Facebook Photo of Child Holding Gun Leads to a Law Enforcement Knock on the Door
Family gives their son a gun. Posts picture of proud child holding gun on Facebook. Child Protective Services is called, their home is raided, and police demand (without a warrant) to see all their guns:
The family’s trouble started Saturday night when Moore received an urgent text message from his wife. The Carneys Point Police Dept. and the New Jersey Dept. of Children and Families had raided their home.
Moore immediately called Nappen and rushed home to find officers demanding to check his guns and his gun safe.
Instead, he handed the cell phone to one of the officers – so they could speak with Nappen.
“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.”
With his attorney on speaker phone, Moore instructed the officers to leave his home.
“I was told I was being unreasonable and that I was acting suspicious because I wouldn’t open my safe,” Moore wrote on the Delaware Open Carry website. “They told me they were going to get a search warrant. I told them to go ahead.”
Moore took this photo of police outside his home.
Nappen told Fox News the police wanted to inventory his firearms.
“”We said no way, it’s not happening,” he said. “This is a guy who is completely credentialed and his son is also credentialed.”
Part of the problem is that the Child Protective Services people claim they are obligated to investigate every single complaint of potential child abuse, no matter how frivolous it is on its face. This “we exercise absolutely no judgment whatsoever” policy obviously makes it easy for harassers to turn peoples lives upside down. The FBI told me SWATters use this technique, and in unrelated news, at least one Brett Kimberlin supporter has called Child Protective Services on a prominent Kimberlin critic.
As a society, we need to learn how to weed out stupid and frivolous complaints without spending wads of taxpayer cash and government resources investigating nonsense. “OMG THERE IS A PICTURE OF A CHILD WITH A GUN!!!!” is not a situation that calls for a team of government officials to knock on a citizen’s door.
Memo to government officials: It’s called “judgment.” Try using it.
And why did they need four police officers?
Tanny O'Haley (4c5a96) — 3/20/2013 @ 7:49 amFor swats, red-flagging of spoofed calls would be a start.
Anonymous CPS reports are one thing – anonymous CPS agents are another. Is it really the law in that locale, that CPS agents do not have to identify themselves or show a credential if police accompany them?
SarahW (b0e533) — 3/20/2013 @ 7:50 amI can tell I’m a gun nut because my first impression on seeing that picture isn’t that I should call the police, but that the child has terrific trigger discipline.
Lawrence (4a8101) — 3/20/2013 @ 8:03 amWe’ve not merely lost judgment in our society, we’ve hunted it down and killed it. (Oops, a violent metaphor – I’m so ashamed)
BTW, I’ve successfully taught hunter education to eight year olds. Eleven year olds are usually great students of firearm safety.
SPQR (768505) — 3/20/2013 @ 8:06 amOur host wrote:
That’s a joke, right?
Government officials are doing their best to reduce the amount of discretion they have — “zero-tolerance” policies being the most obvious example –in an attempt to shiled themselves and their agencies from discrimination lawsuits. For a child protective services agency, a “respond to every notice” policy would be in place to prevent any instances in which a specious-sounding complaint was made, and not acted upon, and then a child winds up injured or killed.
“Gun” is the key word, and many of our friends on the left want physicians and other social service providers to be intrusive about asking if there are firearms in the house. (Will this be a form of back door gun registration, since ObaminableCare requires that medical records be computerized and availavle, on-line, to certain health care providers . . . and the government.)
“Judgement” was exercised by the person who made the complaint in the first place, the complaintant’s judgement that having a firearm in the home is bad, bad, bad! The problem is, in our overly litigious society, there is a real, legal penalty not just for violations of the law, but for a judgement taken which turns out to have been wrong.
The sadly realistic Dana (3e4784) — 3/20/2013 @ 8:10 amPatterico – Great minds
JD (b63a52) — 3/20/2013 @ 8:11 amThe CPS agent refused to identify herself, and threatened to have his children removed from the home if he did not cooperate. The CPS officer claimed to have a RIGHT to inspect his gun safe, and to demand that he open it.
JD (b63a52) — 3/20/2013 @ 8:13 amin my experience CPS doesn’t hire off the creamy top of the job candidate mug
happyfeet (8ce051) — 3/20/2013 @ 8:18 amHow would guns locked in a safe be endangering the kids? That’s where they are supposed to go.
SarahW (b0e533) — 3/20/2013 @ 8:25 amBesides if the safe inventory came up short, she’d have to do math.
