
2) WHY are the protestors upset by knowing who is on their side?
Or are they upset that THEIR side is getting DOXed like they do to their opponents?
sidenote:
3) also – what did the female homeowner think her little pistol was going to do to anyone?
I can’t tell the caliber, but if it’s a 45 or a 9 mm, it can do a lot of damage. What I don’t see are extra magazines for the rifle or the pistol. Big mistake.
If you look at the man’s left pocket you can see the outline of a second 30 rnd mag. 60 rounds of 5.56 is enough to ruin a lot of folks’ day.
It’s #2: they’re upset that the mayor released the identifying information of the people wanting to defund the police.
It’s fine when leftists dox people who don’t agree with them, but HOW DARE anybody dox leftists? That’s an outrage!
As usual with the left, it’s one set of rules for them, and a different set for everybody else.
The pistol is a .380.
It’s a Bursa Thunder .380.
My wife bought the same gun. Single/double action.You need a really good squeeze on the first round to cock the hammer then its half cocked from there. My wife also better know better than to carry it with her finger on the trigger.
The blond in the pic looks like the idiot blonde from walking dead season 1.
I thought you were NOT supposed to go off half-cocked?
Really sloppy = dangerous gun handling there.
Really sloppy – dangerous “protesting” there. “Protestors” should respect the rights and safety of others, and not trespass or threat people. You have the right to peacefully assemble. Trespass and mob intimidation is not peaceful assembly.
Being “dangerous” is the point of a firearm. The presence of a firearm introduces a threat of lethal force that might otherwise not be interjected into a situation. This couple used firearms to project the threat they felt was needed to get compliance from the mob, and they got it without firing a shot (intentionally or inadvertently). They successfully de-escalated the situation and defended their lives, the lives of their family, and their property. It may not have been pretty, but it worked.
BTW, just heard that the local prosecutor, a black woman, intends to investigate and bring charges against the couple for their acts which “chill free speech rights.” News flash: Nobody has “free speech rights” on someone else’s property and “rights” don’t include breaking and entering into private property.
So he’s defending his home and family with an “assault” weapon. Technical foul!
The scariest thing I see is that pink shirt! Kinda hard to take him seriously. Now she on the other hand looks dangerous. The way she is waving that thing around, I would be concern, especially if I as a squirrel.
In the 1967 Detroit race riots, people got shot. I heard stories of people getting shot and never being investigated. (kinda like Chicago now).
“The 1967 Detroit Riots were among the most violent and destructive riots in U.S. history. By the time the bloodshed, burning and looting ended after five days, 43 people were dead, 342 injured, nearly 1,400 buildings had been burned and some 7,000 National Guard and U.S. Army troops had been called into service.”
https://www.history.com/topics/1960s/1967-detroit-riots
I have never owned a fire arm, but I am getting pressure to get a 20 gauge because it is something my wife and kids could handle. Originally, she did not want a gun in the house (because I could get shot by her), but times are changing.
I have actually purchase her wasp spray to carry in the car.
Need to line up training for the kids and wife.
I really think you should reconsider buying the 20 gauge shotgun.
I’ve always favored the pump action 12 gauge myself, especially the Mossberg with a pistol grip.
Thanks for the tip. My gun friends said that my daughter and wife, both at about 100 lbs, might have problems with a 12 gauge kick.
My wife is going full Prepper now. We are stocked up with 50 lbs of rice. Looks like I am going to be eating that for months.
We have decided to start having neighborhood meetings to address grouping and communications if things go bad. Looking in to ham radios and alternative travel sources if we lose gas sources. I am in hurricane area, so we can probably go for two weeks now without leaving the house.
12g Ammo availability is a good point. The risk of a 12-20 is too high though for buying both. Mossberg 12 has a hard kick and its heavy. Remington 20 is actually not bad. I bought one for my daughter to deer hunt (shes small). It’s also lighter easier to manage and the racking sound is the same volume. (The sound of a racking shotgun in the dark is scary as hell that should put a would be criminal off their nefarious intent)
Your not taking down a water buffalo. If they’re determined a poorly placed shot from a 20 guage will still remove limbs but wont penetrate walls with eough force to hurt someone on the other side.. I haven’t tested this though)
Oh.. a 12-20 I should explain.
If you accidentally put a 20guage shell in a 12 guage shotgun, it will slide into the barrel and plug it. If you then rack the shotgun and a 12 guage shell is next, when you fire, the shotgun will explode removing a useful amount of your body.
20 is fine. Nobody shoots with any useful degree of skill if they’re afraid of a gun which hurts to fire.
My advice would be a bit different: a shotgun is good, but .457 gauge is sufficient for home use. In most home situations, you really don’t want to kill the perp (who wants that on their conscience?), you just want him to go away without harm to you/yours.
A .457 won’t penetrate the walls of the house, particularly if you use birdshot or some small shot. It will hurt like hell for the perp.
Plus, a pump-action .457 makes a satisfying ‘snik-snak’ sound that in the dark will inform the perp that bad times are a’coming.
I don’t want to kill anyone, I just want them to go away. In the situation above, I’d wear my bright pink polo and have a .457 shotgun. Point made.
.457? You mean a 410 shotgun? Stupid. If you don’t want to “kill somebody”, then don’t get a gun. The legal premise behind self defense is you are in fear for your life or serious bodily injury. What people that advocate “shoot to wound” don’t understand is that if you say that, then YOU are guilty of assault, NOT the real perp. And if pulling the trigger on someone that might be threatening your life makes you hesitate, don’t have a gun. Because in that split second of indecision the perp will take the gun and use it on you. A 20 ga. with slugs or buckshot NOT BIRDSHOT is an adequate defensive weapon. But with mobs, maybe high on who knows what, you may have to shoot more than 1-2. And that is why a AR-15 with multiple 30+ round mags is preferable. And an AR doesn’t kick at all compared to a gauge. Good luck finding ammo for any of those choices. I would say have at least 200 rounds on hand. A box of 20 ain’t enough.
Don’t leave a live prep. A close family member made that error.
Don’t *ignore* a live perp. If you have shot them and stopped them, you should back off from them still be paying them attention, but under no circumstances should you shoot a disabled perp again. (Unless the perp becomes a lethal threat again, in which case we go back to the first case)
“Why did you shoot him 13 times?”
“He stopped being a threat while I was reloading.”
12 gauge 00 buck
Curious what people think of 9 MM rifles.
I don’t think I’d bother with a 9mm rifle in the proper use of that term. A carbine, however, is a good idea.
Now, you might have reasons to buy something else, but a carbine in the same caliber as your carry pistol, which can utilize the same mags in a pinch, has definite advantages. You can go with an AR-style or a lever-action pretty easily.
Ruger makes a nice pistol cartridge carbine.
Pricewise, they’re a bit more expensive than a shotgun. Defending yourself in court, they may be even more expensive (in my own opinion). Self-defense should be easier if you’ve grabbed your bird-hunting shotgun and put a load of #4 shot into an intruder rather than that Evil Black Rifle that some prosecutor can make out to be some sort of insidious murder weapon that you were stalking the poor intruder with. Generally, if you shoot somebody in the chest once with #4 shot at household range, they’re not going to be interested in much more other than how long the ambulance will take to get there.
00…. too much penetration. #1 is fine. 9mm over-penetrate also. An AR with 55 grain varmint loads is optimal. Bullets break up in wall board and do not over penetrate. The real downside is noise.. can be deafening. So… what ever you get.. electronic earmuffs are needed… protect hearing and amplifies sound for better hearing.
A 38 Special revolver… actually a small 357 mag loaded with 38 Special is a good starter handgun… easy to learn to use. Keep in bedside safe and make one room a safe room. Keep a set of house keys on ring with glow stick. If needed, activate and toss outside for cops to get to after 911 call for someone in house. Do not go out of safe room until cleared by cops.
