Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: FOIC did not like my PA13-3 argument ---- possible appeal?

  1. #1
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838

    FOIC did not like my PA13-3 argument ---- possible appeal?

    Well, I filed a FOIA request in the first qtr of the year .. asking for records relating to guns that a town owns.

    DESPP did their std job of producing a letter (CGS 1-210 (d)) for the town to withhold various records related to guns they owned.

    I argued that the DESPP letter is worthless because our state now requires us to provide detailed information concerning our guns under PA13-3 registration requirements. And if this creates a safety risk then PA13-3 would violate the 2nd amendment.

    But since I'm seeking records, I argued that the state, by passing PA13-3, has made a legislative finding that disclosure of information regarding guns does not create a safety risk and the town should be required to provide records regarding their guns.

    The commission, full of democrats, did not see any conflict between DESPP's finding that disclosing records that show the guns that the town owns creates individual safety risks to individual persons and PA13-3's requirement that we disclose our gun information.

    Don't know if I should just let this FOIC case decision stand as it is or to appeal and push more for disclosure...

    Right now, I see the ruling as being one where they have found a safety risk exists for those that disclose.
    And this would be an issue regarding PA13-3's registration requirements under our 2nd amendment.

    Forum members...what do you think?

  2. #2
    Regular Member Superlite27's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    God's Country, Missouri
    Posts
    1,279
    Pardon my comments from the "peanut gallery" as I'm from out of state and unfamiliar with your situation, or the bureaucratic process you seem to be going through, but one thing I am in HUGE support of is any line of questioning or inquiry that shines a spotlight on hypocrisy concerning my pet issues.

    (One of my favorite things is to ask the most progressive, feminist, pro-choice liberals if they are in favor of a woman's right to choose whether or not to use a firearm to protect her own body, or if the government should make that decision for her.....then stand back and watch the gears in their heads begin to lock up.)

    It sounds as if the 'gubmint in your area seems to think ownership of firearms needs to be disclosed "for public safety".....but when asked about their ownership of firearms, they refuse to disclose ownership "for public safety".

    I would definitely ride the horse until it dies. But, that's just how I am and my 2 cent contribution. I would, at minimum, write letters and make inquiries to authority figures involved clarifying the dilemma of whether or not the disclosure of firearm ownership is a matter of public safety. If it is, I'd kick the horse until I got a satisfactory answer on why, if disclosure of gun ownership makes society safer, does the city refuse to participate in the disclosure they tout so highly.

    (While you're at it, ask them if high capacity magazines have any legitimate value for self-defense. If they parrot the old "high cap mags are only good for killing large amounts of people as quickly as possible" crap, ask them if their SWAT team issues them. If so, ask them why they need to kill large numbers of people as quickly as possible. That's another one of my favorites.
    Last edited by Superlite27; 12-20-2013 at 01:48 PM.

  3. #3
    Accomplished Advocate BB62's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    3,887
    Quote Originally Posted by Superlite27 View Post
    ...One of my favorite things is to ask the most progressive, feminist, pro-choice liberals if they are in favor of a woman's right to choose whether or not to use a firearm to protect her own body, or if the government should make that decision for her.....then stand back and watch the gears in their heads begin to lock up...
    I have the OP on ignore, and don't care a whit about his latest endeavors/thoughts/ramblings, but I LOVE your approach to "pro-choice" people.


  4. #4
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838

    I know...

    Quote Originally Posted by BB62 View Post
    I have the OP on ignore, and don't care a whit about his latest endeavors/thoughts/ramblings, but I LOVE your approach to "pro-choice" people.

    I know you looked lol

  5. #5
    Centurion
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Pleasant Grove, Utah, USA
    Posts
    3,828
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    Well, I filed a FOIA request in the first qtr of the year .. asking for records relating to guns that a town owns.

    DESPP did their std job of producing a letter (CGS 1-210 (d)) for the town to withhold various records related to guns they owned.

    I argued that the DESPP letter is worthless because our state now requires us to provide detailed information concerning our guns under PA13-3 registration requirements. And if this creates a safety risk then PA13-3 would violate the 2nd amendment.

    But since I'm seeking records, I argued that the state, by passing PA13-3, has made a legislative finding that disclosure of information regarding guns does not create a safety risk and the town should be required to provide records regarding their guns.

    The commission, full of democrats, did not see any conflict between DESPP's finding that disclosing records that show the guns that the town owns creates individual safety risks to individual persons and PA13-3's requirement that we disclose our gun information.

    Don't know if I should just let this FOIC case decision stand as it is or to appeal and push more for disclosure...

    Right now, I see the ruling as being one where they have found a safety risk exists for those that disclose.
    And this would be an issue regarding PA13-3's registration requirements under our 2nd amendment.

    Forum members...what do you think?
    I want to ask, "Since when do you care what anyone on this forum thinks?" but that might be taken as a potential rules violation, so I won't!
    RIGHTS don't exist without RESPONSIBILITY!
    If one is not willing to stand for his rights, he doesn't have any Rights.
    I will strive to stand for the rights of ANY person, even those folks with whom I disagree!
    As said by SVG--- "I am not anti-COP, I am PRO-Citizen" and I'll add, PRO-Constitution.
    If the above makes me a RADICAL or EXTREME--- So be it!

    Life Member NRA
    Life Member GOA
    2nd amendment says.... "...The right of the people to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED!"

  6. #6
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by JoeSparky View Post
    I want to ask, "Since when do you care what anyone on this forum thinks?" but that might be taken as a potential rules violation, so I won't!
    Hey, thanks for your input ... don't forget to take your medication !

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •