Look out guys in Callifornia....

Thanks, Ed, for the considered response. (And I won't challenge you on whether Newfies think of themselves as part of Canada or not - ha!).

You know far more about the particulars of this case and the laws involved than I do having only read the news report that you posted. From what you write, yeah, I agree that I'd have real concerns about both how the law is written (e.g. why not let the husband demonstrate that his guns were secure? why is the confiscation permanent?) and also how it was applied in this case (e.g. is a nurse's opinion qualified?). I'm sure the list of flaws is much longer than those examples.

But at a 30,000 foot level, it seems to me that there is an inherent contradiction in someone taking the position that the weaponry is not at fault so it should not be controlled but rather these incidents are due to flawed/deranged/criminal people, whose rights to gun ownership cannot be infringed. If I were a pro-gun moderate in this debate (oh, hang on, I guess I am), then I would take a long look at laws or constitutional amendments (thanks, Mark, yes I did miss that point) that took guns out of certain hands rather than all hands. Admittedly, this would mean trading off individual rights for societal ones and I do know enough about the history of America to respect that that is no small matter.

You might fairly ask why a Canadian is sticking his nose in on this topic. It is of objective interest to me but also of personal concern - Canada is not free of gun violence or gun control extremists and is strongly influenced by US culture. The posts here give me lots to consider. And I hope that I have provided a third-party perspective without offence.

Regardless, I will sign off on the topic, lest my "very active" rating is downgraded to "too active"... (insert winky smiley-face thingy).

Thanks and take care,
Dan
 
Thanks, Ed, for the considered response. (And I won't challenge you on whether Newfies think of themselves as part of Canada or not - ha!).

You know far more about the particulars of this case and the laws involved than I do having only read the news report that you posted. From what you write, yeah, I agree that I'd have real concerns about both how the law is written (e.g. why not let the husband demonstrate that his guns were secure? why is the confiscation permanent?) and also how it was applied in this case (e.g. is a nurse's opinion qualified?). I'm sure the list of flaws is much longer than those examples.

But at a 30,000 foot level, it seems to me that there is an inherent contradiction in someone taking the position that the weaponry is not at fault so it should not be controlled but rather these incidents are due to flawed/deranged/criminal people, whose rights to gun ownership cannot be infringed. If I were a pro-gun moderate in this debate (oh, hang on, I guess I am), then I would take a long look at laws or constitutional amendments (thanks, Mark, yes I did miss that point) that took guns out of certain hands rather than all hands. Admittedly, this would mean trading off individual rights for societal ones and I do know enough about the history of America to respect that that is no small matter.

You might fairly ask why a Canadian is sticking his nose in on this topic. It is of objective interest to me but also of personal concern - Canada is not free of gun violence or gun control extremists and is strongly influenced by US culture. The posts here give me lots to consider. And I hope that I have provided a third-party perspective without offence.

Regardless, I will sign off on the topic, lest my "very active" rating is downgraded to "too active"... (insert winky smiley-face thingy).

Thanks and take care,
Dan
Click to expand...

Dan,

LOL...I'm not sure much of Canada looks at Newfies at all...I mean after all it took until 1949 for Newfoundland to join the Confederation and become a province. Canada was fortunate to have received her independence through legislation and not revolution. Because our forefathers won independence through revolution we call it Independence Day. Whether you call it Canada day or Independence Day the important point here is we can say we are freemen.

I kind of think our forefathers would be shooting already with the government acting as they are today. After all the revolution started because Britian stopped the importation of muskets and then demanded confiscating what was already here. Sound familiar? Lets look at just one...Adolf Hitler required that all firearms be registered. Once the information was compiled the confiscation began. We all know what happened after that. Even in your country you have pro-gun organizations fighting for your gun rights. You're fortunate one of your long standing gun laws have been changed and you no longer have to register your long guns. I hope we can continue to be a NON registed population.

There are no clear cut solutions for the firearm issues and at the risk of being flogged I'll admit there are firearms I'm glad are not available to the common citizen such as the Tommy gun, Browning BAR, Bazooka, or any fully automatic firearm for that matter. I'm sure there are many more I don't even have a clue exist. Those mentioned have been banned from the common citizen as the original assault weapon long before I was a gleam in my fathers eyes. The govenments of the world have so much more advanced weaponry than the so called assault weapon know as an AR15 our government is debating on banning.......again. It only comes in three calibers, .22lr, .223/5.56mm or .308/7.62mm. There are far more destructive calibers out there available to the public. There is not one accessory that makes any of these guns more lethal than the bullet in the chamber. Not a grip, not a forearm, not a folding or telescoping stock, not a flashlight attached to a picatinny rail. Today if we were to have a revolution fighting our government with an AR15 would be like the revolutionaries using muskets against the British using Gatling guns!

Because our forefathers fought a revolution we have a legislative process just as Canada does. I believe in the process and that we have the ability to make change for our futures through the legislative process with our ablity to vote. No one wants to have another revolution so perhaps more people including myself will take more of an interest in the future of the political process before we indeed loose all our rights. As Mark eluded to if there is to be constitutional changes they must follow the laws inacted for change not just a whim by congress.
 
So just because some guy leagally owns guns, and his wife goes to the hospital and unreasonably gets labelled looney tunes, look at what all was trampled on just to be politicaly correct and sensitive to the needs of others.

2nd amendment was toast. They took away a bystanders right to own a gun. They then broke the 4th amendment against unresoinalble search and seizure. They then broke the 5th amanedment against confiscation without compensation. So much for the 7th amendemnts guarantee of trial by jury (he was guilty immediately) and some may even argue the 8th amendment was squashed as well due to excessive bail or cruel punishment (take away my duck gun during duc season and it is cruel punishment to me).

See where this all leads.

Mark W
 
Here is a story in the news about a guy in NJ that gave his son a rifle for his birthday.
Lesson to be learned here is don't post photos on facebook.

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.

boywithARlookinggun_zpsff86421b.jpg


“Someone called family services about the photo,” said Evan Nappen, an attorney representing Shawn Moore. “It led to an incredible, heavy-handed raid on his house. They wanted to see his gun safe, his guns and search his house. They even threatened to take his kids.”
Moore was not arrested or charged.

A Dept. of Children and Families spokesperson told Fox News they could not confirm or deny an investigation or raid had taken place due to government regulations.
“The department has a child abuse hotline for the state of New Jersey and anybody can make a call to that hotline,” spokesperson Kristen Brown said. “We are required to follow up on every single allegation that comes into the central registry.”
Moore, of Carneys Point, is a certified firearms instructor for the National Rifle Association, an NRA range safety officer and a New Jersey hunter education instructor.
He recently posted a photograph of his son wearing camouflage and holding his new .22 rifle. The child has a New Jersey hunting license and recently passed the state’s hunter safety course.
“If you look at the picture, his finger isn’t even on the trigger – which is proper,” Nappen told Fox News. “If half of Hollywood could follow that rule we’d be thankful.”
Brown said their role is not to go out and search Facebook for photos of children holding weapons.
“In general our role is to investigate allegations of child abuse and neglect,” she said.
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.”

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.”
The attorney said police eventually left and never returned.
“He has a Fourth Amendment right and he’s not going to give up his Fourth Amendment right or his Second Amendment right,” he said. “They didn’t have a warrant – so see you later.”
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.
Nappen said what happened to the Moore family should serve as a warning to gun owners across the nation.
“To make someone go through this because he posted a picture of his son with a .22 rifle on his Facebook page is pretty outrageous,” he said. “Does that mean that anyone who posts a picture like that has to consent to a home inspection and a gun inspection? I don’t think so.”
Nappen said they are considering taking legal action against the state for the late night raid.
 
Hey John

I saw this story this morning and didn't have a chance to follow up on it today

What happened to "common sense" in this country? So someone calls in and the agency has to follow up on every call according to the person quoted in the article PE. To me, this should have consisted of checking out the complaint, realizing it was a picture of a kid who got a great present from his Dad. Nothing more

This was deliberate and planned. Wonder if they knew beforehand the guys connection to all things gun and NRA? I know what side of this bet I'd wager on.

My fear on this is apathy and laziness. Sending in a form letter off the Internet is not gong to cut it. You have to be in these "representatives" face letting them know you will do everything in your power to get them unelected. Until this happens in large numbers they will do what they want

Mark W
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top