The "officer 4473 dilema"

[Art Eatman]

Sorry, folks, but I gotta weigh in on the cops' side on this one. Absolutely, for sure.

Look: It's not because cops are "better". It is that the probability of their being specific targets is much higher than for us because of the job.

I'm walking down the street, and some mugger is in "to whom it may concern" mode. Or a burglar figures my house is an easy target. Same deal. I'm not a specific target as "Art Eatman". I or my house is just "there" and available.

But a cop's job is far more likely to make him a specific target for some idiot. As I see it, he has a much stronger NEED for privacy as to his residence address, and it's due to his line of work.

Art

 

[Hkmp5sd]

What is funny is that it isn't all that hard to find out a LEOs address, or anyone elses address for that matter. Maybe it just makes them feel safer.

 

[RevDisk]

Why let them hide?

Have they done something they are going to regret? Why don't I get that protection?

Kel, I disagree with your implied comment that they need to hide or have done something they regret. They are sometimes in a dangerous line of work and need to hide their personal information.

However, that said. I already posted about equal protection. If it's a legal option for them to hide their information, it should be for citizens also.

This just reeks of "If I can't have an ice cream cone, aint nobody having an ice cream cone"

Your need to conceal your addy equals that of an officer in the organized crime bureau? Y'all must lead some exciting lives.

No offense, centac, but I feel you have misplaced values when you equate human lives and equal protection under the law to ice cream cones. I'm trying to decide if you are merely being sarcastic because you cannot come up with a better responce, or because you actually believe your line of work supercedes the Constitition.

Yes, my life does equal that of an officer in an organized crime bureau. Need's got nothing to do with it. I do not need to justify my life, nor my rights under the Constitution.

And yes, I do lead an unfortunately exciting life.

Look: It's not because cops are "better". It is that the probability of their being specific targets is much higher than for us because of the job.

I'm walking down the street, and some mugger is in "to whom it may concern" mode. Or a burglar figures my house is an easy target. Same deal. I'm not a specific target as "Art Eatman". I or my house is just "there" and available.

Art, I'm sorry, but I have to disagree.

Stalking victims are usually more at risk than the average police officers. Often so are spouses from an abusive relationship. Witnesses testifying against gang members or murderers. etc, etc.

I'm glad you do not have someone looking for a specific target as "Art Eatman". Some people are specific targets. Obviously their lives are not less valuable?

 

[lunaslide]

This just reeks of "If I can't have an ice cream cone, aint nobody having an ice cream cone"

Your need to conceal your addy equals that of an officer in the organized crime bureau? Y'all must lead some exciting lives.

Of course, thats not what this is about. It's about ALL citizens having the right to maintain that privacy. Those CCW holders who's addresses were revealed by the Florida paper are now vulnerable to all manner of harrassment and possibly to attempts to break into their homes to steal their weapons. What did they do to deserve that? Even if that paper had not published the list, it was still publicly available. What was the purpose in exposing them to potential harm and harrassment by making their addresses public?

What if you were the one being denied that privacy, but another group of citizens (thats right, police are citizens just like us) had special protections to keep them from harm? Would you then feel it's unfair for them to "have an ice cream cone" when you can't?

By the way, in a sense this already happens. There are laws in many states that explicitly protect the privacy of an alleged rape victim throughout a trial, but no such protections for the person accused of the crime. The defendent has his reputation tarnished badly just on the implication that he is a rapist and the consequences of that accusal, even when false, can follow him for the rest of his life. But for the accuser, if they lie about the rape and ruin the life of the man she accuses of false charges, there is no justice taken upon her, and it is unlikely anyone will ever know who she was. Do you consider this state of affairs fair?

Class differentiation always looks good to those it benefits, but it sure doesn't make it just.

 

[O.F.Fascist]

Why should my address or anyone elses address be kept on record anywhere just because I purchased a firearm?

 

[pax]

Art ~

A LEO arrests a guy, and puts the guy in jail. The guy vows revenge. When he gets out, he finds the LEOs personal info, and goes after the LEO and his family. Result: one dead LEO, one dead LEO's wife, two dead children.

