Jon Gibson has been noticing someone has been stealing his pro-2nd amendment and anti-Safe Act yard signs from his property, so he decided to mount a deer camera and sure enough he caught the thief red handed

Here is one of his signs






and here is who was caught stealing them

I am sure he is just "one bad apple."

yeah right.....he just didn't do this bad deed on his own......it's a dog eat dog world out there.....and is there reprimand for this cop?????????

brotherhood protection...

No, he's a good cop performing his duties as government thought police.

Does anyone know if the signs in question were actually on the homeowners land???

Quoted from Box A Rox

Does anyone know if the signs in question were actually on the homeowners land???

That's what they are fighting about... It all depends on how far the towns land goes from the road... it could be 3 feet, it could be 10 feet...The sign was about five feet from the side of the road..
Two points, however...
1. The homeowner claims they were not warned or notified about the sign seizure, which is required under the law.
2. If campaign signs are allowed in the same area and distance from the road, then it's selective enforcement.

So this has nothing to do with gun rights... It's about property lines, rights of way
& imagined persecution.

Quoted from Box A Rox

So this has nothing to do with gun rights... It's about property lines, rights of way
& imagined persecution.

Don't know enough about it to say either way... the homeowner did imply that other signs in the area (campaign signs presumably) were left untouched..
Regardless, at the very least the homeowner was owed notification via receipt or warning IF the sign was in violation....

Lets be real. instead of being a shill for the government each and every time Box opens his mouth to stuff his pablum in:

If this sign was a sign that had a candidate for office that the cops backed, that sign would of never been touched. Not in one million years or more. If it said "WE MUST HAVE GUN CONTROL NOW" or "SUPPORT THE POLICE!" it would have been hallowed and if anyone dreamed of touching it there would be 59 felony counts lodged against the perpetrator who brushed up against it. He would end up with a$15,000 fine and three felony convictions ranging from theft, to conspiracy, to elections fraud, to harassment, etc.

So, please spare us the excuse making Goebbels-inspired shilling for the government and their agents. We are not democrap puppies in the democrap puppy mill like you and your brethren.

Quoted from GrahamBonnet

Lets be real. instead of being a shill for the government each and every time Box opens his mouth to stuff his pablum in:

If this sign was a sign that had a candidate for office that the cops backed, that sign would of never been touched. Not in one million years or more. If it said "WE MUST HAVE GUN CONTROL NOW" or "SUPPORT THE POLICE!" it would have been hallowed and if anyone dreamed of touching it there would be 59 felony counts lodged against the perpetrator who brushed up against it. He would end up with a$15,000 fine and three felony convictions ranging from theft, to conspiracy, to elections fraud, to harassment, etc.

So, please spare us the excuse making Goebbels-inspired shilling for the government and their agents. We are not democrap puppies in the democrap puppy mill like you and your brethren.

Amusing to watch Graham draw his own conclusions to actual facts.

Graham has the "support the police" people and the "we must have gun control" group as if they are
the same people.
Yet on this board, and it local papers, the police are on record as opposing gun control to the point
that they say they will refuse to enforce the safe act.
So which is it Graham... are the Police on the side of gun control as you contend, or do they
oppose the safe act???
Ya can't have it both ways.  

Quoted from Box A Rox

Does anyone know if the signs in question were actually on the homeowners land???

Yes they were on his front lawn on his property and was told he could leave them up after a neighbor complained. As stated if there was a problem he would have to be notified and given a period of time to remove it. What the cop did was trespassing and theft not to mention destruction of private property.

Quoted from Henry

Yes they were on his front lawn on his property and was told he could leave them up after a neighbor complained. As stated if there was a problem he would have to be notified and given a period of time to remove it. What the cop did was trespassing and theft not to mention destruction of private property.

PLEASE! Don't bother- the Allgemeine is just doing their jobs, and Box would not want to be seen not stuffing as many Americans into the ovens as possible in the shortest time by his kommandants.

Quoted from GrahamBonnet

PLEASE! Don't bother- the Allgemeine is just doing their jobs, and Box would not want to be seen not stuffing as many Americans into the ovens as possible in the shortest time by his kommandants.

Graham seems to be fixated with Nazis, gas chambers and communists.  It doesn't matter what the
subject, Graham manages to work his fixation into the text.

No wonder it took him a month to write his infamous 'paper'.  

Quoted from GrahamBonnet

PLEASE! Don't bother- the Allgemeine is just doing their jobs, and Box would not want to be seen not stuffing as many Americans into the ovens as possible in the shortest time by his kommandants.

Graham seems to be fixated with Nazis, gas chambers and communists.  It doesn't matter what the
subject, Graham manages to work his fixation into the text.

No wonder it took him a month to write his infamous 'paper'.  

Usually, town road crews are responsible for the right-of-way. Very unusual to see a police officer doing roadside maintenance. In fact, I have never, ever seen that before. I'm going to venture out on a limb here and say that the cop was acting illegally, outside his scope of duties. There was no immediate emergency that had to be remedied for safety.