Couple Defends Home against Trespassers

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.

Roughsoul1991

Senior Member
Sep 17, 2016
8,784
4,452
113
"The media did not portray the event accurately.". That's all that I need to read. Why should I believe you, an individual without credentials, instead of the press?

500 people? Were you there? All I saw was three or four people walking by the house on the way to protest at the mayor's house.

Thank God that we have a responsible press!!
Thank God that we have a responsible press!!
The I live under a rock quote of the year!!!:ROFL:

Were you there?
Were you there? If your only taking the media as credentials then why not defend the other medias who are saying the opposite of the liberal media. Or do you hold a bias?
 

sherryt

Active member
Jul 26, 2019
198
130
43
"The media did not portray the event accurately.". That's all that I need to read. Why should I believe you, an individual without credentials, instead of the press?

500 people? Were you there? All I saw was three or four people walking by the house on the way to protest at the mayor's house.

Thank God that we have a responsible press!!

RESPONSIBLE PRESS ????????? Since when ?????? Could there be a reason why the FULL movement of people was not shown ??? Why was it necessary to "BREAK DOWN" a gate to enter into a private community ? To get to the mayor's house, and what where they planning on doing there? The breaking of the gate shows the mind set of the mob. Both the media and the press don't always report everything accurately, but to believe someone because they have credentials ?
 
Jun 5, 2020
941
169
43
The I live under a rock quote of the year!!!:ROFL:



Were you there? If your only taking the media as credentials then why not defend the other medias who are saying the opposite of the liberal media. Or do you hold a bias?
Your use of the phrase "liberal media" shows your bias. I'm really not interested in your opinion of what happened.
 
Jun 5, 2020
941
169
43
RESPONSIBLE PRESS ????????? Since when ?????? Could there be a reason why the FULL movement of people was not shown ??? Why was it necessary to "BREAK DOWN" a gate to enter into a private community ? To get to the mayor's house, and what where they planning on doing there? The breaking of the gate shows the mind set of the mob. Both the media and the press don't always report everything accurately, but to believe someone because they have credentials ?
Blah, blah, blah... "Just the facts Ma'am"
 

Roughsoul1991

Senior Member
Sep 17, 2016
8,784
4,452
113
Your use of the phrase "liberal media" shows your bias. I'm really not interested in your opinion of what happened.
I am bias. I'm bias to a Biblical, conservative, traditional, the support the Constitution, Bill of rights, logic, scientific, history and facts worldview. I filter everything through this and omit everything else. The liberal media gets caught in my filter. If you admit it then we will know why you haven't seen the facts or care to admit it the facts.

I'm really not interested in your opinion of what happened
Tolerant much? Not opinion there are other pictures to show your narrative wrong. A busted gate for example.
 
Jun 5, 2020
941
169
43
I am bias. I'm bias to a Biblical, conservative, traditional, the support the Constitution, Bill of rights, logic, scientific, history and facts worldview. I filter everything through this and omit everything else. The liberal media gets caught in my filter. If you admit it then we will know why you haven't seen the facts or care to admit it the facts.



Tolerant much? Not opinion there are other pictures to show your narrative wrong. A busted gate for example.
After "Biblical" everything else is either irrelevant or wrong. Your bias is so apparent that nothing you say can be seriously considered. Jesus said, "I am the way, the truth, and the life"; the truth is found in Him only.
 

Roughsoul1991

Senior Member
Sep 17, 2016
8,784
4,452
113
After "Biblical" everything else is either irrelevant or wrong. Your bias is so apparent that nothing you say can be seriously considered. Jesus said, "I am the way, the truth, and the life"; the truth is found in Him only.
Huh? Everything else is not irrelevant once filtered through the Bible. For example, my conservative and traditional views are Biblical. The Bible guides us in topics like politics, life issues, government, etc. The Declaration, the Constitution, and Bill of rights aren't only the base documents for US law but are rich in Biblical wisdom. The products of such doctrines testify to Biblical truth. The Word or Logos is the very essence of where we find logic. The truth is logical and based on reality. Science complements the power, the intelligence, the majesty of God. The natural compliments the scriptures as it testifies to the creator. History is ultimately His story. Everything has been either guided towards the day of resurrection or impacted after it. History teaches us that the wisdom of the Bible is true and best for society.