A middle-management type fires a guy, and the guy vows revenge. The guy finds the manager's personal info, and goes after the manager and his family. Result: one dead manager, one dead manager's wife, two dead children.

A single, attractive female turns down a jerk for a date. The jerk vows revenge and begins stalking her. She, being smart, does the smart things about this: she moves, she gets a new job, she gets an unlisted number and she gets a gun. But the creep finds her personal info anyway, and goes after her. Result: one dead woman, one dead cat.

A judge sentences a criminal to ten years in prison. The criminal vows revenge. When he gets out, he finds the judge's personal info, and goes after the judge and her family. Result: one dead judge, one dead husband, one dead teenage daughter.

You know what? Death comes one to a customer. If you're the one who's targeted, and you believe you have a need to keep your physical address out of the very public databases, why should anyone else be able to say that your life isn't important enough to matter??

The LEOs should be able to keep their physical addresses private if they so wish. So should any other citizen. To do otherwise is to say that the LEO's life is worth more than yours or any other citizen's.

And that's just wrong.

Oh, Centac? The right to privacy is more than an ice cream cone.

pax

He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself. -- Thomas Paine

 

[Derek Zeanah]

My take on this:

If you're worried, get a P.O. Box and use that on your driver's license. Or go further and get a "stealth" mailbox like Luna and B.T.Party talk about.

There's more to privacy than what's on your driver's license.

Having said that, the cops have the same option as well -- don't know that I like the implied classism in these sorts of policies.

 

[Art Eatman]

pax, I follow your point and don't disagree, overall. What I'm saying is that the odds are more likely for the average cop than for the average Joe or Joanie SixPack.

That is, what are the probabilities for a woman being stalked by an ex-, out of all women with exes? (And exes don't already know the residence?) Same for bosses; how many people do they fire, for starters--and of those firings, how many were acrimonious? And in both situations, the specific individuals involved as possible victims have some awareness of a particular hazard. IMO, by and large, cops can't.

I'm just looking at what I think the odds are, in today's world.

Art

 

[Werewolf]

It is really rare for law officers to be the victim of revenge crimes, but it is by no means out of the realm of possibility.

Sorry but that dog just don't hunt. Risks like that come with the job. Don't want to assume the risk don't become a LEO.

Complaining that they have a distinction that you dont seems petty and spiteful.

It is actually neither and quite disingenuous to suggest it is. I believe that the constitution prohibits special classes of citizens being created - hmmmmmm...

You would deprive us of this just because you cannot have it?

Yes. LEO's are citizens, not special citizens (most tend to forget that IMO). Do they have a dangerous job - yep. Tough - can't handle it don't become a LEO.

Why is Officer Safety of such paramount performance (officer safety is the reason for no-knock warrants - it is the reason if you let a LEO in your home they can now search it if they feel unsafe (thanks SCOTUS) - officer safety=death of 4th Amendment)? If the military worried as much about soldier safety as LEO's do about officer safety the US would have never won a war - hey - maybe that's why cops are cops and not soldiers.

 

[DMF]

Wow, all this debate, just because someone got their facts wrong. Your DL does not need to have your actual residence on it to purchase a firearm. Read what the ATF has to say on the matter:

http://www.atf.gov/firearms/faq/faq2.htm#d5

(D5) Is a Social Security card a proper means of identification? [Back]

No. A Social Security card, alien registration card, or military identification alone does not contain sufficient information to identify a firearms purchaser. However, a purchaser may be identified by any combination of documents which together establish all of the required information: Name, residence address, date of birth or age, signature, and photograph of the holder. In addition, the documents used to establish the purchaser's identity must have been issued by a government agency. [27 CFR 178.124( c)]

You may use any government issued documents, not just a DL, as long as you have proof of your residence address, along with the other required items. If you don't want your home address on your DL, you just need to think outside the box about using the proper government documents to establish residency. Even a dumb cop like me can figure this stuff out.

All this "us v. them," "cops need more protection," "everyone faces risks," "cops are just citizens, not special citizens," blah, blah, blah, blah, when all anyone had to do was find out what the rules really are, and learn how to play by them.

