Shawn Moore is a certified firearms instructor for the National Rifle Association and a New Jersey hunter education instructor. He was proud of his son for recently passing his hunter’s permit course and posted this picture of his boy in camouflage holding his .22 rifle. A Facebook “friend” saw the picture and reported him to the New Jersey police and Dept. of Children and Families for child endangerment. Moore says that his home was raided, searched, and he was threatened with the loss of custody in response to the complaint.
While not commenting on the alleged raid, Department Spokesperson Kristen Brown said. “We are required to follow up on every single allegation that comes into the central registry.” That is a bit surprising if the allegation describes lawful conduct. Children are allowed to hunt in New Jersey. I had assumed that there was some screening that occurs. Moreover, I am not sure why there is no intermediate step short of the search of the home.
Moore says that he received an text message from his wife that the Carneys Point Police Dept. and the New Jersey Dept. of Children and Families were at the home demanding to see his guns and gun safe. The officers were told by his lawyer to leave the home absent a warrant. He says that that officers responded that the demand for them to get a warrant was “suspicious” behavior. If true, that would be highly abusive and unconstitutional. A citizen invoking their rights does not create reasonable suspicion, let alone probable cause. While the officers said that they would get a warrant, he says that they never returned.
It does strike me as odd that anyone can trigger such an action based on a photo that does not show any illegal action or conduct that is demonstrably dangerous in a state where children are allowed to hunt and shoot such weapons.
What do you think?
Source: Yahoo
Elaine – That would be a trending topic of concern. And with the present administration wanting warrantless taps of e-mails and cell phone conversation, you’re not too far off base. Like the man said, “Thanks for playing” (at your own peril).
Also, interesting that the cops throw in some rejoinder about dad possibly being under the influence, but being kind enough not to take action. That’s a CYA I’ve heard so many times.
junctionshamus,
“Seems we’ve proven today that the First is still intact, at least on this site.”
I thought the First Amendment protected our right to freedom of expression from government interference. Were you expecting the government might shut down our discussion?
emotional yes, name calling and casting aspersions, not so much
Here’s another article on the story:
Carneys Point police: We did not ‘unlawfully search’ Shawn Moore’s home after Facebook gun photo
By Alex Young/South Jersey Times
on March 20, 2013 at 4:42 PM
http://www.nj.com/salem/index.ssf/2013/03/carneys_point_family_says_stat.html
Excerpt:
CARNEYS POINT TWP. — Police investigation into the case of a photo posted on Facebook showing a 10-year-old boy holding a rifle, is closed, according to Carneys Point Police Chief Robert DiGregorio.
DiGregorio said today that no laws were broken in the incident where police and New Jersey Division of Children and Families agents came to the Panama Court home of Shawn Moore Friday night to investigate reports of a child having access to guns and ammunition.
“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.
Moore told The Associated Press that he was on the phone with his lawyer who was advising him on what to do.
DiGregorio said the reports that officers were wearing SWAT gear were not true. They were wearing their Class B uniforms with exterior body armor vests. DiGregorio said officers go out in the same uniform every night.
The DCF caseworkers and the police left the home after Moore asked if they had a warrant to search his house, the chief said.
DiGregorio added that Moore appeared to be under the influence of alcohol at the time of the search, but said he was not charged with any offenses.
Elaine – Yes they do. It’s those inconsequential, silly-ass (depending on your point of view) things like the 1st, 2nd, 4th and 5th Amendments that tend to get folks on both sides, in an uproar. Seems we’ve proven today that the First is still intact, at least on this site.
Hello! That was my point–that we DON’T know what the specific allegation of child abuse was. Maybe someone can provide me with that information.
*****
leejcarroll,
Discussions about guns usually do get emotional.
Better an “assault rifle” than a shotgun. Please ignore the politics preceding the rest of the video:
http://youtu.be/Ia4csoQLvGY
I am astounded at the level of (in)civility I am reading here as opposed to the civil discourse that is the norm here.
If I am the “fool” Randyjet I did not say it was illegal. You are letting your emotions blur your reading.
Had it been an assault rifle and the owner not licensed it would have been illegal, you write, but how would anyone know that absent coming to the house or asking the father to come to the police station?
Well Mac, I reread the article, I must have mistakenly taken a line from one of the postings where the person who made the complaint said it was an assault rifle.
