Home Illegally Raided over Facebook Photo

Wednesday, March 20, 2013

New Jersey police and Dept. of Children and Families officials raided the home of a firearms instructor and demanded to see his guns after he posted a Facebook photo of his 11-year-old son holding a rifle.

Posted by RonPaul at 10:18 AM | 77 COMMENTS | permalink | Comment on This Entry |

Front Page
Breaking News
Comments
Flagged Comments
User Blogs
Write a Blog Entry
Create a Poll
Edit Account
Weekly Digest
Stats Page
RSS Feed
Back Page

Subscriptions

Read the Retort using RSS.

RSS Feed

Author Info

RonPaul

Joined 2012/08/29
Visited 2013/05/17

Status: user

Home Illegally Raided over Facebook Photo (77 comments) ...

Gun Debate in Colorado Heats Up. (8 comments) ...

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Personal attacks, profanity, abusive conduct and expressions of prejudice are not allowed. If you have comments about site moderation, contact the site publisher in email.

The police even threatened to take his child out of the home!

Making a child abuse allegation is illegal. I hope that cop gets fired!

I really think all cops need to be fully educated in the Bill of Rights.

Start firing a few of them and they will study up on their own.

#1 | Posted by RonPaul at 2013-03-20 10:23 AM | Reply | Flag:

To be fair, the cops didn't threaten him. They were just there and by his account acted professionally. They only came because DYFS asked them to be there. It was the [...] from DYFS that did all the threatening.

Here's what Moore alleges on the Delaware open carry forum:

- NJ's Department of Youth and Family Services (DYFS) came to his home, accompanied by police officers. They claimed to be responding to a call about a photo of a young boy holding a firearm.
- Without a search warrant, DYFS demanded entry into Moore's home and access to all of his firearms. Moore was not initially there, but his wife called him.
- With his lawyer listening to the exchange on the phone with police and DFYS, Moore denied entry to his home and access to his safe where he stores his guns.
- When Moore requested the name of the DFYS representative, she refused to give it to him.
- After threatening to "take my kids," the police and Family Services worker left -- "empty handed and seeing nothing."

In an exclusive interview with TheBlaze, Mr. Nappen -- the attorney who was listening to the entire incident via Moore's speaker phone -- added more details:
- The DYFS worker repeatedly demanded access to the house and for Moore to open his safe where the firearms were stored. She said that the guns should be cataloged and checked to make certain they were "properly registered." (NJ does not require registration, it is voluntary.)
- The four police officers acted professionally; they were there at the request of DYFS.
- The worker refused to identify herself. Mr. Moore demanded that she give her name. She refused and ran away.
- As of Tuesday morning, Mr. Nappen believes that DYFS is still pushing for an inspection, "which is not happening."

#2 | Posted by MUSTANG at 2013-03-20 10:35 AM | Reply | Flag:

I saw him being interviewed and he said they kept demanding that he open his safe for over an hour! Good thing he had a lawyer on the phone to listen in. Nothing like largely unaccountable gov't officials giving grief to law-abiding gun owners.

#3 | Posted by AKat at 2013-03-20 10:42 AM | Reply | Flag:

Nonsense.

#4 | Posted by HeuristicGratis at 2013-03-20 10:52 AM | Reply | Flag:

Nothing like largely unaccountable gov't officials giving grief to law-abiding gun owners.
#3 | Posted by AKat

And threatening to take his kids. This is illegal and I think a few of them losing their jobs and even being put in jail for civil rights violation would cool this one down.

The gun issue is by far the dumbest thing that Obama/Biden have done to themselves and the Democrats. In the short time this issue has been around, there are many damning stories to tell around election time.

So far, the Liberals kill the innocent and won't allow innocent women to protect themselves.

Things that make you go... HMMMMMMMmmmmmmmm......

#5 | Posted by RonPaul at 2013-03-20 10:54 AM | Reply | Flag:

#5..So far, the Liberals kill the innocent and won't allow innocent women to protect themselves.

That is a bald face lie.

#6 | Posted by oldwhiskeysour at 2013-03-20 11:09 AM | Reply | Flag:

#5..So far, the Liberals kill the innocent and won't allow innocent women to protect themselves.
#6 | POSTED BY OLDWHISKEYSOUR

But you libs will protect women from having a baby with tax payer funded birth control. Next time a woman is being raped at least she will be on the pill!