 

[EasternShore]

Well said Werewolf, and that is really the point, I don't know a single LEO that can't resign or in one form or another makes the choice every day to continue in that line of work. You make the choice you live with the consequences. It's called personal accountability. I live with it so should you...

 

[Fletchette]

/sacasm on/

Why, you have to tell the Government where you live! Terrible! What have you got to hide?..

Only a paranoid person would worry that this personal information would fall "into the wrong hands". Sheesh. Next it will be black helicopters...


/sarcasm off/

Yup. It sucks to be a prole, doesn't it?

LEOs, please, PLEASE think about this the next time your police chief wants a law passed that infringes on our privacy!

 

[lunaslide]

Wow, all this debate, just because someone got their facts wrong. Your DL does not need to have your actual residence on it to purchase a firearm. Read what the ATF has to say on the matter:

The debate is valid, because your assertion misses the point. First there is this:

Under Florida law, law enforcement officers (for obvious reasons) are entitled to list their agency address on ALL legal documents as well as on their driver's license to ensure that their residence address information does not get into the wrong hands.

Which means that any average citizen must put their home address on any of those documents they wish to use to purchase a firearm, but that a LEO does not. Therein lies the debate.

Lets go back to what the ATF requires and take a look:

(D5) Is a Social Security card a proper means of identification? [Back]

No. A Social Security card, alien registration card, or military identification alone does not contain sufficient information to identify a firearms purchaser. However, a purchaser may be identified by any combination of documents which together establish all of the required information: Name, residence address, date of birth or age, signature, and photograph of the holder. In addition, the documents used to establish the purchaser's identity must have been issued by a government agency. [27 CFR 178.124( c)]

The ATF clearly requires that the document you produce to "establish all of the required information" have your home address on it. By requiring LEOs to provide the same information, the ATF is setting the same standard for all citizens in it's requirements for purchasing a firearm.

If you don't want your home address on your DL, you just need to think outside the box about using the proper government documents to establish residency. Even a dumb cop like me can figure this stuff out.

Well, thats nice that you don't mind that my home address isn't the one on my DL, but it's also irrelevant. The privacy issue is about the availability of the residence address to the public and not the police. I'm not worried about the police looking up my address in public records and coming to steal my firearms from my home in the middle of the night (uhh... hmm, thats another topic). Its the people who get my address from other official documentation that I am more concerned about. I went looking for what documents they do accept for these purposes, but was unable to find a reference. Perhaps someone can enlighten us.

I find this sentence particularly interesting in it's wording:

Hence, a vast majority of Florida law enforcement officers from the local, state, and federal level have exercised their right to this protection and the agency address is reflected on their driver's license.

Government entities don't have rights. They also cannot grant rights. Citizens have rights. Government entities are assigned powers by the people to perform their functions. Those powers do not exceed the rights of citizens, for if they do they are by definition, unconstitutional. If the individual LEOs have this right, they derive that right from being a citizen and not from being a LEO. That means every other citizen should enjoy that same right. Clearly in this instance, that is not the case.

 

[wprebeck]

maybe that's why cops are cops and not soldiers.

A bit off-topic, but hey, whatever...



Maybe you should check the makeup of your local agency. I'd be willing to bet that close to 50%, if not more, of the officers have some connection to the military. Connection to, meaning one of the following:

Were prior active duty
Were prior reserve/National Guard
Current reserve/National Guard
Married to one
Close family member who is/was active/reserve


Just after 9/11, we had about 20-25 members of my agency alone activated. The 223rd MP CO is located here, and many of it's members are local officers. That's not counting the artillery guys we have, the psyop guy that's currently over there, the navy harbor security guy who just came back this week from a year, the ANG guy who's been active for almost 2 years, the scout who's TDY to Knox until 08/06 (been gone almost a year already), or the guy who's been activated 3 times in the 5 years I've worked here.

Plus, many more of our people are preparing for a second trip since 9/11. Another one of our sgt's is preparing for an extended tour in the litter box across the way.

All three of my shift LT's are prior service, and from three different branches, too. Air Force, Army, and Marines, to be precise. The Marine is one of the best bosses I've ever worked for, as well. Many people in my academy were prior service, and a number of our new people are, as well.