I would go with the 12ga simply because there’s a lot more ammo for it – including specialty ammo (flares, pepper spray, bean bag rounds, etc.). But I understand about the recoil.
In your situation, I would perhaps get the 20ga and the 12ga, and spend some time teaching with the 20ga, and occasional shooting to get used to the 12ga. (Sort of like using a .22 for practice to get all the fundamentals down, but shooting some rounds through your carry gun, too, for specifics.)
Also consider with a 12 gauge the issue of over penetration — FWIW, from my research, #4 Buck is a good compromise for effectiveness with reduced over penetration risk.
Others advocate using an AR type with 223/556 — particularly if coupled with self-defense grade ammunition (Hornady Critical Defense).
A good compromise might be a pistol caliber carbine — Ruger carbine, CZ (Scorpion) and Beretta Storm are all considered good to excellent. Note though that there may actually be more over penetration risk than with an AR (using self-defense hollow point type ammo would greatly mitigate this risk, and be more appropriate for self-defense scenarios anyway).
Either of the latter two categories will have considerably less recoil than a 12 gauge, so be easier for smaller people (women / children) to operate.
My weapons are a 9 mm Ruger SR9 pistol and the PC 9 Ruger carbine. The magazines are interchangeable and the ammunition is the same, critical defense. My wife who will outshoot me on any day of the week, likes the Ruger mark III target in .22 cal and the Ruger 10-22 carbine. Both of the carbines are the breakdown models for ease of packing in their very short travel cases.
I suppose I mostly like having to purchase only 2 calibers than have multiple different calibers and not having enough of the one currently in my hand. Also, with the 9, the same magazine is a definate plus.
The first gun I purchased as a Ruger 10-22, had it for about 50 years.
My 12 year old grandson is wearing mens small clothing, and the little dipshit knocked it off the top of a china cabinet, down a flight of stairs, splitting the solid walnut stock a month or so ago. Magazines and am are locked up. I used a urethane glue to repair it.
The second gun was a 25 Browning. I got rid of it, decided it was pretty much useless, and got a 9MM. I also have a few shotguns.
Regarding 12G recoil, are there any aftermarket shock absorbing stocks made?
If you’re worried about over-penetration with a shotgun, look into shorty rounds. They are the smallest of shotgun rounds (in length), and intended for specialty rounds and for things like indoor defense. Most indoor defense (except maybe at these people’s house) takes place inside of 20 feet (7 yds), and shorty rounds pack enough punch to handle that range. But, you get the advantage (in a tube mag) of more rounds in the weapon, and overall less punch beyond that 20+ feet*.
(Do 20ga shotguns have regular and magnum rounds? Do they have shorties for 20ga?)
(* I don’t know what the precise effective range is, compared to regular rounds. I do know they’re for shorter range.)
If you’re going to get a rifle for self-defense, I’d recommend a suppressed 300 BLK if that’s legal in your state. You may not have time to get your hearing protection on in the heat of the moment.
“The scariest thing I see is that pink shirt!”
Always dress for the camera.
Ya know, on second thought, any chance this was a setup? You make a good point. I mean is this guy Thurston Howell IV?
12 ga; go big, or go home. I recommend the Remington 870 pump based on a quarter century of personal experience. I dispense 00 buck, but for crowds like this, a first attention-getter might be #4 shot, just to separate the sheep from the goats.
Don’t fear the “kick”. Practice will resolve that. I was “uncomfortable” when I approached the M-1 for the first time, having heard the “kick like a mule” tales. Once shoulder to stock, it wasn’t that bad… Same with 12 ga the first time.
But do practice, loading and unloading, not just shooting. Also learn tactics, and tailor them to your personal situation. Don’t let the main event be the first time you have to take action.
#4 is as deadly as buck close up if not more so. The number of wounds is daunting. At a distance it has more dispersal. So is good in that respect. As for recoil, 2 3/4 low recoil ammo can assist with that problem.
I recomend a Remington 870 Express 20g. Perfect size. Accurate too.
If you have time, consider going to a gun dealer who will allow you to try out various weapons before buying. Personally, I think either the 20ga or 12ga are perfect but take a certified training course. The problem with any rifle indoors is that they will likely pass through the attacker and maybe even the wall to hit whoever is in the next room. You don’t give up anything by choosing a shotgun over the AR15.
Get a good handgun too for really close quarters. The most likely home situation would require shooting from less than 10-12 feet away.
I use a CMMG converter bolt in my 556 AR15 to shoot 22LR. High velocity 36gr HP. Minimal risk of over-penetration. Minimal recoil/kick. Costed less than buying a whole new gun.
Just have to clean it more often. 22’s are a dirty ammo in general and will foul up a barrel pretty fast.
Very nice. It should also help hold down the price on your range days. Where did you get it and are they worth giving business to?
CMMG is the manufacturer. Delta Team Tactical is the retailer I ordered it from. They’re Utah-based and have some of the best prices I’ve seen on individual AR parts. Not a FFL dealer or distributor, though. Great for builders, not so great if you’re looking for out-of-the-box firearms.
The converter bolt retails for around $200 and comes with a 25rd Bravo mag.
Thank you! It’s on my wish list.
Wow, thanks for all the advice. We have a neighborhood meeting tomorrow. We are also working out communication issues too. If we loose power and phone service we still need to talk. Wife said we need a CB Radio. I laugh. Yes our age is showing. Looking at a ham/shortwave radio. They are really cheap, like $70. Next step is to get Ham Lic.
I have a Yaesu FT60 handheld which can scan bands and connect with anyone within line of sight. There are lots of repeater stations around here too for connecting at a distance but I don’t see a need. You can also create your own network with your own base station.
More important is to be organized within a plan contingent on specific situations. Good luck recruiting people to participate.
I think you’re actually better off getting a CB – everyone can operate it without a license, and your neighborhood is unlikely to be large enough to need the distance a shortwave can give you. They come in walkie-talkie-sized models, as well as going in vehicles or houses.
Now, if you’re talking about keeping in touch with communities on the other side of the county or state, then, yes, HAM is the way to go.
I was shooting a semi-auto 12 ga at 11, when I weighed less than 100lbs. Load with 2 3/4 shells (not 3″ mags) and take everyone trap shooting with it for practice and familiarity. The activity of shooting a moving target really reduces the perception of recoil.
The last thing you want to do with a shotgun, imho, is to shoot at fixed targets with it.
My advice to you is do not employ something that will just make your assailant angry. If you intend to use deadly force, know when you should employ it, and do so decisively. And also remember you must live with the consequences for the rest of your life, no matter which way it goes. So do not buy a firearm lightly if your intent is self-protection. Get a serious weapon, and learn how to use in a functional, legal, and moral sense.
If you are triggered by the pink shirt, you are either a GenX or an inception.
I’m his age, and pink shirts bedded lots of southern blondes during the preppy days of the 70s.
Wearing Pink showed you were confident in your masculinity.
Trust me. It worked.
In the 18th century, pink and red were considered the masculine colors. Blues were feminine.
Ha that is funny Free State Paul:
If you are triggered by the pink shirt, you are either a GenX or an inception.
Try again. You missed on that one.
I’m his age, and pink shirts bedded lots of southern blondes during the preppy days of the 70s.
You just proved my point. Imaged based rich kid or want-to-be rich kid that “wants to be popular”
Wearing Pink showed you were confident in your masculinity.
Trust me. It worked.
Sorry, I am not gen x so you are wrong there. You are wrong implying that I meant that “pink” does not project masculinity.
First, a true Gentlemen does not discuss bedding women, yet let along the color of the hair (even if it was bleach). being about projecting masculinity.
Second, in my generation, men (or boys) who talked about bedding women usually were not.
Third, most true “masculine” men that are gentlemen do not treat women as objects.
Fourth, most true “men” don’t need pink shirts to prove that they are.
