Citizen's home is raided because of a Facebook posting

Everything he has said thus far has been corroborated. And I wouldn't label someone exposing rash tactics by gov't officials as an attention whore but rather a concerned citizen who is not partial to someone attempting to abuse his rights as a free American citizen.

everything he has said has thus far been shown to be exaggerated.

that's what an attention whore would do.
 
Everything he has said thus far has been corroborated. And I wouldn't label someone exposing rash tactics by gov't officials as an attention whore but rather a concerned citizen who is not partial to someone attempting to abuse his rights as a free American citizen.

everything he has said has thus far been shown to be exaggerated.

that's what an attention whore would do.

Your perception of his experience and how he describes it hardly qualify as fact.

The police ADMITTED to demanding access to his safe. That was an attenpt to violate his rights to privacy. End of story
 
Police can question suspects anytime....

What the fuck are these parents suspects of?

Fucking idiot
LOL

You tell me dumbfuck, you posted the OP.

I'm debating whether it was a raid.

They did nothing wrong jackass. Thats why I posted it. You claim police have rights with regard to suspects so what exactly are these parents suspected of doing to violate the law? Or were you just running off at the mouth like most if not all libs in this thread.

That's why the cops went to the house in the first place idiot. To see if the parents were doing anything wrong or not. Guess they weren't doing anything wrong, since the cops haven't returned with a warrant. See how that works?
 
Tell me what's wrong.

Do you think that anonymous tips should be universally ignored, or investigated?

What was wrong were the tactics and aggression used. For example DFS threatening to take his child if he doesn't open his safe.

the only one reporting that is the drunk father.

He was on the speaker phone with his lawyer the whole time.

You're just being an inflammatory troll. Either that or showing your profound ignorance of the incident.
 
Everything he has said thus far has been corroborated. And I wouldn't label someone exposing rash tactics by gov't officials as an attention whore but rather a concerned citizen who is not partial to someone attempting to abuse his rights as a free American citizen.

everything he has said has thus far been shown to be exaggerated.

that's what an attention whore would do.

Prove your allegation.
 
Everything he has said thus far has been corroborated. And I wouldn't label someone exposing rash tactics by gov't officials as an attention whore but rather a concerned citizen who is not partial to someone attempting to abuse his rights as a free American citizen.

everything he has said has thus far been shown to be exaggerated.

that's what an attention whore would do.

Your perception of his experience and how he describes it hardly qualify as fact.

The police ADMITTED to demanding access to his safe. That was an attenpt to violate his rights to privacy. End of story
Police do this ALL THE TIME. They count on people not knowing their rights in order to get them to cooperate. There is no law against people cooperating. Smart people know their rights. The smartest thing the Dad did in this case was call his lawyer immediately. Dad and lawyer were smart in demanding a warrant and because there was no warrant, Dad was smart in demanding the cops leave.

LOL Seriously, have you never seen an episode of Law and Order? Even Judge Judy junkies know this.
 
Last edited:
:eusa_hand:
I figured I'd ask the guy who cared enough to start a 2nd thread on this...with no evidence that it really happened.

Its on the fucking news right now. Get off your fat lazy ass and seek further info yourself

I'm working.....and not near a tv. Sorry I can't just sit back and watch tv all day.

:eusa_hand:Well dude...many good news stations put this kind of news on many times a day even with updates. So turn your tube on when you get home and watch.
 

Yep

but "The Department of Youth and Family Services didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment from The News Wednesday." don't look good

:eek:You know why? Because they knew they were in the wrong. And so did the cops who ran off when not allowed to enter.
 
Still only this guy's version of what happened, isn't it?

Yep

but "The Department of Youth and Family Services didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment from The News Wednesday." don't look good

:eek:You know why? Because they knew they were in the wrong. And so did the cops who ran off when not allowed to enter.

So, if people don't immediately comment, it's because they know they are in the wrong?
 

So how would you define 4 police and two child services people showing up to your home demanding enterance to inspect your home? They failed to gain enterance only because the home owners knew their rights and were willing to stand up to them.

:eusa_drool:And the child service people and the cops both ran off like cowards. They knew they were wrong.
 
Bull. Almost all stories break because of information from "one" side. And as far as paranoia goes it seems you are the one wearing tinfoil with your pics or it didnt happen childish responses.

The DFS agency clearly stated that they are bound to investigate claims of child neglect etc. Then they went on to say its none of your business what exactly they did in this case.
The fathers lawyer confirmed he spoke with police and informed them to leave.

What the fuck else do you want? A notorized affidavit addressed directly to you?

Idiot


We have a BLOG...we have one guy who says this happened...for the reasons he says they happened......and that's all we've got........and I'm the "idiot"?


:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

We also have multiple news services who saw the blog, investigated, and reported the same story. One would think that, since most reporters would love to paint this exactly the same way you are, one of them would have delighted in coming up with a police source that flat out denied that it happened.