So, wanna keep slamming cops? The ones I know that are prior service would, more than likely, take exception to your asinine comment. Not only have they served their country, they now serve their community. Keep that in mind when you start insulting officers, mmkay?

On topic -
CHL holders ALSO assume a risk when they apply for a permit. Why shouldn't they have their addresses out there?

And, for the record, I signed myself up for this job. My wife also signed up for the same thing, but neither of us put our kids out there for possible injury due to retaliation. Anything I can do to help keep the job from coming home with me, is a good thing. Matter of fact, anyone screws with my kids, better disappear before I find them...and I WILL find them eventually.

You know, speaking of kids....some members of this forum sound just like children:

"Mommy, he has something I don't....take it away from him if I can't have it, too"

How many of you all have been out in public, and had the following happen?

Going to your local grocery, and the guy at the register is someone with whom you have fought on multiple occasions

At your local O'Charley's, and the girl who's putting the garnishes on your plate is the crack wh*** you just saw last week in jail

At your local grocery (again), and see the same girl as before, walking around, shopping (or shoplifting, who knows?)

Sitting at a late night eatery, and a guy who's threatened you numerous times, has a history of violent behavior, including fighting with officer and playing with poop, walk up to you and say "Hi"

Going to eat at a wing-joint with the family, and a guy walks up to you and asks, "Hey, don't you work at the jail?"

Walked into two different stores within 30 minutes of each other, and running into former inmates who recognize you

Seeing your neighbor in jail, who KNOWS where you live...seems he just likes to beat his old lady up.

Seeing one of the guys previously mentioned BACK in jail, and having him threaten you, saying that he knows where you live now, and he'll be coming to see you when he gets out

Going out, in pubic, pretty much anywhere, and seeing people you've
a) arrested
b) sent to prison
c) fought with
d) who have threatened you

You know, in five short years with the jail, I've had ALL of the above happen. I'd say it's pretty common with anyone who works in LE, but especially those of us in the local jails. After all, there are 8 police divisions in my city, plus numerous smaller cities, but only ONE jail. And, since I work in the booking area where all the incoming prisoners go to, I see a large number of them. And, for some reason, they get mad at me when I find the contraband they try to bring in (like the half ounce of crack cocaine being the most recent). Yeah, like going to prison for 10 years or so is gonna make him happy...

So, we've got 1 or 2 civilians with "war" stories...anyone else NOT in LE wanna chip in? Because I'm sure we've got ya beat....(Remember that Marine I mentioned I worked for...he had a guy show up at his residence armed with a bat one time....)

 

[R.H. Lee]

The real problem is the 4473. No American should have to fill out a form to buy a firearm. A criminal background check can be done directly from positive ID without a paper record.

 

[wprebeck]

The real problem is the 4473. No American should have to fill out a form to buy a firearm. A criminal background check can be done directly from positive ID without a paper record.

Well, that makes too much sense. We can't have that now, can we?

(Yes, I work for the government. As does a large portion of my family.....I've been around enough to know that almost NOTHING any government does makes sense)

 

[lunaslide]

CHL holders ALSO assume a risk when they apply for a permit. Why shouldn't they have their addresses out there?

They shouldn't, no one should. Maybe you're missing the point people are trying to make here. It isn't that police shouldn't have privacy protection in the interest of their saftey. I'm all for it, as it seems many on this thread are. It's that every other citizen should enjoy that privacy protection as well. It's that the rights of all citizens should be held in the same high regard, and not differentiated based on classification.

 

[RevDisk]

So, we've got 1 or 2 civilians with "war" stories...anyone else NOT in LE wanna chip in? Because I'm sure we've got ya beat....(Remember that Marine I mentioned I worked for...he had a guy show up at his residence armed with a bat one time....)

A bit OT, but the gauntlet has been tossed down.

Ok. I once accidently videotaped some infantry guys doing something they shouldn't. Within 30 minutes, nearly a thousand (well, closer to 800) grunts wanted my head on a pike and everyone knew I had the evidence. Word filtered down that a good number of them wanted me and the evidence to disappear.

