Connect with us

Guns and Crime

Police arrest 80 rioters in third night of St. Louis unrest after officer’s acquittal

Published

on

80 people were arrested during a third night of rioting in downtown St. Louis, following outrage over a white police officer being acquitted in the shooting death of a black man. A man who was fleeing said officer. Officer Jason Stockley was acquitted in the killing of a 24 year-old man six years ago. It doesn’t matter to Black Lives Matter that it was a justified shooting… they are in a rage because it was a white cop killing a black man.

Police officers in riot-gear stood off against militant activists. The media keeps calling what happened, mostly peaceful, but it sure doesn’t look that way to me. One reporter came very close to being beat to death by a mob of these thugs. If one of the masked people hadn’t let him away and fended the mob off, it could of ended very badly. It seems as though the violence ratchets up after the sun goes down. And then things get vicious and strange. There were violent outbursts and police shouted down protesters with their own chants. “Whose streets, our streets,” police officers were heard bellowing — twice — in one video.

As protesters were pepper-sprayed, you could hear and see them coughing and gagging on it. Then they were dragged away in mass arrests. St. Louis Metropolitan Police Chief Lawrence O’Toole blamed the chaotic evening on a “group of criminals,” while Mayor Lyda Krewson described them as “agitators” who stuck around after the initial protest ended. Funny, neither laid this at the feet of Black Lives Matter or Antifa where it belongs. Go figure.

One bicycle cop was injured in the confrontation. “We are closed in on all four sides now I have no idea where people are supposed to go. People freaking out,” tweeted Post-Dispatch journalist Mike Faulk. He was accidentally arrested with all the others that were rioting. There was a memorable pic where Faulk had his press badge on and his hands were secured behind his back while he was placed under arrest. Heck of a way to get a story.

The rioting came to a head after an unmarked police car startled protesters by driving down the street. It went through a crowd of people… in reverse. Video that was shared by the St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department shows a ton of people darting out of the blue Impala’s wild path. The officer in the unmarked police car blamed protesters for his unconventional escape. Road closures blocked him from going forward and protesters were “moving in a threatening manner” from behind. That’s when he backed through the crowd. No one got hurt.

The gathering crowd had marched toward the site of a traffic stop around 7 pm and watched as police arrested two people, one suspected of assault and another of making terrorist threats. Inside that car, police officers found three guns. Some moron was hurling rocks at police officers and was arrested for that too.

Antifa was there as well waving red and black flags, reportedly emblazoned with the Anonymous logo. That was probably the Antifa logo, but whatever. The rioters were spraying officers with some kind of mystery chemical. Rioters destroyed foliage, cars, store fronts, smashed windows, etc. Two others were arrested late Sunday after a speeding car smashed into another vehicle. Inside of the vehicles, police found drugs, masks and an assault-style rifle.

You have two primary groups leading the riots in St. Louis… Black Lives Matter and Antifa. I’m not sure how long this will go on, but there will always be another event that draws these people from one city to the next. I look forward to my friend Trevor Loudon’s film on Antifa, which will be released soon. They should both be labeled as terrorist groups.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Guns and Crime

Intellectual ammunition, part 3: Armed with logic and a mistake by SCOTUS

Published

on

By

Intellectual ammunition part 3 Armed with logic and a mistake by SCOTUS

Is nuclear annihilation less of a threat than purchasing a lower parts kit?

In the third part of a multipart series, Gardner Goldsmith @gardgoldsmith of MRCTV addresses the issues surrounding Liberty Control, destroying some of the prevalent mythologies in the process.

Which is more intimidating: purchasing an inanimate object or the threat of gun confiscation?

In the beginning of the video, he asks the very pertinent question:

“Who engages in threats of gun violence, the civilian who owns, or attempts to own, a firearm, or the civilian or politician intent on passing ‘gun control’ statutes?”

Which is quite an interesting point in light of the comments from Representative Eric Swalwell (D-CA) who wants the government to make gun owners an offer they can’t refuse on their freedom. Rejecting said offer could see them and millions of other die in a thermonuclear style gun confiscation.

That threat being just the latest of the long list of over 70 instances of Leftists demanding gun confiscation. Note that number could easily be doubled or tripled if one were to account for the number of times those demands were syndicated or excerpted in other publications.

The video details the point that it is the people wanting to impose controls on freedom that are threatening violence – up to and including nuclear genocide. But perhaps if one if of the Liberty grabber set on the Left it’s possible that someone having a scary looking rifle is far more of an issue than the wiping out of an area via nuclear incineration with fallout contaminating everything down wind.