#7 | Posted by paneocon at 2013-03-20 11:14 AM | Reply | Flag:

#5..So far, the Liberals kill the innocent and won't allow innocent women to protect themselves.

That is a bald face lie.

#6 | Posted by oldwhiskeysour

You're not following the news are you?

Look up Joe Salazar.

Here ya go:

tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com

Still a bold faced lie? Hmmmmmm????

What do you have to say about the Democrat's war on women and children now? They kill the innocent and won't allow the innocent to protect themselves.

#8 | Posted by RonPaul at 2013-03-20 11:26 AM | Reply | Flag:

One example a trend does not make.

#9 | Posted by kanrei at 2013-03-20 11:28 AM | Reply | Flag:

One example a trend does not make.
#9 | Posted by kanrei

"When state Sen. Janea Holmquist Newbry, R-Moses Lake, left the Senate floor Tuesday to nurse her newborn son, Senate Democrats ... demand[ed] an immediate vote on a bill sponsored by a Democrat that did not appear on the afternoon schedule. ... Members of the Senate Democratic Caucus voted yes as their names were called. Members of the Majority Coalition Caucus voted no. And just in time, Holmquist Newbry emerged from the lounge to cast her vote. The motion failed 25-24."

#10 | Posted by RonPaul at 2013-03-20 11:45 AM | Reply | Flag:

Still not a trend. Do you want to take up this thread with single examples? Shall I start playing tit-for-tat and post counter examples? Then we can kill the thread together.

#11 | Posted by kanrei at 2013-03-20 11:48 AM | Reply | Flag:

DHS did their job. They must follow up on all complaints. Sounds like the cops did their job as even the lawyer says they were professional.

What we need is a follow up mechanism so that people who file false charges are prosecuted. Too many people use DHS as a weapon against neighbors or ex-spouces and take up too much of their time when they could be actually helping kids.

#12 | Posted by kanrei at 2013-03-20 11:51 AM | Reply | Flag:

Still not a trend.
#11 | Posted by kanrei

Good. The Republican "War on Women" wasn't real either.

I didn't see a trend there either.

But, the point of the Salazar faux paw is that it got no press. Salazar was far worse and dumber that Akin's faux paw. Akin's got so much press.

The real trend is that the MSM is Liberal.

#13 | Posted by RonPaul at 2013-03-20 11:53 AM | Reply | Flag:

*faux pas

How's that for a faux paw? LOL.

#14 | Posted by RonPaul at 2013-03-20 11:54 AM | Reply | Flag:

"Nothing like largely unaccountable gov't officials giving grief to law-abiding gun owners."

If the same situation occurred but there was no gun involved you'd be on the side of the cops.

#15 | Posted by danni at 2013-03-20 12:09 PM | Reply | Flag:

"The police even threatened to take his child out of the home!"

Awe, boo-hoo.
Perhaps you need a lesson in state and local ordnance/law.

States Rights!

#16 | Posted by ChiefTutMoses at 2013-03-20 12:28 PM | Reply | Flag:

"Nothing like largely unaccountable gov't officials giving grief to law-abiding gun owners."
If the same situation occurred but there was no gun involved you'd be on the side of the cops.
#15 | Posted by danni

How do you know?

Illegal search and seizure is just that, illegal. Cops need to be held accountable.

Give me an example if you haven't realized that you are wrong yet.

#17 | Posted by RonPaul at 2013-03-20 12:30 PM | Reply | Flag:

"The police even threatened to take his child out of the home!"

Awe, boo-hoo.
Perhaps you need a lesson in state and local ordnance/law.

States Rights!

#16 | Posted by ChiefTutMoses

Wow! I thought before that you really don't know what you're talking about, but now I know.

You are ignorant of the US Constitution aren't you?

#18 | Posted by RonPaul at 2013-03-20 12:31 PM | Reply | Flag:

"The police even threatened to take his child out of the home!"
#16 | Posted by ChiefTutMoses

A false allegation of child abuse is against the law.

#19 | Posted by RonPaul at 2013-03-20 12:38 PM | Reply | Flag:

"Nothing like largely unaccountable gov't officials giving grief to law-abiding gun owners."

If the same situation occurred but there was no gun involved you'd be on the side of the cops.

#15 | Posted by danni

duhhh, what part of "acted professionally" didn't sink in to that noggin of yours?
the beef appears with the "as of yet un-accountable" child services [...]

