“When dealing with guns, the citizen acts at his peril.”

That’s a quote from the 1996 New Jersey Superior Court decision State vs. Pelleteri, which I have discussed previously.

That’s obviously still the law of the land in the People’s Democratic Republic of New Jersey (PDRNJ) as evidenced by this latest story:

Family Says New Jersey Overreacted To Boy’s Gun Photo On Facebook

The ruddy-cheeked, camouflage-clad boy in the photo smiles out from behind a pair of glasses, proudly holding a gun his father gave him as a present for his upcoming 11th birthday.

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.

New Jersey’s Department of Children and Families declined to comment specifically on the case but says it often follows up on tips. The family and an attorney say father Shawn Moore’s Second Amendment rights to bear arms were threatened in a state that already has some of the nation’s strictest gun laws and is considering strengthening them after December’s schoolhouse massacre in Connecticut.

In this case, the family believes someone called New Jersey’s anonymous child abuse hotline.

Moore said he called his lawyer Evan Nappen, who specializes in Second Amendment cases, and had him on speakerphone as he arrived at his house in Carneys Point, just across the Delaware River from Wilmington, Del.

He’s got a good lawyer, anyway.

Here’s the really interesting part:

“They said they wanted to see into my safe and see if my guns were registered,” Moore said. “I said no; in New Jersey, your guns don’t have to be registered with the state; it’s voluntary. I knew once I opened that safe, there was no going back.”

With the lawyer listening in on the phone, Moore said he asked the investigators and police officers whether they had a warrant to search his home. When they said no, he asked them to leave. One of the child welfare officials would not identify herself when Moore asked for her name, he said.

The agents and the police officers left, and nothing has happened since, he said.

“I don’t like what happened,” he said. “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.”

State child welfare spokeswoman Kristine Brown said that when it receives a report of suspected abuse or neglect, it assigns a caseworker to follow up. She said law enforcement officers are asked to accompany caseworkers only if the caseworkers feel their safety could be compromised.

“No going back,” indeed.

Joseph Pelleteri was convicted of possession of an “assault weapon” when his safe was searched and a Marlin Model 60 that he had won in a target competition – manufacturer’s tags still dangling from the trigger guard – was found. Since that weapon could hold 17 rounds of .22 Long Rifle in its magazine tube, and that “highly dangerous offensive weapon” wasn’t licensed, Mr. Pelleteri was convicted of a felony and stripped of his right to arms. Shawn Moore was exactly right in refusing to allow his safe to be searched without a warrant.

But note also that in the PDRNJ, a picture of a  “camoflage-clad boy” smiling while “proudly holding a gun his father gave him as a present” qualifies as potential “abuse or neglect” to “state child welfare” workers.

When dealing with the State, the citizen acts at his peril.

And that’s not the way it’s supposed to be.

Quote of the Day – Malum In Se Edition

Geek WithA.45 left this in a comment:

The reality is that a segment of our society abuses the mechanisms of democracy to seek the authority of law to destroy the lives of honest men who offer harm to none, but who reject ideological compliance.   Apparently, “comply or be destroyed” is now an acceptable American modus operandi.

How can that be characterized as anything but evil?

How, indeed?

I Have an Idea, Joe

[youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wIuk3G9Xixc?rel=0]

Let’s replace all of your security team’s submachineguns and semi-automatic pistols with double-barreled 12 gauge shotguns.  They don’t need thirty rounds (or eighteen) to protect you, right?

In fact, I think all Secret Service protective detail agents should be equipped with Ruger Red Label shotguns and two shells apiece!  If it’s good enough for us, it ought to be good enough for our employees!

Oh, hell, let’s let ’em have Stoeger Tactical Coach Guns so they can hang flashlights, lasers and optics off the rails.

Seriously?

“Designed to prepare officers for the worst possible situation.”

Reader David Turner sent me a link to these Law Enforcement “No More Hesitation” training targets to ask me what I thought of them. Here are four of the seven:

 photo LET-1.jpg  photo LET-5.jpg

 photo LET-6.jpg  photo LET-7.jpg
The sales spiel goes:

No More Hesitation Targets were designed to give officers the experience of dealing with deadly force shooting scenarios with subjects that are not the norm during training.  No More Hesitation faded background enhances the isolation and is meant to help the transition for officers who are faced with these highly unusal targets for the first time.

I’m sure these targets are Bob Owens-approved. I wonder when they’re going to start producing “No Hesitation” targets like this:

 photo Tacoma.jpg
Oh, wait! No need!

 photo copshotnewspaperdelivery.jpg
EDITED TO ADD:

Sometimes hesitation is called for:

[youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DZTkflzRJ_0?rel=0]
UPDATE II:

What, they don’t carry a “Household Pets” target set?

UPDATE III:

No, this is not satire.  At least the targets themselves aren’t.

Quote of the Day – .gov Efficiency Edition

Stolen shamelessly from Sharp as a Marble, this comment by DustyDog:

If gun confiscation happens, it won’t be a shoot out. You’ll get 3 letters of advance notice filled with dire threats. Then a final warning (which will arrive a week late), and two late notices, full of threats. You’ll hear that the people running the database can’t keep track of how many weapons were turned it, so if you turn in anything and get a clean card, you’ll in the record as having no guns. So you drive to the location to find out it was misprinted on the form. You call and google, and find the right place. You’ll go through a humiliating pat-down for knives and drugs, but they won’t take the gun or ammo you have in your hands – that’s somebody else’s job; wait in line. You’ll wait in line all day long, to be turned away.

You’ll come back earlier tomorrow, wait all day, and turn in a gun.

When you turn in your gun, you get a receipt with no unique code. They throw your gun in a completely unsecure box, in an unsecure room. “It’s easier now. When the door was locked, the guns would pile up until there was no more room. Now, the boxes are always empty in the morning.”

The next week, you get a letter saying that due to a database crash, the government is not sure if you turned in your guns. You’ll be ordered to fill out a form, under threat of imprisonment. You’ll have the option of affirming that all your guns were turned in, or that they were not.

If you affirm, you’ll get the same letter every six months. If you refuse to affirm, you’ll go on a waiting list. Two to five years later, a guy with a high school diploma will show up to take your guns. You won’t need a gun to kill this guy, a ten-year old could beat this guy down. He won’t have your name right and the names of guns on his list won’t be the names of guns ever actually made; the records are obviously all mixed up. If you tell him your name is Juan and you’re renting from [you], he won’t be back for another 2 to 5 years.

That’s pretty much how Canada’s attempt at long-gun registration went, before they finally gave up.

Quote of the Day – “PRECISELY!” Edition

From Sebastian at Shall Not Be Questioned:

By now many of you have seen this video where Joe Biden admits gun control won’t be effective at stopping crime or mass shootings. Well, that’s because the purpose of gun control isn’t either of those things. To say that they want to turn millions of gun owners into criminals is not really accurate. What’s accurate is that they already think you’re a criminal. They just want to be able to punish you for it.