I am not a busybody down the road but I would have grave concerns about a kid posing with an assault rifle. If that was the complaint I dot know that she was wrong. I personally would have been upset but I doubt it would ever have occurred to me to call CPS.
I was an abused child, no one took notice, no one cared and it has scarred me for all of my life. I only wish there had been a busybody somewhere. That is not to give free rein but there has to be a line between invisible abuse but seeing the effects and behaviors and reporting it, to someone in authority, whether that be a teacher, the police or CPS and seeing something where nothing is there, such as this picture and at the most asking the parent about it to understand what they are seeing before going overboard
I agree that child abuse is a problem, but when this campaign got rolling about doing something about it, I had grave reservations about the hoopla and hype. I knew it would go overboard, and it did in short order. The McMartin case only cost millions of dollars and was a travesty which cost the innocent day care providers their livihood, reputation, and their money. I don’t recall if they successfully sued the DA for that, but it was so outrageous that one can only conclude that the folks in CPS are retarded or corrupt or both.
This instance is another example of the absurd overreach of such people. As one poster said, this should have ended at the OFFICE, not the doorstep of a good law abiding and by how he takes care of his guns an obviously responsible gun owner. HE is the kind of person who should own guns. I wish all owners were as consciencious.
the inmates are in charge of the asylum. the world is going insane.
CPS: ‘You need to calm down, sir, are you going to let us check your gun safes?’
Father: ‘NO! You don’t have a warrant, go away’
Police: ‘That seems rather suspicious, sir…..I mean, someone with nothing to hide wouldn’t be bothered but folks showing up at his house to ask to search it, you know……And stuff…….’
Typical, TYPICAL cop BS – And if the CPS worker didn’t have anything to hide, she wouldn’t be trying to hide her identity and acting suspiciously now, WOULD SHEEEEEE!! By the way officer, would you mind if I just waltzed into YOUR house and look around? Hmmmm??
Anybody notice that NOBODY has said WHAT specific abuse the child was supposed to have suffered? Elaine has refused to say, Then we have the allegation from some fool that a child holding a semi-automatic rifle with his father taking a picture is a violation of the law! Incredible! Then we have these same people not knowing what an assault weapon is to begin with. Had that been a REAL assault weapon, and the owner not licensed to own it, he WOULD have been in trouble. Yet we have the people who are gun haters making laws about things that they have NO idea of what the subject is. THAT is beyond absurd.
So, leejcaroll, a gun shaped like an ‘assault weapon’ is a violation of the law? What is the allegation? Or is offending your sensibilities now justification for calling CPS? I think we’ve hit on the problem. The old lady down the road using CPS to punish those she disagrees with, and that’s the problem……When you can use CPS as a tool to go after folks who are doing things that are neither illegal, immoral or unethical, but simply disagree with, then they have too much power. There is no allegation of criminal act, wrong doing, or anything else that would trigger state involvement…….Just a busybody who got her indignant meter dinged by the sight of a kid posing with a firearm, and she triggered the state apparatus…….And that is unacceptable.
I so wish the identity of the caller were discernible…….They need to be punished, if not official punishment, by targeting for public ridicule and harassment…….And lets see if we can’t identify the CPS agent, as well…….She should have her name attached to this story.
seems to me if it appeared to be an assault weapon there is a legitimate question as to why a child would have one or be posing with one.
That does not negate the inappropriateness of refusing to divulge a name, or saying that a warrant request is suspicious behavior.
And further, you defenders of the CPS……What is examing the guns going to determine? Anyone? What purpose do they have too examine the guns? What does that have to do with the allegation…..Allegation of what again? What was the purpose CPS going there in the first place. ‘We got a phone call’…..Alleging what?
Let me put it simply…….If what is alleged itself is not a violation of law? What are you investigating? Anyone?
Elaine M.1, March 20, 2013 at 5:29 pm
Mac,
How does a DCF/CPS worker know if a child has/has not been abused unless he/she meets the child and checks out the situation. Shouldn’t the police have known the guns laws in New Jersey?
*****
Excerpt from the Yahoo article:
“The weapon in the photo, posted by his dad on Facebook, resembles a military-style assault rifle but, his father says, is actually just a .22-caliber copy. And that, the family believes, is why child welfare case workers and police officers visited the home in Carneys Point last Friday and asked to see his guns.”
The family believed that was the reason welfare case workers and the police visited the family. Do we know for sure that was what the abuse complaint was about?
Lets start with this, Elaine…….How about actually having an allegation of abuse……What was it in this case? I’ll wait.
Elaine M.1, March 20, 2013 at 5:22 pm
I guess some people haven’t read all of my comments. I have agreed that the police officers and investigators should not have threatened the family. I said the investigator should have talked to the parents–and to the child to make sure he was okay.
Others got off the main track by making certain comments about DCF/CPS workers and casting aspersions on their character–as if to imply that they are all rotten apples. I was addressing those comments. I am free to make any comments I so choose. If you don’t like them–that’s your prerogative.
I’m not a sob sister. I’m a realist.
Not exactly…..Others of us have stated that this particular case of state abuse has resulted from policies that are designed to give way to much discretion in pursuing CPS aims…….In other words, basing way too much on the SUBJECTIVE opinions of individual agents, when it should be on OBJECTIVE standards of evidence…….When agents can’t even articulate what the particular allegation of abuse/neglect is, and how it’s considered abuse or neglect, BY LAW, other than just fishing for things they will then articulate is possibly abuse, based solely on opinion, I think it’s pretty clear there is a problem.
The problem isn’t any rotten apples…….It’s about a system designed so that abuse is inevitable…..Period.
So no, the issue isn’t whether your daughter/sister, whatever, is a bad person, or whether CPS needs to exist……..It’s what authority they should have and what limits should be placed on it…….The US Constitution is a good start…….Try Amendment IV for a start. 😉
Mac,
How does a DCF/CPS worker know if a child has/has not been abused unless he/she meets the child and checks out the situation. Shouldn’t the police have known the guns laws in New Jersey?
*****
Excerpt from the Yahoo article:
“The weapon in the photo, posted by his dad on Facebook, resembles a military-style assault rifle but, his father says, is actually just a .22-caliber copy. And that, the family believes, is why child welfare case workers and police officers visited the home in Carneys Point last Friday and asked to see his guns.”
The family believed that was the reason welfare case workers and the police visited the family. Do we know for sure that was what the abuse complaint was about?
I guess some people haven’t read all of my comments. I have agreed that the police officers and investigators should not have threatened the family. I said the investigator should have talked to the parents–and to the child to make sure he was okay.
Others got off the main track by making certain comments about DCF/CPS workers and casting aspersions on their character–as if to imply that they are all rotten apples. I was addressing those comments. I am free to make any comments I so choose. If you don’t like them–that’s your prerogative.
I’m not a sob sister. I’m a realist.
What needs to happen is that CPS needs to be reined in. They need to be required to adhere to rules of evidence, they need to be held accountable so that when abuse is alleged and no evidence exists, further investigation should cease. They should not have the power to validate a complaint simply because a parent tells them to pee up a rope when they show up at the door. If they didn’t show up with evidence, that should be the end of it. If a police officer couldn’t get a warrant based on the evidence they already have, that should be the end of it. If there is physical evidence of abuse or neglect, or witnesses, of a criminal act, they should contact law enforcement and law enforcement can get a warrant. Using the terror tactics of ‘Well, if we don’t have extraordinary power to interfer in people’s lives, a child could get killed’ is not a valid argument. Physical abuse and neglect is already illegal, and those cases can be made without abusing good folks who simply were targeted by a vindictive caller. It’s called ‘evidence’. In this case, they have none…….Worse, they don’t even have an ALLEGATION OF A CRIME! They’re not even sure what they were fishing for.
CPS: ‘We got a call there was a picture of your child with a gun on the internet.”
Father: ‘Okay, is that illegal?’
CPS: ‘Well…..Uhm…..I don’t know, but, uhm…….We’re going to need to search your house and stuff.’
Father: ‘For what?’
CPS: ‘Well, you know, like, uhm, guns and stuff……You know, for the children’
Father: ‘I don’t think so, why are you even hear.’
CPS: ‘Sir, i’m just doing my job to protect the children and stuff……You can either let us look, or i’m going to validate this complaint.’
Father: ‘What complaint?!’
CPS: ‘You need to calm down, sir, are you going to let us check your gun safes?’
Father: ‘NO! You don’t have a warrant, go away’
Police: ‘That seems rather suspicious, sir…..I mean, someone with nothing to hide wouldn’t be bothered but folks showing up at his house to ask to search it, you know……And stuff…….’
Father: ‘What are you even looking for? What are you alleging i’ve done wrong.’
Police: ‘Sir, please calm down, we’re just trying to protect the children’