I’m not sure you took my point. The castle doctrine means that a person dos not have a duty to retreat, and can use deadly force if they are under threat. The distinction there is that in most situations, you generally have a duty to retreat from a dangerous situation if one is reasonably available before you can use deadly force.
Again, it does NOT provide license for people to point guns at people walking by their property.
They could be, but why would a couple this wealthy not buy the real thing? And there aren’t many if any rules/laws about training in the use of them beforehand.
Yeah the Central West End (with its variously gated sub-areas) is situated in a pretty socio-econo-ethnographically interesting place, with Wellston nearby and Ferguson maybe a few miles from it. The economic violence perpetrated upon the people of Wellston is evident throughout, though in St. Louis hardly unique.
The wild nearly distopian heterogeneity of St. Louis housing stock in that area is a huge tell, sociologically if nothing else.
The Walther looks real. There are some good photos where you can see the barrel is too wide for a BB gun. People are suspicious of the rifle. There a point in the video where he lets go of the grip and just holds it by the barrel in a way that suggests it doesn’t weigh very much.
My personal theory is that the guns aren’t loaded, and that’s why they’re so cavalier about pointing them at each other.* They figured they’d go out and scare people, but weren’t prepared to actually shoot anyone.
*You should always treat every gun as if it is loaded, but I don’t expect these two to know that.
EDIT: This is the part I was talking about. Either he has a very strong grip on that forestock (which it doesn’t look like), or that is lighter than your average rifle.
I still go back once a year to visit family who have made that area their home, but I knew early on that getting out of that town was the only way I’d ever get to build a better life. It’s a really strange place culturally, highly segregated and racialized, on the border of being Southern. I am unapologetically part of the brain drain.
Not all of us in the south are racist mouth breathers. Let’s cut that stereotype, shall we. Racists exist all over the country, and it’s a national, not a regional problem. thanks.
I think there’s a big difference between acknowledging that a city has structural segregation issues, both historical and contemporary, and calling everyone who lives there a racist mouthbreather. In calling STL a highly racialized place, where people still try to enforce neighborhood divisions and the privileged agitate against infrastructure development out of the fear that it will make it easier for minorities to access their neck of the woods, I’m not calling every resident of STL a horrible racist, I’m acknowledging that there are deep issues around race and social mobility that one group is invested in ignoring and other groups are invested in changing. There are indeed racists everywhere and segregationist policies we’re definitely not limited to the South, e.g. Milwaukee, and I don’t think it helps us to confuse issues with a place with insults about the people who live there.
Fun fact: I’m informed by an acquaintance who is familiar with this area (and gentleman) that this home is located in a stretch of buildings purpose-built as embassies during the 1904 World’s Fair.
ETA: I am subsequently informed by sources hereabout that my friend was wrong about this particular house. Imagine that! Not sure if he’s right about the neighborhood or not, confirmation to come.
Yeah but… keep any individuals housebound for 3 months, watching Fox News, this what emerges. They’re doing tests all the time - same results - why no shoes - no one knows yet
Geography does not determine racism.
George Floyd (may he rest in power) died in Minneapolis fergoodnessake.
That’s practically in Canada.
If you adopt the Southern vs. Northern stereotypes about racism, you’re creating a massive blindspot in your thinking. Please don’t. We need everybody everybody everybody in this fight for equality and equity.
Missouri history in 1819 portended [cough] interesting times ahead: the U.S. Civil War (1861-1865).
If past is prologue, then yeah you can see the odd, conflicted nature of today’s Missouri society.
I wish I could go back in time and talk to Tallmadge and Taylor in 1819.
A political outsider, the 41-year old Tallmadge conceived his amendment based on a personal aversion to slavery. He had played a leading role in accelerating emancipation of the remaining slaves in New York in 1817. Moreover, he had campaigned against Illinois’ Black Codes: though ostensibly free-soil, the new Illinois state constitution permitted indentured servitude and a limited form of slavery.[25][26] As a New York Republican, Tallmadge maintained an uneasy association with Governor DeWitt Clinton, a former Republican who depended on support from ex-Federalists. Clinton’s faction was hostile to Tallmadge for his spirited defense of General Andrew Jackson over his contentious invasion of Florida.[27][28]
After proposing the amendment, Tallmadge fell ill, Congressman John W. Taylor, a fellow New York Republican, stepped in to fill the void. Taylor also had antislavery credentials, in February 1819, he had proposed a similar slave restriction for Arkansas Territory in the House (which was defeated 89–87).[29] In a speech before the House during the debate on the Tallmadge Amendment, Taylor was highly critical of Southern lawmakers who frequently voiced their dismay that slavery was entrenched and necessary to their existence, and warned that Missouri’s fate would “decide the destiny of millions” in future states in the American West.[30]
… a coupla New York guys multi-tasking with I am sure several agenda.
@anon61221983 : if ever go to grad school and get funding to build a time machine, I’ll be asking you to help me write the grant. All’s I got for now is this: