Livermoron
Regular Member
imported post
Below is the letter that is now on its way to KPIX-TV.
Carry On,
Livermoron
January 15, 2010
KPIX-TV
Broadcast Journalism Staff
855 Battery Street
San Francicso, California 94111
Jon Schwartz
Bay Area Open Carry
Livermore, California
http://www.baoc.us
Regarding: Lead Story on “Open Carry”, Evening News Broadcast, January 14[sup]th[/sup] 2010
Dear Sirs & Madams,
As you may be aware there is a growing movement of individuals around the country, and here in California, which advocate and practice the open carry of firearms. The primary reasons generally orated by Open Carriers as to why they Open Carry are personal protection and the exercise of a Constitutional Right. Much like the freedom of the press, the right of the people to keep and bear arms is crucial to the survival of this great nation.
In your broadcast of last night you chose to begin the story on Open Carry with the words, “…Gun owners are flaunting it.” I cannot adequately explain my strong feelings that this inflammatory statement served only to editorialize the “news story” from the outset. When I studied Journalism I was always instructed to only report the facts of the news and save editorials for the editorial section. To say that gun owners are “flaunting it” by practicing Open Carry makes about as much sense as to say that people who are walking are flaunting their legs.
Ownership of firearms, and the open carry of them, is absolutely legal in California. Further, the open carry of firearms is largely the only practical means for law-abiding citizens to be secure in their person at all times. The simple fact is that Police have no requirement to protect you. Due to the nearly unattainable requirements in the application process to obtain a Concealed Carry Weapons Permit in California, Open Carry of a firearm is the only option for the average law-abiding citizen. Truly, “when seconds count the police are only minutes away” and you are on your own if your life is threatened. This is not conjecture; it is fact.
If given the choice I will actively defend myself and my precious family against any attacker with deadly force as warranted. I always, of course, take steps to not place myself, or my family, in obviously dangerous situations. However, danger and evil actively seeks a target. You must always be vigilant in your personal security.
The premise for your news story (the January 14[sup]th[/sup] open letter written by Lt. Ray Lunny from the San Mateo County Sheriff’s Office on the topic of “Unloaded Open Carry”) is an example of how poorly trained many law enforcement agencies are on this topic. This letter could also seen to be a standing open threat by law enforcement to law-abiding citizens that choose to protect themselves responsibly with a firearm by practicing Open Carry. The tactics apparently currently approved by the San Mateo County Sheriff’s Office do not make sense. The Sheriff’s Office intends to treat a citizen who is legally and safely carrying a firearm as if the citizen were a violent criminal until proven otherwise. This policy is just plain wrong.
Does the Sheriff’s Office also intend to pull over every driver on the road to complete a warrantless search of his or her vehicle at will? I do not think so. Under the 4[sup]th[/sup] Amendment we as Americans are afforded certain protections against such warrantless searches. The mere appearance of a firearm in public, especially legally carried openly in a holster, does not equal commission of a crime, period. This knee-jerk reactionary policy by law enforcement outlined in the San Mateo County letter needs to be quickly and closely studied and revised so as to not infringe on the rights we enjoy as a people.
The San Mateo County staff, such as 911 Operators, dispatchers and officers in the field, need to ask the right questions when a “man with a gun” call comes in. Basic questions like, “What is the person doing? Is this person doing anything threatening? Is the gun in a holster? Does this person appear to be intoxicated?” seem to be a good place to start. If the Sheriff’s Office is not already doing this they should immediately start. The officer(s) on the way to the radio call will then have an informed expectation of what the situation will be when arriving at the location. Then, a low-key, safe and even cordial meeting between officer and citizen may take place. The interaction to confirm the “load condition”, under California Penal Code Section 12031(e), of the firearm might only take 30 seconds and not have any unfortunate consequences.
In conclusion, I will tell you that people who participate in the Open Carry “movement” are not out looking for trouble. We are not seeking to test the law and law enforcement at every turn. We are not yelling, picketing, or causing riots. We are not accosting people on the street and forcing unwanted information down their throats. We do, however, seek to be safe and continue to lawfully exercise our rights as Americans. We do seek to further public awareness that this responsible practice is as legal and as common as going to the movies, walking your dog, or spending time with your family.
Ask anyone who has been the victim of a violent crime if they wished they’d had the means to defend against their aggressor at the time. The logical and likely answer will be a resounding “yes”. I do not wish to be a victim at all and will stand up for my rights as a law-abiding American citizen.
Sincerely,
Below is the letter that is now on its way to KPIX-TV.
Carry On,
Livermoron
January 15, 2010
KPIX-TV
Broadcast Journalism Staff
855 Battery Street
San Francicso, California 94111
Jon Schwartz
Bay Area Open Carry
Livermore, California
http://www.baoc.us
Regarding: Lead Story on “Open Carry”, Evening News Broadcast, January 14[sup]th[/sup] 2010
Dear Sirs & Madams,
As you may be aware there is a growing movement of individuals around the country, and here in California, which advocate and practice the open carry of firearms. The primary reasons generally orated by Open Carriers as to why they Open Carry are personal protection and the exercise of a Constitutional Right. Much like the freedom of the press, the right of the people to keep and bear arms is crucial to the survival of this great nation.
In your broadcast of last night you chose to begin the story on Open Carry with the words, “…Gun owners are flaunting it.” I cannot adequately explain my strong feelings that this inflammatory statement served only to editorialize the “news story” from the outset. When I studied Journalism I was always instructed to only report the facts of the news and save editorials for the editorial section. To say that gun owners are “flaunting it” by practicing Open Carry makes about as much sense as to say that people who are walking are flaunting their legs.
Ownership of firearms, and the open carry of them, is absolutely legal in California. Further, the open carry of firearms is largely the only practical means for law-abiding citizens to be secure in their person at all times. The simple fact is that Police have no requirement to protect you. Due to the nearly unattainable requirements in the application process to obtain a Concealed Carry Weapons Permit in California, Open Carry of a firearm is the only option for the average law-abiding citizen. Truly, “when seconds count the police are only minutes away” and you are on your own if your life is threatened. This is not conjecture; it is fact.
If given the choice I will actively defend myself and my precious family against any attacker with deadly force as warranted. I always, of course, take steps to not place myself, or my family, in obviously dangerous situations. However, danger and evil actively seeks a target. You must always be vigilant in your personal security.
The premise for your news story (the January 14[sup]th[/sup] open letter written by Lt. Ray Lunny from the San Mateo County Sheriff’s Office on the topic of “Unloaded Open Carry”) is an example of how poorly trained many law enforcement agencies are on this topic. This letter could also seen to be a standing open threat by law enforcement to law-abiding citizens that choose to protect themselves responsibly with a firearm by practicing Open Carry. The tactics apparently currently approved by the San Mateo County Sheriff’s Office do not make sense. The Sheriff’s Office intends to treat a citizen who is legally and safely carrying a firearm as if the citizen were a violent criminal until proven otherwise. This policy is just plain wrong.
Does the Sheriff’s Office also intend to pull over every driver on the road to complete a warrantless search of his or her vehicle at will? I do not think so. Under the 4[sup]th[/sup] Amendment we as Americans are afforded certain protections against such warrantless searches. The mere appearance of a firearm in public, especially legally carried openly in a holster, does not equal commission of a crime, period. This knee-jerk reactionary policy by law enforcement outlined in the San Mateo County letter needs to be quickly and closely studied and revised so as to not infringe on the rights we enjoy as a people.
The San Mateo County staff, such as 911 Operators, dispatchers and officers in the field, need to ask the right questions when a “man with a gun” call comes in. Basic questions like, “What is the person doing? Is this person doing anything threatening? Is the gun in a holster? Does this person appear to be intoxicated?” seem to be a good place to start. If the Sheriff’s Office is not already doing this they should immediately start. The officer(s) on the way to the radio call will then have an informed expectation of what the situation will be when arriving at the location. Then, a low-key, safe and even cordial meeting between officer and citizen may take place. The interaction to confirm the “load condition”, under California Penal Code Section 12031(e), of the firearm might only take 30 seconds and not have any unfortunate consequences.
In conclusion, I will tell you that people who participate in the Open Carry “movement” are not out looking for trouble. We are not seeking to test the law and law enforcement at every turn. We are not yelling, picketing, or causing riots. We are not accosting people on the street and forcing unwanted information down their throats. We do, however, seek to be safe and continue to lawfully exercise our rights as Americans. We do seek to further public awareness that this responsible practice is as legal and as common as going to the movies, walking your dog, or spending time with your family.
Ask anyone who has been the victim of a violent crime if they wished they’d had the means to defend against their aggressor at the time. The logical and likely answer will be a resounding “yes”. I do not wish to be a victim at all and will stand up for my rights as a law-abiding American citizen.
Sincerely,