Glad you got some pleasure from women who liked your shirt. I have taught my son to be a true gentlemen and treat women with respect. His experience with women will be a lot more fruitful than with a women interested in his external fake image that he could project.
McCloskey might be a great guy, but right now he is all about image. I support his right to the 2nd Amend and protect his property, but he is not a good role model.
He appears to try being in the middle of the road. I think Tip ONeil said that is the quickest way to become road kill.
“…but times are changing.”
So your wife is no longer a threat? What brought on this change of heart in her?
Menupause and Revelations
They’re both trial lawyers. 10 to 1 then donate to the democrats.
Or they “DID” donate to the dems…
Yep:
https://twitter.com/bennyjohnson/status/1277691917199904768
And they have said they support BLM. And that all of the people at whom they were pointing the guns were white.
That information turns out to be false. Different Mark McCloskey in different state (MI) – misleadingly cropped FEC report. This Mark McCloskey has contributed mostly to Republicans.
However, that is completely irrelevant to the circumstances and a pointless distraction.
Open Secrets has someone with his name within 13 mile from his office donating 4 K to the dems in 2004.
Look at my comments at the end of the threat 4:39. His position on the issues is a factor. Love the comments by alohahola. Gotta at least ask the question about it being staged?
No, they would never try to do that! Not!
Daiwa is correct. The Johnson site is in error. As I posted below – I will repeat to be accurate:
Yep, my error on the donations. His interview is damning.
https://www.opensecrets.org/donor-lookup/results?name=Mark+McCloskey+&order=desc&sort=N
Money to Candidates MCCLOSKEY, MARK T MR
CLAYTON, MO 63105 Attorney 11-01-2000 $2,000 Bush, George W (R)
Money to Candidates MCCLOSKEY, MARK T MR
CLAYTON, MO 63105 12-30-2000 -$1,000 Bush, George W (R)
Money to PACs MCCLOSKEY, MARK T
ST LOUIS, MO 63108 ATTORNEY 04-11-1996 $1,000 National Republican Congressional Cmte (R)
Money to Candidates MCCLOSKEY, MARK T
ST LOUIS, MO 63108 M T MCCLOSKEY PC 10-14-1996 $500 Phelps, Bill (R)
Money to Candidates MCCLOSKEY, MARK T
SAINT LOUIS, MO 63108 MCCLOSKEY PC 05-14-2012 $500 McCaskill, Claire (D)
Money to Candidates MCCLOSKEY, MARK T
ST LOUIS, MO 63108 LAKIN LAW FIRM 03-24-1992 $1,000 Bush, George (R)
I do see support there for Claire McCaskill. Oh boy, she was blow hot air just yesterday I also found one earlier where it looked like he had given the Ill. democrats 4K. Can’t find it, but I do not think this guy is on the right side.
The woman hasn’t been trained on firearms handling: Pointing the pistol at someone, finger on the trigger instead of along the side of the weapon, a bent elbow with no other way to steady the weapon guarantees a miss, and she probably has only five shots. At least the man has what looks like a 30-round magazine and he knows what to do with his index finger.
They only think they’re in the right. This is a disaster looking for a time and place.
.
If deadly force is not justified until aggressors enter your dwelling, then my problem with this is being outside your house with drawn weapons. Better to take up a position in your doorway. More legally defensible in the event someone is accidentally (or otherwise) shot.
From a quote in the post:
However, in Missouri, people also have no duty to retreat from their vehicles, any property they own or anywhere they’re entitled to be. (emphasis added)
smashed through the historic wrought iron gates of Portland Place, destroying them, rushed towards my home
Right there – violent action to enter my domicile – I wouldn’t even give a warning if they “rushed towards” me. Just start shooting.
I’m pretty sure Branca would argue you needed to retreat inside, but I disagree entirely, given what we’ve seen mobs do in the last month or so. (And, I admit I don’t know MO’s specific laws on self-defense.)
We were told that we would be killed, our home burned and our dog killed.
Well, that would up the credibility of my fear significantly.
In one sense I’m glad they didn’t have to kill anyone.
In another, the only thing that will finally dissuade these crowds is “a whiff of grapeshot.”
*sigh*
Somehow I failed to close the ’em’ tag after the first quote. The italics should stop after “towards my home”. They should then restart before “We were told”.
Oh, for an edit function….
Always give a verbal warning, when in a public defensive situation where you are being charged or threatened with a distance weapon. You can still shoot a person while yelling “Stay Back” or “Drop the Gun” and, if witnesses are available, they may testify that the person whom you shot was attacking in the face of a verbal warning not to and ignored it.
Unlikely a mob like this will produce any witnesses helpful to the defense. I’d worry more about them lying.
This looks staged, like in for The Onion.
It’s so easy to Monday morning quarterback. Put yourself in a position where 100 angry people forcibly enter your gated property. The couple are still alive and so are the angry mob. Unless and until you find yourself in their position don’t criticize their following the rules, weaponry techniques, etc. They aren’t the aggressors here.
I’ll temper your comment a little. We shouldn’t criticize and demean, but we should critique and give helpful advice. I want them to be the most effective armed citizens they can be.
Amen.
I have no problem with what they did. It was a conspicuous show of arms as a deterrent. What was missing was neighborhood organization and coordination with the police. All of this nitpicking about legalities, choice of weapons, proper gun handling is irrelevant. There weren’t positioned to shoot. They were positioned to be seen.
I’m guessing the mobs weren’t exactly marching in formation directly to the mayor’s house and may have kept going this house without incident. But a show of arms may have surprised more than a few of them made them wonder whether the entire neighborhood was prepared.
I agree with you here. A community, any community, needs to consider how to be organized for emergencies. It’s no longer enough to leave it to the police/fire fighters/ EMTs/city hall. City hall has now demonstrated that they won’t protect parts of the community. Depending on where you live, you and your neighbors may not have the backup of the city/village to whom you’ve been paying taxes all these years.
So some quiet organization is needed. I recall the good former Secretary of State Condeleeza Rice talking about just this after the events of Selma, Alabama, in the 1960s. Her father, a minister, and neighborhood men sat quietly on their doorsteps at night and stoops with whatever weapons they had clearly visible for about a week. Their message to the Klan was simple: not in OUR neighborhood. It worked.
So neighbors need to consider what they’ll do and pull together. It need not (and indeed, should not) be loud, and should be visible only at the moment needed. But a little discussion and planning before-hand is essential.
Though, I would say, that if you can make a neighborhood event of a shooting day, that would combine visibility (for certain values of visibility) with bringing the community together with upping everyone’s skills and prepping for any trouble.
This is what I’m talking about.
https://currently.att.yahoo.com/att/xandr/ve-warned-florida-sheriff-says-180642419.html
This is a sheriff who gets it. I don’t know about deputizing every gun owner but it’s a big step in the right direction. An armed citizenry that loves the police is a powerful ally. That is why we have the 2nd Amendment.
Now you want to talk about a self defense move, check this one out:
https://www.bitchute.com/video/s7WQ1a15yJqy/
Not too happy about a group Proud Boys that posted this, but interesting different angle from this twitter account.
https://twitter.com/WhlteHovse/status/1272749526755901441
Nothing wrong with Proud boys
Nothing wrong? The comments are full of Jew haters.
I saw that. Nothing wrong with proud boys they simply hate left wingers and won’t back down in a fight. They aren’t racists, jew haters or anything else. The commenters that appear to be “JEW HATERS” are left wing assholes looking to sully the name. Similar to painting N***** on the side of your car or putting a clothesline noose around your neck then paying someone to throw bleach on you then calling the cops. Or vandalizing your own business with racial epithets to collect the insurance money. I could go on. 99.9% of “racial attacks” are hoaxes meant to instill sympathy. Liars and leftists are the worst kind of garbage human beings.