#20 | Posted by roadrunner22 at 2013-03-20 12:39 PM | Reply | Flag:

#20, I don't think #15 reads the stories. I think #15 just comments on the articles based on preconceived notions.

#21 | Posted by HeuristicGratis at 2013-03-20 01:10 PM | Reply | Flag:

"A false allegation of child abuse is against the law."

A presumption of innocence made entirely from an opinion piece on an ideological site should be illegal.
But it certainly is stupid, now.

#22 | Posted by ChiefTutMoses at 2013-03-20 01:19 PM | Reply | Flag:

"Illegal search and seizure is just that, illegal. Cops need to be held accountable"

You should sue.

You can use the fox opinion piece as your evidence

#23 | Posted by ChiefTutMoses at 2013-03-20 01:21 PM | Reply | Flag:

"You are ignorant of the US Constitution aren't you?"

You just shot your own ilk's "States Rights" argument in the foot.

Talk about ignorant.

#24 | Posted by ChiefTutMoses at 2013-03-20 01:40 PM | Reply | Flag:

A false allegation of child abuse is against the law.

#19 | POSTED BY RONPAUL

From the article:

Brown told Fox News that it's "prudent and wise to protect children."
"In many cases we may follow up on something and we don't find any problems and the case is closed," she said. But the person who reported the false allegations of abuse cannot be held liable, she noted. "You can't be prosecuted for making an allegation of child abuse –even if it's false," she said.

#25 | Posted by MUSTANG at 2013-03-20 02:26 PM | Reply | Flag:

"You can't be prosecuted for making an allegation of child abuse –even if it's false," she said.
#25 | Posted by MUSTANG

Not true. If those allegations are proven to be malicious, then they go to jail.

#27 | Posted by RonPaul at 2013-03-20 02:49 PM | Reply | Flag:

#12 | Posted by kanrei at 2013-03-20 11:51 AM

#28 | Posted by kanrei at 2013-03-20 02:50 PM | Reply | Flag:

#28 | Posted by kanrei

I completely agree with this, Kanrei.

#29 | Posted by RonPaul at 2013-03-20 03:03 PM | Reply | Flag:

The real issue here is requiring any search, once upon the home and seeing quickly that it was a normal clean home the whole thing should have ended.

#30 | Posted by moneywar at 2013-03-20 03:17 PM | Reply | Flag:

The real story here is this: How many times has this happened before to people who didn't think to have their lawyer on speaker phone?

#31 | Posted by kanrei at 2013-03-20 03:19 PM | Reply | Flag:

It is funny too that from the photo that anyone would think this child was abused is stupid.

I am surprised the cops even decided to show up, they should have told DHS to conduct the visit on their own because we see no evidence of something wrong.

#32 | Posted by moneywar at 2013-03-20 03:19 PM | Reply | Flag:

The link says the cops showed up and did not search the house because the homeowner turned down their request. They didn't have a search warrant, so they didn't enter. So there was no raid.

Child-protective officials have a lot of power in most states. People who come under their investigations should get a lawyer involved immediately and never speak to them in the absence of that lawyer.

#33 | Posted by rcade at 2013-03-20 04:05 PM | Reply | Flag:

Misleading headline. Misinformative article description.

Seems like Eddie didn't even read the article.

Not a surprise.

Thanks to #2 | POSTED BY MUSTANG for providing information.

The cops acted appropriately. The father acted appropriately, the wife and the lawyer acted appropriately.

But, please GOTPers, display your emotion fueled, ignorant, reactions.

#34 | Posted by ClownShack at 2013-03-20 04:20 PM | Reply | Flag:

The link says the cops showed up and did not search the house because the homeowner turned down their request.
#33 | Posted by rcade

They wanted to search the safe and inventory the weapons, but he refused.

They illegally searched the house with the threat of taking the children.

#35 | Posted by RonPaul at 2013-03-20 04:23 PM | Reply | Flag:

Clown,

Please stop stalking me. You're wrong! How did the cops know he had a safe without illegally searching the house?

You can answer, but I will not respond. You will not give up when you're wrong.

#36 | Posted by RonPaul at 2013-03-20 04:27 PM | Reply | Flag:

You're wrong! How did the cops know he had a safe without illegally searching the house?
#36 | POSTED BY RONPAUL AT 2013-03-20 04:27 PM

My goodness how stubborn and ignorant are you Eddie?

