whiskeytangofoxtrot
Member
I think you are missing the point of the argument. If he made those threats, then yes, by all means, throw the book at him. But, the opposing point here is the warrant was based purely on the boss, who fired the guy, stating to police that the guy said what he said. Further more, since the boss knew he had firearms and told the police as much, now the police officer offers as evidence for a warrant 1) the guy made a threat ... heresay. 2) the guy had the means to act on the threat. 3) the complaintant "felt" threatened.
Does that really meet the expectation that someone should be visited by police with a warrant, involuntarily committed to the cookoo bin and to have his legally owned property confiscated?
That's what the trial will be for isn't it? A search warrant is to gather evidence, and that's what they did. I don't get everyone defending this guy, Why would you make those threats then throw up the 2A argument, it is past that not you threatened someone's life, and judging by his other thread about the AA county PD he seems like he has a few screws loose in the head.