The McCloskeys probably weren't going to be anyone's role model when it comes to tactical gun handling, but I absolutely understood why they stood outside of their home armed. It wasn't exactly a peaceful moment in American history, and a mob was right outside in a gated community.
I'd be concerned. However, it cost them their guns.
It shouldn't have, of course, because they did nothing wrong. Still, they accepted a plea deal that required them to give up their claim to their guns.
Then came a pardon, which created an issue. Should they get their guns back?
Well, that question has been answered.
It has been five years since the authorities stole Mark and Patricia’s firearms after a confrontation with Black Lives Matter protesters in St. Louis, Missouri. The government has finally given back the Mark’s AR-15 rifle, which featured in the incident, which garnered national attention.
In a post on X, Mark McCloskey announced that after a series of lawsuits, he finally got his rifle back. “It only took 3 lawsuits, 2 trips to the Court of Appeals and 1,847 days, but I got my AR15 back! We defended our home, were persecuted by the left, smeared by the press, and threatened with death, but we never backed down,” he wrote.
It only took 3 lawsuits, 2 trips to the Court of Appeals and 1,847 days, but I got my AR15 back! We defended our home, were persecuted by the left, smeared by the press, and threatened with death, but we never backed down
— Mark McCloskey (@mccloskeyusa) August 1, 2025
What's missing-Patty and the Bryco (soon) pic.twitter.com/NOEyzyXZWMPicking up the AR at the police property room@ pic.twitter.com/Jcp16tYhpA...— Mark McCloskey (@mccloskeyusa) August 1, 2025
Missouri’s stand-your-ground and castle doctrine laws protect people’s right to defend their homes. Neither Mark nor Patricia actually fired their weapons. It was clear that the prosecution was politically motivated. They sought to make an example of the couple.
What was ironic about the whole thing is that the McCloskeys actually supported Black Lives Matter before the incident. Like many White progressives, they were conned into believing the national organization was actually trying to help Black people.
And before anyone calls the writer who wrote the above paragraph a good-for-nothing racist, that was written by my friend Jeff Charles, a black man, so don't even try it.
Black Lives Matter, as an organization, was and is absolutely corrupt. As a movement, it wasn't a whole lot better, in part because it was premised on Marxist ideas.
The McCloskeys were good progressives who likely supported gun control, as a general thing. Many who support anti-gun laws often see themselves as not being the problem and thus should be exempt. I'm unsure if they were in that camp or not--there are leftists who support gun rights, after all, and they could have been among those, and therefore, I'm wrong.
Still, they weren't right-leaning racists who were just looking for an excuse to gun down black people.
They saw a mob coming up the road in their gated community, and following countless riots around the country, they feared for their safety. They took their guns and went outside to discourage the mob. They had reason to fear for their safety, too. It wasn't like these "fiery but mostly peaceful protests" were that peaceful.
And they were prosecuted not so much because of wrongdoing, but because they'd angered the wrong crowd. It was political persecution, not prosecution.
Them getting their guns back is only right, because they never should have lost them in the first place.
Granted, the Bryco is no great claim, but the principle of the matter remains. It was theirs. It never should have been taken from them. They deserve to get it back.
