Mark and Patricia McCloskey made plenty of waves last year when pictures of the St. Louis couple defending their home went viral. At the time, Black Lives Matters protestors had decended on the couple’s neighborhood and broke through a gate. The McCloskey’s feared for their safety.
The story became highly publicized when St. Louis Circuit Attorney Kim Gardner brought felony charges against the McCloskeys. A judge pulled the case from Gardner and appointed special prosecutor, former U.S. Attorney Richard Callahan, to handle the case.
The McCloskeys reached a plea deal with Callahan last week. According to KSDK-TV, the special prosecutor “took several factors into consideration, including ‘the age and lack of a criminal record for the McCloskeys, the fact they initially called the police and the fact that no one was hurt and no shots were fired.'”
Mark pleaded guilty to one count of fourth-degree assault, which is a Class C misdemeanor. He was ordered to pay a $750 fine. Patricia pleaded guilty to one count of second-degree harassment, which is a Class A misdemeanor. She was ordered to pay a $2,000 fine and $10 to the crime victims fund.
After the deal was finalized, Mark – who is running for the Republican nomination to fill the U.S. Senate seat that will be vacant when Roy Blunt (R) retires – released a campaign video defending his decision to rely on firearms to protect himself and his family.
“One year ago, an angry mob crashed through my gate and threatened my wife, my family, and my home. The prosecutor dropped all charges against me except for a claim that I put other people in ‘imminent fear’ of physical harm,” he said in the video. “That’s exactly what I did, that’s what guns are for. And any time the mob comes and threatens me, I’ll do the same to protect my family.”
A year ago, the mob came to my door to attack my family— I backed them down
The mob came for me, the media attacked me & prosecutors tried to punish me for defending my family
They dropped all charges, except for a claim I instilled “imminent fear” in the mob
I’d do it again. pic.twitter.com/ECPsSwa2Iw
— Mark McCloskey (@mccloskeyusa) June 17, 2021
The couple was ordered to turn over the AR-15 and handgun that were seen in the viral photos. The state then destroyed the firearms.
But while the McCloskeys lost their guns, they didn’t lose their gun rights. Two days after the deal was finalized, though, the couple went out and purchased a new AR-15…and tweeted photos of the new rifle.
Checking out my new AR! #2A #MOSen pic.twitter.com/Qa5UKupXSX
— Mark McCloskey (@mccloskeyusa) June 19, 2021
Let’s see what type of handgun Patricia decides to purchase.
“I’d do it again”
Gangster.
Doesn’t matter what they did before it all happened. That night, they became the only opposition to a violent mob of people trying to intimidate the local population. Again, they were all out past curfew, and breaking numerous laws simply by being in streets and on people’s property. Don’t act like they weren’t. Don’t act like their intention was wholesome. Don’t act like you would feel safe standing on your lawn being forced to say whatever they want you to, or threatened if you’d didn’t.
“I’ll fucken do it again.” – boojahideen Bois (not to be confused with the reddit variants who marched with these mobs)
I can hear miner putting on his clogs right now and running to the keyboard…
In all the fevered media coverage of this guy buying a new gun, I’ve seen multiple articles that say things like “…intimidated the peaceful protestors after claiming they threatened him, which was not true.”
I’ve seen the pictures of the destroyed gate and as I understand this was private property, so the crowd was breaking the law just by being there. Furthermore I remember at the time that the McCloskey’s said various people in the crowd issued threats to kill their dog, burn their house, “you’re next”, etc. none of this was in dispute as far as I know. So why now is it suddenly “not true?” Did the McCloskey’s rescind their statements that the crowd threatened them or has the media passed judgement on the truth of the situation on its own volition?
Your understanding is factually incorrect.
There were no threats, in fact there was zero interaction with the protesters and the McCloskey’s until the McCloskey’s exited their home, pointing weapons and yelling at the marchers.
And the gate was not the McCloskey’s property, and it was not damaged when the protesters initially marched through the neighborhood.
There is a reason that two elite multimillionaire trial attorneys would be willing to roll over like little puppies and take a criminal charge. It is because they knew they were guilty of a felony and they did not want to stand trial and receive a public felony conviction.
if their assessment fees cover gate maintenance it does imply partial ownership.
as for the plea deal i’d say this is a case of let’s get this over with.
you pedo, you.
Sorry Miner. Those are not the facts. Police reports of the investigation show otherwise. There were armed “protestors” in the crowd. There may or may not have been verbal threats of violence, but the damage to the gate and intrusion on private property is a crime. You might want to turn off the MSM and look into the facts that the Democrat activist special prosecutor decided to ignore from his own supporting police department. I’d recommend the Ammoland report on this plea deal.
Very little in the “mostly peaceful protests” of 2020 was peaceful or just a protest.
Miner49: You really need to come out from your hole in the ground and start to get a touch of reality. The gate was common property of all the folks living in the development. So the McCloskeys did have their property destroyed. You had better believe the funds to repair the gate came from the association account to which the McCloskeys are required to contribute based on the agreement they signed when they purchased the home in which they live.