I don’t know why your wife wants a shotgun, but instead look at getting an AR-15. Hardly any recoil compared to a shotgun and it gets the job done. And the magazines are MUCH larger.
Perhaps your wife believes that the shotgun pellets spread out making it easier to hit a target. In a home defense situation that wouldn’t happen so much.
When I was in the police academy, our instructors showed us how big the spread of a 12 gauge is at close range. Hardly any at all.
Go with the AR-15.
If I remember correctly,one radial inch per foot traveled
If I remember correctly,one radial inch per foot traveled
Wouldn’t that depend on the choke?
Yes. Shotguns are great weapons but Hollywood has created too many myths about them. At close range it’s very easy to miss with a shotgun.
And further away, they loose lethal force. Most have small magazines and take a long time to reload. As you imply, it is not a simpler weapon to employ effectively and should not be used, if at all possible, by someone who has not prepared to use it. Weapons come in all sorts of calibers and ammunition with all sorts of attributes because they all have plusses and minuses. Understand your tactical situation, buy the right weapon to use in that tactical situation, and train to use that weapon in the right tactical situation. In a self-defense situation, you, or your loved ones, live or die by those decisions, and so might someone else, even if they are bent on evil intent. Do not enter this transaction lightly and with frivolity.
The AR is a terrible choice as a dedicated home defense weapon. Bullet penetration is way too high for use inside a home. If you missed your target, you could hit someone houses away, or strike a family member at the other end of the home.
However, when a specific tactical situation arises that requires the attributes of a long gun (e.g., higher power than a pistol, larger magazine capacity, better accuracy at range, etc.), then an AR is appropriate. These situations do not usually arise indoors, and therefore long guns are not particularly well-suited to home defense.
Home defense is better served by a handgun for each family member who can handle one (9mm is easily handled by smaller people, just find a model that fits the individual’s grip for recoil control). The AR has a place in self-defense for those situations in which its unique capabilities are needed and the dangers posed by its rifle-class performance are outweighed by tactical necessity or are mitigated by the situation.
As posted… I disagree… AR is great but choice of ammunition is critical. Highly frangible varmint loads are best. Handgun ammo will penetrate… the present loads are designed to penetrate glass, wallboard, heavy clothing.
Good on the home owners for defending their property. Just got done watching a video about this and apparently this couple has spent something like the last 30 YEARS fixing this place up because it was a bit run down when they bought it. I wouldn’t be all that keen either on letting a random mob just march in and destroy all that work! Best thing is they didn’t actually have to fire on the mob, all it took was some brandishing to get them to back off and move on. I will agree with Dana Loesch though: if you are going to have them please get some training on the proper use and care of them! You’ll be doing yourself and those around you a huge favor!
I’ve seen the inside pictures in news articles. They’ve got it to museum quality. That’s how much time and money they put into that house to restore it to its original state.
…and all it would have taken was one of those idiots with a bottle of gasoline to burn it all down, kill their family, and destroy their lives.
Yeah, they should have exhibited more care with weapon handling. But their house is unburned, unlooted, and their family safe. I count that as a win.
To those who say we should respect life more than property, I agree. If you respect your life more than you covet my property, we’ll get along just fine.
Oh yeah the video I watched: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N4j3PRR3hoc
“The best point Dana made is that the ‘one top responsibility when you’re armed is de-escalation.'”
I agree that during peacetime, in a civilized society, de-escalation is a top priority.
Do those conditions apply? It’s arguable that if they did, the couple would not have needed to use firearms in defense of their home and family.
In this instance I’d say the duty to de-escalate is on the intruders.
That said, trigger discipline is no joke and the woman could benefit from an after-action discussion with — perhaps — her husband, who seems to have been doing almost everything right (except not bringing loaded spare magazines).
As for the intimidation effect of pointing the gun at people instead of merely holding it openly (argued upthread), that’s limited to the person you’re pointing it at. If you’re overly focused on one individual out of a large group, anyone else in that group could see an opportunity to charge, potentially reaching you before you can change your point of aim.
I haven’t watched a lot of zombie movies, but the ones where zombies can run almost certainly made use of this at some point.
(except not bringing loaded spare magazines)
That you could see. 🙂
I spoke to a guy who lives near the Mayor’s house in Olympia. He’s full on conservative. They trashed his yard and pulled up plants. You need to think about what you are going to do if this shit gets real in your life.
Yep. Too many of us think we are protected merely because we own guns. So what is the plan? We grab our guns and ….. what? Go Rambo?
Go with the AR-15.
__________________
the only issue with an AR platform indoors is penetration–ie, do you have children/pets/guests in your home?
a shotgun with #4s at 2 or 3 meters packs one helluva punch–additionally, prefer a pump to a semi-auto with a scattergun
believe he’s right to consider a 20 for his wife/daughter–a lot more manageable than a 12 for a lighter-framed individual and just about as lethal–while the felt recoil difference will not even register in the moment, the physics of the thing are still there–particularly if firing off hand/off balance–confidence in your ability is important for any shooter
if have to go out of the house, prefer a rifle
while the felt recoil difference will not even register in the moment
No doubt correct . . . when the balloon goes up, the chips are down, and the SHTF. But otherwise, not so much; and nobody will practice with a gun which hurts to shoot. (Well, I would, but I’m a notorious gun crank; somebody’s wife or daughter most likely is not.)
Actually, testing has shown that pistols round penetrate many more layers of wallboard [sheetrock] than do .223 and 5.56×45 rounds; even hardball. Also, I load up my wife’s 20ga shotgun with slugs, for outdoor defense. Their effective range is greater than buckshot and they essentially turn the shotgun into a short to medium range rifle. Also, a solid hit with a slug, at 100 yards or less, will usually terminate a person’s anti-social behavior, immediately. I usually keep my 12ga loaded with #1 buckshot, as it is used as a short range weapon, with a rifle being used as my goto medium or long range weapon. One thing to remember about the .223/5.56×45, it is not a very good man-stopper. Our military has learned, over the years, that it often takes two or more solid torso hits to stop a determined attacker. So, figure that a 20 round magazine will only stop 10 attackers.
The secret to taming recoil rests with using a proper stance. When standing, one needs to have a solid shoulder weld and cheek weld and lean forward into the weapon. This lets the shooter “ride” the recoil and body weight absorbs it.
” One thing to remember about the .223/5.56×45, it is not a very good man-stopper.”
Absolutely incorrect. At short ranges (under 40 meters), where 90% of small arms wounds occur in combat, the high velocity round of the 5.56 causes the bullet to tumble and then explode as it penetrates the body causing an enormous wound cavity. It is much more lethal than a 7.62 x 39mm or NATO 7.62 which creates a comparatively small wound cavity. The last thing I want to be shot with is a 5.56 at less than 100 yards range. There is a reason most militaries have gone to the 5.56mm or similar high velocity round. The issue is penetration through body armor. For that, larger rounds tend to be better. So, if shooting at range against opponents with body armor, the 5.56 may not be the best round. But for close quarter combat, like most home defense scenarios, an assailant would need come prepared wearing some serious body armor to defeat the 5.56mm round, while even low grade body armor will defeat most anything fired from a shotgun even at close range, which, as another poster pointed out, is not so easy to hit with. In truth, thick winter clothing can do a decent job at protecting you against the effects of most shotgun rounds. The human body can take a remarkable amount of damage, but the 5.56mm round produces decisive firepower a close range against unarmored or lightly armored opponents. I know I am just a guy one the internet, and you can chose to believe me or not.
Wrong. A ball peen hammer an effective man stopper it you get close enough. Now, 40 yards is not a very long distance with a rifle. A military rifle has to be effective out to 6000 yards. Regardless of what the US Army says, the AR15/M16, especially in the M4 configuration, ix not really effective beyond 350 yards. And, it shows a significant reduction in effectiveness beyond 100 yards. Lethality is also not the criteria with regard to military rifle rounds. Incapacitation is much more important. While the 5.56 NATO is unstable and tumbles and fragments inside the human body, it does not have the size of the secondary wound cavity caused by hydro-static shock that 7.62 NATO and more powerful rounds cause. And, hydro-static shock causes incapacitation more quickly than blood loss.
