Shawn Moore of Carneys Point, New Jersey was visiting a friend’s house when he got a disturbing call from his wife, who said that police and child welfare investigators were at their home.
By the time he got back to his house, Moore – a certified hunting safety instructor -- was on the phone with attorney Evan Nappen, who specializes in Second Amendment cases. The investigators were demanding access to the family’s gun safe to see if all of their firearms were registered. At one point the child “safety” bureaucrats threatened to seize Moore’s children.
In the face of this provocation, Moore maintained his composure while refusing to relinquish his rights. He wisely withheld permission to inspect his gun safe, since New Jersey law doesn’t require him to grant such access. Instead, he demanded to see a search warrant, and when none was produced, he ordered the investigators to leave.
"I don't like what happened," Moore later observed. "You're not even safe in your own house. If they can just show up at any time and make you open safes and go through your house, that's not freedom; it's like tyranny."
The simple rule in the United States now is that acts of individual freedom (just like acts of criminality) should be practiced in secret to be successful (unless you are a celebrity or a political leader). So don't post on Facebook !
"My point is the incident is an isolated example and appears to have occured within the boundaries of the laws."
Just because the authorities did not ultimately violate the law (yet) doesn't mean that they would not have. How would it have turned out if the father hadn't had a prominent 2nd Amendment attorney on speeddial and speakerphone during the engagement?
First, the laws to which each of us are subject were put in place by politicians which EVERYONE ELSE elected.
Second, let us suppose there was a law in NJ against children handling a firearm and this guys child was posed with a gun and was under the NJ minimum age. How would that support a search of this guy's home? If there was a law violation, then you might argue that that justifies removing the children from the home. But it could not justify removing the weapons from the home without at least a judicial hearing (I am not sure even that would be enough since it is difficult to imagine that your Constitutional rights could be required to be sacrificed in order to keep your children). It should be that the photo could only support a criminal charge of contributing to the delinquency of a minor. Consider, suppose you posted video of your under 18 child going into a poling place and voting under another person's name. Which of your (the parent) Constitutional rights would you say could be taken from you? Should Child Welfare be allowed to show up with armed police and demand warrantless entry to your home under threat of removing your child? warrantless search of your home under similar threat?
You are incorrect in your assumption that I favor a bias of government over individual citizens. I don't know the law in NJ but I assume there is a minimum age for a minor to handle a firearm and that is the basis for the claim. I have firearms in the home so I clearly don't have a problem with that and if the child if of legal age to handle a firearm then fine. I assume that is what the authorities were there to verify. It was an unfortunate incident and I would be upset in his position too. We are however a land of laws. Laws put into effect by politicians we elect. My point is the incident is an isolated example and appears to have occured within the boundaries of the laws. If it was as sinister event as some would like it to sound then charges would have been levied and the children removed from the home to support some "government agenda". Fortunately that was not the case.
I agree with you, captain, that shining a light on what is going on is good. Unfortunately, it is not good enough. The abuses by police are ignored by the populace and the media unless the police abused members of politically favored classes (blacks, women, gays etc.). The abuses by child welfare authorities are also ignored by the populace and the media assists by promoting early extreme intervention by those authorities acting on mere accusation.
Not to be argumentative, but I think that by sticking his neck out publicly, he brought the tyranny out in the open and exposed it to millions that wouldn't have been informed otherwise. If we are going to expect people to get on-board to our way of thinking and push back against the anti freedom and liberty movement, we first have to shine a light on what is going on, before it's too late.