pytron
Member
After reading this article about a proposal to get rid of a gun-owner database in Florida, I'm stirred up enough to write a letter.
Here is my letter, please help me make it concise and include enough information to make them think about their wrong-headed view.
-----start letter-------
To: First Amendment Foundation <[email protected]>
Subject: President Petersen's recent response on NBC12
I was startled to read the following article from First News (NBC12) which included the following:
http://www.firstcoastnews.com/news/florida/news-article.aspx?storyid=11079
-------------------------
Right now in the state of Florida, people who buy guns from pawn shops, have their information stored into a database that can be accessed by law enforcement. But the proposed bill will restrict access law enforcement has to that list.
....
First Amendment Foundation President Barbara Petersen was shocked to hear about the proposal. "I don't understand it. I'm totally perplexed by the bill and the notion by the bill."
Petersen says the legislation is dangerous for society and especially law enforcement.
"Think about it. They drive up to a house for a domestic disturbance they want to know if anyone in the house is licensed to carry a weapon or own a weapon. No records."
Harrington says under the proposed bill, lists of stolen guns would still exist. Law enforcement could also obtain gun records from pawn shops for investigations, after an investigation is over, the data must be destroyed.
-------------------------
I'm extremely confused by these soundbites. Perhaps they are taken out of context. I would love to hear that. Please let me know if I am wrong.
Petersen is for keeping a law-enforcement-only database of lawful citizens? For what purpose? In order to legally buy a firearm that is tracked by the current database, the owner must pass a background check proving that they are not a felon nor have any misdemenor domestic violence convictions. The people in this database are by definition LAW-ABIDING. Criminals, who the police should be worried about, are not going to be in this database because they will have to buy on the black market or steal their firearms.
As I read it, the First Amendment Foundation was "established to protect and advance First Amendment, public records, and open meetings rights of Floridians." How is this LAW-ENFORCEMENT-ONLY database a public record? What about the right to privacy?
A similar database allowed police in Maryland to find gun-owners who had AR-15s during the "sniper" killings. After it was all over, it turns out the CRIMINALs behind the killings did not get their gun by passing a background check or having their name in a database. Law-abiding citizens who had done nothing were harrassed because of the actions of a criminal.
President Petersen's words strike me as hypocritical. If the police were keeping a database of members of the First Amendment Foundation, wouldn't she be lobbying against the database?
Sincerely,
-Pytron
-----end letter-------
Like I said, I'm looking for any help I can get. I'm trying to give them an out by saying that perhaps she was misquoted. If indeed this is her viewpoint, I don't want her to become defensive, but rather look at the error in her ways.
-Pytron
Here is my letter, please help me make it concise and include enough information to make them think about their wrong-headed view.
-----start letter-------
To: First Amendment Foundation <[email protected]>
Subject: President Petersen's recent response on NBC12
I was startled to read the following article from First News (NBC12) which included the following:
http://www.firstcoastnews.com/news/florida/news-article.aspx?storyid=11079
-------------------------
Right now in the state of Florida, people who buy guns from pawn shops, have their information stored into a database that can be accessed by law enforcement. But the proposed bill will restrict access law enforcement has to that list.
....
First Amendment Foundation President Barbara Petersen was shocked to hear about the proposal. "I don't understand it. I'm totally perplexed by the bill and the notion by the bill."
Petersen says the legislation is dangerous for society and especially law enforcement.
"Think about it. They drive up to a house for a domestic disturbance they want to know if anyone in the house is licensed to carry a weapon or own a weapon. No records."
Harrington says under the proposed bill, lists of stolen guns would still exist. Law enforcement could also obtain gun records from pawn shops for investigations, after an investigation is over, the data must be destroyed.
-------------------------
I'm extremely confused by these soundbites. Perhaps they are taken out of context. I would love to hear that. Please let me know if I am wrong.
Petersen is for keeping a law-enforcement-only database of lawful citizens? For what purpose? In order to legally buy a firearm that is tracked by the current database, the owner must pass a background check proving that they are not a felon nor have any misdemenor domestic violence convictions. The people in this database are by definition LAW-ABIDING. Criminals, who the police should be worried about, are not going to be in this database because they will have to buy on the black market or steal their firearms.
As I read it, the First Amendment Foundation was "established to protect and advance First Amendment, public records, and open meetings rights of Floridians." How is this LAW-ENFORCEMENT-ONLY database a public record? What about the right to privacy?
A similar database allowed police in Maryland to find gun-owners who had AR-15s during the "sniper" killings. After it was all over, it turns out the CRIMINALs behind the killings did not get their gun by passing a background check or having their name in a database. Law-abiding citizens who had done nothing were harrassed because of the actions of a criminal.
President Petersen's words strike me as hypocritical. If the police were keeping a database of members of the First Amendment Foundation, wouldn't she be lobbying against the database?
Sincerely,
-Pytron
-----end letter-------
Like I said, I'm looking for any help I can get. I'm trying to give them an out by saying that perhaps she was misquoted. If indeed this is her viewpoint, I don't want her to become defensive, but rather look at the error in her ways.
-Pytron