This version of the now infamous Missouri Mum gun brandishing story contains the raw footage. It’s most instructive. It tells us that Tracy Leeser did nothing to de-escalate the confrontation with her son’s alleged tormentors – such as change her tone, put distance between herself and the boys, seek to get her son away and disengage, etc. – and much to make it worse. Would a reasonable person . . .
believe that the teenagers put Ms. Leeser in imminent danger of death or grievous bodily harm? I don’t think so. Her actions were the height of irresponsibility, including the fact that she carried her gun in her pocket without a holster. That’s not a crime, but an excellent indication that she lacked a fundamental understanding of safe gun handling.
I suspect that the Divine Ms. L will soon lack the ability to keep and bear arms, which is just as it should be and just as well. Although I believe felons should have their gun rights restored, a ballistic time out seems appropriate here, yes?
self-defense rights are absolute. even criminals have the natural right to defend themselves, wherever they are…even in jail. “stupid” does not qualify as an exemption under the second amendment.
While I don’t want to argue over the definition of “absolute,” I submit that losing one’s rights is a fairly common punishment for violating the rights of others. In this case I think it’s a fair punishment.
fair, it may be. common, it may be. popular, it may be.
but it is unconstitutional. if illegals are “people” under the constitution, if anchor babies are “people” under the constitution, where is the court ruling that convicts (at any level) are not “people” under the constitution. law is a tough master. oh how we want it to be what we want it to be when we want it to be. if it is permissible to deny self-defense rights to convicts, why is it not permissible to require firearms training, certification, background checks, police monitoring, guns in safes when not onbody, or any other restriction to the “absolute” RTKBA? we don’t object to restrictions, only to those we don’t like.
I see your point, I really do, but there is (maybe? maybe not?) a difference between someone who is convicted of a violent felony and someone who hasn’t. Illegal immigration isn’t a violent felony. Granted, even violent felons have the right to free speech and due process, but they don’t have the complete set (what remains, anyway) that the rest of us have. To take your train of thought to its conclusion, you would have to let inmates have access to pistols and rifles while they are incarcerated. Unless you believe they should just be executed upon conviction, which isn’t the worst idea I’ve heard today.
Don’t pull your gun out unless you intend on using it. These kids were not intimidated by this women with or without her gun. If they attempted to take it from her she would have had no choice but to shoot. Thus, landing her in jail and rightfully so.
Except, a self-defense claim isn’t available when you instigate the encounter or at least consent to it. She has an ongoing dispute with these kids, I get it, but this exact encounter she initiated by accosting them. No valid self-defense claim.
Well, it’s not like she shot the bastards.
Agreed, which is why I’d only convict for aggravated assault in the 2nd degree (felony, 2-20 years), instead of 1st degree (also a felony, but 5-99 years), in Texas, anyway.
She’s demonstrated that she cannot exercise her rights without being a menace to public safety. Guns go bye bye for her, if I’m making the call.
Not much different rhan the police vids I have seen. Oh yeah….. the police are better than we are.
That’s right, the police can and often do much, much worse with impunity.
Bullies got what was coming to them. I fail to see the problem.
Some people think anyone who carries a gun is a bully. So they think they have the right to “SWAT” anyone they see carrying.
We need to be better than them, and not bring deadly force to bear unless/until there is a credible, imminent threat.
Got what was coming to them? You mean a good laugh? Because they don’t seem to be too afraid of her in that video. Looks to me like she accomplished nothing with her little brandishing exercise other than to give the antis more fuel for their “gun owners are dangerous hotheads” stereotype. Thanks, lady.
The way she’s casually waving it in their faces, she’s lucky one of the little bastards didn’t take it right out of her hand.
Lmao, yeah she just completely ignored rules of carrying a gun – always avoid confrontation, or attempt to deescalate the situation, never draw to intimidate, never point at anything you don’t intend to destroy. If her son was getting bullied before, he sure as will now that mommy had to step in and protect her little daisy. And seeing as her carrying days are more than likely number, if the bullies decide to become more aggressive/violent, she won’t be able to do much.
This trailer-park slag is lucky they didn’t take her gun from her, or pull their own steel and glock-rock her to the ground. It would be totally justified in my eyes, if you pull a gun on someone who has done nothing but argue with you, you get what you get.
What makes you think teens NOWADAYS don’t threaten bodily harm/death? I don’t travel to most of Chiraq because of 14 years spraying and (not) praying. And as I travel my area(south of Chicago) there are plenty of “urban” teens wandering the streets looking for someone to “interact” with. But yeah she’s an idiot…and my own son was bullied until we instructed him to stand up for himself. I was prepared to step in come hell or high water-these “kids” are brutal and vicious and generally have zero parental authority(except mama defending her baby).
The worst part is the migrate from your area towards mine.
On the last day of high school thirty savages were fighting in the field in front of my home and their parents were encouraging it. Five white men open carrying pistols and AR15’s made them scatter like roaches. I prefer the head of the snake route and went up to the head HUDrat drug dealer and had a conversation on cause and effect.
Thankfully my city is maintained by the 2 main MC organizations of the world.
Hmmm… not clear cut.
I will say that I’m glad to live nowhere near anywhere she’ll likely ever be.
Damn fool. Never pull out a gun unless you plan to use it in self defense. I.E. Shoot someone.
Mamma Griznatch sees Russia from her house.
Pailin never said that.
And I’m not surprised you don’t know that.
Tina Fey on SNL said it when she parodied Palin.
(It’s a fact you can see Russian territory on a clear day at one location in Alaska territory, at the end of the Aleutian Islands …)
You’re the only one mentioning Palin
“You’re the only one mentioning Palin”
Wrong. His quote was:
“Mamma Griznatch sees Russia from her house.”
