NJ Court Denies LTC Applicant over Facebook Posts

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

  • No ad networks!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • clandestine

    Active Member
    Oct 13, 2008
    36,472
    How do they dig up such an old post without help from FB, or them having something on the guy already?
    I'm certain that LE has access to private FB content. No one will admit it though.
     

    clandestine

    Active Member
    Oct 13, 2008
    36,472
    Interesting. I don’t know how this holds up in court.
    If the guy already owns firearms (and has for some time), then it’s really going to be bad for this judge.
    I assume they’re using “good moral character” as the basis for denial?
    According to Anthony from Gun for Hire Radio, there has been instances of NJ gun owners who possessed firearms and their FID for over a decade, then applied for a PTC, and were denied based on things found on the LE side of the investigation. The denied applicant's are now subject to their guns being seized and FID revoked.
     

    Threeband

    The M1 Does My Talking
    MDS Supporter
    Dec 30, 2006
    22,297
    Carroll County
    I'm certain that LE has access to private FB content. No one will admit it though.


    Facebook has been red-flagging private messages of "election deniers" to the FBI.
    Starts at about 2:30.

    QUOTE from episode description: "Whistleblowers strike again, this time revealing that Facebook has been spying on ‘election deniers’ via their private messages; Facebook then shares that data with the FBI, violating the First Amendment."





    Meanwhile, remember that the Left says "Words are Violence." Saying something they disagree with is the same as going around sucker-punching people. Can't let violent people carry guns!






    .
     
    Last edited:

    swinokur

    In a State of Bliss
    Patriot Picket
    Apr 15, 2009
    52,987
    Not in Montgomery any longer
    The thing about social media there are those that hold it up like its some talisman of higher power and knowledge. Others like me see it as a grocery stor billboard where you occasionally drop in to do something crass and make jokes and take it about as seriously as an onion or Babylon Bee article. Anything on social media is judge subjectively and not objectively because those that moderate it and those that use it as some sort of cache of intel on people have blinders on. I hope that citizen of new jersey all the luck and hope that social media stalking takes a hit. Social media the 21st century's more dangerous version of the National Enquirer.

    The National Enquirer caught John Edwards when no one else did


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     

    swinokur

    In a State of Bliss
    Patriot Picket
    Apr 15, 2009
    52,987
    Not in Montgomery any longer
    What did luck have to do with it?

    Was it not a fact Edwards had a mistress?

    Was it also not a fact that the National Enquirer broke the story when no other media outlet did?

    Oh that’s right they did

    Those are called facts

    Clean up on aisle 3


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
    Last edited:

    ryan_j

    Active Member
    Aug 6, 2013
    2,247
    There is more to this story. I had my doubts that police were simply trolling social media. Apparently the social media posts came up during investigation of a complaint.

    That said, be careful on social media. Don't put anything there you wouldn't be comfortable seeing on a billboard on the interstate.

    This is the snippet from CNJFO, a gun rights organization who reported about the case:

    "It all started 5-6 years ago when an estranged family member of Mr. Smith's posted a questionable statement on a post initiated by carry permit applicant Smith. It involved a personal family matter where a family member was injured, and emotions were present. Smith didn't make the offending post in question and deleted it when the police (who were made aware by a third party) brought it to his attention. No further action was necessary or taken. It was all forgotten. But a Police report was filed on the "incident".
    Smith crossed all his "T"'s and dotted all his "I"'s and jumped through the redundant fingerprint "poll tax". His packet was complete and without any disqualifiers, since none could be found! The local Police Chief signed-off on Smith's carry application and what was supposed to be a "rubber stamp" in front of the Judge TURNED INTO A NIGHTMARE of epic proportion!"
     

    swinokur

    In a State of Bliss
    Patriot Picket
    Apr 15, 2009
    52,987
    Not in Montgomery any longer
    No way. Is he really becoming a woman?

    Oh wait.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
     

    Attachments

    • 86E5B1A7-62EF-4316-9E8A-B405E21CE238.jpeg
      86E5B1A7-62EF-4316-9E8A-B405E21CE238.jpeg
      149.2 KB · Views: 31

    Trepang

    Active Member
    Dec 10, 2015
    2,070
    Calvert County, MD
    1. I am amazed at the $hit people post on FB.
    2. I am amazed at the privacy settings or lack there of that people have on their FB page.

    I know a guy who ended up getting hired as a paid fireman but at the final interview they had printed out some pics from his FB page of him hammered drunk in a VFB uniform as some function and ask him to explain.

    Yep, he had the privacy setting on "PUBLIC" on all these compromising and embarrassing pictures of himself.
     

    press1280

    Active Member
    Jun 11, 2010
    7,059
    WV
    There is more to this story. I had my doubts that police were simply trolling social media. Apparently the social media posts came up during investigation of a complaint.

    That said, be careful on social media. Don't put anything there you wouldn't be comfortable seeing on a billboard on the interstate.

    This is the snippet from CNJFO, a gun rights organization who reported about the case:

    "It all started 5-6 years ago when an estranged family member of Mr. Smith's posted a questionable statement on a post initiated by carry permit applicant Smith. It involved a personal family matter where a family member was injured, and emotions were present. Smith didn't make the offending post in question and deleted it when the police (who were made aware by a third party) brought it to his attention. No further action was necessary or taken. It was all forgotten. But a Police report was filed on the "incident".
    Smith crossed all his "T"'s and dotted all his "I"'s and jumped through the redundant fingerprint "poll tax". His packet was complete and without any disqualifiers, since none could be found! The local Police Chief signed-off on Smith's carry application and what was supposed to be a "rubber stamp" in front of the Judge TURNED INTO A NIGHTMARE of epic proportion!"
    So they denied him because of what someone else posted on his FB page?
     

    Docster

    Active Member
    Jul 19, 2010
    9,582
    Well look at it this way, if you can't post responsibility (1A) you shouldn't be able to carry (2A).

    But hey you can still be a politician and say and write all the stupid shite you like, and if you choose to be a Democrat politician then you can pull strings to get a permit, so where there's a will there's a way.

    Or you can sue the shite out of them for denying your civil rights.
    Agree somewhat. 5 yrs ago the poster was still an adult and had the capability of knowing that posting stupid or controversial sh_t could bite one in the ass for any number of reasons good or bad at any time in the future. It's been that way for years yet some folks still use FB for political platforms
     

    MaxVO2

    Active Member
    MDS Supporter
    *****I know several people who have lost lucrative employment opportunities over stupid stuff they had posted on Facebook that made them seem like irresponsible drunks, with poor judgement, etc.. High dollar law firms, big four accounting/consulting firms, and many other employers now look at social media postings for management/executive positions, etc.. Some even ask for your password(s) to see what is posted there (really..), or ask you to unlock them to allow HR or folks in charge of hiring to see if your postings might reflect badly on the company, etc..

    Nothing you post on these social platforms is truly private and it can and probably will eventually come out at some point. Look at all the dumb stuff famous and not so famous people have gotten busted over for stuff they wrote over 10 years ago on whatever platform... Mebbe stuff involving drug culture, or racist jokes, or dressing up for Halloween or a masquerade party in blackface or as a KKK member while having the nickname "Coonman" - just not a smart thing to do if you have political or executive aspirations, etc.. *



    * - (unless you are a Democrat, then you have a bit more latitude to get away with more bad or embarrassing stuff..)
    :innocent0
     

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    262,880
    Messages
    6,729,667
    Members
    30,824
    Latest member
    devcole1717

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom