Well, the original story was strictly from Moore's point of view, so its not surprising that he would come out of it looking like the hero. Having said that, (and I refuse to go read it again) I seem to recall that Moore himself said the police acted professionally. His issue was more with the social services woman. Also, I don't think anyone here said they threatened to take the kid.
Did the police question the dad at home? If so, why does it matter if he smelled of alcohol? We do most of our drinking at home, where as far as I know, it's perfectly legal to do so--even to the point of being quite drunk. I was originally thinking the whole taking pictures with guns thing was stupid (as I don't own any guns), then I perused the wall in my breakfast area last night and noticed the "old time" photos my daughters and I took last summer in Eureka Springs. We were dressed as gangsters, and we looked pretty tough with our guns.
To play devils advocate what if it was a person who did not know better and let the police and the social worker in ? My fellings are if a social worker shows up on your front lawn there is threat to take custody of your child whether it is verbally stated or not. I am not a conspiracy nut but i do belive in agendas driven to help strengthen a political view. Lately i feel like either side of the political isle will throw a person under the bus or inflame a situation just to demonize the other side.
It would end up in civil court with the police and the social worker being sued. Bottom line is that there was no crime committed or suggested by that photo. The police had no probable cause or reasonable suspicion that a crime had been committed. They had no right or reason to inspect anybody's firearms in their home. The social worker had no legal right to question whether a child was being abused. Lawyers are licking their chops to get a case like this one.
This is all part of the presence of government (here, in two of its "authoritarian" forms), which pushes the ordinary citizenry into government's version of how to think, how to reason, etc. The police & CPS--were they not shut down by a citizen with knowledge and courage--were prepared to roll right over this family with the full force of their heavy-handed approach--and let it get sorted out in the courts. Never mind that they were without the rule of law, without common sense and without scruples; they were ready to fk up an American family for a socio-political ideal: "gun control" of a sort. These "Stasi" need to be pushed back every time and every way that they attempt to encroach on rights-bearing Americans. (Rant off).
The title of the thread is "Dad posts pic of kid w/ gun, Family Services threatens to take kid". When the police arrived, Mr Moore was not at home. Mrs Moore called him and when he drove to his home, he smelled of alcohol. I don't know a cop alive that wouldn't arrest someone for DUI under those circumstances.
How were they without the rule of law? Since when is a police officer prohibited from asking to see someone's weapons? When is a Social Services Worker prohibited from asking to enter a residence to observe when a child's welfare has been reported to be in danger? What happens if the police and social services ignores the report and then this kid shows up at school with a firearm? How quick we are with the uneducated, paranoid anti-government rant...
Not sure about you, but most people would get defensive when a social worker shows up at their house out of the blue, without cause, with cops; demanding to do an inspection to make sure everything is ok. It's not uneducated or paranoid anti-government rant to exercise your constitutional rights. In fact, I would argue that the uneducated approach would be to NOT exercise your rights. I know you're probably of the mindset to 'let them look, I'm not doing anything wrong', and that's fine too, but a lot of others are not going to let the government trample on their civil liberties unless they have just cause and I don't think this case merits that.
When there exists no law that says a weapon must be registered. When there exists no law that gives a policeman any authority to inspect your weapons inside your home. They cannot just make up a reason and go fishing for evidence of a possible crime, much less when there is no suspicion that a law has been violated. The social worker feared gun violence and requested to be accompanied by police. All they can do is protect the social worker from harm. They are allowed to protect themselves by asking if you are armed. If you are on the street, they are allowed to protect themselves by searching you for a weapon. This right does not apply in your own home. Police must obtain a warrant from a judge and they must present probably cause or reasonable suspicion that a crime has been committed. No one reported that a child was in danger. They only observed a perfectly legal photo of a child with a gun. This family was under no child-protection order from a judge. She had no right to demand proof of gun registration in any circumstances, much less in a state where gun registration is not even required. She has no rights at all when she refused to identify herself and show a court order to authorize her to enter. What happens if all the police need to violate your Constitutional rights, invade your home, and possibly take away your children is a anonymous report that this family possesses both children and firearms? A perfectly legal situation. Then anybody that dislikes you can make your life miserable just by making groundless charges. It's why we have laws. The child did not threaten anybody at school or anywhere else. This is a simple case of a social worker overstepping her authority and attempting to deprive a family of its Constitutional rights. The cops knew this and were just covering their asses. She should have done the proper thing and reported her allegations to the police who would have consulted with a DA who would tell them that they have no authority to do anything. If she had reported the allegation to her superiors, they might have told her the same thing. It will be interesting to see if they stand behind her or fire her for incompetence. I am neither uneducated nor paranoid nor anti-government. I ridicule the anti-government loons all of the time. But one does not have to be a anarchist to recognize that this situation violates Constitutional rights and legal rights. One paranoid and incompetent social worker cannot be allowed to usurp the law and try to make the police into accomplices.