Unlike other websites where comments that are deemed “factually untrue” are banned, you still retain the ability to post grossly incorrect information without censorship here.
So much wrong, as usual. The gate was undamaged prior to the rioters breaking it and entering. There is photo evidence of the gate prior to and after they broke it. The entire neighborhood is a gated property and gate is owned by the neighborhood, not an individual. Whereas the street in front of your average house is public property, that is not the case in a private gated neighborhood. The area inside the fence is all private property and the rioters violated the law as soon as they broke in and crossed the outer property line.
Several of the rioters were armed and repeatedly threatened the home owners. One of the rioters wore body armor with a “human shield” placard on it. What got the charges dropped was video and audio recordings of the rioters threatening the home owners. Not even the leftist socialist prosecuter could lie her way past that in court. All of the lies told by the state prosecutors were proven false in court and their entire case flopped under the preponderance of evidence.
The fact that the liberal leftists refused to prosecute the rioters while trying, and failing, to prosecute the victims clearly shows that this was nothing more than political virtue signaling and a travesty of justice.
The McCloskeys are wrong because they are white and rich. How DARE they stand up for themselves in the face of social justice heroes who were out to right the wrongs of the past. How DARE YOU defend them for such imperialist white supremacist actions. The days of western capitalist racism are coming to and end. A new socialist people of color world order is encroaching, and in this future utopia of progress, you will own nothing, and like it.
Your not the Real Miner49er.
You are correct Opossum, but imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.
Fake Miner thinks he is ridiculing me but he is actually revealing that deep down he is jealous of my rugged good looks and sparkling wit and wishes to be me so that he could finally have some success with the chicks.
Fake it till you make it, Fake Miner!
Oh Opossum, since you are my new bestest friend,
I just want you to know, when I said “with the chicks” I didn’t mean women (yuck!).
No, I meant chicks…
…Literately…….chicks
….as in chickens.
“You’ll own nothing and be happy.”
The Great Reset.
https://greatreset.com/
“The Great Reset.”
Bring it.
It won’t work out the way the Leftists seem to be so convinced it will work out.
The vast majority of America will grow sick and tired of their accusations as to how terrible and evil they are, and put their necks on the block… 😉
(Metaphorically. It wouldn’t be nice to do an accurate historical re-enactment of 1789… 🙂 )
“White and rich” classic!! Miner49 what LBGTO group to you put yourself in?
and that’t that..apparently…sorry he lost what appeared to be a vintage AR-15…..
Exactly considering how much Colt SP1 s are going for now. If that’s what it is.
Maybe destroyed to remove the bad ju-ju the guns had. Or more likely in an officer’s private collection.
I bought my SP1 in 1983 when I got out, I paid $400 plus sales tax at that time.
I like the triangular hand guards, when you wrap the sling around your forearm you can sit the flat bottom of the handguard right on your palm and it makes a very stable hold.
The triangular handguard also helps orient the weapon in the dark.
I have an AR question for the crowd – I picked up a complete upper recently, but it’s a little ‘odd’.
It’s like its a combination of a railed flat top with the same front sight as the new AR he’s holding in the pic. If I use the rear flip-up backup sight I have, it’s way to low for the front sight.
The question I have is, can I get the type of rear sight and ‘handle’ as he has, and what’s it called, for ordering purposes?
Secondary AR question – How much of a PITA is it to eventually replace that front sight ‘triangle’ with something lower? It looks like the front sight also secures the gas tube needed to cycle the action…
You have a pretty common setup. If you want the handle and sight that goes on a flat top, just search for “carry handle.” If you don’t want the handle, lots of backup sights are made for use with the standard FSB. Knights and Matech are the ones usually used with an M4, or you can get a Daniel Defense A1.5 fixed sight if you aren’t sure if you’ll use an optic. Removing the FSB to replace it with a gas block is just a few pins.
I’m assuming the stormtroopers still have their original guns? You know, the ones they “tweaked” to fit the narrative!!
Of course they kept the gunms, and everyone in the precinct has their name on a ticket waiting to be pulled from a hat.
When I ask a deputy about getting my gunms back he said, ” Well I dont know possum, a lot of officers are gunm collectors too.”
I hope he buys two.
I hope he goes full “Captain Awesome” and builds them from 80% receivers and parts kits.
Given the type of law he practices and judging by the house they own I bet he can do better than that an go NFA if he wants to.
I buy two guns in the morning,
I buy two guns at night,
I buy two guns in the afternoon,
It makes me feel all right.
I buy two guns in time of peace,
And two in time of war.
I buy two guns before I buy two guns,
And then I buy two more
Now I’m going to smoke two joints before I buy two guns.
And then smoke two more.
Made me smile, Montana. 🙂
I’m calling Scott, rent a room off him, then I’m a resident of Mo. then I’m voting for McCloskey.
Because anybody who I said I protected my family with a gunm, and by God I’d do it again gets my vote.
