Child Welfare called in on Father who gave Son a Gun

How is that an argument against freedom? If it is, then we have no freedom, and we never had. As far back as Adam and Eve, we have the freedom to choose. But then, we must all answer for our choices. Or the Freedom of Speech, Amendment numero uno. We all have the Freedom of Speech, but we must be prepared to pay the consequences (say, yelling "fire" in a full theatre, when in fact, there is no fire).

 

It's true. I was generic, and I have cousins that live in the country that learned to shoot guns at a younger age. In general, in areas of greater populace where guns are not used in daily life (i.e. with my cousins, they routinely used guns for hunting or to scare coyotes from livestock), I'd say most children are not educated on gun safety. And I'm going to assume you're from a different generation than me.

Most people who are properly educated on gun safety and are not completely clueless would not post pics of their child holding a gun that looks similar to a semi-automatic on FB, and then be totally shocked when child services comes to the door. You guys are missing the point. I don't fear guns. I don't care if the kid learns to shoot a gun properly. I don't care that the dad is a bad-ass for posting the picture.

What I don't understand is why the dad is upset that, after HE posted pictures on FB, HIS "friend" called child services/police, and yet he is upset at child service for doing their job and performing a welfare check (which everything sounds like it was by the book and everything was fine).

 

This.

As for your example of the cops.... I see no lying or intimidation there. I see a cop using common sense and was friendly enough that the kid felt comfortable communicating with him.

 

Yeah, donkiez is right on this one, ToB. I've witnessed similar situations in HS, but I just assumed it was common sence (hence, the age-21 drinking law).

 

Over and over in this thread, the CPS employees and their relatives whine, "If the CPS doesn't act like Nazis, one or two Nazis will get on a message board somewhere and CRITICIZE them! You who are calling for freedom--you'll be the first!"

No we won't. We'll be the first to oppose the Nazis who criticize the CPS Nazis for not being Nazi enough.

 

If you maliciously do it, I'd agree with you. The problem is, some people might make a complaint, and it could look to them like something is wrong, and it can turn out fine. Should they be penalized? I think a rule like that might dissuade someone from calling on something that MIGHT look sketchy, but they're not 100% sure. And then more issues can slip through the cracks.

 

My now-tubby ex-wife patrols dating sites. Last night she told me that her new interest is an old guy who is a volunteer for the police, calling in cars who park in handicap spots. He does this for free.

Years ago when I had long hair, my little boy and I got into our car in a grocery store. I noticed a policeman giving us a dirty look. Next day, a younger cop knocks at my door. Seems an anonymous citizen thought that I looked like someone who was wanted. The young cop compared me to a picture and left.

My point is that "anonymous citizen complaints" are neither anonymous nor random. Besides actual police being the informants, the police organize groups of informants.

 

They should be able to sue someone? For what? Gimme a break. It's funny how often we have complaints on here about it being an overly litigious society, yet people still call for someone to be sued over something like this.

 

Those complaints are from conservatives who love the police state and CPS. Again, as with the "anonymous citizen informant" issue, your side is using the fear of conservative critics who want the CPS to be more police statish, to justify the CPS already being police statish.

If the government is run so democratically on the basis of complaints, why aren't drugs legal? Why are conservative complaints jumped on while liberal complaints are ignored?

 

I guess just disband the agency, instead. And hope out of the kindness of their hearts, people stop abusing children.

 

How was this one malicious? Someone thought the kid was endangered or in an unsafe environment. Turns out they were wrong. Doesn't mean it was malicious.

 

can you show me where they said that's why they showed up?

 

when you get a hold of the call that caused the investigation, let me know.

 

Doesn't say that at all.