Terrifying 4th/2nd Amendment Story!

[jlrhiner]

Welcome to the real world. Anyone can place a phone call. Anyone can phone DFACS or the equivalent state agency and create a great deal of trouble for any one at all. And it is all perfectly legal. There are no repercussions on the individual who makes the report, regardless of if it is or is not true.

No repercussions? You can't sue them for defaming your character?

 

[Rintimtin]

All I can do is shake my head.

 

[mg357]

 

[sps282]

The anti gun people will do just about anything to stir the pot and cause trouble. This incident will probably gives others ideas.

 

[badge]

Unfortunately the officers are required to accompany these folks on complaints as they are unarmed. Most of the Health and Human Services folks are decent and realize the seriousness of the complaints and will advise the officers of this. There are zeolots in every business but in this case I feel that lines were more than crossed and this is a disgrace by that agency. Heads should roll on this one but they will circle the wagons and protect the little Tyrant who went out their to harass this man and his family.

 

[BCDWYO]

I can see how the police are legally obligated to investigate any call about child abuse that they may get, but that investigation shouldn't involve searching a man's safe without a warrant or any more cause than a photo! Clearly they overstepped. I'm guessing this wouldn't have happened in most parts of the country.

 

[relic]

The anti gun people will do just about anything to stir the pot and cause trouble.

Here's a similar case. Indy Police shut down an urban college campus for 4+ hrs yesterday after someone called in a "gun sighting". Turns out someone saw what they thought to be a gun case when a car trunk was briefly opened.

The report screwed up classes, hospitals, traffic, etc. for the whole afternoon. The cops and school admin say everybody did the right thing! Yeah, right.

 

[S. Hammer]

Where was the police officers' common sense? Why didn't they look at that picture and say, 'We don't see a problem - Nice gun that kid has!'

Probably because we don't get to pick and choose what calls we respond to. From what I read, the cops got sent to escort the kiddie bureaucrats. We don't get to refuse on calls for service. The father (rightfully so) called his attorney then refused them entry. No one's "house got raided." The idiots blustered and threatened, but left. FWIW, I side with the family on this one.

 

[OLDFED]

And we don't have to worry about drone strikes either? That police department needs new leadership!

 

[dcxplant]

Yet another reason to no do Facebook.

What a stupid thing, to put your whole life online to the viewing public.

While I feel badly for his wife and son, who were probably very frightened by the ordeal, the dad brought this on himself, and his family.

Thanks dad!

 

[Lost Lake]

Probably because we don't get to pick and choose what calls we respond to. From what I read, the cops got sent to escort the kiddie bureaucrats. We don't get to refuse on calls for service. The father (rightfully so) called his attorney then refused them entry. No one's "house got raided." The idiots blustered and threatened, but left. FWIW, I side with the family on this one.

Good point. So Child Protection is who wants to storm the house and the cops are there to supervise, escort and be sure nobody gets hurt. The cops really have no choice, they gotta go, even if they look at the picture and say it's nothing.

I'll change my former post to say the parents should have a long talk with CPS and try and set them straight. Kids can hold guns, shoot guns and pose with guns and the world won't come to a grinding halt.

 

[Steve in Vermont]

No repercussions? You can't sue them for defaming your character?

Unless you can prove the person complaining was not acting "in good faith" there is nothing you can do. So behavior that to 99% of the population is reasonable and appropriate ( a boy holding a gun) 1 person finds it objectionable and calls juvenile services. That starts the ball rolling. Many years ago JS would pick and choose complaints, disregarding cases like this one. Then it bit them in the ***. A complaint wasn't investigated and a child died. Laws were passed making investigation mandatory and "protecting" the accuser. And while I don't support how the caseworker conducted this investigation, I will say JS ranks right up there with the stress of a LEO. I wouldn't have touched that job with a 10 foot pole.

 

[jlrhiner]

I'm going to be naive here for minute, so bear with me.

An incorrect allegation of child abuse (or endangering or neglect) whether in good faith or not, doesn't defame you? What about your standing in the community? Possibly your profession?

 

[Zjnovak]

Yet another reason to no do Facebook.

What a stupid thing, to put your whole life online to the viewing public.

While I feel badly for his wife and son, who were probably very frightened by the ordeal, the dad brought this on himself, and his family.

Thanks dad!

I definitely see where you are coming from, and to an extent you are correct.

Posting a picture of your son with his new 22, from a proud father's point of view, is completely different than some others. I have seen people posting pics up of their whole arsenal laid out on the kitchen table. I feel like everybody should be able to (and can) post whatever they want, however, they are just slapping a big target on their front door- since most of the people on Facebook are friends, and would know where they live. It also leads to other issues- like the one in the article.

 

[MaximumLawman]

Where did the civil rights violation come in? Did the police search the house without a warrant or did they search it without consent?

 

[dcxplant]

I definitely see where you are coming from, and to an extent you are correct.

Posting a picture of your son with his new 22, from a proud father's point of view, is completely different than some others. I have seen people posting pics up of their whole arsenal laid out on the kitchen table. I feel like everybody should be able to (and can) post whatever they want, however, they are just slapping a big target on their front door- since most of the people on Facebook are friends, and would know where they live. It also leads to other issues- like the one in the article.

I agree. I can't fault his feelings of being a proud pappa!

But a little discretion never hurts. I too am a NRA instructor, and from my experiences, one can never trust the open public on topics like guns. People love to be keyboard commandos.

Posting that pic on this forum, for instance, is a LOT different than posting it on Facebook.

He shares his proud poppa moment with us, and we say "great, fantastic, way to go, good lookin' kid, nice gun" all that.

Do that on Facebook where people spend their entire day trolling for stupid stuff to bash people on or make calls for as if they are the World Secret Police, and you're just asking for trouble.

I have a general heartburn about Facebook anyway..... and I hear from folks at work who were burned in one way or another by what they put on Facebook, and all I have to say is: Well, ya did it to yourself buddy!

Hopefully a bit of a warning to others about Facebook.

 

[brucev]

No repercussions? You can't sue them for defaming your character?

As far as I am aware, in the state of Ga. the identification of the person making the report is not required for a report to be complaint/report to be made to DFACS. Once a complaint/report has been received DFACS is required to investigate.

I am not aware of any legal recourse available to anyone who might be inconvenienced/harmed by such a spurious or even a outright false report. Perhaps there is some mechanism. I think it would be a very hard uphill climb.

 

[RobbW]

Finger off the trigger, nice big smile, cute kid! Looks like he would make a fine Boy Scout.

How in the world is child abuse/neglect possibly related to posing with a rifle? I can send them hundreds of pics and videos of my kids posing/shooting if they like. Think it would cause them conniptions?

 

[Razer1]

Well that's my thought anyway... a Ruger 10/22 isn't a scary "assault weapon" its just a .22 semi-automatic... fires the same bullets at the same rate, and is looks aside basically the same gun. The whole thing is moronic.

Of course... from the Fox Article, where the person from NJ DYFS states that you can't prosecute false allegations called into DYFS... doesn't that seem... off somehow? What is there to prevent you from harassing someone by constantly calling in false allegations? What is there to prevent you from calling in false allegations in such quantity that actual cases can't be dealt with? Heck, what keeps you from getting their list of employees and calling in false allegations of every one of them and the entirety of the NJ state government?

(In Hank Hill's voice) "That state just ain't right."

You cannot prosecute criminally. You can however go after them civilly.

Also, whether this guy is an attention w*ore online or even irl has no bearing on the cops entering his home - not just to escort child services or to make a welfare check - but to try to inventory his weapons, has no bearing on things whatsoever. Whether he is a jerk in reality or not does not cause him to lose his rights as a gun owning citizen.

 

[S. Hammer]

Where did the civil rights violation come in? Did the police search the house without a warrant or did they search it without consent?

From the article I read, no entry was made, no search was conducted, nothing was seized, no one was arrested. The cops said absolutely nothing during the incident. It's cr*p that child services had to entertain a complaint like that. The residents handled the situation very well.