The illogic of so-called ‘Gun-free’ zones.

Further on he addresses question of whether the passage of more and more restrictions on freedom and setting up ‘gun-free’ zones keep people safe? Consider the scenario he proposes in how a mass murderer might select is his target:

And what of the idea that, practically, passing gun statutes will make areas safer? In Part One of this series, we looked at the real-world numbers on that question, but here is a logical argument to pose to gun-grabbers.

Suppose you are in a paintball game. You have a paintball gun, and you will win $10,000 if you enter one of three houses and, in five minutes, hit ten people with pellets. If you get hit by a pellet, you will have to pay $200,000… There are forty people in each house. In House One, you know that there is no one with a paintball gun. In House Two, you know that there are a few people with paintball guns, and in House Three, you know that there are many, many people with paintball guns.

Which house would you choose?

The answer is obvious. Let’s not be foolish about pretending that we would choose anything other than House One.

The logic of self-protection through firearm possession and use is irrefutable. The statistics of it are clear. The history of despots disarming citizens prior to destroying their lives is also clear, as is the history of what the Founders thought when they wrote the Second Amendment.

 

Continue Reading

Guns and Crime

When gungrabbers like Eric Swalwell say they respect the 2nd Amendment, don’t believe them

Published

on

When gungrabbers like Eric Swalwell say they respect the 2nd Amendment, don't believe them

It’s a lie. Every time, it’s a lie. Most leftist gungrabbers will add a note at the end of their gungrabbing rhetoric by pretending to respect the 2nd Amendment. They want you to think they’re pushing “common sense” gun control, because who doesn’t like common sense?

There isn’t a lick of common sense in any gun control measure. Anything that could have been considered common sense gun control, such as the Gun Control Act of 1968 that kept regulated interstate commerce to hamper mail-order gun purchases, have already been put in place. Anything going forward that appeals to common sense is unnecessary and damaging to the 2nd Amendment.

Representative Eric Swalwell (D-CA) once said he respects the 2nd Amendment.

“I support gun safety measures, and I’ll tell you, I grew up in a family of gun owners and hunters, and I went hunting with my dad as a kid, and you know, I have deep respect for the Second Amendment and the culture of our country.”

His statements on Twitter yesterday said all we need to know.

 

Continue Reading

Guns and Crime

Gun rights activists: Stop acting like we don’t hold every high ground

Published

on

Gun rights activists Stop acting like we don't hold every high ground

Forgive me if I offend any of my fellow gun rights activists. It’s my intention to educate, not irritate. But I’ve become increasingly annoyed by arguments that play into the leftist agenda. We have the high ground. When you have the high ground, you don’t go down to the enemy’s level. We hold the high ground.

We hold the moral high ground. For every mass shooting incident that takes lives, there are dozens of stories that don’t get nearly the same attention but demonstrate how gun owners prevent crimes. They’re out there defending themselves and others from people who would do them harm.

We hold the intellectual high ground. Where do most gun crimes occur? Where gun laws are obtuse. Chicago is the shining example of how obtuse gun laws prevent citizens from defending themselves. How often do we see gun violence in gun free zones?

We hold the historical high ground. The first thing a government does before turning against its people is take away the people’s ability to defend their rights. One of the most common leftist arguments is that Americans have no reason to fear oppression from the government. This is a backwards argument as it has been shown on multiple occasions that the government was hampered from oppressing American citizens because of the presence of weapons. It’s naive to think the government would never try to oppress us. History shows they already have at times and certainly will again in the future.

We hold the constitutional high ground. This needs no explanation.

We hold the emotional high ground. This is hard for most to understand since it’s emotional responses to mass shooting that usually prompt calls for gun control. That’s exactly why we hold the emotional high ground. As long as we remain consistent and stop operating in the leftists’ emotional echo chambers, we can maintain control of the emotional argument. It’s easy for people to be affected by senseless violence, but that’s no reason to ignore common sense or logical discipline.

What gets to me is when gun rights activists start making arguments such as logistics. I cringe every time I see stats about how many AR rifles are owned. The argument that there are so many out there it would be impractical to take them away is ludicrous. It’s like saying, “You may be right to want to take away guns but it would be too hard.”

The push for gun control is gaining momentum. We cannot give the gungrabbers an inch. We don’t need to. Our arguments are righteous. The only way they’ll win is if we let them distract us and bring us down to fighting on their level.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Advertisement Donate to NOQ Report

Facebook

Twitter

Trending

Copyright © 2018 NOQ Report