Well, since the State of MO decided to destroy the McC’s guns, I am assuming those firearms were approprtately convicted of felonious criminal behavior and justly assigned capital punishment. This is further evidence that guns, not people, commit crimes. The McC’s received only misdemeanor charges and fines were levied. The guns, however, their behavior was so horrendous, they were convicted and sentenced to death.
Yes, yes, yes; /Sarc
They should go shopping for some training instead.
Yes, maybe they have done that recently.
His pose in the photos with the new gun looked a lot more like it than the night of the incident.
I’m glad to see they settled this with a minimum of problems and support their rights but they really looked like people that had no clue before.
True. And still, result. You can screw a lot up and still effectively protect yourself.
In an interview he said that both he and his wife have taken additional training “and especially Patricia”.
Personally, to people clucking about them needing training can just FOAD. Their unskilled tactics won the day.
“Their unskilled tactics won the day.“
Well no, the fact is the marchers moved right on through the neighborhood without restraint and the McCloskeys both caught criminal charges that they have pleaded guilty to. They had their weapons confiscated and they’re paying almost $3K in fines, and now they have a criminal record.
Their tactics did not win the day, but I’m not surprised that you try to revise history, it’s very common with the conservatives.
Moved right on through without attacking anyone or burning anything, because immediate consequences were standing right in front of them. Everyone’s a “peaceful protestor” or “marcher” at gunpoint- funny how that works.
I’d say their method was effective. Even if they had “training” it would been the same result. Guaranteed. Low ready the whole time would have changed nothing here.
Low ready instead of pointing at the crowd may have saved them from the criminal charges.
Yea? Right…
I have yet to get a definitive/authoritative answer to the question: who explicitly threatened whom first?
Did the crowd/mob first verbally threaten great bodily harm to the McCloskeys who then, in response, grabbed their firearms and pointed them at the crowd/mob?
Or, did the McCloskeys (nervous about the crowd/mob) first point their firearms at the crowd/mob which, in response, verbally threatened great bodily harm to the McCloskeys?
The answer to that question is absolutely key to whether or not the McCloskeys committed any crimes since property owners generally have no legal justification to threaten to kill simple trespassers, no matter how many there are or how raucous they are. Of course, if the property owner verbally orders the trespassers to vacate the property and those trespassers respond by threatening great bodily harm to the property owner, they are no longer simple trespassers and the property owner would often be legally justified to threaten the aggressors with deadly force.
An armed, masked mob that destroyed a gate to invade the neighborhood and is on your property is an implicit threat, nothing verbal would be required.
Although I think they were probably wrong to have been actually pointing the guns at anybody… particularly while fingering the trigger like the missus was. Keeping them visibly at the ready would have been a better approach both for not escalating and to manage the optics.
“and is on your property“
No one ever trespassed on the McCloskey’s property, and the gate was not their property as well.
THIS is the real miner…
Come out of the woodworks for this article alone. Nothing to contribute to TTAG anywhere else except shit like this.
Laughable. Good thing you don’t own guns.
But the mob did indeed trespass. If you do not live in a given gated community, and are not authorized/allowed to go in, then you are trespassing. Which the BLM group did do.
Well according to Mark Mc , he dont care who threatened who first.
In fact, here is a suit by the McCloskey’s against the homeowners association where in the McCloskey’s admit that the homeowners association is the right Ferrell owner of the roadway.
The McCloskey’s had no right to exit dwelling and point guns at people marching by on the roadway, that’s why they were charged with assault and harassment.
Here is a 2017 lawsuit by the McCloskeys, against the Portland Place Assn trustees, in which the McCloskeys admit that Portland Place trustees own the roadway:
“Portland Place property owners claim association failed to fix sewers
By Lhalie Castillo | Nov 10, 2017
shutterstock.com
ST. LOUIS — Property owners are suing homeowners’ association trustees, citing alleged breach of fiduciary duty and constructive fraud.
Mark T. McCloskey and Patricia N. McCloskey filed a complaint on Oct. 23, in the St. Louis Circuit Court against Sanjay Jain, Russell John and Richard Gemberling, Portland Place Association trustees, alleging they breached their duties to maintain the sewer lateral in Portland Place.
According to the complaint, the plaintiffs allege that as a result of the debris and obstructions at the sewer lateral, water backed up and flowed into the plaintiffs’ home. They paid to repair a collapsed portion of the sewer lateral at their property but were unable to repair those that pass through defendants’ roadway. They claim they have suffered damages to real estate and personal property, annoyance, inconvenience and emotional distress.”
Cool story bro.
Almost like shit that goes on in front of your home can have an effect on your home, huh?
Did your siblings torment you with the “I’m not touching you, I’m not touching you” game when you were younger? Is that where it all began? Mom sided with them cuz they were not actually touching you? Daddy just went to the garage and drank his pain away cuz the runt of his litter was too afraid to stand up for himself? lol. Cry us a river, miner.
Shut up Montana!
I was talking to my new bestest friend Opossum!
So Opossum, did you know I cut and pasted my reply?
That is because I love to…
Cut, cut, cut and paste,
cut and paste,
cut and paste!
You have indeed found the crux of the matter.
And the truth is, the marchers were just passing through on the street until the McCloskey’s, outraged over people walking through the neighborhood, exited their dwelling, pointed guns at the protesters while screaming at them.
The marchers took no notice of anyone in particular’s residence, they were just passing through on the street headed to the mayors house to publicly petition the government for a redress of grievances.
The McCloskeys have demonstrated in the past that they are willing to threaten those who entered what they considered their property, but as a result of many court cases the homeowners association has proven that the McCloskey’s did not own the street. If you doubt this, simply do a few minutes of research on the inter-webs, it’s all a matter of public record.
I don’t doubt that at all. I doubt the “lack of a threat” you are dismissing. So does everyone with a brain that would have a violent mob coming down their street. Did you see what they started doing after this? When they would go up to peoples doors and ride motorcycles through their property? One democrat even came out and said he was siding with them and voting for biden… they said “don’t tell me how to protest cracker”. lmfao. People like you would get run over by a group less than 5 with intentions like these mobs in 2020 had. But don’t lie. You live in a small town, went out with your fist up, and got thrown back indoors by a community that actually respects each other and won’t allow these mobs to intimidate innocents. U just mad, bro.
Look Montana,
They were merely headed to the mayors house to publicly petition the government for a redress of grievances.
They were very much like the protesters on Jan 6th. No real difference.
So, a “mob”. Lol. If they knew where the mayor’s house was, why involve innocents around the city? Also, that Jan 6th “mob”, went to the source. Throughout 2020 you saw what? Cities burned. People’s businesses looted. People’s neighborhoods given the same tactics the ATF used at Waco, with lights and music, like they used at Guantanamo Bay to keep their prisoners awake… Jan 6th might not have been any smarter because they failed to achieve their goal, but what exactly was the goal of every protest in 2020? To raise awareness? Lol. So kind of them. Glad these people cared. If they cared enough about actual problems, they probably could have toppled the government along with the “mob” on Jan 6th, and we could work on rebuilding the country together without two shitty elitist parties and their super PACs.
Did that go the way you hoped? Nope. Think before you speak, miner. I’ll bury you, the Jan 6th “mob”, BLM, and our entire government in the same mass grave, then throw wag bags full my platoons MRE loaded rock solid shits on top of it.
Isn’t a gated community technically the private property of the home owners association?
I get grief from walking my dog around a closed loop road. The residents think I am trespassing on private property and have either threatened to call the police or actual physical harm. I am walking on the roadway because there is no footpath. Also there is no fence, no gate, and no gatehouse with security. I have asked them to call the police and offered to wait the several hours for their response. No takers so far.
“they are no longer simple trespassers”
They never trespassed on the McCloskey’s property, that’s why the McCloskey’s were charged with felony menacing.
As 2 elite multimillionaire trial attorneys with decades of experience in the Missouri courts, they knew their best bet was to plead to a lesser charge because the state of Missouri had ample evidence to convict.
But they did trespass. Going into a gated community that one is not authorized to go into is trespass. Most if not all home associations say that at the gate. Trespass took place and you are playing word games by maintaining that because BLM did not go onto their domicile that BLM was completely innocent.
The protesters did indeed march in the roadway, the property of the Portland Place HOA.
The HOA declined to prosecute or file a complaint for trespass, that’s the end of the trespassing claims.
It is not legal for a third-party to threaten other people for trespassing on some other persons property.
There would’ve been no altercation whatsoever if the McCloskeys had stayed in their home and watched the protesters march down the street.
But they chose to exit their dwelling, point firearms at the protesters while yelling.
And that’s why they now have a criminal record.
You are in a court of internet not a court of law 🙂 BLM showing up is in itself a provocation given their collective anti-social deeds during the summer of 2020. Which includes harassing people, sometimes w/ guns, just eating at a restaurant. Maybe if the police around America had done their job then the McCloskeys, as well as others, would not feel the need to take their guns outside. Maybe just, maybe the court took into account this concept of provocation into account in giving the sentence that it did.
As typical, Miner49, you know not of what you speak. The simultaneous presence of the three elements of justification for deployment of deadly force…..in all 50 states…..consists of Ability/Opportunity/Jeoparady…AOJ. Ability means the invader/threatener/attacker has the power to cause death/great bodily injury via weapon or disparity of force….size, training, numbers. Opportunity means attacker is capable of immediately employing that power. The Tueller 21 foot rule (from standing start one can inflict deadly fatal stab wound 9n 1.5sec on average) clearly applied as the mob was within 7-10 paces. Jeopardy means opponent is acting such manner that reasopnable prudent in our situation would conclude that his intent was to kill/injure….manifest intent as expressed in word/actions. BLM mobs had one night earlier during similar marching burned down a 7-11 store, looted many businesses, set numerous fires putting fer in normal citizen hearts of similar actions if in one’s neighborhood, as in the McCloskey’s case. One does not have to wait until the attacker actually nflicts death blows/great bodily hrm before utilizing deadly force. Stand your ground and Castle Doctrine also applied for the McCloskeys. I believe they accepted the terms of the settlement as less expensive and swifter resolution. Being in the right can still be very expensive and time consuming.
