If gun owner poses no threat, he should get his collection back

[Gunreference1]

If gun owner poses no threat, he should get his collection back

Published: Tuesday, September 14, 2010, 5:37 AM
Star-Ledger Editorial Board

John Brek was in deep trouble after two Continental Airlines employees at Newark Airport told police he’d made comments about cutting a hole in a fence so he could shoot the arriving President Obama.

But authorities later dropped the most serious charges that Brek made terroristic threats and possessed a stolen rifle. The 56-year-old Linden man ended up pleading guilty only to harassment, for causing inconvenience, annoyance and alarm — not to the president, but to the pair of worried employees he’d been talking to.

To read the rest of the story click the link below.

http://blog.nj.com/njv_editorial_page/2010/09/if_gun_owner_poses_no_threat_h.html

Steve

[ATAK, Inc.]

A world with no guns in it would be ideal, but under our laws, you can’t deprive a citizen of his right to own a gun if he’s not considered a threat. The judge acknowledged that Brek doesn’t pose a threat — agreeing to lift a restraining order that had prohibited him from having any contact with Obama or the White House — but said the gun collection would still be confiscated because “we live in a different world” after 9/11.

The judge was erring on the side of caution, yet fundamental rights cannot be eroded because times have changed or people are worried.


We can tell where the author stands, but at least he still believes in the 2nd.

WTF is this judge thinking? Just another screaming example of legislating from the bench, cause he has no legal standing to keep the man's weapons. F$&KING liberals!!! What different world? One where it's more important to the RKBA!

[Charliebravo]

We "live in a different world since 9/11"? He's right about that. We should be deporting the shit out of some Muslims rather than fucking with one asshat with a minor collection of firearms.