Your bias is so apparent that nothing you say can be seriously considered.
You seem to be doing a lot of diverting or retreat tactics. Sorry to break it to you but everyone is biased or holds pre held beliefs that they use to make judgments. The only problem is, are they justified. For example, a materialist judged science based on the pre held belief that the supernatural cannot exist. So the only answer has to automatically be a material answer.
 
Jun 5, 2020
941
169
43
Huh? Everything else is not irrelevant once filtered through the Bible. For example, my conservative and traditional views are Biblical. The Bible guides us in topics like politics, life issues, government, etc. The Declaration, the Constitution, and Bill of rights aren't only the base documents for US law but are rich in Biblical wisdom. The products of such doctrines testify to Biblical truth. The Word or Logos is the very essence of where we find logic. The truth is logical and based on reality. Science complements the power, the intelligence, the majesty of God. The natural compliments the scriptures as it testifies to the creator. History is ultimately His story. Everything has been either guided towards the day of resurrection or impacted after it. History teaches us that the wisdom of the Bible is true and best for society.


You seem to be doing a lot of diverting or retreat tactics. Sorry to break it to you but everyone is biased or holds pre held beliefs that they use to make judgments. The only problem is, are they justified. For example, a materialist judged science based on the pre held belief that the supernatural cannot exist. So the only answer has to automatically be a material answer.
As I said, you're biased. "... my conservative and traditional views are Biblical" -- not. "The Declaration, the Constitution, and Bill of rights aren't only the base documents for US law but are rich in Biblical wisdom" -- not.

US conservative politics and Christian beliefs are diametrically opposite. Everything Jesus did was in favor of the disadvantaged: the poor, the outcast, etc. He opposed the Sadducees and the Pharisees, the political conservatives of the time, and of course the Roman government.

Do you think that waving guns at peaceful, unarmed protesters walking by their house is what Jesus would have done??
 

Roughsoul1991

Senior Member
Sep 17, 2016
8,784
4,452
113
As I said, you're biased. "... my conservative and traditional views are Biblical" -- not. "The Declaration, the Constitution, and Bill of rights aren't only the base documents for US law but are rich in Biblical wisdom" -- not.

US conservative politics and Christian beliefs are diametrically opposite. Everything Jesus did was in favor of the disadvantaged: the poor, the outcast, etc. He opposed the Sadducees and the Pharisees, the political conservatives of the time, and of course the Roman government.

Do you think that waving guns at peaceful, unarmed protesters walking by their house is what Jesus would have done??
As I said, you're biased. "... my conservative and traditional views are Biblical" -- not. "The Declaration, the Constitution, and Bill of rights aren't only the base documents for US law but are rich in Biblical wisdom" -- not.
Not is not a suffice answer.

US conservative politics and Christian beliefs are diametrically opposite.
Please explain how so?

Everything Jesus did was in favor of the disadvantaged: the poor, the outcast, etc.
What does this have to do with US conservative politcs? It is an actual fact conservatives give more to charity. Here is a liberal news link.

https://abcnews.go.com/2020/story?id=2682730&page=1

Arthur C. Brooks (born May 21, 1964) is an American social scientist, He was the president of the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative think tank, for a decade. As of July 2019, he joined the faculty of the Harvard Kennedy School and Harvard Business School.

Arthur Brooks found,
"When you look at the data, it turns out the conservatives give about 30 percent more." He adds, "And incidentally, conservative-headed families make slightly less money."

And he says the differences in giving goes beyond money, pointing out that conservatives are 18 percent more likely to donate blood. He says this difference is not about politics, but about the different way conservatives and liberals view government.


"You find that people who believe it's the government's job to make incomes more equal, are far less likely to give their money away," Brooks says. In fact, people who disagree with the statement, "The government has a basic responsibility to take care of the people who can't take care of themselves," are 27 percent more likely to give to charity.

He opposed the Sadducees and the Pharisees, the political conservatives of the time,
They were the political branches of the Jewish people but to say conservative in this context means you are implying the conservatism of US politics matches the same beliefs of the Pharisees and Sadducees. That is a logic error.

and of course the Roman government.
Do you know what the Bible says about good government vs bad? Do you know why the Apostles obeyed government but sometimes opposed? Think on that for a little bit or do some research.

Do you think that waving guns at peaceful, unarmed protesters walking by their house is what Jesus would have done??
Well first off. Not peaceful or unarmed protesters.

But despite that. Who is Jesus? Jesus is God the Logos or the Word. The Bible is the Word of God. The Word of God has a lot to say on defending self defense, life, the weak, and helpless. Jesus even mentioned to buy a long knife or sword. Also the Bible has much to say about property and the results of a thief. Now Jesus will return and cause much more death than a gun ever could. As for his time on Earth, he could of called in a billion angels to destroy Rome. Why didn't he you asked?
Because it was the will of the Father for Jesus to face the cross.
 
Jun 5, 2020
941
169
43
Not is not a suffice answer.



Please explain how so?



What does this have to do with US conservative politcs? It is an actual fact conservatives give more to charity. Here is a liberal news link.

https://abcnews.go.com/2020/story?id=2682730&page=1

Arthur C. Brooks (born May 21, 1964) is an American social scientist, He was the president of the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative think tank, for a decade. As of July 2019, he joined the faculty of the Harvard Kennedy School and Harvard Business School.

Arthur Brooks found,
"When you look at the data, it turns out the conservatives give about 30 percent more." He adds, "And incidentally, conservative-headed families make slightly less money."

And he says the differences in giving goes beyond money, pointing out that conservatives are 18 percent more likely to donate blood. He says this difference is not about politics, but about the different way conservatives and liberals view government.


"You find that people who believe it's the government's job to make incomes more equal, are far less likely to give their money away," Brooks says. In fact, people who disagree with the statement, "The government has a basic responsibility to take care of the people who can't take care of themselves," are 27 percent more likely to give to charity.



They were the political branches of the Jewish people but to say conservative in this context means you are implying the conservatism of US politics matches the same beliefs of the Pharisees and Sadducees. That is a logic error.



Do you know what the Bible says about good government vs bad? Do you know why the Apostles obeyed government but sometimes opposed? Think on that for a little bit or do some research.



Well first off. Not peaceful or unarmed protesters.

But despite that. Who is Jesus? Jesus is God the Logos or the Word. The Bible is the Word of God. The Word of God has a lot to say on defending self defense, life, the weak, and helpless. Jesus even mentioned to buy a long knife or sword. Also the Bible has much to say about property and the results of a thief. Now Jesus will return and cause much more death than a gun ever could. As for his time on Earth, he could of called in a billion angels to destroy Rome. Why didn't he you asked?
Because it was the will of the Father for Jesus to face the cross.
OMG!! I will pray for you! I hope that someday, somehow, the eyes of your heart will be enlightened and that you will know and understand God's will.
 

Truth7t7

Well-known member
May 19, 2020
7,685
2,492
113
Matthew 7:12, "So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets." Nothing here about threatening peaceful strangers.

Matthew 7:1, “Do not judge, or you too will be judged." Obviously the couple were judging people for peacefully walking down a street.

And that's just from one Gospel!

Here's more...

Leviticus 19:18, “‘Do not seek revenge or bear a grudge against anyone among your people, but love your neighbor as yourself. I am the Lord.

Mark 12:33, "To love him with all your heart, with all your understanding and with all your strength, and to love your neighbor as yourself is more important than all burnt offerings and sacrifices.

Romans 13:9, "The commandments, “You shall not commit adultery,” “You shall not murder,” “You shall not steal,” “You shall not covet,” and whatever other command there may be, are summed up in this one command: “Love your neighbor as yourself.”

Galatians 5:14, "For the entire law is fulfilled in keeping this one command:Love your neighbor as yourself.”