SarahW (b0e533) — 3/20/2013 @ 8:26 amDown here, the local variant, DCF has been known to be fatally inefficient, perhaps you’ve heard of a few instances.
narciso (3fec35) — 3/20/2013 @ 8:29 amIt would be one thing if some ignorant or trouble-making yokel called in a complaint about the facebook photo. But while DFS is denying they troll facebook for kid with gun pics, what if some law enforcement agency checks that guy’s facebook page on a regular basis?
What if the raid was all pretext, the pic used as an excuse for a visit and inspection, without “need” of a warrant?
SarahW (b0e533) — 3/20/2013 @ 8:35 amNot really likely I guess. An unjustified intrusion is bad publicity.
The refusal of the DFS person to cheerfully identify herself is very strange, though.
SarahW (b0e533) — 3/20/2013 @ 8:41 amGreetings:
B.F. Skinner (of rewarded behavior tends to be repeated fame) fan that I am, I’m guessing we will experience a continuing drip, drip, drip (in a Chinese water torture kind of way) of these anti-gun rights incident nominally to protect the children but in reality “to encourage the others”. Across the country, power-abusing bureaucrats are using their regulatory powers to move America into the age of “the process is the punishment”.
11B40 (ae75e1) — 3/20/2013 @ 8:58 amDana nails it. They adopt these zero tolerance policies not to protect the public but primarily to protect themselves from accusations of either discrimination or failing to do enough to ‘protect the kids’. Locally, there have been workers fired because they didn’t remove a kid from a home when the kid is later killed by someone in the household – since these workers don’t want to lose their jobs, it is to be expected that they’ll investigate everybody rather than leave themselves open to risk of losing their job. And what manager wants to try disciplining a worker for not using discretion, only to find the worker complaining to the media that they’re being fired for caring too much about the kids?
steve (369bc6) — 3/20/2013 @ 9:06 amWould calls to New Jersey DCF reporting parents endangering their children by sending them to public schools be similarly investigated?
How about parents who smoke, or text while driving, or who cook with trans fats, or drink Big Gulps? Oh, the horror, the horror!
ropelight (996587) — 3/20/2013 @ 9:11 amI think its worse than that this time. The desire to enter that gunsafe and catalog the contents and “run the serial numbers” without any complaint of crime or abuse and based on a picture of a kid properly credentialled properly holding a 22′ rifle
seems more sinister to me than “we have to check out all complaints.”
FWIW, Kid has come forward with his own point of view, in interview along with his father on FoxNews. http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/03/20/i-was-seriously-mad-about-it-11-year-old-behind-facebook-gun-photo-speaks-out/
SarahW (b0e533) — 3/20/2013 @ 9:14 amTime for a new movie:
The SWATting of Ralphie Parker.
db (fe109c) — 3/20/2013 @ 9:16 amonly to find the worker complaining to the media that they’re being fired for caring too much about the kids?
Who cares? Dont the individual’s actual Rights trump their professed “caring”? If she “cared” so much, she wouldnt have refused to identify herself, she would have been proud of the service she was providing the State.
Oh, and ditto what SarahW said in #17. She has no Right to do so, or even to demand that of a citizen.
JD (b63a52) — 3/20/2013 @ 9:23 amSarahW, indeed, its thug government without any shred of justification.
SPQR (768505) — 3/20/2013 @ 9:36 amTar, feathers. Apply liberally.
papertiger (c2d6da) — 3/20/2013 @ 9:52 amMemo to government officials: It’s called “judgment.” Try using it.
But government is about substituting rules for judgement. In the ideal regulatory State, there are only rules and people who obey them. And criminals.
Kevin M (bf8ad7) — 3/20/2013 @ 10:05 amIf so, then why not press trespassing charges against the CPS drones? The police are already there; there’s no warrant so there’s no legal reason for the drones to be there, and their failure to identify themselves means they could be criminals attempting to gain access to your home by posing as CPS drones.
If the police balk, call their department: “There are some people here claiming to be officers from your department. They appear to be part of a gang posing as government officials to get access to my home. I asked for a warrant, but they say they don’t have one. I’m worried about my safety; these poseurs are armed!”
Rob Crawford (04f50f) — 3/20/2013 @ 10:07 amI’m pretty sure you’re not supposed to put kids in a safe. 🙂
Rob Crawford (04f50f) — 3/20/2013 @ 10:08 amNot really. Can’t be held accountable if they don’t know your name.
Which begs the question of why there are no cell phone photos.
Rob Crawford (04f50f) — 3/20/2013 @ 10:09 amMemo to government officials: It’s called “judgment.” Try using it.
Absolutely, 100% dead on, but…
Memo to people who throw all sorts of personal info up on Facebook, Twitter, etc. (especially photos of your children): It’s called “judgment.” Try using it.
beer 'n pretzels (6ef50f) — 3/20/2013 @ 10:11 amAnd remember — synthetic rope stretches, so it should be a bit shorter than the traditional hemp.
Rob Crawford (04f50f) — 3/20/2013 @ 10:11 amSteve wrote:
[Pats self on back.] 🙂
The appreciative Dana (3e4784) — 3/20/2013 @ 10:17 amComment by ropelight (996587) — 3/20/2013 @ 9:11 am
If you wanted to “Cloward-Piven” them, that is exactly what you would do!
askeptic (b8ab92) — 3/20/2013 @ 10:21 amComment by Kevin M (bf8ad7) — 3/20/2013 @ 10:05 am
You end up with three classifications of people:
askeptic (b8ab92) — 3/20/2013 @ 10:23 amAppartchiks;
Serfs;
Enemies of the State!
Our host wrote:
My darling bride is a registered nurse on a pediatric wing of a large hospital.. She is required, under Pennsylvania law, to report any suspected case of child abuse upon which she comes, and could lose her license if she does not.
Fortunately, she almost never has to: by the time an abuse case gets to the hospitalization stage, it’s already been reported through the emergency room or other caregivers, but she has no discretion in choosing to report.
The Dana married to a nurse for 33 years, 10 months and 1 day (3e4784) — 3/20/2013 @ 10:24 amShe also has to give her name on her report, or at least she would have to do so in my state.
SarahW (b0e533) — 3/20/2013 @ 10:31 amAnd in PA too: http://www.pacode.com/secure/data/049/chapter42/s42.42.html
SarahW (b0e533) — 3/20/2013 @ 10:33 amIn my experiences with government and government unions, common sense and judgement are myths.
Those in government don’t think they need any restraints like applying for a search warrant. They know better than your or a judge.
Children die because of the crap called welfare laws. In Iowa, we have the deaths of Shelby Duis and Jetsetta Gage as a result of 2 bit social workers too lazy to do their jobs properly. They seem to think their job is only to take kids from homes that have wealth and assets to pay fees and fines to get the kids back.
PCD (1d8b6d) — 3/20/2013 @ 10:52 amThe problem here is with the too much discretion given to child protection services, not with anything about guns.
You can read other stories about child protective services has done, equally bad, that don’t ahve anything to do with guns.
And CPS never gets called on itself when THEY put a child into a dangerous situation.
Doing things without due process is a really bad idea.
There rarely is any danger to children that’s real that’s not blatently obvious.
Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 3/20/2013 @ 10:52 amAnd the propaganda still is probably is that all the mostakes are those made by NOT removing a child.
Even in cases where something happened, the datum that might have caused a removal was irrelevant. The never asked question is: how many cases were there exactly like it?
Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 3/20/2013 @ 10:57 amIt’s “let 100 guilty men go free lest 1 guilty person stay in jail” in reverse.
Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 3/20/2013 @ 10:58 amOH, to reinforce common sense lacking in Gov’t, look up the Orange County (CA) Banruptcy. Plenty of warnings to stop and change things, including me to Chairman of the Board of Supervisors, William Steiner, face to face.
PCD (1d8b6d) — 3/20/2013 @ 10:59 amAs a physician (or nurse, police, etc.) the law tells us we must contact the authorities if we have a reasonable suspicion; in part so a doc doesn’t have to worry about getting sued and hence puts the bar too high before they act. I have found this helpful in the past, when something was said by a child that I did not think I could ignore.
In practice the level of concern is variable upon the location and resources of the locale- suburban county folks will jump on things that philly city folks ignore.
That said, I would think whoever took the report could see that the level of panic in the reporter was the bigger issue, and as in any other police response to a call a certain amount of probable cause needs to be apparent before searches can take place without a warrant. Had the police apologetically informed the family of the issue, their need to “check it out”, and have a little discussion at the door, perhaps things would have been satisfactory to all. Even when some aspects of a policy are “zero tolerance”, judegement must take place somewhere along the line.
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 3/20/2013 @ 11:00 amthis is the face of fascism.
get used to it…
redc1c4 (403dff) — 3/20/2013 @ 11:14 amGood thing the SWATters haven’t thought of this , or maybe it wouldn’t work, because the response is so much more unpredictable. Also they’d have to identify themselves, unlike when they call 911, when there’s no time to check out anything.
Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 3/20/2013 @ 11:21 amTanny O’Haley – “And why did they need four police officers?”
Why so three could testify for thr fourth about the “furtive movement” the suspect made before he was blown away. The cops would also have a “drop gun” to place next to the corpse to further justify their actions.
Joe Mama (8f3393) — 3/20/2013 @ 11:24 amWhat is to stop the GOVERNMENT from creating a complaint anonymously, and using that pretext to violate various rights.
Gus (694db4) — 3/20/2013 @ 11:51 amI say weadopt a zero tolerance policy vis a vis government intruding into our homes and violating our privacy without REASONABLE CAUSE.
And why did they need four police officers?
Comment by Tanny O’Haley (4c5a96)
Because there are guns in the home! Gunz!
Officer safety uber alles.
bonhomme (7064bc) — 3/20/2013 @ 12:09 pmCPS barely investigates any child abuse and rarely saves children. So this notion they must check out every instance is ridiculous. And they needed polic officers? That family should sue every agency and the town for this type of abuse and the name of the one who called in the “tip” should be identified and sued.
Krystal (8e2b67) — 3/20/2013 @ 1:07 pmStop using Facebook, stop voting in Democrats, end big government, because the more gov’t officials there are that we pay for then the more corruption and abuse of our freedoms.
The Newark Star-Ledger Editorial apparently think that this wasn’t overzealous at all…unbelievable.
So…what is worst, the original story or the pathetic opinion of NJ’s largest paper??? We are sooooo screwed here.
http://blog.nj.com/njv_editorial_page/2013/03/was_the_state_overzealous_in_c.html
exnavyguy (818521) — 3/20/2013 @ 1:07 pmLucky. In this country, they only need to take a dislike to you and they can remove the children.
And spanking was made illegal recently against the wishes of the population, so all they need to do is ask if you’ve done that and they’ve got you down for assault.
scrubone (e7e0ea) — 3/20/2013 @ 1:18 pm}}} Memo to government officials: It’s called “judgment.” Try using it.
ARE YOU A MEMBER OF THE “ELITE“???
Well, then there’s no call to use “judgement”.
That’s for the Elites, didn’t you GET THE MEMO??
No one ELSE is ever supposed to THINK, they are here to OBEY.
MMMbbbaaaah!! MMMMMbbbbbbaaaahhhhh!!
S:-/
IGotBupkis, Legally Defined Cyberbully in All 57 States and some Canadian provinces (98ae1f) — 3/20/2013 @ 1:39 pmMmmmmm…
I smell lawsuit.
mojo (8096f2) — 3/20/2013 @ 1:58 pmName the local head of CPS, loudly. Repeatedly. Eventually, a denial will come. Repeat, with demands for the names of those who were there.
htom (412a17) — 3/20/2013 @ 2:25 pm41. SF: Good thing the SWATters haven’t thought of this…
Actually, I recall, the enemies of David Koresh, the people whom he had replaced, did. They called in Texas Child Protective Services. It didn’t work, even though he was sleeping with adolescents. Then they called in the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms. But they didn’t get what they wanted – restoration of control. Instead the compound was destroyed.
They ran into Jay William Buford, head of the BATF in Little Rock, Arkansas, and friend of Bill Clinton, who saw an opportunity. He was actibvely involved in preparing the warrant and planning the raid. He was an associate of Bill Clinton – he had prevented the first murder attempt on Alice McArthur (which was by bomb) from getting anywhere.
If you study the Waco search warrant, you will see that activity picks up when Clinton is ahead, stops abruptly when Perot is ahead in the polls and then resumes as sooin as Clinton is elected.
It is my hypothesis that Buford wanted the greatest SWAT raid of all time. To make sure no questions were asked, he wanted some BATF agents dead. To make sure they were dead, and to avoid the necessity of taking anyone into his confidence, he killed them himself.
But the raid stopped in the middle. His friend Bill Clinton had to rescue him and the way he did it was by murdering most of the Branch Davidians, and in partivular the leadership, using the FBI’s misnamed “Hostage Rescue Team” – the same people involved in Ruby Ridge.
Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 3/20/2013 @ 3:53 pmI thought Facebook photos could be restricted to “only friends”? Maybe they were, and it was a “friend” who dropped the time? If so, it’ll be easier to find out who.
nk (516897) — 3/20/2013 @ 4:10 pmCPS is another organization mistaking “zero reasoning” for “zero tolerance!”
It is one thing to mandate hospitals report injuries to children. It is another thing when people start reporting pictures because they don’t like them.
I am trying to figure out where there is a minimum age for the Second Amendment? I don’t see an asterisk there in the Constitution.
Bloody morons…
WarEagle82 (2b7355) — 3/20/2013 @ 4:31 pmComment by WarEagle82 (2b7355) — 3/20/2013 @ 4:31 pm
I am trying to figure out where there is a minimum age for the Second Amendment? I don’t see an asterisk there in the Constitution.
Probably 21 or 18, because that’s generally the age for all rights, and for teh rights of citizenship.
Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 3/20/2013 @ 4:41 pmNJ has specific restrictions, but his pose, his weapon, were legal under those restrictions. That midnight raid had no rational basis, no probable cause, if whatever tip or complaint was based on “Dad has guns, and here is a pic of his kid with a gun.”
SarahW (b0e533) — 3/20/2013 @ 4:49 pmnk wrote:
They can be, but that doesn’t mean that the family did so.
You have a couple of layers of security on Facebook: where you can restrict your personal information and comments to your friends, and another where you can restrict your photos; a lot of people who do the former never do the latter.
The Dana on Facebook® (af9ec3) — 3/20/2013 @ 5:40 pmAs a physician (or nurse, police, etc.) the law tells us we must contact the authorities if we have a reasonable suspicion…
There is no “reasonable suspicion” of abuse from a picture of a kid holding a firearm and demonstrating more training and safety concern than your average cop or Senator.
Rob Crawford (04f50f) — 3/21/2013 @ 7:47 amOr your average Vice President.
Patterico (9c670f) — 3/21/2013 @ 7:57 amThe incident described does have stupid written in large letters but let’s dial a couple of things back.
MT Geoff (a67ef4) — 3/21/2013 @ 8:38 amFirst, it doesn’t appear to have been a “midnight” anything. Saturday evening, yes, but I haven’t read that it was late at night.
Second, it wasn’t a “raid”. It was an intrusive, unnecessary visit that could have turned into a raid. The mother stood on her right not to allow the visitors into the home; the father came home and continued to stand on that right. The visitors never entered the home or used any form of force, although the DCF agent appears to have been snotty.
Third, in the end, the officials acted according to the rights of the family and left without entering. I agree the whole incident should never have occurred but the officials acted properly when the family stood on their rights.
The fact that someone called the attention of the police to the Facebook photo is no more reason for the intervention than is the existence of the photo itself, unless the police-caller made some additional claim we don’t know about. The police and child services cannot maintain a “we have to check out every report, no matter how ridiculous” policy. To prove the point, someone with a background in Tarot or something should claim that the police chief is abusing his children, based on her card-readings, or her dreams to that effect, and a claim of psychic powers (e.g., I’ve had some other dreams, and they came true!).
David Pittelli (9fd726) — 3/21/2013 @ 9:15 amGEoff, it was late at night. Look at the video.
SarahW (b0e533) — 3/21/2013 @ 9:24 amIt might not have been midnight, but it wasn’t broad day in business hours.
SarahW (b0e533) — 3/21/2013 @ 9:26 amThere was nothing to suggest improper storage of guns in the picture or the child having improper access to weapons.
SarahW (b0e533) — 3/21/2013 @ 9:30 ambut the officials acted properly when the family stood on their rights.
Wrong. Unless failing to identify yourself, and threatening to have the children removed from the home qualifies as acting properly in your calculus.
JD (b63a52) — 3/21/2013 @ 9:30 amThe problem with exercising judgement is that it leaves you open to, um, being judged. Can’t have that. Being found, by whatever dubious authority, of exercising “bad” judgement will inevitably lead to someone filing a suit seeking redress.
And avoiding that is what all this zero-tolerance crap is all about. Right and wrong are secondary now to avoiding tort happy idiots, whom the courts have encouraged by becoming shadow legislatures. “Can’t find the law you want? Create/find a test case and we’ll get a court to make one for you-!”
NeoCon_1 (9dccdd) — 3/21/2013 @ 12:12 pmI’m sure that the cops in NYS will display vastly greater judgement in going after targets highlighted by their Gun Tip Line…..
http://dailycaller.com/2013/03/20/new-york-state-offers-500-reward-for-reporting-gun-owners/
Somebody’s going to get killed!
askeptic (b8ab92) — 3/21/2013 @ 1:36 pmI flat-out don’t believe that CPS “has” to investigate every report, regardless of the content. If that’s true, then I can anonymously call CPS and report that my cousin’s neighbor’s maid said that someone told her that Joe Smith is not a good dad. That triggers an unannounced visit to Joe Smith? Or I could email CPS with a link to a Facebook picture of a child and tell them I think they should investigate these parents because the little girl is wearing a bow in her hair?
RigelDog (0d4bcd) — 3/21/2013 @ 5:31 pm51. I made a typo.
That should be:
* ….Jay William Buford, head of the BATF in Little Rock, Arkansas…was actively involved in preparing the warrant and planning the raid. He was an associate of Bill Clinton – he had prevented the investigation of the first murder attempt on Alice McArthur in 1982 (which was by bomb) from getting anywhere.
Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 3/22/2013 @ 12:06 pmA bit about the McArthur case.
I see there have been so new developments (mostly deaths) in the last dozen or so years.
http://www.encyclopediaofarkansas.net/encyclopedia/entry-detail.aspx?entryID=3484
Mary Lee Orsini, at one point made the claim she had been having an affair with Jim Guy Tucker. this may have helped make the runoff in his comeback attempt in 1982. Jim Guy Tucker came in third.
Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 3/22/2013 @ 12:19 pmHere’s another incident involving Buford in 2001, I think. Buford did not get promoted – he was probably hoping the BATF would be mergeed with the FBI and he would get a high position. Instead he remained head of the BATF in Little Rock all through Clinton’s term. It is safe to say he was the chief planner and architect of the Waco search warrant and Waco raid.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/962093/posts
There’s a comment there that quotes a newspaper:
Arkansas Democrat Gazette 1/16/01 Jay Meisel “……Relatives of Carl Wilson said Monday that they don’t believe he would have shot at police officers if he had known the men coming into his house on Friday were lawmen. …… Wilson’s family said the raid by agents of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, Faulkner County sheriff’s deputies and Conway police Special Weapons and Tactics team members left them with questions about why the shooting occurred. ….. The lawmen left a search warrant saying they were looking for a .30-30 Winchester rifle and ammunition. …… Wilson was a figure in two high-profile murder cases in Pulaski County during the past 20 years — the slayings of Alice McArthur and Johnny Burnett. He was not charged in either case. ……… Bill Buford, agent in charge of the bureau’s Little Rock office, said Carl Wilson, 60, fired at officers as they approached the house. He said that Sgt. Jason Young of the Faulkner County sheriff’s office and Larry Hearn, a Conway police officer on the SWAT team, received minor injuries. Officers returned fire, killing Wilson. Buford said Wilson knew the men entering his home were officers. …….But Tammy Wilson, Carl Wilson’s widow, said she never heard officers identify themselves. She said she was sleeping when an alarm clock woke her and she heard what sounded like firecrackers. ….. Regardless of how the shooting started, Tammy Wilson said, she doesn’t understand why so many federal agents and local police officers would break into the house in the early morning hours, just to search for one gun. ……..”
Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 3/22/2013 @ 12:27 pmI learned to shoot guns before I was 11 years old. I was a police officer for 5 years now I see why I am not one anymore. We are seeing a paradime shift in people who cannot think for themselves called socialism so they naively trust in their gov. to protect them and to make all the right decisions. If the truth were known the one who called the child welfare is probably a criminal. He/she should be thrown in jail for yelling fire in a movie theater Criminals always point fingers at everyone else. They want to lower everyone else to their perverted level. And it is a fact that this is not child abuse end of discussion.
Has anyone made the factual connection that ever since Obama got reelected that for a while almost every week there was a school shooting. And it was that SandyHook shooting that all the liberals have loved so they can get people all fearful and desperate enough to accept any answer called gun control. This is not an opinion this is a fact so deal with it. the liberals who are the greatest hateful group got what they want.
Liberalism is a mental disease it is like a virus in a computer if it is allowed to fester it will destroy its host. This world has become a more scary place since the liberals, atheists and radical environmentalists have taken over since the 60s. Liberals never want to make the connection that the 20th century was the bloodiest century in world history and that is when liberals began to get things their way. Liberalism has proven to fail. They had nothing to do with the formation of the greatest country in the world. The country that everyone wants to come to get freedom. freedom from communism/liberalism, high taxes, robbing from those who work and giving to those who do not want to work.
Definition of a liberal: someone who believes in freedom of speech until he finds out that there is a different view and wants everyone else to pay for their drug/porno/hate addictions. Liberals got their Obama in the white house now he is making a fool of them called “Obamination Care”
Mark (2d2fcd) — 3/30/2013 @ 8:19 am