StLPro2A,
“… intent was to kill/injure….manifest intent as expressed in word/actions.”
And therein lies the crux of the matter.
I agree that the crowd/mob satisfied the “ability” and “opportunity” criteria. I do not agree that some other crowd/mob burning buildings the previous day means it is reasonable to conclude that this crowd/mob (which may or may not share any of the same members) was going to burn the McCloskey’s home right then and there.
They accepted the plea because a misdemeanor charge has no bearing their ability to practice law, own weapons and costs them nothing.
They are worth 50 million dollars.
As stated below, The mob threatens to burn down your house.
They do so while committing a trespass on your property.
The mob was committing a trespass, it was a private street.
The street is owned by everyone in good standing with the HOA.
The HOA is actually a corporation for legal purposes.
You don’t have to wait for them to light and lob Molotov Cocktails.
You fear for your life because you can burn to death so deadly force is justified. That prerequisite alone justifies deadly force.
Acting in a riotous manner, threatening to kill you (burning the house down)
and being on your property is the trifecta.
They co owned the street with everyone in the HOA.
It doesn’t matter if they were nice people or not.
Kimberly Gardner overstepped her authority in convening a grand jury.
“They do so while committing a trespass on your property.
The mob was committing a trespass, it was a private street.
The street is owned by everyone in good standing with the HOA.“
Incorrect. The HOA declined to file a trespassing complaint, end of trespassing claims.
And you ignore the much larger issue: The McCloskeys initiated the altercation, the marchers had had no interaction with the McCloskeys and had made no threats to the McCloskeys, until the McCloskeys exited their dwelling, screaming and pointing guns at the marchers.
As you noted, the McCloskeys are elite trial attorneys whose fortune exceeds $50 million, do you really think that they would accept a criminal record just to save themselves inconvenience?
If you believe that then I have serious doubts about your level of cognitive functioning.
Troll, are you a member of the Bar?
That’s what I thought, the answer is no so don’t act like you can dispense legal advice or opinions.
Stop with your nonsense.
The riotous mob initiated the whole thing, they were on private property.
Whether the HOA filed trespass charges is irrelevant.
The McCloskys were in good standing (they had paid the association or “corporation” dues) but had a beef with the HOA in the past.
In legal standing they were joint owners in tenancy of said private street.
The HOA isn’t going to open up the piggy bank to file charges after the fact.
The misdemeanor charge is irrelevant in Missouri as long as it isn’t for domestic violence offenses.
Most attorneys have criminal records, it’s pretty much a parking ticket offense of the business.
“the McCloskeys are elite trial attorneys”
No, they are personal injury attorneys and would not be the attorneys representing you in a trial.
Most personal injury cases are settled in arbitration.
They retained Joel Scwartz who is a Criminal Defense Attorney who does nothing else but defend people against criminal charges.
49er just stop, you are absolutely clueless as to the law and legal process.
Your opinions would be comical but I fear you are a piece of bread short of a sandwich. Stop before you make yourself into more of a fool if that’s even possible.
“Most attorneys have criminal records“
Really?
I think what you mean is that most attorneys you know have criminal records, and I am not surprised by that.
You need to hang out with a better class of attorneys, ones who have more familiarity with the law and can avoid criminal convictions.
“They retained Joel Scwartz who is a Criminal Defense Attorney who does nothing else but defend people against criminal charges.“
Of course they did not represent themselves, anyone who represents themselves in a criminal matter has a fool for a client.
And even with this representation, and all the experience and resources they have, they could not avoid criminal convictions for crimes of violence involving a firearm.
the Mccloskeys mistake was they should have retreated in side there home and waited.and the first maggot that came thru the door it’s SHOW TIME!
What if they stood in the street and started throwing bricks and sht at your house?
I’d have to say, ” Now you guys cut that out, you know that’s not nice. “
lol. Never underestimate a marsupial.
No duty to retreat. Duty to retreat is an antiquated and outrageous concept that gets people killed.
Why would anyone come through the door, you can light the home on fire from outside, The ATF demonstrated that at Waco.
The rioters were not from the ATF. We know that because the McC’s house was not exploded.
Not saying they weren’t dangerous, just not as dangerous as the ATF.
Had the BLM mob thrown fire bombs at their home, as was the case the previous night at other businesses, they could have perished in their home for not having decidedly acted in a timely manner. One does not have to wait for the fire bombs to be thrown or the death blow/great bodily harm be inflicted to apply deadly force if all the above outlined legs are simultaneously present. Heasitating can cost one their life, as in the case of police needing to make split second life/death decisions. If they hesitate, they may not go home to their family at shift end. Same with McCloskeys.
