Gun range reports law-abiding customers to police.

[CAJUNLAWYER]

Well if you guys don't think that someone from the government is keeping an eye on this forum I got a bridge to sell you.
(Sits back and waits for the fireworks to really start)

 

[monet61]

That wouldn't bother me but I wonder why people get in an uproar over something that LEs are working weeding out the criminal elements.

I have nothing to hide. Do you?

With respect; I think you are missing the point of the post. I have nothing to hide either, (well maybe that one thing), but having your name run through a law enforcement data base of any sort with no evidence of wrong doing, is just wrong. YMMV.

 

[jdh]

That wouldn't bother me but I wonder why people get in an uproar over something that LEs are working weeding out the criminal elements.

I have nothing to hide. Do you?

The legal system of this country was not based on the "Guilty until proven innocent" principle.

Since you have nothing to hide you won't mind if detectives just stroll in your home to conduct random searches with no notice, probable cause, or warrant.

 

[HalfStack]

The legal system of this country was not based on the "Guilty until proven innocent" principle.

Since you have nothing to hide you won't mind if detectives just stroll in your home to conduct random searches with no notice, probable cause, or warrant.

What! Have them find my porn?

 

[cmort666]

What! Have them find my porn?

Or your bible.

Buying a gun at a gunstore as a non-prohibited person, on a 4473 is no less legal than owning a bible.

If you're willing to have the police pry into one thing that's none of their business, why quibble about another?

 

[DLeeHarley]

You should amend or delete your post.

Our freedom is being taken away a little at a time. And this is how it starts.

The post should NOT be deleted. Know Thy enemy. I want to know what people are really thinking whether I agree or not. I don't want to hear just one side of the story. I can't believe people can just stand around with their heads in the sand, but I would rather know the truth than have someone lie to me and just tell me what they think I want to hear. Our rights were earned by the Blood and Sweat of our forefathers and we and I mean ALL OF US need to stand up to anyone, and I mean anyone who would attempt to either deny or limit them in ANY damn way. Please say a prayer for all those involved. And please be prepared because I really think it's only going to happen more often I'm sorry to say. Have a good one & keep your powder dry. Later,

 

[moosedog]

I would boycott that place like the plague.

 

[Badkarma 1]

Far from it to be me who would fan the flames of rampant paranoia...but as your all aware we gun owners aren't exactly liked by main stream media, or certain gov't types. Are we used to it? Yes! Have we really tried to change their opinions? Yes! Are they listening? NO!
Thing is right now with the recently defeated U.N. gun policy and a rather well timed attack on innocents in a theater make me wonder if we're being set up as "fall guys and gals"?
There's a saying:"The Price of Freedom is Eternal Vigilance!" and now more than ever we need to be watchful! Dale

 

[boatbum101]

The boat I work on is home ported in Milwaukee . This place used to be named Badger Arms . Yes they had their FFL yanked by BATF due to the fact that the majority of crime guns in the area were directly traced back to them . I imagine that to be able to keep business open they have to cooperate with local LE . There are many other places to shoot in the area . Due to all the conterversy I avoid the place . I work for a Gov't contractor & frankly don't need the hassle . Above facts can be verified by searching local newspapers etc .

 

[fat tom]

That wouldn't bother me but I wonder why people get in an uproar over something that LEs are working weeding out the criminal elements.

I have nothing to hide. Do you?

You need to give some serious thought to your position.
f.t.

 

[11B Lifer]

Back at ya

At our range, when we detect a Political Police Officer, we report it to the entire membership-just to run a check-after all the political police shouldn't have anything to hide.

 

[HalfStack]

You need to give some serious thought to your position.
f.t.

Actually I thought when you're in a public place you don't have much privacy.

 

[peyton]

When you are engaged in a lawful activity the police/government does not need to know your business. A gun range/business has rules and laws it must follow by city/state and federal statues.
It seems strange that the "local authories" have not been taken to task over the 8,000 plus criminal background checks, key word there is "Criminal." This is nothing more than a "fishing expedition". Now if I decide to associate with people who are committing a crime then I deserve the scrutiny, however I had the misguided thought that all citizens are innocent until proven guilty.

I enjoy this forum because it does have a civil dialogue on the matters of guns and responsible gun ownership.

 

[BuckeyeChuck]

Actually I thought when you're in a public place you don't have much privacy.

A business is not a public place, even if it is open to the public. It is private property. Furthermore, your statement is not sufficiently detailed to adequately address expectations.

While in a business, I have no expectation of not being seen or heard or even recognized both while inside, or while entering or exiting, the business. I may have an expectation that I am being recorded as many businesses (including the range to which I belong) have video security.

I was in Las Vegas two weeks ago and a guy on the Strip seemed a little upset that I took his picture. I ignored him and went on my way. I was taking a picture and he was in my shot. If you don't like having your picture taken on the street, the Strip is probably not a good choice.