“Mamma Griznatch” – Momma Grizzly (bear)
“sees Russia from her house” – Tina Fey mocked Palin on SNL with: “I can see Russia from my house” When Palin (correctly) stated there are places in Alaska where on a clear day Russia can be seen.
Try and pay attention, son.
There are certain pistols the can be carried in the pocket quite well. Another writer with an opinion but not much for brains.
Gotta ask, is that her kid at the start that walks by with the bat in his hand? If so, forget that. By the time he has a bat he’s already escalated the situation. It’s time to grab and retreat.
What a series of tactical and legal mistakes. She didn’t even watch her sides while they were flanking her. They could have done what they wanted to gun or not if they would have been bold enough. She may have gotten one but not both. They could both go up the river real easily. That’s one of those things you back out and call the cops if they’re that uppity.
If she thought that the bullying of her son was bad enough to pull a pistol & start brandishing it, she has no idea how much worse it’ll be now.
That his mommy stepped into things only serves to instigates that type of delinquent, and she’s lucky they didn’t snatch that gun from her and start playing keep-away.
But methinks her kid is likely as much of a loudmouth idiot as she is, and an innocent, helpless victim of bullying he is not.
Man, I grew up in Missouri, and those people are soooo Missouri!
Also, the balls-to-brains ratio in those kids is approaching infinity; mouthing off to an obviously off her rocker armed broad is not a good idea
Every single person in this video, was a moron. I feel dumber just for having watched it.
Routinely carry my S&W 638 in my left pocket without a holster. It has a 10 lb. + DA trigger pull.
I also make sure I don’t carry anything else in my left pocket.
She illegally brandished the gun and walked into the bad situation. There was no self defense from a physical threat need to open carry in hand and point the gun. If her kid was on the ground being beaten, thats very different.
That didnt happen.
One of the kids did have what appeared to be a bat in hand at the very start but he never hit her with it nor raised it in a way to give the appearance he would hit her. No attack nor any pre-assault cue to scale force against in self defense.
Tactically, she was an idiot. Three on one. Walked herself right into it. Because I have a gun and feel its amulet like power! They didnt even need to flank her.
She could have stated her case with more articulation from distance with a holstered and concealed weapon. If they closed distance and were menacing, she has ability, opportunity, and jeopardy (and time) all present to defensively display her weapon. There is disparity of force in strength and numbers as well. This lowers her threshold to legally articulate her use of deadly force.
If they continue menacing and closing distance on her after defensive display, that would clearly show tactical and legal deliberate indifference of aggression on their part. They see the gun, they dont care and are coming for her anyway. The very definition of “unreasonable.” Shoot to stop that deadly threat. When the threat stops, stop using deadly force.
Since none of the prior two paragraphs happened and she was illegally brandishing the gun, the kid with the bat at the very beginning could have legally articulated he felt a deadly threat against his friends, flanked her and beat her about the head until she stopped being a threat. Deadly force in self defense with the bat against illegal deadly threat brandishing the gun. He was defending his “third party” friends from a woman he thought might kill them. She provided him ability opportunity and jeopardy to act with deadly force.
In order for the woman to use her gun legally, she would have had to back off, shown submission, broken her engagement and illegal aggressive encounter before the situation “resets” for her to potentially use her gun legally in self defense. (she still would be charged with branishing, agg assault etc for her initial illegal display) Here is the law on that from the above link.
(a) He or she has withdrawn from the encounter and effectively communicated such withdrawal to such other person but the latter persists in continuing the incident by the use or threatened use of unlawful force;
“Would a reasonable person . . . believe that the teenagers put Ms. Leeser in imminent danger of death or grievous bodily harm? I don’t think so.”
When it comes to hotheaded and impetuous teenagers, that can change in an instant, as we’ve seen over and over again…
I don’t know anything about this situation other than what’s in the video. But if that’s all I have to go on, then that woman clearly needs to be behind bars for a few years. She was the aggressor, and at the very least threatened to kill a minor. She needs to be off the streets.
If a cop responded to a 911 call there, that call might be that a woman was threatening kids with a gun. If that cop showed up right around one of the several times she points the pistol right at a kid, the officer would have very little time to recognize the totality of the situation and react. In that instance, if a cop were to have shot her dead, I would have said the cop was justified.
There’s probably a lot more history behind this situation, but the woman’s ignorance of the legalities involved, poor judgment and tactical idiocy is only outweighed by phenomenal luck that those young men she was “confronting” did not rush her and either kill her with her own gun, or beat the living crap out of her…is there a category beyond “irresponsible”? She deserves stronger recognition. Oh, and the DA Thanks her for her recorded confession to the TV Reporter.
Once I saw the term ” Mum”.. i knew it was going to be an story written by an Anti.
I had to stop watching half way through. I hope everybody went back to their respective trailers and cooled off.
Deescalation only works if the other party wants to leave you alone. “A dozen BB bullets were fired into the Leesers’ front window last Saturday, three days after the confrontation at the park.” These guys weren’t cowed when staring into a barrel of a gun. “Reasonable” bullies would move on to another kid, but apparently these guys want to take her and family on, pistol or no pistol. If this went to a jury I don’t think I could convict her even though she probably broke the letter of the law, because she needs that gun to protect her home.
This woman likes to brag about receiving disability from the state of Missouri for a mental disability. Pro-gun or not, I sure as hell don’t want a mentally impaired person with a loaded weapon running amuck in my neighborhood. Are they waiting for this crazy woman to kill someone before they will charge her with anything?