So when a cop pulls you over lunging for the glove box to retrieve
your documents with ” You’ll never take me alive ! ! !” is not a good idea?
“as was the case the previous night at other businesses“
What do you mean “other businesses”?
It seems you are not very familiar with the actual physical situation.
In any case, how do you explain the fact that, even without an armed response, no homes in this subdivision were harmed, much less firebombed?
Well if they’re going to have to replace their weapons might I suggest an upgrade. After all, 30 rounds clipazines are just standard.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KwgcEnwS5EQ
I’ve seen a couple AR lowers with belt fed uppers. Maybe not the most practical, but as we saw in 2020 and going into 2024, practical can fuck right off.
My personal touch is more of a heavy equipment variant. Fuck around and find out, 2024.
Oh, kinda like rock, paper, scissors.
Rifle, Tank, Explosives.
Rifle shoots explosives, tank crushes rifle, explosives blow up tank.
It’s a fun game if you dont lose.
Actually, I really like the way the Czech freedom fighters used soap to defeat armor during the Prague spring in the ‘50s.
You know, soap is a really handy substance when fighting armored vehicles, like Madge says about Palmolive, “you’re soaking in it!”
Fun fact, Madge’s last name was…
Miner!
Were not playing Rifle, Tank, Explosives, Soap.
Hrm, what I’m wondering is – if it had be me or most any other average citizen who is not an (multi-millionaire, politically-connected) attorney, would a misdemeanor plea deal have even been on the table?
I’m thinking probably not.
I hope his wife did not get another jennings. With a house like theirs she should at least have a sig , if not a Korth revolver. And he should get a better AR with a flat top and aim point.
” Honey I want a new Kahr.”
Here’s an interesting fact regarding the firearm Patricia was pointing at the marchers:
“Patricia McCloskey and her husband, Mark McCloskey, have said the handgun Patricia McCloskey waved at protesters was inoperable because they had used it as a prop during a lawsuit they once filed against a gun manufacturer. In order to bring it into a courtroom, they made it inoperable.“
It is so refreshing to see all of you POTG defending lawsuit happy trial lawyers who have sued gun manufacturers, fascinating!
Go to the original story and read what I wrote in the comments yesterday.
The real Miner49er got his ass handed to him and nothing else to say.
I gave him too much information on the HOA and the McCloskey’s.
His knowledge of the law is questionable at best, he’s basically a troll.
https://ttagstaging.wpenginepowered.com/mark-and-patricia-mccloskey-plead-guilty-to-misdemeanors-pay-small-fines/
The law is simple on this one. A mob of people is on private property committing a trespass.
The street and subdivision is Private Property, they pay the HOA, the HOA is a corporation.
The threaten to burn down your house.
You don’t have to wait for them to light and lob Molotov Cocktails.
You fear for your life because you can burn to death so deadly force is justified.
Kimberly M. Gardner pursued charges but a judge disqualified Gardner.
He did so because “It raises the appearance that she initiated a criminal prosecution for political purposes.” She had sent out campaign material asking contributions before bringing charges saying she would. She convened a grand jury and both were indicted.
The McCloskey’s are not particularly likable people, they sue a lot over trivial matters.
They sued the HOA and a Synagogue, that’s not going get you brownie points.
In the end Mark McClosky will likely be a Senator and Gardners career will be over.
He’s probably a prick in real life. However a person who faced down an angry mob with an AR15 wouldn’t be a bad guy to have on our side right now.
I doubt he’s got much use for Chippy.
No, you offered no proof whatsoever to support your claims.
I posted an actual reference to a real court case, wherein the McCloskeys admit they do not own the roadway the protesters were marching on.
Do you really think elite trial lawyers whose financial resources exceed $50 million, as well as having decades of experience in Missouri courts, would roll over like tiny little puppies and accept a criminal record without a good reason?
And I must say, I am so much surprised you would be so vocal in your support of trial attorneys who have sued gun manufacturers for millions of dollars, it seems somewhat inconsistent with your philosophies.
Apples and oranges plus you trying to deflect because you don’t know the law.
The McCloskys are personal injury attorneys, they sue people.
That’s their specialty when it comes to practicing law.
They aren’t “elite trial lawyers”, they have probably settle 95% + of their cases through arbitration.
If Bryco sold guns that blew up or went off w/o pulling the trigger they should be sued.
I have no junk guns in my collection so it doesn’t affect me in one bit.
I cannot seem to find where you posted an actual reference to a real court case, wherein the McCloskeys admit they do not own the roadway the protesters were marching on.
Once again: The McCloskys were in good standing (they had paid the association or “corporation” dues) but had a beef with the HOA in the past.
In legal standing they were joint owners in tenancy of said private street.
The fact that you don’t even know what “curtilage” is in legal terms proves what an idiot you are.
Big hint: gate = curtilage.
Posted PRIVATE street: Everyone lives within the curtilage of the property and shares common space.
“I own stock in FoMoCo” – Sure you do little troll, did Auntie 49er give you one share when you graduated 5th grade? Miner 49er is worth $14.91 so everybody be careful.
He wants to shoot people at the Ford dealership, like I said a piece of bread short of a sandwich. He has a Huffy bike so that’s really alarming.
Wow, I cannot believe I’m replying to this idiot.
Most attorneys I’m familiar with understand how to research previous lawsuits, it is my understanding that is taught to first year all students.
Here is a 2017 lawsuit by the McCloskeys, against the Portland Place Assn trustees, in which the McCloskeys admit that Portland Place trustees own the roadway:
“Portland Place property owners claim association failed to fix sewers
By Lhalie Castillo | Nov 10, 2017
shutterstock.com
ST. LOUIS — Property owners are suing homeowners’ association trustees, citing alleged breach of fiduciary duty and constructive fraud.
Mark T. McCloskey and Patricia N. McCloskey filed a complaint on Oct. 23, in the St. Louis Circuit Court against Sanjay Jain, Russell John and Richard Gemberling, Portland Place Association trustees, alleging they breached their duties to maintain the sewer lateral in Portland Place.
According to the complaint, the plaintiffs allege that as a result of the debris and obstructions at the sewer lateral, water backed up and flowed into the plaintiffs’ home. They paid to repair a collapsed portion of the sewer lateral at their property but were unable to repair those that pass through defendants’ roadway. They claim they have suffered damages to real estate and personal property, annoyance, inconvenience and emotional distress.
The plaintiffs hold the defendants responsible because they allegedly wrongfully ignored their legitimate request to repair the storm or fowl water sewer system at Portland Place.
The plaintiffs seek judgment in their favor in a fair reasonable amount that will compensate their actual and consequential damages, plus interest, costs of this action and all further relief the court deems just and proper. They are representing themselves.
St. Louis Circuit Court case number 1722-CC11570”
In case you missed it, here’s the relevant acknowledgment of roadway ownership:
“ …those that pass through defendants’ roadway… “
Bob, I hope that clears up the issue for you.
“Huffy bike”
Yes, I have owned many Huffy bicycles… when I was a kid.
Brought back fond memories…
Oh wait, was that supposed to be an insult?
Insult?
FYI; I’m kinda difficult to insult, being I abandoned all hope of ever being with a woman.
Yep, my rugged good looks and sparkling wit are reserved for chickens now.
“Big hint: gate = curtilage”
Even bigger hint: gate not attached to their actual titled private property, therefore not part of their curtilage.
I got to thinking about that. A rich guy like that usually dont care much about ” the poors” and ” the poors” have every right to be armed and maybe more so then the next guy. He’d money law the 2A up with anything that didnt affect his elite I betcha.
I guarantee that he is a prick.
I doubt he gives a rats ass about the common folk.
He has been proven to be sue happy.
That being said they had a right to defend their lives and property.
He actually showed restraint or maybe the AR wasn’t even loaded.
The pistol was inoperative so the case against the wife was weak at best.
Rich prick or not, you don’t wait for a life threatening crime to happen, you prevent it.
If someone threatens to burn down my house, have the ability to do it and I reasonably believe they will,
I have met the criteria for the use of deadly force.
My problem was I told MIner49er too much in a response to the original story yesterday.
He was probably Googling all night to spout his nonsense.
“The HOA declined to prosecute or file a complaint for trespass”
Yeah he sued them (the HOA), they were probably the pricks in the HOA.
That doesn’t change the fact that they were in good standing with the HOA so the street was private property owned by everyone in the HOA (corporation) including the McClosky’s.
BLM or whoever was in the mob didn’t have to be on their lawn or “proper” property.
You learn this in the first year of law school.
“That doesn’t change the fact that they were in good standing with the HOA so the street was private property owned by everyone in the HOA (corporation) including the McClosky’s.“
You have yet to post any evidence to support the multiple claims you make in the statement above.
I really don’t have to, it’s Missouri law.
Look it up and not on Wikipedia.
The record shows that the McCloskeys pleaded guilty to violating Missouri state criminal law by committing a criminal act with a firearm.
If you’re wondering why the Portland Place HOA Trustees declined to file a trespassing complaint against the marchers, you might consider this mention in the official record:
“Mark T. McCloskey and Patricia N. McCloskey filed a complaint on Oct. 23, in the St. Louis Circuit Court against Sanjay Jain, Russell John and Richard Gemberling, Portland Place Association trustees“
I was the one who told you that so it’s no surprise to me.
Food for thought, why did the McCloskys only go after
Sanjay Jain, Russell John and Richard Gemberling?
Are they the only Portland Place trustees?
Clue: There are more then 40 houses in Portland Place.
“I was the one who told you that so it’s no surprise to me.“
Now you’re just flat out lying, I took that quote from the news story I posted about the McCloskeys dispute with the Portland Place HOA.
As of yet, you have not supported the claims you’ve made with any sort of citation or reference. As my post shows, the McCloskeys admitted in court they do not own the roadway, therefore they cannot support a claim of trespassing against the marchers on the roadway. Only the trustees of the HOA have standing to file a complaint of trespassing, and thanks to the McCloskeys adversarial nature, that ship apparently has already sailed.
Now I understand why from your perspective all attorneys have criminal records, you are either incompetent or dishonest, or both.
“BLM or whoever was in the mob didn’t have to be on their lawn or “proper” property.
You learn this in the first year of law school“
Those who have successfully completed the first year of law school know that the term you are grasping for is ‘curtilage’.
And no, the street is not part of their ‘curtilage’ and not their property.
“In several cases in state and federal courts, Mark McCloskey represented plaintiffs who had been injured by handguns manufactured by Bryco Arms, a gunmaker that became notorious in the late 1990s and early 2000s for producing low-quality pistols derided as “junk guns” by gun-rights and gun-control activists alike. Bryco’s products had a reputation for being used in crimes — and having design defects that lead to unintentional discharges.
One case, Chronister v. Bryco, ended in a judgment of more than $350,000 in 2001 after Mark McCloskey successfully argued that the company was liable for a defective design that caused one of its handguns to misfire in a man’s hand with the chamber open. The explosion left the plaintiff in the case with shrapnel in his face, hearing loss, tinnitus and temporary blindness.
The McCloskeys’ website says they handled at least two other product liability cases against gun manufacturers, including one that resulted in a judgment of more than $400,000 and another misfiring-gun death case, which resulted in a confidential settlement.“
Personally, I am in favor of suing gun companies who manufacture defective products.
But I am surprised that so many POTG on this forum agree with me about supporting attorneys who sue gun manufacturers for defective products.
“I have asked them to call the police and offered to wait the several hours for their response. No takers so far.“
They have probably called the police, and the police gave them a quick lesson in understanding the limits of their personal property ownership and rights.
Some claim that the HOA is a corporation and that somehow grants the McCloskey’s some sort of right to threaten other people that aren’t on their actual private property.
I own stock in FoMoCo, does that give me the right to point guns at at someone if I see them trespassing at the local Ford dealership?
Only if I want to go to jail for assault, Reckless endangerment, felony menacing, etc.
“Only if I want to go to jail for assault, Reckless endangerment, felony menacing, etc.”
Please do, you might learn something from Bubba or actually study some law books.
I know your parents will probably be happy to have you out of their basement.
Sadly, all you have is ad hominem attacks.
Any first year law school student would be able to actually provide citations in Missouri state law to support your contention, but you have failed to do so.
The fact is I gave you all of this information but you don’t know how it is used in law.
It’s your job to cite Missouri statute, I have given you all the info that disproves your “feelings” already.
IOWs I’m not pointing you towards more HOAs lawsuits involving the McCloskys.
There is more to come with this, that’s all I am going to say.
You figure out what recourse the McCloskys have, I’m not going to tell you.
I have read the HOA case and not some newspaper article.
I have LexisNexis, you obviously do not, you have Google.
You may want to look at the LEGAL definition of the terms you love to quote.
Let me know when you get a Doctor of Jurisprudence degree. LOL
“It’s your job to cite Missouri statute, I have given you all the info that disproves your “feelings” already.“
I am not making any claims about the situation, I’m merely relating the official record of the case. They will get you to buy
The proof is in the pudding, they voluntarily pleaded guilty to a criminal act involving the use of a firearm.
It is on the record, they pleaded guilty and paid the fines. End of story.
“There is more to come with this, that’s all I am going to say.“
You may want to consult LEXIS-NEXIS regarding filing an appeal to a voluntary plea agreement, I’m betting you will be disappointed with the answer.
What you are relating is your feelings and newspaper articles.
Actually newspaper articles I helped you find.
I said nothing of an appeal, they don’t need one.
You actually have no idea of what LexisNexis even is.
I should charge you $350 per hour just to respond to your inane babble.
End of story
“Actually newspaper articles I helped you find.“
Now you are delusional, I originally posted the news story regarding the McCloskeys admission that they did not own the roadway in front of their home on TTAG on January 2, 2021.
It is sad to watch you attempt to claim credit for my research, it just shows the depth of your intellectual bankruptcy.
And the McCloskeys now have a criminal record that will exist in perpetuity.
Of course, as these are state charges it is certainly possible that the Republican governor will issue a politically motivated pardon.
And, like all pardons, it will include an admission of guilt by the McCloskeys but that will be a moot point as they have already admitted guilt in open court.
Enough of your trolling and newspaper reading.
They already had criminal records so your point is what exactly?
End of Story unless you want to pay $350 an hour.
Then I’ll talk with you and you might learn something.
End of Story again
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BdLi5UUsxxM
Let’s hope she gets some training and actually learns how to hold the damn thing this time around.
Guns, the great equalizer! Why do you think dems and libs want them gone? They want you to get equal handouts and have no rights!🖕💩👜🐀s that they are!
Comments are closed.