The reason why many nations went to rifles firing sub-munitions is because of three things. The recoil was lower, the weapon was lighter and more ammunition can be carried because of the smaller, lighter rounds. Not because they were more effective than .30 caliber weapons
5.56mm weapons are effective defensive tools, under 150 yards. But, they have their limitations and those have to be allowed for.
Edit: “A military rifle has to be effective out to 6000 yards” should read 600 yards, not 6000 yards.
Mac45
Not because they were more effective
I would point out that the advantages you point to make them “more effective” – in a battlefield situation. Not necessarily in a single-shot comparison, but in a unit action, carrying lots of ammo that can hurt the enemy (you pointed out it does not have to kill) and keep his head down, etc. is a definite advantage.
It really depends on your criteria for “effective”.
“Now, 40 yards is not a very long distance with a rifle.”
The US army conducted extensive studies for small arms casualty production all the back to the Revolutionary War up through the Korean conflict. This exhaustive study showed that 90% of all small arms wounds in EVERY conflict occurred under 40 meters in range. Even in the Civil Ward combatants primarily used rifles with effective ranges that met or surpassed 600 yards while Soldiers marched forward shoulder to shoulder in close-order ranks, and yet, still 90% of wounds occurred within 40 meters.
The fact is, most people, even trained Soldiers, cannot hit anything in battle at a greater range. There are large number of reasons for this. If you have ever been in a fire-fight, you will have a good idea as to why. The long-range capabilities of the heavier 30-06, .308, 7.62, etc., are simply not required. They are good for snipers, but everyone else simply do not need these larger long-range rounds. At shorter ranges, within the 40 meter kill zone, the high-velocity 5.56 is simply a more lethal round, and is why everyone has transitioned to it.
Having said that, the use of body armor is expanding, even to irregular forces, so militaries are relooking at the larger rounds for their penetrating capabilities which are superior to the 5.56.
Again, choosing the right weapon and round is a complex equation. My personal solution to the evolving threat field is to acquire a .308/7.62 bullpup as it provides a more compact frame for superior rapid gun handling, and good long-short range capability and body armor penetration, and thus, more versatility. But the 5.56 high-velocity round is more lethal at the typical engagement ranges one can reasonably expect.
“While the 5.56 NATO is unstable and tumbles and fragments inside the human body, it does not have the size of the secondary wound cavity caused by hydro-static shock that 7.62 NATO and more powerful rounds cause.”
Larger rounds such as the .308 or 7.62 tend to pass through the body at closer ranges (under 40 meters) so a lot of the energy is NOT imparted into the target. “Hydro-static shock” from these rounds at these ranges is therefore reduced. The 5.56 in most cases and types of bullet loads do NOT pass through the body, but rather tumble, swerve around, and then explode at these ranges. When velocity drops below 3,000 feet per second, this round loses its potency as it tends to hold together, considerably reducing lethality. But again, the vast majority of engagements a person will ever have with other people will be within 40 meters range.
For home defense an expanding bullet should be used. (Not limited as the military is to ball ammunition). An expanding bullet that stops in the target deposits all of the bullet’s energy into the target. A .223/5.56 bullet has far more energy than most handguns (this includes, of course, .45ACP and 9mm). When a bullet flies through a target, it does so because it still has energy that was NOT deposited in the target. Shoot an expanding bullet (as do hunters) and the AR becomes more lethal, hitting harder than any practical handgun, esp. at close range. (Although I don’t generally recommend them for home defense.)
Clint Smith says that for all the complaints he hears about the AR not being a man-stopper he has yet to meet anyone who would volunteer to be shot with one.
I would suggest that this couple get a pitbull and then stand behind the dog with their firearms.
Maybe place a sign in front saying “If you make it past the dog you will have to deal with me”. Even if the mob members can’t read they will get the message.
They threatened to kill the dog
I have 2 pits
“The wife has no trigger discipline and she’s holding the gun all wrong. Also, you do not point your weapon at a target unless you would shoot said target.”
That is your take away from this? That these people need more tactical training? Jeez.
Look, these people were faced with a situation in which 100+ people invaded their property. The “demonstrators” constituted a mob and mobs are dangerous. The home owners armed themselves as a warning to the interlopers not to approach their home. And, it worked. Why? Because these demonstrators are largely cowards. The only armed people who they ever attack are the COPS. Why? Because LEOs are trained NOT to simply shoot people. People feel safe in attacking armed LEOs. This kind of flies in the face of the claims of how dangerous cops are, doesn’t it?
Now, should people get training in the tactical use of firearms in their own defense? Sure. But, having been involved with the tactical use of firearms for the last 50 years, I can tell you that there are a large number of people offering tactic firearms training who have little knowledge of the subject.
Here is the take away from this. Ordinary people are fed up with destructive and threatening displays by mobs. ordinary people WILL defend their persons and property. Ordinary people have weapons, including high capacity semi-automatic rifles. Ordinary people are far more likely to shoot you than are LEOs. So, an intelligent person should probably stay off private property, out of public streets and not interfere with the daily activities of ordinary people. Meet with your fellow “demonstrators” in a secluded corner of a public park, away from others, with your bumper sticker slogan signs. You’ll live longer that way.
I understand the reasoning behind the statement: “You don’t point at a target unless you intend to shoot the target”, but it is pretty dumb.
So if you point at a target and they start running away, did you fail if you rightfully don’t shoot them?
I get that the wording is not meant to indicate as such, but I think the harm of people taking it that way is far more dangerous than the benefit of the saying.
Just about any range I’ve been to has rules against “flagging”, or pointing the muzzle of a weapon at anything except a target, the backstop, or the ground. (A discharge into the air could drop a bullet on some unlucky bastard blocks away.)
The couple wasn’t in the controlled environment of a range, though. Not by a long shot.
The best point Dana made is that the “one top responsibility when you’re armed is de-escalation.”
That’s ridiculous. If not using lethal force is the Prime Directive, lugging a weapon around serves no purpose.
The top responsibility is defense. The weapon has no other purpose. The secondary responsibility may be to limit damage while you go about responsibility #1, and de-escalation could be considered to fall under that. But “top” responsibility? Nowhere near.
The MSM/DNC axis is freaking out over this story, claiming they were threatening to shoot innocent bystanders and hinting that the couple is somehow part of a white supremacist group. Having found their Horst Wessel (George Floyd) journalists are now seeking their Reichstag fire.
Joseph Goebbels would be so proud of his disciples in the American media.
Go inside and wait for this huge mob to break your doors and windows and come streaming in like they do when looting a store. At that point you wouldn’t stand a chance.
That depends entirely on the tactical layout of your home. Theirs has lots of large ground floor windows, so maybe. Mine is a little more restrictive.
However, retreating and waiting for them to enter means you can’t shoot the guy throwing the molotov cocktail to burn your house down with you in it.
Rioters have attempted to board up police station windows and doors and then set fire to the building while the police officers were trapped inside. I think the best course of action was to try and deter the mob from entering, which they did successfully. And yes, they need some training, but don’t we all. Even SEAL TEAM needs more training. They will not tell you they over train.
These mobs have been known to use incendiary devices. They cannot be allowed within throwing distance of you or any building you may be occupying.
Police shot and killed a man (Antifa member) in Tacoma who was armed with incendiary devices, even though he was not successful in deploying them. Obviously, the rationale is that such devices are so dangerous that the user can’t be allowed to deploy them and should be stopped, by shooting if necessary, before any devices can be successfully deployed. Anyone carrying an incendiary device should be shot on sight. Unlike a firearm which is used against discrete targets and can be used in self-defense, incendiary devices are indiscriminate and therefore have no value as self-defense weapons. They are nothing but weapons of destruction.
