LaxPower Back-Up Stick

Matnum PI wrote: ↑Tue Aug 18, 2020 1:32 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Tue Aug 18, 2020 1:28 pm Are we truly sure you're not some Russian troll?

FanLax has received more than one PM asking the same question. He's real.

Just a right wing "Real American" troll who never actually played lacrosse, no family who played, didn't go the college he "roots" for... if we can call it that when he trolls the Hopkins thread and makes outlandish claims for "his" team...

Strange.

holmes435 wrote: ↑Tue Aug 18, 2020 1:25 pm

kramerica.inc wrote: ↑Tue Aug 18, 2020 1:20 pm

holmes435 wrote: ↑Tue Aug 18, 2020 10:29 am St. Louis couple who pointed guns at protesters to speak at Republican convention

Because of course they are. Republicans are doubling down on stupid.

I understand why the left wants to take away my guns. Because idiots like these prove some people don't deserve them.

Why don't they deserve guns, again?

From a technical side, because they committed felonies.

From a realistic side, because they have no idea how to use them properly or safely or legally.

Did they commit a felony or were charged with a felony?
And who got hurt in the incident, please refresh my memory, did I miss something?

Get them while they are hot:

kramerica.inc wrote: ↑Tue Aug 18, 2020 1:27 pm Democrats shocked and mad that people used guns to protect themselves and their property and no one got hurt...

Danger! They are idiots!

I'm not a Democrat and I'm a gun owner. These idiots literally broke the law with how they handled their guns regardless of whether anyone got hurt.

There's a reason so many people get accidentally and negligently shot, and they're prime examples of why.

kramerica.inc wrote: ↑Tue Aug 18, 2020 1:37 pm

holmes435 wrote: ↑Tue Aug 18, 2020 1:25 pm

kramerica.inc wrote: ↑Tue Aug 18, 2020 1:20 pm

holmes435 wrote: ↑Tue Aug 18, 2020 10:29 am St. Louis couple who pointed guns at protesters to speak at Republican convention

Because of course they are. Republicans are doubling down on stupid.

I understand why the left wants to take away my guns. Because idiots like these prove some people don't deserve them.

Why don't they deserve guns, again?

From a technical side, because they committed felonies.

From a realistic side, because they have no idea how to use them properly or safely or legally.

Did they commit a felony or were charged with a felony?
And who got hurt in the incident, please refresh my memory, did I miss something?

They committed felonies and were charged with felonies. They're literally on camera doing it.

Are you cool with someone driving 120 on the interstate if no one gets hurt?

Edit - there are lots of ways to be outside your home with a gun protecting yourself without committing multiple felonies.

holmes435 wrote: ↑Tue Aug 18, 2020 1:50 pm

kramerica.inc wrote: ↑Tue Aug 18, 2020 1:37 pm

holmes435 wrote: ↑Tue Aug 18, 2020 1:25 pm

kramerica.inc wrote: ↑Tue Aug 18, 2020 1:20 pm

holmes435 wrote: ↑Tue Aug 18, 2020 10:29 am St. Louis couple who pointed guns at protesters to speak at Republican convention

Because of course they are. Republicans are doubling down on stupid.

I understand why the left wants to take away my guns. Because idiots like these prove some people don't deserve them.

Why don't they deserve guns, again?

From a technical side, because they committed felonies.

From a realistic side, because they have no idea how to use them properly or safely or legally.

Did they commit a felony or were charged with a felony?
And who got hurt in the incident, please refresh my memory, did I miss something?

They committed felonies and were charged with felonies. They're literally on camera doing it.

Are you cool with someone driving 120 on the interstate if no one gets hurt?

I got that they were charged. But were they convicted? There are a lot of laws surrounding use of weapons including if they were properly liscensed, if they felt threatened, were on their property etc.

I am actually fine with people driving as fast as they want on the highway. Even more so like in your scenario where no one gets hurt.

kramerica.inc wrote: ↑Tue Aug 18, 2020 2:00 pm I got that they were charged. But were they convicted? There are a lot of laws surrounding use of weapons including if they were properly liscensed, if they felt threatened, were on their property etc.

I am actually fine with people driving as fast as they want on the highway. Even more so like in your scenario where no one gets hurt.

They have not yet been convicted, which has no bearing. Lots of people commit crimes and don't get convicted or are later pardoned.

And yep, lots of laws surrounding use of weapons, when you can brandish them, discharge them, etc. There's a reason we all made fun of Biden for saying you should step out on your front porch and fire two warning shots with your double barrel shotgun. It's illegal. Plus you have to reload.

Fitting.

A Speed Limit On Germany's Autobahns: 'Like Talking Gun Control In The U.S.' Cars drive near Frankfurt Airport on Tuesday in Germany. Much of Germany's autobahn system has no speed limit, and a proposal to cap speeds at about 80 mph has sparked controversy.

I've seen a couple of wrecks on the Autobahn...lots of little pieces scattered for a long way.

holmes435 wrote: ↑Tue Aug 18, 2020 1:50 pm They committed felonies and were charged with felonies. They're literally on camera doing it.

They were charged with felonies (subsequently dropped).
It's your opinion that they committed felonies.
Her pistol was found to be inoperable when tested by police.
I've seen no photos of him aiming his rifle at anyone.

old salt wrote: ↑Tue Aug 18, 2020 2:45 pm

holmes435 wrote: ↑Tue Aug 18, 2020 1:50 pm They committed felonies and were charged with felonies. They're literally on camera doing it.

They were charged with felonies (subsequently dropped).
It's your opinion that they committed felonies.
Her pistol was found to be inoperable when tested by police.
I've seen no photos of him aiming his rifle at anyone.

Where did you see the charges were dropped or dismissed?

Her pistol was reassembled later and found to operate just fine, I doubt she knew it wasn't working considering how little respect she has for guns. But it doesn't have to be in operating condition to still be a felony. If you rob a bank with a broken gun, you're not gonna get any leniency.

As far as the husband...

holmes435 wrote: ↑Tue Aug 18, 2020 3:00 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Tue Aug 18, 2020 2:45 pm

holmes435 wrote: ↑Tue Aug 18, 2020 1:50 pm They committed felonies and were charged with felonies. They're literally on camera doing it.

They were charged with felonies (subsequently dropped).
It's your opinion that they committed felonies.
Her pistol was found to be inoperable when tested by police.
I've seen no photos of him aiming his rifle at anyone.

Where did you see the charges were dropped or dismissed?

Her pistol was reassembled later and found to operate just fine, I doubt she knew it wasn't working considering how little respect she has for guns. But it doesn't have to be in operating condition to still be a felony. If you rob a bank with a broken gun, you're not gonna get any leniency.

As far as the husband...

https://www.kmov.com/news/report-patric ... 19c88.html

A previous attorney for the McCloskey's had indicated the gun had been rendered inoperable long before the incident because it had been used as an exhibit in previous lawsuits.

Is Mr McCloskey aiming the rifle at anyone ? He's looking straight ahead, with the rifle in a carry position, aimed to the side. Is his finger on the trigger?

The MO AG announced he's joining the case to file for dismissal. The MO Governor says he'll pardon if convicted.

old salt wrote: ↑Tue Aug 18, 2020 3:16 pm

holmes435 wrote: ↑Tue Aug 18, 2020 3:00 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Tue Aug 18, 2020 2:45 pm

holmes435 wrote: ↑Tue Aug 18, 2020 1:50 pm They committed felonies and were charged with felonies. They're literally on camera doing it.

They were charged with felonies (subsequently dropped).
It's your opinion that they committed felonies.
Her pistol was found to be inoperable when tested by police.
I've seen no photos of him aiming his rifle at anyone.

Where did you see the charges were dropped or dismissed?

Her pistol was reassembled later and found to operate just fine, I doubt she knew it wasn't working considering how little respect she has for guns. But it doesn't have to be in operating condition to still be a felony. If you rob a bank with a broken gun, you're not gonna get any leniency.

As far as the husband...

https://www.kmov.com/news/report-patric ... 19c88.html

A previous attorney for the McCloskey's had indicated the gun had been rendered inoperable long before the incident because it had been used as an exhibit in previous lawsuits.

Is Mr McCloskey aiming the rifle at anyone ? He's looking straight ahead, with the rifle in a carry position, aimed to the side. Is his finger on the trigger?

The MO AG announced he's joining the case to file for dismissal. The MO Governor says he'll pardon if convicted.

The better question is why does this one couple upset the Left so much? There isn't enough money in the universe to make me care what they did...it simply doesn't register with me.

What is it about this couple and their brandishing a firearm that upsets the Left so much? You know what it is, the Left hates that someone would deign to defend themselves in the most American of ways, the #2A.

I don't care. You shouldn't either.

I heard Donald Trump has asked Bill Barr to look into whether Michelle Obama can be indicted for election interference because she wore a necklace last night that said V-O-T-E.

Left complains about criminal justice overeach.

Asks for less charges/prosecutions when people go to far protesting and people/property are hurt/damaged.

Asks for more prosecutions when no one got hurt, and peace was kept.

old salt wrote: ↑Tue Aug 18, 2020 3:16 pm

holmes435 wrote: ↑Tue Aug 18, 2020 3:00 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Tue Aug 18, 2020 2:45 pm

holmes435 wrote: ↑Tue Aug 18, 2020 1:50 pm They committed felonies and were charged with felonies. They're literally on camera doing it.

They were charged with felonies (subsequently dropped).
It's your opinion that they committed felonies.
Her pistol was found to be inoperable when tested by police.
I've seen no photos of him aiming his rifle at anyone.

Where did you see the charges were dropped or dismissed?

Her pistol was reassembled later and found to operate just fine, I doubt she knew it wasn't working considering how little respect she has for guns. But it doesn't have to be in operating condition to still be a felony. If you rob a bank with a broken gun, you're not gonna get any leniency.

As far as the husband...

https://www.kmov.com/news/report-patric ... 19c88.html

A previous attorney for the McCloskey's had indicated the gun had been rendered inoperable long before the incident because it had been used as an exhibit in previous lawsuits.

Is Mr McCloskey aiming the rifle at anyone ? He's looking straight ahead, with the rifle in a carry position, aimed to the side. Is his finger on the trigger?

The MO AG announced he's joining the case to file for dismissal. The MO Governor says he'll pardon if convicted.

Yes, in the video he flags a bunch of people and is certainly angry. There's nothing in the law there about trigger discipline. and plenty of protestors wouldn't know whether his finger is on or off the trigger in the moment. If you rob a bank and keep your finger off the trigger, you're not getting any leniency.

So the charges haven't been dropped yet.... And if they go through and a jury of their peers convicts them, the Governor is gonna throw the rule of law out the window. Some guy...

Again, there are plenty of ways to protect yourself legally while standing outside your house with a gun. This was not one of them. Why is it so hard to say they should know proper gun safety and use? Especially as lawyers!




These idiots give responsible gun owners a bad rap. And it's fuel for the left.

I don’t have a lot of sympathy for the St. Louis couple. They claim people were on their property, but none of the videos show that. They claim they were threatened, etc., but again none of the videos show that. Is it possible that stuff happened but wasn’t on video? Yeah, sure. Do they have any other eyewitnesses, however? Not that I am aware of.

It is a question for the jury whether waving the guns the way they did was threatening within the meaning of the felony statute. I could see a juror going either way on that. Depending on the panel, they could well get off.

Much has been made about the fact that this was a private development with private streets. But this couple didn’t own the streets. They were owned by the homeowners association. So the protesters were not walking on their property.

It’s just like any other homeowners association. If someone is on association common grounds, you (a homeowner) don’t have the right to kick them off or point your gun at them. You can call the association and make a complaint. The association then can kick the people off, or charge them with trespass, or whatever.

These people are the ones who made a mountain out of a mole hill. The protesters were simply walking down the street, through the private development, to get to the mayor’s house. Had these people simply stayed inside and minded their own business, the protesters would have walked past their house in less than five minutes.

The picture of the damaged gate is also suspicious because you can see in other video protesters simply opening the gate and walking through. Don’t know that there is any proof as to who damaged the gate.

I don’t condone vandalism. Anyone who damaged the gate should be charged. But if it was this couple who did that in order to try to “sweeten” their case, the book should be thrown at them.

Next time, if there is a next time, Karen should at least put on a clean shirt.

holmes435 wrote: ↑Tue Aug 18, 2020 3:53 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Tue Aug 18, 2020 3:16 pm

holmes435 wrote: ↑Tue Aug 18, 2020 3:00 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Tue Aug 18, 2020 2:45 pm

holmes435 wrote: ↑Tue Aug 18, 2020 1:50 pm They committed felonies and were charged with felonies. They're literally on camera doing it.

They were charged with felonies (subsequently dropped).
It's your opinion that they committed felonies.
Her pistol was found to be inoperable when tested by police.
I've seen no photos of him aiming his rifle at anyone.

Where did you see the charges were dropped or dismissed?

Her pistol was reassembled later and found to operate just fine, I doubt she knew it wasn't working considering how little respect she has for guns. But it doesn't have to be in operating condition to still be a felony. If you rob a bank with a broken gun, you're not gonna get any leniency.

As far as the husband...

https://www.kmov.com/news/report-patric ... 19c88.html

A previous attorney for the McCloskey's had indicated the gun had been rendered inoperable long before the incident because it had been used as an exhibit in previous lawsuits.

Is Mr McCloskey aiming the rifle at anyone ? He's looking straight ahead, with the rifle in a carry position, aimed to the side. Is his finger on the trigger?

The MO AG announced he's joining the case to file for dismissal. The MO Governor says he'll pardon if convicted.

Yes, in the video he flags a bunch of people and is certainly angry. There's nothing in the law there about trigger discipline. and plenty of protestors wouldn't know whether his finger is on or off the trigger in the moment. If you rob a bank and keep your finger off the trigger, you're not getting any leniency.

So the charges haven't been dropped yet.... And if they go through and a jury of their peers convicts them, the Governor is gonna throw the rule of law out the window. Some guy...

Again, there are plenty of ways to protect yourself legally while standing outside your house with a gun. This was not one of them. Why is it so hard to say they should know proper gun safety and use? Especially as lawyers!


These idiots give responsible gun owners a bad rap. And it's fuel for the left.

The issue is not what the trespassers thought or knew. The issue is whether or not they were endangered.
That's why the position of the rifle & whether or not he had his finger on the trigger is relevant.
As gunowners, they accomplished what they intended. They kept the trespassers from coming further onto private property (the street & sidewalk were private property) & prevented them from carrying out the threats they were making. They weren't making the protesters leave their private community's property. They were defending their own property. The trespassers were directing specific threats at them.

old salt wrote: ↑Tue Aug 18, 2020 4:19 pm

holmes435 wrote: ↑Tue Aug 18, 2020 3:53 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Tue Aug 18, 2020 3:16 pm

holmes435 wrote: ↑Tue Aug 18, 2020 3:00 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Tue Aug 18, 2020 2:45 pm

holmes435 wrote: ↑Tue Aug 18, 2020 1:50 pm They committed felonies and were charged with felonies. They're literally on camera doing it.

They were charged with felonies (subsequently dropped).
It's your opinion that they committed felonies.
Her pistol was found to be inoperable when tested by police.
I've seen no photos of him aiming his rifle at anyone.

Where did you see the charges were dropped or dismissed?

Her pistol was reassembled later and found to operate just fine, I doubt she knew it wasn't working considering how little respect she has for guns. But it doesn't have to be in operating condition to still be a felony. If you rob a bank with a broken gun, you're not gonna get any leniency.

As far as the husband...

https://www.kmov.com/news/report-patric ... 19c88.html

A previous attorney for the McCloskey's had indicated the gun had been rendered inoperable long before the incident because it had been used as an exhibit in previous lawsuits.

Is Mr McCloskey aiming the rifle at anyone ? He's looking straight ahead, with the rifle in a carry position, aimed to the side. Is his finger on the trigger?

The MO AG announced he's joining the case to file for dismissal. The MO Governor says he'll pardon if convicted.

Yes, in the video he flags a bunch of people and is certainly angry. There's nothing in the law there about trigger discipline. and plenty of protestors wouldn't know whether his finger is on or off the trigger in the moment. If you rob a bank and keep your finger off the trigger, you're not getting any leniency.

So the charges haven't been dropped yet.... And if they go through and a jury of their peers convicts them, the Governor is gonna throw the rule of law out the window. Some guy...

Again, there are plenty of ways to protect yourself legally while standing outside your house with a gun. This was not one of them. Why is it so hard to say they should know proper gun safety and use? Especially as lawyers!


These idiots give responsible gun owners a bad rap. And it's fuel for the left.

The issue is not what the trespassers thought or knew. The issue is whether or not they were endangered.
That's why the position of the rifle & whether or not he had his finger on the trigger is relevant.
As gunowners, they accomplished what they intended. They kept the trespassers from coming further onto private property (the street & sidewalk were private property) & prevented them from carrying out the threats they were making. They weren't making the protesters leave the community property. They were defending their own property.

And the police are “threatened” by people not brandishing a weapon and are often unarmed....and they are supposed to be “trained”.

Frank Bruni in the NY Times:

"I think I’m supposed to question whether the Democratic Party can really stretch far enough in opposite directions to accommodate a democratic socialist like Bernie Sanders and an estranged Republican like John Kasich, transcendently strange bedfellows who spoke and served as ideological poles on the opening night of whatever we’re calling this shrunken, not-in-Milwaukee, pandemic-warped political jubilee.

I should probably describe that warping, review the attendant adjustments and find fault here, there and everywhere, because that’s what we pundits do. We quibble. We naysay. We’re insufferable that way.

But this isn’t a time for business as usual. It isn’t a usual time. I’m not referring to the coronavirus per se, to the history-making selection of a Black woman as the Democratic Party’s vice-presidential nominee or to any one facet, any one dynamic of the days before us. I’m referring to the stakes of the days ahead. They’re immeasurable.

Never in my 55 years has the Democrats’ success mattered more for the welfare, the sanity — the future — of these United States than now, because never has the other fork in the road been a Republican president as profoundly amoral, fundamentally corrupt and flatly incompetent as the one seeking four more years.

Donald Trump has made clear that he’s willing to steal this election from Joe Biden if that’s the only way to “win.” He has in fact commenced that heist. He’s ready to smash all faith in our institutions and all pride in our democratic system and fashion a throne amid the wreckage. And he has a shockingly large number of accomplices — including, to date, most of the Republicans in Congress — who are cheering him on or biting their tongues to the point of hemorrhage.

In the context of that, what I saw on Monday night wasn’t something to be parsed or graded. It was something to rush toward and relish: a buffet for the starving. It was salvation. I have zero interest in decreeing whether the mashed potatoes were suitably fluffy or the asparagus overcooked.

Instead I want to note that nowhere in Trump’s inner circle is there anyone with the gravitas and grace of Michelle Obama, because someone like her wouldn’t last a nanosecond there. Trump would find the example of her too threatening, the yardstick of her too diminishing. She’d find his ethical ecosystem uninhabitable: the cold, dark surface of the moon without a spacesuit.

I want to savor her every word on Monday night, when she so beautifully distilled what’s wrong with Trump — “He simply cannot be who we need him to be for us,” she said — and so hauntingly defined what it feels like to live in Trump’s America.

“Kids in this country are seeing what happens when we stop requiring empathy of one another,” she said. “They’re looking around wondering if we’ve been lying to them this whole time about who we really are and what we truly value.”

“What’s going on in this country is just not right,” she added. “This is not who we want to be.” It was an excellent speech, gorgeously delivered, and that’s in large part because she recognized and maximized the fact that many Americans see her as someone less partisan and more practical than the conventional convention orator.

“You know I hate politics,” she said, making no apologies for that. “But you also know that I care about this nation. You know how much I care about all of our children.” From that perspective came this plea: “We have got to vote for Joe Biden like our lives depend on it.”

That was the message of many of the speakers. Their words varied; their urgency didn’t. Usually when politicians adopt such epic, dire tones, I want to reach for some bleach to wash the purple from their prose. On Monday night I just nodded (and, in Obama’s case, got a little teary, too).

There was much talk beforehand about the Democrats’ ardent desire and assiduous efforts to project unity. To my eyes and ears they took things to a higher level than that, not because they have such a talent for diplomacy or such a gift for television choreography but because they obviously and genuinely and passionately share the conviction that if Biden fails, America falls — at least the America that we’re all still trying to hold on to, the America that we sing about in songs and speak of when we put our hands over our hearts and turn toward the flag.

“During this president’s term, the unthinkable has become normal,” Sanders said during his remarks. “The future of our democracy is at stake. The future of our economy is at stake. The future of our planet is at stake.”

He specifically and pointedly instructed his frustrated supporters to get with the program and vote for Biden. “We must come together,” he said. “My friends, the price of failure is just too great to imagine.” He didn’t sound quite like this in 2016. Back then the damage from a Trump presidency was merely predicted, theoretical. Now it’s on the unemployment lines and in the morgue.

This convention isn’t without its ideological tussles, bruised egos and other offscreen drama. But anyone who’s focused on that has lost the big picture. Anyone who’s focused on that can’t recognize how many of the compliments bestowed on Biden on Monday night could never be given to Trump.

I’m talking about simple compliments, like when Kasich praised Biden as “a man of faith, a unifier.” Or when Representative James Clyburn deemed him “as good a man as he is a leader.” Not even the practiced liars who prop up Trump try to get away with calling him “good.” They’re reprobates, not comedians.

Biden doesn’t have everything I wish for in a president, but he has goodness, and for a country that needs to reclaim its decency, re-establish its dignity and right its course, that’s not a bad place to start.

The Democrats’ show will go on for three more nights, but I don’t need to watch another second to know what’s what."

well, as i surmised yesterday, by election time it's altogether possible the postal service should be a-ok doing their normal deal at least:

USPS chief says he is suspending some post office changes until after 2020 vote

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/08/18/usps-ch ... idappshare

everyone should breathe a sigh of relief.

south carolina looks like the one state i've seen where the combo of no universal mail in and no early voting stands out. (alabama, too, (and i'm sure there are a couple others) but i don't really consider them in play). anyone else?