If Only They Weren't So Rich

The Irish have a word for the way the media is covering events in St. Louis:

Begrudgery.

It means resentment of someone else’s success or the “criticism of ostentatious display of success.”

I’m talking, of course, about the gun-toting millionaires, Mark and Patricia McCloskey, who stood in front of their stately mansion Sunday evening and told a marauding band of trespassers to get off their property. Or else.

Good for them.

They live in a gated community. The moment the mob breached the gate and thundered past the “No Trespassing” “Private Street” signs they were on private property. As the couple pointed out, there are no public streets or sidewalks in their exclusive neighborhood of Portland Place, which is full of stunning multi-million dollar residences.

The couple would seem to have a right to brandish weapons after they say some members of the throng threatened to kill them and their family dog. So there they stood, two packing plaintiffs’ lawyers: he in a pink polo, she in a Breton sailor-style shirt, waving weapons at the taunting protesters.

If the McCloskeys lived in a modest neighborhood, they might get a pass for such a display of firearms. But how dare they defend their Renaissance palazzo-style palace in such a manner? 

Instead of siding with the homeowners, the media sided with the trespassers and portrayed the McCloskeys as the wrongdoers. As if they should have just waved and welcomed the unruly brigade to their neighborhood.

“White Couple Aims Guns At St. Louis Protesters,” CBS.

“White St. Louis Couple Point Guns On Protesters Marching By Their Mansion To Mayor’s Home,” ABC.

And my favorite: “St. Louis Couple Point Guns At Peaceful Crowd of Protesters,” The Washington Post.

Peaceful protesters? Well, they weren’t lobbing Molotov cocktails, so there’s that.

In a sane world, the sight of a chanting, screaming gang threatening residents in their home on a private street would stir outrage among the law-abiding. But fear of angering Black Lives Matter is so strong that by Monday - according to Fox News - even the McCloskeys were siding with BLM, insisting that they were flashing their hardware at whites in the crowd. 

Al Watkins, an attorney for Mark McCloskey, 63, and his 61-year-old wife, Patricia, said the protest was largely peaceful and the pair did not bring their guns outside of the home until two men in particular, both of whom were white, started menacing them…

“They were acting in a fashion inconsistent with the message being given," Watkins said. "My clients were not arming themselves against peaceful protesters, they were arming themselves about people with a really bad motive, a motive that runs afoul of the fundamental tenets of our country.”

After the couple brought the guns outside, Watkins said, others began threatening them, unaware of the reason behind the couple's interpreted need to arm themselves.

The St. Louis Circuit Attorney, the city’s chief prosecutor, is making noises about charging the McCloskeys with a crime, but in an open-carry state with a Castle Doctrine, it’s hard to see how anything will stick. The right to protect yourself extends to what is known as “curtilage,” which includes the land surrounding your home.

Or chateau, as the case may be.

There may be a lesson here for protesters determined to take their grievances into residential neighborhoods, no matter the level of affluence: It’s one thing to demonstrate in city centers where at most you risk tear gas. Suburbia, as these folks found out on Sunday, is full of gun owners.

Even in places run by Democrats. Like St. Louis.