The cops were not given permission to enter the house. Read the article. Or read Mustang's comment, or read RCade's Comment.

Also,

The police even threatened to take his child out of the home!
Making a child abuse allegation is illegal. I hope that cop gets fired!
I really think all cops need to be fully educated in the Bill of Rights.
Start firing a few of them and they will study up on their own.
#1 | POSTED BY RONPAUL AT 2013-03-20 10:23 AM

Your comment is inaccurate. The cops never threatened anything. Your over reaction to an article you didn't even read is pretty absurd. You're ready to fire a cop for absolutely no reason at all.

#37 | Posted by ClownShack at 2013-03-20 04:37 PM | Reply | Flag:

They illegally searched the house with the threat of taking the children.

This quote from the homeowner's attorney indicates police never went into the house:

"If you have a warrant, you're coming in," Nappen told the officers. "If you don't, then you're not. That's what privacy is all about."

#38 | Posted by rcade at 2013-03-20 04:50 PM | Reply | Flag:

The emotional psychosis many on the DR Left suffer from runs so deep that even a story like this must be defended. Any clear thinking person can see the abuse. An emotionally invested leftist secretly does as well but will not betray the sworn elbow lock defense of Democrat controlled government and Democrat supported government control programs.

#39 | Posted by libertarian_gi at 2013-03-20 04:52 PM | Reply | Flag:

#38 | Posted by rcade

How did the police know he had a gun safe?

The Home Raid was illegal. If the Police were in the right, they would be back. They didn't come back.

At minimum, the police harassed this family for a Facebook picture. They made false allegations of child abuse in order to gain entry. I don't know, but lying to gain permission to search is an illegal search.

Again, if what they were doing was the right thing, they would be back with a search warrant. It seems that they would have found out that the Dad is fully credentialed as well as the child.

It was a mistake and because of the tensions raised by the Obama Administration making it a Federal issue, it was an enormous mistake.

#40 | Posted by RonPaul at 2013-03-20 05:00 PM | Reply | Flag:

"If you have a warrant, you're coming in," Nappen told the officers. "If you don't, then you're not. That's what privacy is all about."

#38 | Posted by rcade at

They were talking about the safe. They were already in the house by lying to the wife about taking her child.

Bad, bad coppers.

#41 | Posted by RonPaul at 2013-03-20 05:01 PM | Reply | Flag:

The link says the cops showed up and did not search the house because the homeowner turned down their request. They didn't have a search warrant, so they didn't enter. So there was no raid.
Child-protective officials have a lot of power in most states. People who come under their investigations should get a lawyer involved immediately and never speak to them in the absence of that lawyer.
#33 | Posted by rcade at 2013-03-20 04:05 PM

Wait, so it's yet another inaccurate headline?!

If the SWAT were called in there would have been bloodshed. Give this cop a break - the welfare of a child dressed military-style displaying a serious gun collection could obviously be reason for some concern. He didn't get access to the house at the time because the parent was "offended".

#42 | Posted by redlightrobot at 2013-03-20 05:02 PM | Reply | Flag:

Think about it.

The cops making this illegal home raid was actual child abuse!

This kid was probably traumatized by the event.

#43 | Posted by RonPaul at 2013-03-20 05:03 PM | Reply | Flag:

"Any clear thinking person can see the abuse"

You were there?

#44 | Posted by ChiefTutMoses at 2013-03-20 05:06 PM | Reply | Flag:

Give this cop a break - the welfare of a child dressed military-style displaying a serious gun collection
#42 | Posted by redlightrobot

Wait, wait, wait.

five+ cops show up and try to gain entry to a home because a dad put up a picture of his kid wearing hunting clothes and holding a .22 rifle?

Notice, also, that the kids finger is not on the trigger, which shoes that he is well trained with the weapon.

Are you saying that the cops didn't see this? How dumb and untrained are these cops?

I don't think you should dig the cops a deeper hole now.

#45 | Posted by RonPaul at 2013-03-20 05:07 PM | Reply | Flag:

"Any clear thinking person can see the abuse"

You were there?

#44 | Posted by ChiefTutMoses

The Home owner said it was abusive.

Why are the DR Left so uptight over this?

The cops make a huge mistake. Don't make it worse for them by saying they did nothing wrong.

#46 | Posted by RonPaul at 2013-03-20 05:09 PM | Reply | Flag:

They were talking about the safe.