800 trained infantry soldiers with access to all kinds of automatic weapons, all of which are annoyed at me and an unknown number wanting to kill me.

Beat that.

 

[Greg L]

It might be the bourbon talking but are the details of the 4473's that are filled out in FL regularly released to the public? If not (which would be my guess), have the #@$#!! agency issue the officers an id which would comply with the requirements. Chances are that a gunshop owner isn't going to let a goblin know where the random LEO who bought a pistol at his shop lives. Said random LEO shouldn't expect preferential treatment because he wanders around with a whole bunch of extra gear on his work belt.

Some people do need an extra layer of privacy protection - most of those same people need to get off their high horse where they think they "deserve" it because they took a job opening.

 

[Lone_Gunman]

What I'm saying is that the odds are more likely for the average cop than for the average Joe or Joanie SixPack.

Art, where do you get that statistic or draw that conclusion?

How many police are killed because a criminal gets their address off a drivers license, tracks them down, and kills them? Has that ever actually happened?

I would hypothesize that the number of police officers stalked and murdered annually is less than the number of regular people stalked and murdered annually.

Not having their address on driver's licenses may make the police feel better, but I suspect no life has ever been saved because of this.

 

[rock jock]

I really don't see this as any kind of special "right." It is more a matter of practicality. I don't show my DL to anybody that I would be concerned about.

 

[VARifleman]

So, we've got 1 or 2 civilians with "war" stories...anyone else NOT in LE wanna chip in? Because I'm sure we've got ya beat....(Remember that Marine I mentioned I worked for...he had a guy show up at his residence armed with a bat one time....)

A friend of mine shot an off duty LEO that tried to rob his store. Because my friend is white, and the BG was black, he got all sorts of threats of violence for simply protecting himself, his employees, and his buisness.

As pointed out, there should be no 4473, and information on addresses and such should not be available due to privacy. This goes for EVERYONE, not just LEO's, that's the problem we have with the current law. It's not constitutional per the 14th amendment.

 

[Kestrel]

pax - WELL SAID!

I don't think anyone here is saying LEOs shouldn't have privacy... We are saying WE SHOULD ALL BE ALLOWED OUR PRIVACY. Whether LEO or Civilian. Odds and percentages have NOTHING to do with it.

Good grief - is that so hard for LE and GVMT to understand?

 

[stevelyn]

My DL says I live in a post office box. When filling out the 4473 you are asked to put down your residence address. You are also asked if you are addicted to drugs and alcohol, convicted of crimes.........ya'll know the drill.
My point is that there is no documentation required to show you told the truth on the questions and in my experience I haven't had to show anything confirming my physical address. My identity is what's being confirmed as well as my criminal history on the NICS check.

Now as far as LE trying to remain anonymous by using a front address on their DLs, having a marked take-home vehicle parked in the driveway kinda makes that one a useless argument.

 

[Walt Sherrill]

Centac wrote:

And how many people have you put in prison?

It is really rare for law officers to be the victim of revenge crimes, but it is by no means out of the realm of possibility. Complaining that they have a distinction that you dont seems petty and spiteful. You would deprive us of this just because you cannot have it?

I don't think anyone really wants to make your life more dangerous. (My son is an LEO and I'm sensitive to some of the issues associated with that profession.)

The puzzling part of this discussion, for me, is seeing how writing anything on a 4473 puts you or any other LEO at risk? Get a second ID for FFLs, maybe?

How in hell is using an LEO agency's address going to do anything to make an LEO life less danagerous? Do you think the bad guys, when they come to get you, are going to go flipping through an FFL's files to find you? Are they going to rifle through cash register receipts at the grocery store to find out where you live? If they know you SHOP THERE, they know how to find you.

Do the checks you write have that same ID address? How about your wife's checks?

Do your power, phone and electricity bills go that that Agency's address? How 'bout your charge cards? If not, someone with a friend at any of those businesses can find you. Easily.

If the bad guy wants you, can't he just follow you home at night, or ask around? Or come after you on duty? It shouldn't take a private investigator to find out where a particular LEO lives or works.

That special ID thing seems like very superficial protection, at best.