Wisconsin: "Ann Frisch: Secrecy worsens carry bill "

Status
Not open for further replies.

cuchulainn

Member
Joined
Dec 24, 2002
Messages
3,297
Location
Looking for a cow that Queen Meadhbh stole
Whaaaa! Whawhawha Whaaaaaaaaaa!

from the Capital Times

http://www.madison.com/captimes/opinion/column/guest/60615.php
Ann Frisch: Secrecy worsens carry bill

By Ann Frisch
November 6, 2003

The so-called Personal Protection Act now making its way through the Legislature would allow concealed weapons virtually anywhere in the state, under the illogical theory that this would enhance public safety. But the most egregious part of this bill is its secrecy.

As written, the proposed bill (SB-214 and AB-444) would exempt "records created or kept under this section" from the state's open records law. Further, it directs that any records be recoverable only by licensees' names and license numbers to prevent the public - even the sheriff - from getting lists of weapons carriers in their community.

"After entering the information that it receives (rom licensees) the department may not store, maintain, format, sort, or access the information in any way other than by the name of the licensee or the identification number assigned to the licensee," the bill declares.

This secrecy stands in stark contrast to the bulk of Wisconsin law. Records of other people licensed by the state (for example, social workers, acupuncturists, dieticians, barbers, funeral directors, etc.) are available to the public by name, address, license number, gender, ZIP code and the dates when licenses are granted and renewed. This disclosure helps assure the public that state requirements for these professions are met.

There are many reasons to object to this law, which Gov. Jim Doyle has promised to veto. (Republicans in the Legislature have promised to attempt an override.) It would let Wisconsin residents over 21 become licensed to carry concealed handguns, electric guns, tear gas guns and knives other than a switchblade, virtually anywhere. People licensed in other states would also be allowed to carry concealed weapons in Wisconsin under this law.

The penalties for going into a prohibited place - an elementary classroom, for example - could be as low as nothing and no jail time ("not more than $1,000 or imprisoned for not more than 90 days or both"). The penalties for obtaining a license under false premises are as low as $500 and no jail time.

But it is secrecy that takes this bad idea and makes it truly frightening. The bill would create, in effect, a secret police force whose mission it is to protect the public in a way comparable to other police, whose weapons, qualifications and past major discipline are matters of public record.

Proponents of the gun law argue the state needs to shield the identities of people carrying concealed weapons in order to protect those who do not. The theory is that criminals will use these records to target citizens who are, for whatever reason, not packing heat.

This is ridiculous, not in the least because even people not licensed to carry concealed weapons may still legally have a weapon in their home or business.

Members of the public have every right to know who is being licensed to carry concealed weapons. We deserve to be able to tell a licensee that he or she may not come into our business or home. We deserve to be able to file complaints against people who misuse their state license to threaten people.

The exemptions added to the bill before it passed the state Senate in late October are meaningless without access to information as to who is licensed under this act. A domestic abuse shelter cannot know if someone coming to visit a resident is armed with a concealed and dangerous weapon. A parent with a child in a day care center or Head Start will never know - and cannot find out - if another parent or visitor has weapons on their person.

Finally, and most important, without access to public records, the public will never be able independently to evaluate the law, leaving it to bureaucrats and the NRA to tell us what we should think about it.

Pass this act if you will, legislators, but do no harm to our public right to know. It is the policy of this state that the public is entitled to the fullest possible information regarding the affairs of government as is compatible with the conduct of governmental business. We do not need or want secret police.


Ann Frisch is professor of education and human services at the University of Wisconsin-Oshkosh and a public representative on the Wisconsin Freedom of Information Council. Your Right to Know is a monthly column produced by the council, a media group devoted to protecting public access to meetings and records.


Published: 7:27 AM 11/06/03
Copyright 2003 The Capital Times
 
Alarmist nonsense.

I particularly like this part:

"A domestic abuse shelter cannot know if someone coming to visit a resident is armed with a concealed and dangerous weapon."

I don't see how the law has anything to do with this. If a wife-beater is going to the shelter to shoot his wife, he's going to do it whether he's got a permit or not.

Imagine this scenario: "Well, I was going to go bust into the shelter and shoot my wife. But then I remembered, heck, I ain't got no permit to carry a gun. Didn't wanna get prosecuted for illegally carrying the gun, so I just dropped the whole idea of murdering my wife."

It is still a source of bemusement to me that these folks can't distinguish between an object and an action. :rolleyes:
 
"A domestic abuse shelter cannot know if someone coming to visit a resident is armed with a concealed and dangerous weapon."

Hmmmmm......

All the Domestic Abuse shelters that I know about*** do not allow visitors, other than legal counsel, LEO, etc. Do not allow visits from the abuser. And those shelters kept the location confidential.



***(Mom was on the board of a couple of shelters before she passed away)
 
We deserve to be able to file complaints against people who misuse their state license to threaten people.

Ummm....

If someone uses a gun to threaten you, how is citizen access to the CCW records going to help identify that person?

The police are the people who'll investigate the complaint, and they will have access to the CCW database.

Members of the public have every right to know who is being licensed to carry concealed weapons. We deserve to be able to tell a licensee that he or she may not come into our business or home.

Aside from the point that not all licensees carry a gun at all times, just how is the average citizen going to get hold of this information even if it is (and it is here in Indiana) public record?


Ann Frisch is professor of education and human services at the University of Wisconsin-Oshkosh and a public representative on the Wisconsin Freedom of Information Council.

Apparently a firm grasp of logic isn't required in order to be a professor of education. :rolleyes:
 
This list of occupations (social workers, acupuncturists, dieticians, barbers, funeral directors, etc) she provides are all people who interact with the public by providing a service. A CHL holder does not provide a service to the public (per say). It is much more like a driver's license.

Do we have free and open records on driver's license holders? Car titles? Criminal records?

Wouldn't you be more interested to know if the parent you are sending you kids over to play with has a criminal record than a CHL?

The only benefit to having the names in public record could possibly be when the system is a may-issue so that people can expose any corruption of local CLEOs in issuing permits. Shall-issue systems have no need for public records. Vermont has no records. Look at all the bloodshed there :rolleyes:

-Pytron
 
The bill would create, in effect, a secret police force whose mission it is to protect the public in a way comparable to other police, whose weapons, qualifications and past major discipline are matters of public record.

Huh?

Do we have free and open records on driver's license holders? Car titles? Criminal records?

Actually, in my state(MN) and in yours (WA), yes!

In WA:
http://www.leg.wa.gov/RCW/index.cfm?fuseaction=section&section=42.17.250
RCW 42.17.260
Each agency, in accordance with published rules, shall make available for public inspection and copying all public records, unless the record falls within the specific exemptions of subsection (6) of this section, RCW 42.17.310, 42.17.315, or other statute which exempts or prohibits disclosure of specific information or records.

The exclusions are things like student records, medical records, trade secrets, open police investigations, etc.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top