That makes no sense. People don't come in to a safe. They come in to a house. The homeowner knew his rights and got his lawyer involved, so police and child-protective officials left because they had no warrant. Good for him.

#47 | Posted by rcade at 2013-03-20 05:25 PM | Reply | Flag:

They were talking about the safe. They were already in the house by lying to the wife about taking her child.
Bad, bad coppers.
#41 | POSTED BY RONPAUL AT 2013-03-20 05:01 PM | FLAG:

More fabrications from Eddie.

No one got into the house.

How is anyone supposed to have a discussion with Eddie? He refuses to acknowledge reality.

#48 | Posted by ClownShack at 2013-03-20 05:36 PM | Reply | Flag:

They were talking about the safe.
That makes no sense.
#47 | Posted by rcade

Why wouldn't it make sense?

Are you saying that the safe is never mentioned in the article and that it is not the subject of the search?

Do you at least admit that the cops made a huge mistake?
Can you at least admit that 5+ cops hanging around making threatening statements caused more trauma for the kid? Can you admit that is actual child abuse?

Sounds like illegal behavior to me.

#49 | Posted by RonPaul at 2013-03-20 05:50 PM | Reply | Flag:

#46 & #49| POSTED BY RONPAUL

Uh, well, they could have interviewed the wife on the front porch asking where the weapons were stored.

While it's not clear in the article that they actually "entered" the home, the lawyer seems to have made it pretty clear that they did not enter with the comments he made.

My guess is you couldn't get past headline that included the word "raided".

Hell even TheBlaze, which first reported the story didn't use "raided" in the headline. www.theblaze.com

But I guess that doesn't have the same emotional punch as the title on the Fox re-post article. Which looks like you fell for big time.

Loh

#50 | Posted by Lohocla at 2013-03-20 05:53 PM | Reply | Flag:

"The Home owner said it was abusive."

Maybe he is a liar with an ax to grind? I don't know. And neither do you. The fact that it comes from the blaze is a good indicator where it's coming from (ideological).
For all you know there is some "history" not being included in the hit piece because it undermines the opinions impact (on the weak minded). But don't let that stop you from wildly attacking and rushing to judgment about everyone else involved

"Why are the DR Left so uptight over this? "

I am not upset. It's not like a created a thread where wild defenses are made for a person I don't know anything about based on information from an ideological opinion piece.

#51 | Posted by ChiefTutMoses at 2013-03-20 05:59 PM | Reply | Flag:

Hell even TheBlaze, which first reported the story didn't use "raided" in the headline. www.theblaze.com

#50 | Posted by Lohocla

Go out and google "Family's Home Raided over Facebook Photo of Child's Rifle"

It was reported on probably 25+ other legitimate sites as well.

What's your point?

#52 | Posted by RonPaul at 2013-03-20 06:55 PM | Reply | Flag:

"Why are the DR Left so uptight over this? "

I am not upset. It's not like a created a thread where wild defenses are made for a person I don't know anything about based on information from an ideological opinion piece.

#51 | Posted by ChiefTutMoses

Oops. There is a lot of fact in the article. How, again, is this an "ideological opinion piece"?

You seem to be hung up on trying to pigeon hole folks as being "ideological".

So, you think it's a good thing to have no definable ethics at all?

Why don't you share yours? I'll bet you won't.

#53 | Posted by RonPaul at 2013-03-20 06:59 PM | Reply | Flag:

"What we need is a follow up mechanism so that people who file false charges are prosecuted."

Huh? That's ridiculous. Who is going to call Child Protective Services when they hear a child screaming in the middle of the night if they think they can be prosecuted for reporting something that turns out not to be child abuse but oftentimes it is child abuse. An inconvenience occurs when the investigators show up and there is not child abuse, that's too bad, a tragedy happens when child abuse occurs and people are afraid to report it.

#54 | Posted by danni at 2013-03-20 07:10 PM | Reply | Flag:

It was reported on probably 25+ other legitimate sites as well.

Probably, or probably not.

It could have been 25+, or it could have been 2.

Eddie is trying out to be a journalist for Fox News.

He doesn't need to know any facts. He can just assume.

Also, these legitimate sites maybe the New York Times, or it could be "Angry Tea Party for no more Obama" blogs.

#55 | Posted by ClownShack at 2013-03-20 07:10 PM | Reply | Flag:

"What we need is a follow up mechanism so that people who file false charges are prosecuted."

Huh? That's ridiculous. Who is going to call Child Protective Services when they hear a child screaming in the middle of the night if they think they can be prosecuted for ...
#54 | Posted by danni at

Kanrei was obvious talking about how other family members divisively use CPS to gain power in a divorce case. It happens all the time. Didn't you read that in his post? There needs to be a way to punish people who knowingly falsely accuse someone of child abuse.

#56 | Posted by RonPaul at 2013-03-20 07:14 PM | Reply | Flag:

"DHS did their job. They must follow up on all complaints. Sounds like the cops did their job as even the lawyer says they were professional."
#12 | Posted by kanrei

All they had to do was go to the facebook page and get context to see if it matched the complaint.

Check this out:

"New York State Sets Up Gun Snitch Line With $500 Award"

"NY State has established a toll-free tip line – 1-855-GUNSNYS (1-855- 486-7697) to encourage residents to report illegal firearm possession. The tip line also allows for information to be submitted via text – individuals can text GUNTIP and their message to CRIMES (274637). The New York State Police staff the tip line 24 hours a day. Upon receiving a call, troopers will solicit as much information as possible regarding a firearm tip then contact the appropriate police agency with the lead to initiate an investigation. If the information leads to an arrest for the illegal possession of a firearm, the "tipster" will be awarded $500."

"A program aimed at rewarding people who blow the whistle on illegal gun owners has yet to show significant results, says three police agencies in the New York.

In February of 2012, 11 months before the passage of the NY SAFE Act, Governor Cuomo's office announced a four pronged initiative to curb gun violence. One of the programs was a cash reward for citizens who lead police to the arrest and confiscation of illegal fire arms."

www.thegatewaypundit.com

#57 | Posted by KBM at 2013-03-20 07:15 PM | Reply | Flag:

Probably, or probably not.
It could have been 25+, or it could have been 2.
#55 | Posted by ClownShack

Go out and google "Family's Home Raided over Facebook Photo of Child's Rifle"

There are about 30 legitimate sites posting the story.

What's wrong with you? LOL!!!

#58 | Posted by RonPaul at 2013-03-20 07:17 PM | Reply | Flag:

"New York State Sets Up Gun Snitch Line With $500 Award"
#57 | Posted by KBM

LOL!!!

Hmmmmmm. Getting more like Communist Russia and modern day North Korea every day.

#59 | Posted by RonPaul at 2013-03-20 07:19 PM | Reply | Flag:

"Kanrei was obvious talking about how other family members divisively use CPS to gain power in a divorce case. It happens all the time."

I'm quite sure it does but that doesn't change anything. When we start prosecuting people who innocently report abuse, as was probably the case in this situtation, you put children at risk. Now, if someone maliciously, knowingly falsely accuses someone of abuse that is a completely different thing and I would agree they should be prosecuted but that isn't what most likely happened here. Someone probably saw the pictures and was actually frightened for the welfare of that boy although, after reading all the details, it is obvious he was in no way endangered. So, someone who is fearful of guns, especially in the hands of children, called the authorities? Now they should face prosecution? Ridiculous. They meant no harm.

#60 | Posted by danni at 2013-03-20 07:21 PM | Reply | Flag:

Someone probably saw the pictures and was actually frightened for the welfare of that boy although, after reading all the details, it is obvious he was in no way endangered.
#60 | Posted by danni

I agree with you 100%. I don't blame the person who saw it on Facebook, but I do blame the Cops and the CPS person. It was a mistake for them to behave that way. That's child abuse!

#61 | Posted by RonPaul at 2013-03-20 07:33 PM | Reply | Flag:

It was a mistake for them to behave that way. That's child abuse!

#61 | Posted by RonPaul

Me thinks thou doest protest too much!

It is a mistake to behave the way you do. It's blog abuse!

#62 | Posted by donnerboy at 2013-03-20 07:41 PM | Reply | Flag:

but I do blame the Cops and the CPS person. It was a mistake for them to behave that way. That's child abuse!
#61 | POSTED BY RONPAUL AT 2013-03-20 07:33 PM

The cops were doing their job Eddie. And No One Entered the house.

if anyone was over stepping their authority it was CPS.

The wife wouldn't let them in and neither would the lawyer.

Nothing done was child abuse. none of it.

#63 | Posted by ClownShack at 2013-03-20 07:48 PM | Reply | Flag:

Getting more like Communist Russia and modern day North Korea every day.
#59 | POSTED BY RONPAUL AT 2013-03-20 07:19 PM

Russia is Socialist, always has been.

North Korea is a dictatorship.

#64 | Posted by ClownShack at 2013-03-20 07:49 PM | Reply | Flag:

North Korea. Censorship. Gun control. Mandatory health care. Mandatory government service. Sound familiar?

#65 | Posted by brilliantbart at 2013-03-20 07:58 PM | Reply | Flag:

It is a mistake to behave the way you do. It's blog abuse!

#62 | Posted by donnerboy

Ok. That made me laugh.

#66 | Posted by RonPaul at 2013-03-20 09:02 PM | Reply | Flag:

#64 | Posted by ClownShack

LOL!!! Are you being foolish on purpose? LOL!!

You didn't disagree with me though.

Oh! You missed that.

#67 | Posted by RonPaul at 2013-03-20 09:04 PM | Reply | Flag:

The bluer states go, the closer to a police state they become; and that so many on the left actually want that is scary.

#68 | Posted by MSgt at 2013-03-20 09:08 PM | Reply | Flag:

#67

I was just correcting you Eddie.

You should pay a fact checker to follow you around all day to correct all the misinformation you spew.

#69 | Posted by ClownShack at 2013-03-20 09:09 PM | Reply | Flag:

For what its worth (Springfield), this story is just outrageously wrong... stop children ... everybody looks whats going on on... what a field day for the heat...

Last i knew the age to get a hunting license was 12. I had a 22 when I was 10. BB gun at 5. 12 Ga for my 12th birthday (still use it too).

#70 | Posted by reitze at 2013-03-20 10:35 PM | Reply | Flag:

This demonstrates our system is worthless for justice:
FTA: "But the person who reported the false allegations of abuse cannot be held liable, she noted.
"You can't be prosecuted for making an allegation of child abuse –even if it's false," she said."

hmmmm, There's not much stopping vigilantes from stoning the false accusers as well as the idiots that blow stuff out of proportion. If crap like this keeps happening THEY WILL. There are some MEN still living in this country. Many who've paid for the constitution with their own blood from bullet wounds.

And beware ... the govt idiots can't really be this stupid... they're up to no good. Instigating, abusing, accusing... look out!

Helter Skelter (St Paul McCartney)

#71 | Posted by reitze at 2013-03-20 10:59 PM | Reply | Flag:

I hope something bad happens to the person who called DFYS.

But you shouldn't put your kids on Facebook.

#72 | Posted by Sully at 2013-03-21 09:41 AM | Reply | Flag:

#60 The individual who reported this matter was probably just an ignorant, anti-gun democrat. They saw the gun and got scared for the child not realize that the child was more grown up than they in realizing what is and is not a rational fear.

They should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. This was a malicious reporting. Don't protect the reporter in this case.

#73 | Posted by HeuristicGratis at 2013-03-21 09:51 AM | Reply | Flag:

The biggest issue in this matter is that the DYFS worker refused to reveal her name, identity, or identification.

That should be illegal and DYFS should be held accountable for that misstep.

#74 | Posted by HeuristicGratis at 2013-03-21 09:56 AM | Reply | Flag:

I was 11 when I received my first .22 rifle. In the 60s that was not called that child abuse; rather, it was a rite of passage. Back then this was known as normal... and yes, I got my first 'jack knife' about age nine.

ps: Have had knives and many pistols/rifles, etc. over the decades.......and not once did any of them ever jump up and attack someone [had they, I would have disciplined them severely]:)

#75 | Posted by MSgt at 2013-03-21 02:26 PM | Reply | Flag:

How long before we force TNT to stop showing a 24 Christmas Story marathon since Ralphie wants a gun so badly?

#76 | Posted by kanrei at 2013-03-21 02:27 PM | Reply | Flag:

#67

I was just correcting you Eddie.

You should pay a fact checker to follow you around all day to correct all the misinformation you spew.

#69 | Posted by ClownShack

But, you were wrong. You missed that

#77 | Posted by RonPaul at 2013-03-22 09:00 AM | Reply | Flag:

#76 That is Bloomberg's next bill.

#78 | Posted by HeuristicGratis at 2013-03-22 09:53 AM | Reply | Flag: