NJ man accused of Obama threat can get guns back

[Judi Lynn]

Source: Associated Press

Tuesday, May. 22, 2012
NJ man accused of Obama threat can get guns back
The Associated Press

NEWARK, N.J. — A New Jersey appeals court says a man accused of talking about shooting President Obama can get his gun collection back.

John Brek was working at Newark Liberty International Airport in 2009 when he was overheard talking about how easy it would be to shoot the president, who was scheduled to arrive the next day.

Brek was charged with making terroristic threats but pleaded guilty to harassment and served 30 days in jail.

However, a judge denied him the return of more than 70 weapons that had been seized from his house during the investigation.




Read more: http://www.thestate.com/2012/05/22/2285884/nj-man-accused-of-obama-threat.html#storylink=cpy

[onehandle]

1. What would be the harm?

Here come the gungeoneers to defend!

[rfranklin]

2. I seem to recall a fellow who made a joke about a "burning bush" and got jail time...

This seems insane.

[gratuitous]

14. Richard Humphreys

A name and an incident we ought not to forget.

[abelenkpe]

3. WTF?

Why on earth would someone accused of terroristic threats who talked of shooting the president get his weapons back? Clearly he is mentally unstable.

[hack89]

6. What does the law say? What is the legal process to deny him his guns?

was that process followed?

Everyone has the right to due process.

[hack89]

8. He was evaluated by two mental health professionals

Last edited Tue May 22, 2012, 03:42 PM - Edit history (1)

who determined he was not a threat.

[TheCowsCameHome]

9. Dr. LaPierre and who else?

[hack89]

10. Ask the court - I suspect they were court appointed. nt

[abelenkpe]

11. "He was evaluated by two mental health professions"?

I'm happy to hear two professions evaluated him. And so happy that you are here to defend a lunatic who threatened our president.

[hack89]

13. So you don't believe in due process?

you trust the government that much with your civil liberties?

[Zoeisright]

4. That's insane.

n/t

[hack89]

7. What? That the judges actually followed the law? nt

[ManiacJoe]

5. I am surprised it went to trial in the first place...

... given the way the article is written.

[Kolesar]

12. I have an idea for a new Discovery reality program: gun hoarders

The producers could bring in calm counselors to convince a paranoid sociophobe that he doesn't need seventy guns. Add frequent glimpses of his cute teenage girl with a bare midriff and tats.

[ZombieHorde]

15. ...

[WHEN CRABS ROAR]

16. Not defending his speech about shooting the President,

But he appears to be a collector of guns and as a collector of rocks, it might be hard for me to explain why I have over two tons of gems and minerals, but I didn't threaten to throw them at the President.

[randome]

17. I think we forget, sometimes, how much a decision like this is made on gut instinct.

A judge normally has a lot of discretion to determine if the guy in question actually seems remorseful, authentic, appears to feel genuinely stupid for having gotten into this predicament, has an otherwise clean record, etc.

Pleading guilty in the first place is a small mark on his side.