But being recognized (or even photographed) in public is clearly not the same as having a business with whom I transact covertly sharing my information and activity with law enforcement. I say "clearly" here as a counter to your use of "Actually..." becaue the difference should be obvious and should be included in any statement discussing privacy.

I have no expectation that my local gun range will disclose my information and usage to local enforcement than my favorite restaurant will disclose my information and meals to the local health department. In both cases I expect that such disclosure will either be made only after my consent or as part of a legal proceeding in which I have no choice.

I struggle to understand what would motivate this business to engage in activity which they must know will inflame their customers. I struggle to understand why their customers would NOT be inflamed by this activity. I can only imagine what would happen if, say, Olive Garden announced that it had been tracking buying habits of names on credit cards and voluntarily providing that information to the CDC, for example. I suspect they'd have a rapid revenue decrease.

 

[dswancutt]

To me the question is this. Did the people who where shooting at this range know their names where being turned over to the police.
When you pull into Walley World, there are signs posted that the parking lot is under video surveillance and I believe also signs stating that you are under surveillance inside. I can then make the choice whether or not I will frequent that establishment.
I think it is called informed consent.
If the shooters where told and agreed that it was a condition of using the range, then no foul as they have given consnet. Otherwise, to me it opens up a whole can of privacy issues.

 

[Kanewpadle]

**********Edited for repeat of Public Service announcement **********​

I call your attention to the following rules:

2. Remember- opinions will differ. Get over it. State your opinion calmly, and allow others to state theirs. Discussion will be fine, but there is no need to take a thread into a verbal fistfight or shouting match.

3. Do NOT descend into personal attacks on a member.
Naiveté, or viewpoints different from yours are no reason to call a member an idiot or moron.

Focus on the issues, NOT each other.

 

[BuckeyeChuck]

Now if I decide to associate with people who are committing a crime then I deserve the scrutiny...

I'm not sure this reasoning is far removed from HalfStack's. Association, if it means "I know them" or "I work with them" or even in most cases "I conduct business with them" should not necessarily warrant scrutiny even if they commit a crime. This is especially true if "scrutiny" means "My personal information and purchase habits at a business should be given to law enforcement."

American society seems to have a significant division in it. There are the people who think that civil liberties should be assumed and only moved aside under due process of law (which itself should be carefully scrutinized). Then there are the people who think "If you have nothing to hide, then you shouldn't object." The former group thinks the latter is complicit in the trampling of civil rights. That's certainly what I think.

If I'm a member of a gun range (which I am) and the owner of the range commits a crime (say, sells a gun to felon) then I still don't see why law enforcement needs to know how often I frequent the range.

 

[quneur]

My $.02

Mike Allen started up a range membership after Dec 31, 2011. "since late 2009, he has run more than 25,000 names of range users through his system". This has been happening 2009. So, I can only assume consent was not given or we would have heard of this earlier.

In WA state, many outdoor shooting area have been shutdown by the DWF. There are no options except private ranges or else drive half a day to rural E. WA. That said;

I bet someone in the capitol is looking to implement the same system here in WA. If they can't control our guns or our ammo, they can try for our places to shoot. We have to nip this at the start or it will become a national fight - requiring background checks on gun range users prior to issuing an operating license.

I don't know about you, but every time there's a shooting incident where the shooter can't be found, I don't want to be scrutinized because I'm some gun nut list. I do know my local PD have knowledge of my guns due to the background check when buying, which is bad enough, but if I go to a range outside my neighborhood, I don't want to be in a position of 'he shot a 9mm at the range just prior to the incident'.

And who to say what becomes of the list? A state database? Some support tech person is going to say, 'Wow, this guy has a nice S&W collection. Here is his name, his address..."

 

[HalfStack]

I guess I've been pretty naive. I didn't think much about privacy as I should be but y'all made your point.

Sorry guys, I learned something alright.

 

[venomballistics]

I guess I've been pretty naive. I didn't think much about privacy as I should be but y'all made your point.

Sorry guys, I learned something alright.

many are naive. Just look at the numbers stated from the shop in question.
Step back and reflect from a few perspective other than your own.
I have nothing to hide either, however someone in witness protection does and probably has a greater need for arms proficiency than anyone here.
being from WI I can tell you that I never trusted Madison, Milwaukee, or EauClaire. these are the places in the state where all the poison comes from. since they form policy and training for the rest of the states LEO's it's not hard to find evidence of problems everywhere.
for my experience .. I find it very easy to believe that Milwaukee PD strong-armed the shop into reporting as a condition of operation.
WI is a battleground state in more ways than just elections. there are areas that set bad precedent that need to be challenged. You being from TX have no way of knowing how awry things are in some parts of the state. Therefore I'd much rather try to inform you of how things like this may be, and probably are, abused rather than punching you in the face over it.