Somer town officials tell FoxNews.com that the sign was removed because it was on public property and therefore a code violation. Gibson maintains that the sign was on his property and is currently obtaining a new land survey to be certain.(COURTESY OF JOE GIBSON)
A New York man, frustrated when his pro-Second Amendment sign kept disappearing, was surprised when the hidden camera he set up revealed the culprit to be a local cop.
Jon Gibson, of rural Lake Lincolndale, about 50 miles north of New York City, told FoxNews.com he set up a hunting field camera near the sign, which reads "Protect the Second Amendment," and features the silhouette of an assault rifle, after two mysteriously vanished. A third sign disappeared before the camera finally captured the sign stealer -- a police officer from the nearby Somers Police Department.
Somers Town Supervisor Mary Beth Murphy told FoxNews.com that the signs were indeed on public property -- within 15 feet of the road -- and were removed to comply with town ordinances.
“The town does not allow signs in the right of way,” Murphy said. “The police chief had received numerous complaints from neighbors and it was determined that the sign was posted in the right of way.”
What I'm enjoying about this story is the way it conflicts with the pro-gun pitch. Rank and file cops are on their side, they keep telling us. Most of the good citizens too, but this case seems to tell a very different story.What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.
"Rank and file cops are on their side, they keep telling us. Most of the good citizens too, but this case seems to tell a very different story."
ReplyDeleteThe police officer taking the sign might be very we'll be in favor of civilian ownership of firearms. But if his boss, the chief, or the mayor tells him to pull up the sign, then he does it and let's the courts figure it out, and it's looking like it might very well head there.
If it turns out the sign wasn't on public property, then the owner can ask the court to be reimbursed.
The right of way is to allow the city to install power lines or the like or to take a person's land for widening the road. As such, it's a hateful concept to begin with. But the notion that a property owner can't put a sign on his own land is contrary to the First Amendment, showing once again that when you give up one right, no right is safe.
ReplyDeleteThe "deliverance" boy shows his hate for authority again.
ReplyDelete