:eusa_drool:The police couldn't deny it. When they found out that the gentleman had his lawyer on his cell phone listening the cops ran like cowards. They knew they were in the wrong.
 
The police show up, carrying weapons, and you don't see that as hostile? Do you have any idea of the legacy of liberals you just threw under the bus?

assuming they showed up at all -

would you like an unarmed social worker going in to a potentially hostile situation with someone known to have firearms?

the police go to protect the social worker. I'm glad they do.

:eusa_eh:But when the police realized there was no real danger they should of just left. Instead they wanted entry to check his firearms. They knew since they didn't have a warrant that their choice was wrong.
 
We have a BLOG...we have one guy who says this happened...for the reasons he says they happened......and that's all we've got........and I'm the "idiot"?


:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

We also have multiple news services who saw the blog, investigated, and reported the same story. One would think that, since most reporters would love to paint this exactly the same way you are, one of them would have delighted in coming up with a police source that flat out denied that it happened.

The same story....with no police agency name, no number of cops, no name of any social agent/agency....just one guy's word repeated from blog...to newstory...to here.

Pardon me if I remain unconvinced at this moment.

:eusa_hand:Well when the police know they were in the wrong then the police dept. is going to stall on giving out names until the situation is investigated. When they get all the facts...names will come out.
 
We also have multiple news services who saw the blog, investigated, and reported the same story. One would think that, since most reporters would love to paint this exactly the same way you are, one of them would have delighted in coming up with a police source that flat out denied that it happened.

The same story....with no police agency name, no number of cops, no name of any social agent/agency....just one guy's word repeated from blog...to newstory...to here.

Pardon me if I remain unconvinced at this moment.

:eusa_hand:Well when the police know they were in the wrong then the police dept. is going to stall on giving out names until the situation is investigated. When they get all the facts...names will come out.

What did the police do wrong?
 
So it was in fact not 'raided'..:clap2:

So how would you define 4 police and two child services people showing up to your home demanding enterance to inspect your home? They failed to gain enterance only because the home owners knew their rights and were willing to stand up to them.

:eusa_drool:And the child service people and the cops both ran off like cowards. They knew they were wrong.
Oh....this is an interesting post.
 
Please, someone, post something that would lead a person of average intelligence to think the visit to this dude's house is the result of that photograph.

Please post something that would lead anyone other than a moron to think it wasn't a result of that photo.

Holy Moley! Listen to yourself, will you?

:eusa_hand:And you should listen to the news. They don't put the story out until they investigate. Their good at it.
 
The same story....with no police agency name, no number of cops, no name of any social agent/agency....just one guy's word repeated from blog...to newstory...to here.

Pardon me if I remain unconvinced at this moment.

:eusa_hand:Well when the police know they were in the wrong then the police dept. is going to stall on giving out names until the situation is investigated. When they get all the facts...names will come out.

What did the police do wrong?

They attempted and failed publicly to violate the mans civil rights.
 
We have a BLOG...we have one guy who says this happened...for the reasons he says they happened......and that's all we've got........and I'm the "idiot"?


:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

We also have multiple news services who saw the blog, investigated, and reported the same story. One would think that, since most reporters would love to paint this exactly the same way you are, one of them would have delighted in coming up with a police source that flat out denied that it happened.

:eusa_drool:The police couldn't deny it. When they found out that the gentleman had his lawyer on his cell phone listening the cops ran like cowards. They knew they were in the wrong.

logo_v001.png


Carneys Point police: We did not 'unlawfully search' Shawn Moore's home after Facebook gun photo

“At no time did the police attempt to unlawfully search his residence or violate the second for fourth amendment rights of Mr. Moore,” DiGregorio said. He added that the gun was a legal .22-caliber rifle and was given from father to son as a birthday present.

Moore posted the photo of his son, Josh, holding what appears to be an assault rifle on Facebook, and DiGregorio said that both his department and DCF received anonymous phone calls about the picture.

“In light of some of the recent school shooting across our nation, the Carneys Point Police Department takes these kind of calls seriously,” he said.

Four officers and two DCF caseworkers arrived at Moore's home at about 8:15 p.m. Friday to inquire about the photo and guns in the home.

Moore was not home at the time, but his wife welcomed the officers and the child welfare agents into the home. She did not have access to the home's gun safe so she called her husband.

DiGregorio said that interaction between Moore's wife and police was extremely cordial.

Moore arrived a short time later at which point the situation began to escalate, according to DiGregorio, with Moore telling officers and the DCF agent to leave his home.
 
We live in a country with 300 million people and thousands of municipalities. There will be cases of government overreach and cases of government neglect. The idea that every isolated case of either is a sign of the apocalypse is something that should be reserved for the least among us.

Maybe I overestimate those who frequent this forum.

:eusa_eh:Yes. And there were four officiers there wanting to enter...not to seize the weapons but to check out if they were registered. The officiers should of not even asked to enter not having a warrant and they knew it. If they thought there was danger they would of gotten one.
 

Forum List

Back
Top