I am hoping the NRA is involved in his defense.

Might the issue be that they were pointing the weapons in a threatening manner? The pictures I saw didn't appear to show that they were experienced in handling firearms.

Especially the wife. Waving that thing all over the place.

They committed no crime. At least not in this state. Now if they were anyplace other than their property it might be a different story.

Bushmaster wrote:

Especially the wife. Waving that thing all over the place. They committed no crime. At least not in this state. Now if they were anyplace other than their property it might be a different story.

I agree with Slim...a definite lack of experience on the part of both. And as Bushy said...the woman was waving the pistol around everywhere, displaying a total lack of safety and a complete and utter lack of knowledge and experience in her part. I think the husband has said to her...her, you take this and cover my back for me. All you have to do is point it and pull the trigger.

I also agree with what Paul said about it being theft. Having said that, it will be interesting to see what transpires and if any charges are laid. Maybe, just maybe, the Police Chief has done them a favour by removing their firearms so that nobody is accidentally shot and he is forced to charge the home owners. Who knows, only time will tell.

Well, the wife was "brandishing" her weapon but the rifle was across the mans belly and not at the ready. As far as I know trespassing is a civil infraction and no reason for deadly force but deadly force was not used but could be considered threatening by the wife. The man had his finger off the trigger and kept the muzzle low and at 90 degrees to the group. Not a threat or brandishing when on your own property. As I understand it the wife's revolver was in the lawyers possession so they couldn't get it. I hope he has other guns because the group might do more than trespass if they come back.

I hope NRA gets involved in this. That is why I pay and donate for this exact incident.

I agree with all the comments. But I will tell you, as a previous police officer, when you are threaten you do things that you normally would not do. No body, and I mean no body can say how or what they will do when your life is threaten, weather real or perceived. As a Monday morning quarterback, I can say the wife could have handled the firearm better. But, as with a lot of women and men (my wife included), they do not have the mind set or training to handle a firearm during a situation. They just don't think about it or believe it will happen to them.

I have spent hours training my wife both in the house and on the range. She has been trained on every weapon in the house. Hand guns, rifles, even an AR 10. BUT...No one knows just how they will react in a bad situation. Not even me and I have been there. My wife has been in a bad situation and didn't act like that woman. Her husband has spent little or no time teaching her. Of course he has to have no-how to be able to teach.

Bushmaster wrote:

I have spent hours training my wife both in the house and on the range. She has been trained on every weapon in the house. Hand guns, rifles, even an AR 10. BUT...No one knows just how they will react in a bad situation. Not even me and I have been there. My wife has been in a bad situation and didn't act like that woman. Her husband has spent little or no time teaching her. Of course he has to have no-how to be able to teach.

Sage words Bushy. Until such time as you are badly threatened, and the adrenaline starts pumping, you don’t know how you will react...or even think before reacting. A “fight or flight” dose of adrenaline hitting your system can often cause you to react without thinking...or even before you realise you will react.

I too have been in that position, and it’s damn scary, but that is where good training comes to the fore. With good training, and regular practice, reactions become a “drill”, you will automatically react the way you have trained. If your training instructs you to do a particular thing or movement, then that is what will happen...stopping at the end of the “drill”. This will, depending on the situation, put you in a position of control And readiness, allowing you the time to think about what your next move or step will be without any unintended reactions. For arguments sake, NONE of my training included a “warning shot”...ALL of my training drills ended with the sights firmly fixed in the “centre of the seen mass”...the A Zone. It was then up to me to decide whether I deliver killing shots or take other actions. Of course each situation is different and the final outcome is entirely dependant on the actions of the antagonist.

It is clearly obvious that neither the man or the woman has had any training and have put no more thought other than “display weapons to intimidate” into protecting themselves or their property. Bad move!

Everyone is correct on this and I agree with the comments. It goes to show us that we need to do more training. Training that includes our love ones. As much as I have trained, shared and discussed the possibility, I can tell that mine has not thought about it enough and does not train as much I would like. But as a military retiree, there is never enough training.

Getting back to the subject at hand. Do keep in mind that he did nothing wrong as far as defending his and his wife's (not to mention the dog) life and property.

Bushmaster wrote:

Getting back to the subject at hand. Do keep in mind that he did nothing wrong as far as defending his and his wife's (not to mention the dog) life and property.

Yes mate, that is true...but the potential was there for things to go pear shaped quickly and badly for all concerned. However, I commend him for his forethought to protect his loved ones and property. Hopefully the confiscation of his firearms was for his own protection and that they will be returned when things calm down.

Not true Vince. Again I will repeat. "He did not commit any crime in the state of Missouri" He broke no laws. Unless you figure in a corrupt St Louis attorny general who is a left wing freak and anti firearm. Because he was on his own property he can not be charges with "brandishing".

Bushy, I am wondering, does Missouri have an open carry law? I know the state has the Castle Doctrine law.

Vince wrote:

Hopefully the confiscation of his firearms was for his own protection

Please explain this. How can taking the ability to protect one's self and family be "for their own protection"?