These people succumbed to fear and thereby violated the commandments of Christ.
They were afraid to trust God.
"Peaceful Strangers" "Peacefully Walking Down A Street"?

Your Claim Is "Fake News" they broke down a security gate, with no trespassing signs, and we're hostile on private property.

TimeMagizine

St. Louis Couple Point Guns at Protesters Headed to Mayor's House

No charges were brought against them. Police said they were still investigating but labeled it a case of trespassing and assault by intimidation against the couple by protesters.

Police said the couple had heard a loud commotion in the street and saw a large group of people break an iron gate marked with “No Trespassing” and “Private Street” signs.

Police said the man and woman told the marchers to leave because they were on a private street. But people in the crowd yelled obscenities and threats, police said. The man and woman said they saw people who were armed, so they armed themselves and called police, according to authorities.
 

Roughsoul1991

Senior Member
Sep 17, 2016
8,784
4,452
113
OMG!! I will pray for you! I hope that someday, somehow, the eyes of your heart will be enlightened and that you will know and understand God's will.
Again a retreat and no thanks I doubt I want your prayers.
 

Truth7t7

Well-known member
May 19, 2020
7,685
2,492
113
OMG!! I will pray for you! I hope that someday, somehow, the eyes of your heart will be enlightened and that you will know and understand God's will.
Pray for yourself, that God would open your eyes to salvation and truth, as you sure don't present it in this thread regarding events that took place at the couple's home.

Jaybo Said: "Peaceful Strangers, Peacefully Walking Down A Street"?

Why Pinocchio Your Nose Is Growing!

TimeMagizine

St. Louis Couple Point Guns at Protesters Headed to Mayor's House

No charges were brought against them. Police said they were still investigating but labeled it a case of trespassing and assault by intimidation against the couple by protesters.

Police said the couple had heard a loud commotion in the street and saw a large group of people break an iron gate marked with “No Trespassing” and “Private Street” signs.

Police said the man and woman told the marchers to leave because they were on a private street. But people in the crowd yelled obscenities and threats, police said. The man and woman said they saw people who were armed, so they armed themselves and called police, according to authorities.
 

Roughsoul1991

Senior Member
Sep 17, 2016
8,784
4,452
113
It looks like the Governor has said if the Judiciary system charges the couple. They will pardon them. President Trump has also stated he has thought about doing the same thing if charged.

It would be a obvious violation of their 2nd Amendment rights. And both the governor or President has the power to pardon. Before trying to argue that. Just look at the people who have been pardoned in the past. Some good and some really bad.
 

Truth7t7

Well-known member
May 19, 2020
7,685
2,492
113
It looks like the Governor has said if the Judiciary system charges the couple. They will pardon them. President Trump has also stated he has thought about doing the same thing if charged.

It would be a obvious violation of their 2nd Amendment rights. And both the governor or President has the power to pardon. Before trying to argue that. Just look at the people who have been pardoned in the past. Some good and some really bad.
It's all the Judicial Activist Judges that are delivering these unconstitutional rulings.

President Trump has replaced 200+ judiciary seats, this Liberal judiciary is shrinking quick, 4 more years will see it erased!
 
Jun 5, 2020
941
169
43
It looks like the Governor has said if the Judiciary system charges the couple. They will pardon them. President Trump has also stated he has thought about doing the same thing if charged.

It would be a obvious violation of their 2nd Amendment rights. And both the governor or President has the power to pardon. Before trying to argue that. Just look at the people who have been pardoned in the past. Some good and some really bad.
Apparently you don't know what the Second Amendment says. In its entirety, "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." It's obvious that the couple is not part of any well-regulated militia; they are just lawless people pointing guns at unarmed people walking by their house. (It's also obvious from the video that they don't know how to safely handle guns!)
 
Jun 5, 2020
941
169
43
It's all the Judicial Activist Judges that are delivering these unconstitutional rulings.