(Well, I would, but I’m a notorious gun crank; somebody’s wife or daughter most likely is not.)
____________________________________________________________
you touched on one the most important responsibilities of any gun owner(especially if for self-defense): practice, practice, practice–indoors, outdoors, daylight, dark–how to load/unload, clear a jam, fire off-hand, off-balance, one/both eyes open, point shooting, weapon retention, if a longarm, how to use as a thrusting/striking weapon, etc.
mac mentioned a 223/556 AR and how might be less of a hazard indoors than a pistol regards penetration–personally, a 223/556 AR is just too damned under-powered for anything beyond about 30 metres–30 cal or larger AR will definitely penetrate beyond all but a few pistol rounds so, for us, not really practical indoors–prefer 12ga pumps–outside, though, and especially against multiple opponents, 30 cal or larger AR can be used with considerable effect(much more than 223/556)–from the look of this guy’s weapon/magazine, appears to be a 30 cal–agree he should have at least a couple of extra mags in his back pockets or to hand but am grateful to the both of them for stepping outside their home and letting the little lefty/blm/antifa bunnies know that the folks around there are dangerous a bunny’s health
First, the 5.56×45 NATO actually penetrates fewer sheets of drywall than all pistol rounds, greater than the .380. The reason for this is that the .223/5.56 bullet has a much smaller mass than most pistol bullets and is designed to tumble and fragment upon striking any moderately solid object. Pistol bullets just drill right on through.
Second, long barrelled weapons, such as rifles and shotguns, are not as well suited as pistols, for indoor home defense, unless you barricade yourself in a single room and mount a static defense. Moving through the interior of many houses is difficult with a long gun. Outdoor defense scenarios are different.
Rifles and shotguns are much better for outdoor defense.The effective range of a 12ga shotgun, loaded with #00 buckshot is 75-100 yards. Pistol caliber rifles are effective to 75-150 yards, depending upon caliber. The .223/5.56mm is effective out to 300 yards. .308/7.65x51mm is effective from 600-1000 yards depending upon the platform. .30-06, the same. Now, for most people, outdoor defensive distances will be 100 yards or less and usually less than 50 yards. So, for balanced defense, with a firearm, one should have access to a pistol, in an effective caliber, a medium range rifle or shotgun and, in some cases a long range rifle.
This of course is only true of hollow point or soft nose ammo. Fmj or green tip are not safe to use if over penetration is an issue.
Always carry a secondary weapon, usually a pistol. But the most important thing you carry into combat is mental preparedness. This means training, and knowing what you are doing, and knowing the consequences of your actions. If you want to acquire weapons for self-defense, please do so with a great deal of responsibility. These people may be new to gun ownership and may not have had time to properly prepare. These last couple of months have produced a lot of new gun owners.
Guy in the pink shirt is a lefty.
Always a pain to find a firearm for a lefty. Even if the safety and mag eject can be reversed, shell casings still eject on the right – inches from my ear (semiauto handbun). Revolvers always swing the cylinder to the left for eject/reloading meaning a hand switch. PITA.
The woman looks to have a (vanity chrome/stainless) “purse gun”. After this experience, bet she gets an AR or shotgun for home defense. And the neighborhood gets private f/t security. I’m not discounting her firearm of choice – I have a pocket 380 – great for an up close and personal confrontation. But if a handgun is her preferred firearm, I’d like to see her move to a double-stack 17+1 or the like. I’ve been considering trading my Nano for a full-size 9mm like the Beretta 92X. It’s reversible for a southpaw.
Particularly when pointing out the lefty (hand, not mind) aspect, it is useful to say again: the best gun to have is one you actually will carry and with which you practice.
FYI, Palmetto State Armory has lefty uppers and even uppers that eject forward, iirc. And they have lowers where you can swap the mag eject.
Dang, we do like to talk about guns. 🙂
And we didn’t even get into the .45 vs 9mm wars. (Please guys. Don’t start.)
.40 S&W 😉
We should all agree on the various points of debate, categorize them, and number them. Makes the debate much more concise.
“well, 9.2”
“sure, but what about 45.3?)
Of course, you know that the sooner or later the left would accuse everyone of using codes to disguise their racism.
.357 Mag lever action short carbine accompanied by a revolver in the same caliber…
Better accuracy at a longer distance say 75-90 yards, decent speed on follow up shots, plus a secondary weapon and best of all neither are ‘scary’ black guns for the jury to contemplate
If only lever actions weren’t so expensive. 🙁
Well, most all firearms are expensive when you’re close to paycheck-to-paycheck. Except HiPoints.
Well you could use the lever and the recover to hunt white tail and smaller hogs…so you can tell the wife or that voice saying ‘you don’t need’ another gun that they can pay for themselves in venison and bacon….
It might work. It might not. Anyway most of likely don’t need another gun but hey what’s that got to do with it?
Maybe phrase it as an investment opportunity? I haven’t tried that one, feel free to use it and let me know if it works.
Besides lever action are not that expensive. Dollar a day for three years and it’s paid for. Less than most spend on cigarettes…
You can find Rossi Model R92s under $600. They’re chambered in .44MAG or .45LC with either 8 or 10 round capacity.
When it comes to a Henry or a Winchester lever-action, you’re often paying a premium for the brand. The firearm equivalent of designer clothes.
Key word : “TALK”
When the police passively allow looting, vandalism, arson, and assault to occur – and city and state elected leaders refuse to allow the National Guard to come in and restore order, citizens are forced to step up and become their own plainclothes police to defend life, liberty, and property. This is serious. If this continues, someone on the Black Lives Matter/Antifa/thug side is going to get killed or seriously injured. Law enforcement needs to man up and do their jobs, and city and state government needs to get the hell out of their way.
Well, here is a start reposting from above:
https://www.bitchute.com/video/s7WQ1a15yJqy/
As a sorta counter-point….
It was always your responsibility.
Giving up the responsibility to those you hired is part of how we got in this mess. When you abdicate to a technocrat (police, politician, bureaucrat) you are no longer self-governing and are at the mercy of said technocrats.
BLM = Bullets Love Miscreants.
I had to explain this to a number of leftist attorneys who, stupidly, think these people committed a crime. As a former policeman and retired CPA, the law (criminal and civil) have been a big part of my life.
That lady scares me, like all folks do who demonstrate poor muzzle discipline.
That said, these are not normal times. A mob of 100+ persons breached the gate. Then continued to trespass; probably criminal trespass not simply petit trespass, not sure of Missouri statute.
Then the mob gathered in front of the home yelling and screaming and chanting. Was any member of the mob armed? What was their intent?
I would simply submit that the homeowners are not required to allow a mob to advance into their yard to throwing range for an incendiary like a make shift Molotov cocktail.
In this situation the homeowners cannot possibly closely observe each of the 100+ members of the mob. They can only scan the crowd and react.
They definitely need a better plan and organization of other neighbors. A rent a cop or two would be useful as a minor deterrent and to provide an early warning at the gate.
This kind of scenario doesn’t fit neatly into the run of the mill ccw training class or use of force situation.
I have seen folks burn alive in Iraq. Personally, I would choose almost any other way to die given time to choose. I can’t fault them because their actions in confronting the mob from a distance but outside the home worked.
Given a visibly armed mob, the tactical situation is significantly different. This mob seemed more bent upon intimidating the homeowners but were themselves intimidated out of more criminal activity by the armed homeowners.
Maybe they need a cannon for next time since claymore are not possible?
Many people in the mob were armed and wearing body armor. They were threatening to burn down the house, to kill the owners, and live in the house after the homeowners were killed. They threatened to burn down the guy’s office next to the house, and threatened to kill their dog. Anyone who calls it peaceful protesters are just plain liars.
garybritt,
Ok, I believe you. I didn’t see body armor or weapons in the video but I’ll take your word for it. My point of view is that with 100+ folks I don’t NEED to see a weapon. All I need to look for are physical cues, like a sudden arm raise low to high or someone reaching into a backpack. Is the mob pulling out a bottle of water to drink or a Molotov cocktail? I don’t care to wait, if he ignores my command to drop the pack and step back, the result is on him not me.
The couple need to have a point picked out that is their final protective line and if the crowd advances to that point then one final command to stop and then open fire on those persons not obeying the command.
Two people can’t defend that large an area given the size of the mob. Two people who both have rifles and a single 30 round magazine each can engage 60 targets maximum. That’s if every shot eliminated a target. Now over 40 targets left. Not to mention the fact that they would likely be overwhelmed by a straight up charge before they could get off a full mag.
They need the neighborhood to work together if not there is no way they will prevail. Short of illegal ‘man traps’, pipe bombs etc. Two people can’t secure a perimeter on a 1/4 acre lot, much less that monster of a house from a determined attack.
That doesn’t mean the couple shouldn’t try. They did and were successful in confronting a mob on this occasion which was less determined. All I am saying is don’t let the mob close enough to open up a back pack, pull out a Molotov cocktail and throw it.
Personally, I would be looking for a throwing motion and the fpl as my keys for firing in that situation. With a 100+ folks you can’t effectively evaluate them individually. You can look for and identify certain visual cues that are threatening from those closest.
Yes I’m serious about a reproduction canon as a functional decoration. Something like a six pounder with an equivalent weight of ball bearings fired as the projectile would certainly have an effect on the morale of a mob.
What you forget is these are NOT battle-hardened troops*. I doubt you need to drop 60 of the mob to get the final 40 running. I doubt you need to shoot more than 3 to 5. More than that will get hurt trying to squeeze through that gate.
(There’s also the fact that it wasn’t a concentrated mob of 100, but strung out as they poured through that narrow gate.)
(* Neither are the defenders, so there’s a psychological battle going on, as well as the potential physical one.)
These attackers were “non-dedicated personnel.” It would not have taken more than the felling of two or three (preferably those identified as armed, to get them out of the way first) before the lot of them would have beat-feet out of there. No two people armed with anything other than Claymore mines would be capable of stopping one hundred unarmed people attacking from close range if those attacking are “dedicated personnel.”
LOL, is a DNC Donor, race baiter ambulance chaser.
https://twitter.com/bennyjohnson/status/1277691917199904768
So it turns out the gun-toting couple:
-Supports BLM
-Are Democrats
-Are representing a victim of police brutality.
The media is going to have a hard time comprehending this since they spent all of last night and this morning smearing them.
The Benny Johnson post is false. Different Mark McCloskey in different state (MI) – deceptively cropped FEC report. The Missouri Mark McCloskey has donated mostly to Republicans.
Completely irrelevant in any event. He was entitled to make his intent to defend his life/family/home clear no matter his politics.
Yep, my error on the donations. His interview is damning.
https://www.opensecrets.org/donor-lookup/results?name=Mark+McCloskey+&order=desc&sort=N
Money to Candidates MCCLOSKEY, MARK T MR
CLAYTON, MO 63105 Attorney 11-01-2000 $2,000 Bush, George W (R)
Money to Candidates MCCLOSKEY, MARK T MR
CLAYTON, MO 63105 12-30-2000 -$1,000 Bush, George W (R)
Money to PACs MCCLOSKEY, MARK T
ST LOUIS, MO 63108 ATTORNEY 04-11-1996 $1,000 National Republican Congressional Cmte (R)
Money to Candidates MCCLOSKEY, MARK T
ST LOUIS, MO 63108 M T MCCLOSKEY PC 10-14-1996 $500 Phelps, Bill (R)
Money to Candidates MCCLOSKEY, MARK T
SAINT LOUIS, MO 63108 MCCLOSKEY PC 05-14-2012 $500 McCaskill, Claire (D)
Money to Candidates MCCLOSKEY, MARK T
ST LOUIS, MO 63108 LAKIN LAW FIRM 03-24-1992 $1,000 Bush, George (R)
FWIW, it appears Johnson may have been unintentionally (but inexcusably) deceiving – he apparently failed to do his due diligence before posting the deceptively cropped FEC report he found elsewhere, presumably because it fit his pre-existing bias. This sort of thing happens way too often on social media: Fire, Aim, Ready!! I initially & casually accepted the cropped report as legit until hearing about the real McCloskey from a friend who lives in St. Louis. At this rate, we’re going to run out of grains of salt damn quick.
https://www.ksdk.com/article/news/local/interview-man-with-rifle-during-st-louis-protest/63-eeb61c07-4adc-4df0-a7d0-000d40a89e78
“McCloskey: Well, you know, we were always obviously upset. My wife doesn’t know anything about guns, but she knows about being scared. And she grabbed a pistol and I had a rifle, and I was very, very careful I didn’t point the rifle at anybody. ”
What an idiot. These people are dangerous. At one point they were pointing at each other.
I love this statement:
“I do civil rights cases. Right now, I’m representing a young man who was assaulted by the police who is sitting in prison right now for being involved in a car accident after which the police came in and assaulted him.”
What he failed to tell you is “the young man” car jacked a car, had a large group of police chasing him and then crashed the car in to a police car injuring a police officer.
but….it gets better:
McCloskey: Well, I’m hoping that the government goes to protect us. Although I have my doubts about that. We will struggle through the best way we can. It is it is discouraging.
OMG!!!!!!
A fellow, heterosexual, white man defending his wife and home. And you’re criticizing his politics?
SAD!
A fellow, heterosexual, white man defending his wife and home. And you’re criticizing his politics?
SAD!
Wow, that pink shirt must still be bothering you. Please reread my last post. It was not political.
He admits his wife does not know how to handle a gun! Duh, she should not be near that thing then. Where is politics in that.
Next “I do civil rights cases.” is a case against the police that he is doing? What is the politics there?
And finally:
McCloskey: Well, I’m hoping that the government goes to protect us. Although I have my doubts about that. We will struggle through the best way we can. It is it is discouraging.
I think McCloskey is discovering that money can’t buy you everything.
There is a statement supposedly made by his legal counsel that shows support for BLM. It was posted on Snopes with a link, but I can’t source the original letter so I will not post it until I do.
Benny Johnson tweeter post was delete and he made a statement about his error about the donations. I now know I need to verify things better since “trusted” sources are wrong too.
I like Polk County, FL Sheriff Grady Judd: Media: Sheriff, why did you put 68 bullets into the suspect? Sheriff Judd: That’s all the bullets we had!
Recently, he had this to say about looters:
“I can assure you, if someone breaks into my home,
I’m going to shoot them, and I’m going to shoot them a lot!
I’m going to shoot them so much you can read a newspaper thru them!
And that’s my recommendation to other people.”
given a situation similar to this one, if a rioter HAD been in possession of a molotov or similar incendiary device, at what point does the green light come on? is possession(in plain sight) sufficient cause or must a defender wait till a rioter activates/lights said device, to take action?
live under the lone star and am pretty sure would not have to wait until rioter IGNITES a stick/cocktail to shoot them but am interested in other opinions as well
A properly made molotov cocktail will shatter the container if left to burn. Therefore, once lit, it must be gotten rid of. So, it’s a deadly weapon the moment it is lit – it has to go somewhere.
I advocate waiting (if you can) until he’s at peak drawback in the throwing motion, with no forward energy yet expended. It drops the molotov right there where it is least welcome. It also lessens the chance he can set it down peacefully for another to pick up (if you, say, shot him while he was merely holding it). And, the target is not as much in motion as later in the throw.
