PDA

View Full Version : Ab334 letter - Good or Bad?


Bizcuits
08-31-2007, 9:29 AM
To whom to may concern;

I speak as a voter, citizen, worker, tax paying American. After reviewing AB334 Mandatory Loss/Theft Reporting, I feel I must speak out against this Assembly Bill. This Bill places the ability of deeming a person "criminal" for simply not reporting a crime. While yes stolen firearms do need to be reported, but punishing the reporting party only deters them from wanting to report the crime.

A Law enforcement officer during POST "Police Officer Standards and Training" learns one of the most important missions during an incident is to keep respect with the reporting party. This bill handicaps law enforcement officers abilities to accomplish this mission. Instead of reporting parties being held as good citizens for reporting the crime of stolen firearms, they will now be deemed as possible criminals.

Officers and CSO's who are placed in the position of interviewing the reporters will now be tasked with questioning the credibility of the reporting party. When victimized citizens have their intergity questioned and sought to be possible criminals, the relations of law enforcement and communities will only become further complicated.

As a Californian, I am against AB334 Mandatory Loss/Theft Reporting.

- Insert name here

This was my first email against an Assembly Bill, working on some others. Yes I know I'm alittle late, but today is my first day off in over a month. Anyways I'd appericate any feedback on what to add in future letters / emails. I am trying to take a different approach then what most people take.

rod
08-31-2007, 11:10 AM
To whom to may concern;Recommend addressing to "insert name here", "Congressman", or "Senator". "To Whom it May Concern" isn't very direct and sounds a little canned and will probably be treated as such.

I speak as a voter, citizen, worker, tax paying American. After reviewing AB334 Mandatory Loss/Theft Reporting, I feel I must speak out against this Assembly Bill. This Bill places the ability of deeming a person "criminal" for simply not reporting a crime. While yes, stolen firearms do need to be reported, but punishing the reporting party only deters them from wanting to report the crime. I'm not following this line of thought. I can't think of a reason why someone wouldn't report a stolen firearm on purpose. I can see why this bill is unfair to someone who has a firearm stolen while on vacation and doesn't discover the theft for a period of time, making that person a criminal.
A Law enforcement officer during POST "Police Officer Standards and Training" learns one of the most important missions during an incident is to keep respect with the reporting party. This bill handicaps law enforcement officers abilities to accomplish this mission. Instead of reporting parties being held as good citizens for reporting the crime of stolen firearms, they will now be deemed as possible criminals. This sounds like speculation and not backed up by any studies or evidence. I recommend sticking to facts, case history, and statements that are supportable.

Officers and CSO's who are placed in the position of interviewing the reporters will now be tasked with questioning the credibility of the reporting party. I think that's always been the case. When victimized citizens have their intergity questioned and sought to be possible criminals, the relations of law enforcement and communities will only become further complicated.

As a Californian, I am against AB334 Mandatory Loss/Theft Reporting.

- Insert name here

These are just my opinions. Here's a grain of salt "." to take with it.

Bizcuits
08-31-2007, 11:58 AM
Thanks for the heads up, want to keep these letters short and sweet to the point. Not very good at this stuff, but its better then sitting and doing nothing. I'll start inculding Oppose in the email subject line.

rod
08-31-2007, 12:16 PM
You're off to a great start. Keep it up. The important thing is to let them know your position instead of not saying anything.

Piper
08-31-2007, 12:34 PM
You could say something like, (insert name) you will have bad Karma if you don't oppose AB 334.