President Trump has replaced 200+ judiciary seats, this Liberal judiciary is shrinking quick, 4 more years will see it erased!
What "unconstitutional rulings" are you referring to? (Even though your post has nothing to do with the subject being discussed). BTW, Trump will be voted out in just a few months.
 

Roughsoul1991

Senior Member
Sep 17, 2016
8,784
4,452
113
Apparently you don't know what the Second Amendment says. In its entirety, "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." It's obvious that the couple is not part of any well-regulated militia; they are just lawless people pointing guns at unarmed people walking by their house. (It's also obvious from the video that they don't know how to safely handle guns!)
Oh, I know what is says. I know how the founders described it. I know the conventional debates. The militia and the people are made of the same. At that time every able body man at the age of 18 was to be part of the local militia. It was the people or minute men who would respond to local threats. These men were farmers, pastors, church members, lawyers, doctors, tailors, butchers, etc. And even children would be taught as young as 8 how to shoot. Self Defense was none debatable as at that time it was an illogical argument. British was paying Indians scalp bounties on American Patriots, the British loyalist could have been your neighbor and in some locations, you could have been dragged off for supporting the American cause. Wildlife was more of a threat.

William Blackstone the English law commentator that the founding fathers used as a reference described why the right of the people to keep and bear Arms was also important within the Castle doctrine. Meaning every man is the king of his castle and has the right to protect his life, liberty, and property.

To protect liberty involves a collective group or a militia. Which was every citizen who could respond to the situation.

States under the Constitution also was given more liberty than the federal government. Meaning they could create even stricter constitutions that would double protect their God-given rights.

"When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

These God-given rights are as the Declaration states, "We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.—That to secure these Rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed,—That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these Ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its Foundation on such Principles, and organizing its Powers in such Form, as to them shall seem most likely to affect their Safety and Happiness."

Life is sacred and considered of the natural law that everything living does all it can to survive including the defense of self. To also protect the life of the people. They needed guns if the Government becomes destructive then worst case scenario they would have the power to abolish it instead of being enslaved.

Thomas Hobbes another of the founder's sources for his political theory (1588–1679) said this below,
The Right of Nature, which Writers commonly call Jus Naturale, is the Liberty each man hath, to use his own power, as he will himselfe, for the preservation of his own Nature; that is to say, of his own Life; and consequently, of doing any thing, which in his own Judgement, and Reason, hee shall conceive to be the aptest means thereunto.​
The human nature, laws of nature, or as Romans 2 describes as the moral law can not only show life is sacred but also proves the human nature too often leans towards wickedness. As a murderer may be just fine taking life until he self evidently proves life is sacred when faced with execution. The Founding fathers understood human nature as to why we have the 2nd Amendment. The most referenced source was the Bible. 2nd is John Locke.

John Locke explained this in his own words.

"He, that, in the state of nature, would take away the freedom that belongs to anyone in that state must necessarily be supposed to have a design to take away everything else, that freedom being the foundation of all the rest; as he that, in a state of society, would take away the freedom belonging to those of that society or commonwealth must be supposed to design to take away from them everything else, and so be looked on as in a state of war….​
Thus a thief, whom I cannot harm but by appeal to the [civil] law for having stolen all that I am worth, I may kill when he sets on me to rob me but of my horse or coat; because the law, which was made for my preservation, where it cannot interpose to secure my life from present force, which, if lost, is capable of no reparation, permits me my own defense and the right of war, a liberty to kill the aggressor, because the aggressor allows not time to appeal to our common judge, nor the decision of the law, for remedy in a case where the mischief may be irreparable."​
Basically the old way of saying that the wicked do not care for society's laws.

The 2nd Amendment has two points to protect.
  1. The Militia
  2. The right of the People
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

As for saying the couple was lawless well not according to facts that you still deny.

Anyways civics class is complete. If you pass the test I'll give you a thumbs up.
 

Roughsoul1991

Senior Member
Sep 17, 2016
8,784
4,452
113
What "unconstitutional rulings" are you referring to? (Even though your post has nothing to do with the subject being discussed). BTW, Trump will be voted out in just a few months.
About as sane of statement as Joe Biden's speeches.