I’ve argued elsewhere here that an Molotov cocktail is a deadly weapon, period. If you wait until it’s lit, you’re going to have a fire (somewhere). That fire can be indiscriminate in its effects on people (including people with the bearer of the weapon) and property. Unless you’re defending a fixed position against attackers, incendiaries are not weapons of self-defense. Merely possessing one in a mobile mob should be sufficient to indicate an intent to use it. People bearing such weapons should be shot on sight. Carrying shouldered, slung, or holstered weapons is in no way comparable, so the “shoot on sight” is not transferable to those carrying in said manner. Incendiary devices present unique threats that not even explosive devices present.
Weapons – there are so many choices that it can become overwhelming.
12g Vs 20g shotgun. I have a 12g semi auto, 10 shots of 00buck will put a stop to a lot of nastiness. I have back up weapons. It is not what I recommend for the novice.
For family including wife, especially when small in stature I would recommend a 20g shotgun with 22″ or shorter barrel in semi auto. Semi auto is lower felt recoil. Pump action is not for the untrained or in the heat of a home invasion. The 20g should be lighter in weight which makes it more maneuverable. Lighter weight increases felt recoil but light weight is more maneuverable. Practice, which is a requirement, is not going to happen with a heavy hard kicking 12g. You could go low recoil ammo in the 12, but that nixes a semi auto, which is what you desire IMO. Low recoil ammo will not properly cycle a semi auto and sometimes doesn’t work that well in a pump. 20g with #3 or #4 buck will do the job. While a 12g can use birdshot pretty effectively for home defense, I wouldn’t select it for a 20g. The current problem is finding ammo for either gauge, especially the 20g which is much more limited in selection.
Training is required. Having a weapon for home protection is useless if you cannot use it in the heat of the moment. Only training will make that possible. Go to a range and hire a qualified instructor to spend an hour with your wife/other family. Cheap price for valuable instruction to get started. Then shoot for fun and education at the range until those that are going to use the weapon are comfortable with its use. Follow up with additional instruction as needed.
Did I mention TRAINING?
Be patient. The arms industry is stressed at the moment and finding what you want may take some time. Go to the range and practice with rentals until your order comes in.
A properly made molotov cocktail will shatter the container if left to burn. Therefore, once lit, it must be gotten rid of. So, it’s a deadly weapon the moment it is lit – it has to go somewhere.
____________________________________________________________
thank you for the clarification–only concern is throwing range–unlike a grenade/bangstick, etc. can’t really throw one overhand, more of a lob or(if skilled)perhaps a spiral throw similar to a football–either way, up close, say 20 metres or so–fair enough
these folks in st louis were lucky–even with the lady firing, outnumbered 50 or so to 1–definitely took some cojones to step outside–good on them–a night confrontation would have been a different proposition indeed
The rioter who lit himself up with one did so with an overhand motion, which caused the flaming contents of the device to spill on him during his throwing motion.
https://concealednation.org/2020/06/video-rioter-accidentally-catches-himself-on-fire-with-molotov-cocktail-in-fayetteville-nc/
(At the end of the video, someone can be heard asking about the condition of the man, “Is he good?” No, most assuredly not.)
Good article here about firearms and their ability to kill/incapacitate, the number of rounds it takes to have these effects, and percentages of failure to kill or incapacitate for different popular rounds.
https://concealednation.org/2020/06/video-rioter-accidentally-catches-himself-on-fire-with-molotov-cocktail-in-fayetteville-nc/
The upshot is that rifles (of all kinds lumped together) and the .357 magnum have the lowest failure-to-stop rates.
Also noteworthy is this explanation of why even small caliber handguns have a high percentage of one-shot stops:
In a certain (fairly high) percentage of shootings, people stop their aggressive actions after being hit with one round regardless of caliber or shot placement. These people are likely NOT physically incapacitated by the bullet. They just don’t want to be shot anymore and give up! Call it a psychological stop if you will. Any bullet or caliber combination will likely yield similar results in those cases. And fortunately for us, there are a lot of these “psychological stops” occurring. The problem we have is when we don’t get a psychological stop. If our attacker fights through the pain and continues to victimize us, we might want a round that causes the most damage possible. In essence, we are relying on a “physical stop” rather than a “psychological” one. In order to physically force someone to stop their violent actions we need to either hit him in the Central Nervous System (brain or upper spine) or cause enough bleeding that he becomes unconscious. The more powerful rounds look to be better at doing this.
Evan Marshall is the acknowledged expert on ammunition performance in real street outcomes and has published much on this. We are talking the classic “one shot stops”. The “gold standard” has been the 135 grain 357 Magnum. However, modern 9mm, 40 and 45 cal ammo produces 90-94% stops. This also means a hit to center of mass and not a peripheral hit.
As the Muros of the Philippines showed… people heavily doped up can take a lot of lead if not well placed as it takes pulling the vascular or neurological plugs to drop someone with standard hits.
For those unlucky enough to live in state that ban or limit semi-autos, a good level action rifle with red dot is a good option. One in 357 mag, 45 Colt or 44 mag is good. Handy. I have a Win 94 Trapper in 45 Colt for just such as issue (in California).
Rifles are artillery… handguns are infantry.
did not mean to stir-up a debate over 223/556 vs 30cal or larger regards ARs–in practically any shooting engagement, accuracy is the most important element, then power, then speed(cyclic rate)–one well-placed hit from a 30-30 is better than 2 dead misses from a 458–it’s all about what you can shoot accurately–not talking about scatterguns but rifles–next is power and by that mean knock-down power/muzzle energy which is a product of momentum–in this guy’s situation, as his lady has only a handgun, he’s essentially alone–he needs the most powerful weapon he can handle well and also one that’s capable of defeating body armor(if present)and providing one shot knockdowns/kills
BSR made some excellent points as did Mac about 223/556 but just don’t have confidence in the 223/556 round to deliver one shot knockdowns/kills like i know a 30cal or larger WILL
each his own, of course, but if you’re going to go outdoors into an uncontrolled environment(vs inside your home)would encourage you to take the largest cal weapon you can shoot well
All handheld weapons are a compromise. There are pros and cons to all platforms, calibers and cartridges in any situation.
.223/5.56mm platforms are light, low recoil, have high onboard ammo capacity, are quick to reload and reasonably effective at ranges of 300 yards or less. For a suburban o urban outdoor defensive situation, they are a good choice for many people. However, as with many weapons and calibers certain myths have grown up around them. One of those is the effectiveness of individual bullet impacts for stopping human aggressive actions. But, if the operator is aware of the limitations of the platform and cartridge, then he, or she, can act to mitigate those limitations.
.30 caliber is not a magic number. The power of the cartridge is also important. the .30 Carbine U.S. is more closely akin to the 5.56 NATO, inside 150 yards. Beyond that range, the 5.56mm is superior. However, the .308/7.62 NATO, the .30-06, the 7mm and 8mm Mauser and similar cartridges are much more effective than the 5.56mm beyond 300 yards and is effective out to 800 yards in most cases. But, it exhibits greater recoil and is heavier.
The venerable shotgun is the most versatile weapon platform available. It is capable of using a wide range of ammunition, making it suitable for use against small game, birds in flight, human beings and medium sized animals. Its effective range is usually limited to about 100 yards and in most cases has a low onboard magazine capacity. It also usually has a greater recoil when using loads effective against human beings.
Handguns are the usual weapon of choice for everyday defensive carry and interior defense. Because of their reduced size and power, they are more limited in outdoor defense situations, than long guns.
It is important to know the limitations of both your tool and yourself. This the first leg of the effective self defense stool. To maximize the effectiveness of the tool that you choose, or have, to use, you have to be trained in practices and tactics which maximize that tool’s effectiveness. Practice is also required to use the tool in an effective manner. This is the second leg of the effective self defense stool. The last leg is knowledge of the laws pertaining to the use of force, especially deadly force, in lawful self defense.