Replies

I think you mistake defending a right with defending the person. Unless it turns out that the ownership of firearms and association with Oath Keepers was NOT on the affidavits accepted by the court, Oath Keepers definately needs to fight this out. They can and should specify that abuse of the children is a legitimate concern, but constitutionally protected rights are not and cannot be made so.

And if he's ignored a court order, he should be in jail, and then there would NOT be a problem with him abusing the new daughter. Court needs to do its job, properly, and that is that. The Law is the Law. It needs to be followed.

Also, let me reemphasize that CHILD ABUSE SHOULD HAVE BEEN THE ONLY THING on the affidavit. If it had been, we wouldn't be having this conversation. We wouldn't need to converse, because we both agree that the child abuse is the issue that should have already been dealt with. Oath Keepers wouldn't be involved at all, in that case. I've seen other copies of the affidavit, and Oath Keepers was mentioned, as were his possession of firearms. Mind you, FELONY convictions are the only ones that can legally lose you your 2nd Amendment rights. If his conviction (which I've not seen, but I'll accept your word on) was not for a felony, then they had no business mentioning his possession of firearms, either. What, exactly, was he convicted of? I've not seen that anywhere, and unless it was child abuse, it's not proven, either.

Before I respond to your post I want to let you know how much I respect your opinions and particularly the decency you've exhibited in this exchange.

I agree with you that firearm possession and Oath Keepers shouldn't have been included on the affidavit.

I've maintained that Oath Keepers is being set up — I just didn't know by whom.

The following interview with Grandpa Irish may, and I tentatively say ‘may’, shed some light on why Oath Keepers was included on the affidavit. It's obvious he and his son are at odds and that should be judged objectively while listening to this interview.

“Oath Keeper Baby” Grandad Backs CPS (DCYF) — on FreeKeene.com

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=knFeIyeuSy8&feature=channel

(around the 3:00 to 3:30 point in this interview, Mr. Irish makes some eye-opening statements about his son's “non-association” with Oath Keepers and the son's claims about his behavior in relation to that organization)

This interview sheds some light on how the Oath Keepers were possibly included on the affidavit.

Oath Keepers should press the issue of how John Irish is NOT a dues paying member of their organization nor does he in any way represent their membership or its goals.