'Keep moving!' Couple brandish an AR-15 and a handgun at protesters

[HCM]

Is it still brandishing if you point the weapon directly at someone, which occurred in this instance? This is not a criticism, but a question. That feels like some sort of assault level in Texas, hence my question.

In Texas:

displaying a weapon without cause is misdemeanor Disorderly conduct.

Recklessly Pointing a firearm (without cause)is misdemeanor deadly conduct.

Recklessly firing a weapon at someone is aggravated deadly conduct, a third degree felony.

None of that applies here as the facts of situation appear to justify the conduct per chapter 9 TX PC.

[HCM]

I’m confused. Maybe I’m missing part of the story.

For weeks it’s been “just try and bring that shit to the burbs or rural area” and “make Koreans rooftop
Again”

Now the mob shows up to (an obviously upscale) burb and bust down a dudes gate and he waives a gun at them and we mock him?

Sure he could use some training and seems kind of rich douchey and his wife needs some lessons on how to look cool holding a gun, but so what?

If a mob busting down your gate isn’t permissible AR deployment territory, what is? We all ought to just give ours up and stop pretending like we have any balls at all.

Yup.

[HCM]

I find it interesting that the prosecutor is going to investigate them for threatening the “protesters” but I have yet to hear if someone is going to investigate the two who pointed guns at the motorcyclist.

Who is investigating destruction of the gate ?

[Caballoflaco]

Calm yourself. I am asking if this is still brandishing or gas it gone up the food chain on the charge spectrum due to directly threatening others with it. As we have multiple LEOs on this forum I was wondering what their thoughts are.

They can argue defenses, I am not arguing the legality with this question.

Yes you are, because if they felt they were in danger then it’s not a crime. You can’t take the action and ask about it’s legality out of the context of the situation.

They didn’t just pull up at the local Communist Party rally and randomly start pointing guns at people, the Communists came to them.

[Beat Trash]

When I first saw this picture in the media, I was wondering if there was more to the story. Only because the first article I read left me with the impression that the, “peaceful protesters” were walking down the street that happened to be in front of the mansion being protected by the man in pink.

Then I read that it was at the end of a private drive, and I saw pictures of the busted gate. It took effort to bust up that gate, aka intent...

Most states won’t let you use deadly force to protect property. But a Castle Doctrine State usually isn’t about protecting property. And busting up that gate shows intent in my mind.

To be honest, my FIRST thought when seeing that picture was, with a mansion like that, they’re using what looks like an old Colt HBar AR and a Jennings 380 to protect a high dollar property like that?!?

[okie john]

To be honest, my FIRST thought when seeing that picture was, with a mansion like that, they’re using what looks like an old Col HBar AR and a Jennings 380 to protect a high dollar property like that?!?

I've had occasion to rub shoulders with more of those folks than I care to admit. They're some of the cheapest bastards on the planet.


Okie John

[Casual Friday]

Aaaaand they've released a statement they support BLM and the agitators were white.

https://fox2now.com/news/couple-seen...imminent-harm/

[Zincwarrior]

In Texas:

displaying a weapon without cause is misdemeanor Disorderly conduct.

Recklessly Pointing a firearm (without cause)is misdemeanor deadly conduct.

Recklessly firing a weapon at someone is aggravated deadly conduct, a third degree felony.

None of that applies here as the facts of situation appear to justify the conduct per chapter 9 TX PC.

Much as gracias! I retract my first statement.
So how did this end? Did the crowd go away, keep marching or what?

[Hambo]

I've had occasion to rub shoulders with more of those folks than I care to admit. They're some of the cheapest bastards on the planet.


Okie John

Just where guns are concerned. I read the article linked in the Daily Mail (post #1) about the house and the work they've done to it. More than 30 years of work and money to restore a historically significant house to what it was circa WWI. Having seen arson follow protests throughout the country, I'm sure they didn't want any part of their house torched.

Was it smart? Was it the best way? Was it the only way? Does it really matter when their house stills stands and they didn't even shoot at anyone?

[peterb]

Missouri Revised Statutes Title XXXVIII. Crimes and Punishment; Peace Officers and Public Defenders § 563.041. Use of physical force in defense of property
1. A person may, subject to the limitations of subsection 2, use physical force upon another person when and to the extent that he or she reasonably believes it necessary to prevent what he or she reasonably believes to be the commission or attempted commission by such person of stealing, property damage or tampering in any degree.

2. A person may use deadly force under circumstances described in subsection 1 only when such use of deadly force is authorized under other sections of this chapter.

3. The justification afforded by this section extends to the use of physical restraint as protective force provided that the actor takes all reasonable measures to terminate the restraint as soon as it is reasonable to do so.

4. The defendant shall have the burden of injecting the issue of justification under this section.