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.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?
I'm certain that LE has access to private FB content. No one will admit it though.
BotsIf the account is still active, just unused, those posts from years ago might be among the most recent posts available. Easy to find that way.
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.
So they denied him because of what someone else posted on his FB page?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!"
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 platformsWell 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.