Jump to content

Oak Park Firearm Regulation Forum - Public Safety Issue


GarandCollector

Recommended Posts

:thinking: Comments on recommendations for local regulation of firearms – D. Schweig

Here's what happened during this part of the meeting:

 

David Schweig had put together a team of:

1. An M.D.

2. An R.N.

3. An attorney that specializes in domestic violence cases.

4. A retired school teacher

5. A village resident who grew up around firearms learning safety practices from her father.

 

David talked about Canada's failed gun registry.

the MD talked about mitigating risk through education and safety practices.

the RN talked about suicide rates and no correlation to gun ownership

the attorney talked about existing domestic violence law and resource access.

the teacher talked about education programs, specifically Eddie Eagle and brought samples.

 

They all had relevant facts and data, and they were all qualified to talk about the material

that was covered.

The board had a few questions at the end, and their segment took about 25 min total.

 

I don't think there were any other IC'ers there.

There were no reporters there, AFAIK.

There were some students in attendance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Latest commentary...

 

My link

 

Why vigilantes make lousy cops

 

Tuesday, April 17th, 2012 10:00 PM

 

By Ken Trainor

 

Staff writer

 

When I heard about George Zimmerman killing Trayvon Martin in Florida, I thought about the 1992 Clint Eastwood film, Unforgiven. I wondered if Zimmerman had ever killed a man before. I wondered how he was feeling about it.

 

"It's a heck of a thing, killing a man," says Eastwood's character, Will Munny, who has killed more than his share. "You take away all he's got and all he's ever gonna have."

 

The Schofield Kid (after killing someone for the first time) had just finished telling Munny, "It don't seem real ... how he ain't gonna never breathe again, ever ... how he's dead. All on account of pulling a trigger."

 

Right now, I suspect George Zimmerman would agree. It's a heck of a thing, killing a man.

 

But he "stood his ground."

 

Whatever comes of this case, of one thing we can be fairly certain: Mr. Zimmerman may think twice before he goes hunting "bad guys" again.

 

Zimmerman, it's probably safe to assume, thinks of himself as one of the "good guys." That's the problem with vigilantes — that righteous certainty.

 

Florida's self-defense law encourages gunslingers to "Stand Your Ground." The name of the law is a dead (so to speak) giveaway. It's all about machismo, defiance, fighting back (pre-emptively if necessary) against all the "bad guys" out there, real and imagined.

 

When I'm out walking at night, I know I'm innocent, that I'm not acting "suspicious," but I'm not the one defining that, am I? The guy concealing and carrying a loaded gun is defining it. If I make a "wrong" move, if I'm in the wrong place at the wrong time, I could be shot, maybe killed.

 

Whatever else we learn about this case, one thing seems pretty clear: Zimmerman was the protagonist. He initiated the contact.

 

By the time he ended it, was his life in danger? Or was he merely in danger of getting a sound thrashing? There's a difference, but a guy with a gun is not likely to make such fine distinctions.

 

Might this kid have been a hothead (or just having a bad night) who retaliated when confronted? If he did, was Zimmerman justified in shooting him?

 

Did Zimmerman show his gun first or did he conceal it until he fired? If he showed the gun, did Martin grab for it? If he did, was it because he was trying to attack Zimmerman or was he desperately trying to save his own life? At what point in such an altercation does "stand your ground" shift over to protecting Trayvon Martin? Would he have been justified in killing Zimmerman if he ended up with the gun? After all, his life, we now know, was clearly threatened.

 

Maybe Martin would have been more merciful with Zimmerman than Zimmerman was with him.

 

We'll never know for sure. Lack of witnesses makes this a "he said/he said" incident. Oops, I forgot. One of the "he"s is dead. It's now down to a "he said" case. Very convenient for Mr. Zimmerman.

 

This incident reminds us, as if we needed a reminder, that vigilantes make lousy cops. I guess the Bernard Goetz lesson has worn off. Was Zimmerman inspired in his pre-emptive law enforcement efforts by the Bush administration's pre-emptive invasion of Iraq (international vigilantism)? Were the two revenge-seekers in Tulsa, Okla. encouraged by the "stand your ground" laws in more than 20 states?

 

Creating a climate, it seems, has consequences, many of them unintended. If you have a gun and permission to use it, you're not necessarily going to wait for the other guy to possibly shoot first. Too risky. Safer to ask questions later.

 

But Mr. Zimmerman might think twice the next time.

 

Maybe he'll think about the film Body Heat, where Mickey Rourke, playing a two-bit criminal, reminds William Hurt's character about some advice he once received: "In any crime, there are at least 50 ways it can go wrong. If you're a genius, you can maybe anticipate 20. And you ain't no genius."

 

There are a lot of vigilante wanna-bes out there who either applaud George Zimmerman or think they could have avoided whatever mistakes he might have made. But vigilantism is a lot like committing a crime. As Zimmerman now knows, there are plenty of ways it can go wrong.

 

But maybe others think they could do better. They can tell the difference between a bad guy and a scared kid in the dark. They'll only shoot if their life is truly threatened. After all, they're the "good guys." I can't tell you how reassuring that is for the rest of us — because it's not.

 

Vigilantes make lousy cops because they have an ax to grind — or they wouldn't resort to being vigilantes in the first place. Their judgment is questionable, and reality just isn't as clear-cut as it is in all those "righteous revenge" action flicks that thrill them so. Life isn't so black and white — well, maybe in this case, though not the way Zimmerman figured.

 

A nationwide movement has begun to repeal these vigilante laws, and that's a bandwagon Oak Park should be jumping on. If it happens, Neighborhood Watch volunteer George Zimmerman may get his wish at last: Making all of us safer — from people like himself.

 

And if Trayvon Martin turns out to be the guilty party? It's still a heck of a thing to kill a man.

 

In Unforgiven, the Schofield Kid says, "Yeah, well, I guess they had it comin'."

 

To which the Clint Eastwood character replies, "We all got it comin', kid."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

someone needs to take in a copy of Massad Ayoob's Gun Proof Your Children. And say look, this is how police prevent their kids from getting hurt having a loaded gun in the house, this is how all the farm kids to our south survive having a loaded gun in the house, You can also apply this knowledge to power saws, swimming pools, and anything else that might endanger our children.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is the agenda for the April 24th Meeting. Is anyone planning to attend the meeting?

 

My link

 

AGENDA

Oak Park Board of Health

April 24, 2012, 6 PM

Village Hall – Room 101

 

1)Call to Order

2)Approval of Agenda

3)Approval of Minutes of March 27, 2012

4)Public Comment

5)Old Business:

a)2012 Work Plan - updates:

i)Cycling Safety – Ravi Grivois – Shah

ii)Chronic Disease

• Childhood Obesity – Margaret Provost-Fyfe

• Tobacco Education - Margaret Provost-Fyfe

• Skin Cancer Prevention – Margaret Provost-Fyfe for Rhoda Bernstein

iii)Mental Health

•Substance Abuse - update on IMPACT initiatives, Margaret Provost-Fyfe

iv) Create packet of materials for new BOH Commissioners - David Rechs

b)Discussion of draft recommendations regarding potential handgun legislation– Ravi Grivois Shah; Diana Diakite

6) Adjourn

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll be there. Word on the street is that the outcome will be positive.

 

On a quasi related note I'm going to crack up if they actually add manditory helmet to the current bicycle law: Amber front wheel reflector, red rear wheel reflector, horn that can be heard from at least a hundred feet, white front light, red reflector or light at night and manditory registration. I don't think I've ever seen a "legal" bicycle in Oak Park.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just think of the revenue they could generate.

 

I'll be there. Word on the street is that the outcome will be positive.

 

On a quasi related note I'm going to crack up if they actually add manditory helmet to the current bicycle law: Amber front wheel reflector, red rear wheel reflector, horn that can be heard from at least a hundred feet, white front light, red reflector or light at night and manditory registration. I don't think I've ever seen a "legal" bicycle in Oak Park.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The draft recommendation from the BOH....

 

http://www.oakpark.com/News/Articles/04-26-2012/Oak_Park_public_health_board_opposes_handgun_restrictions

 

Oak Park public health board opposes handgun restrictions

 

Thursday, April 26th, 2012 6:41 PM

 

By Anna Lothson

Staff Reporter

 

The Oak Park Board of Health was tasked by village trustees with reviewing options for handgun regulation in the village after the 2010 U.S. Supreme Court decision that overturned Oak Park's ban on the possession of handguns. Meeting Tuesday evening, the health board reached preliminary recommendations that the village not pursue specific regulations such as a handgun registry or mandatory handgun training.

The health board's review process will continue in the coming months and the village board will not receive formal recommendations on the subject until late summer or into the fall. The health board's recommendations are completely advisory and final decisions are left to the village board.

At the health board's meeting, seven draft proposals were discussed related to the matter. These consisted of a local handgun registry; mandatory training requirements for handgun owners; and mandatory requirements for handgun storage or use of trigger locks; mandatory reporting of lost or stolen guns within 72 hours; licensing of gun dealers, limitations on location of gun dealers; and voluntary education campaigns and other initiatives.

Of the seven proposals on the table, the board indicated it was against all except two. The board expressed support for a proposal regarding voluntary education campaigns and other initiatives. The only proposal the board did not indicate a position on was the mandatory reporting of lost or stolen hand guns within 72 hours.

The draft report from the health board will now be reviewed over the next month by Simone Boutet, the acting Village Attorney.

According to the health board's draft report, it stated while most members of the health board "prefer to live in a community free from firearms, the OPBoH recommends against most legislation that mandates registries, licensing and regulations within the jurisdiction of Oak Park."

A number of reasons were discussed why the board recommended against implementing such proposals, but a majority were focused on a lack of evidence indicating that implementing the policies would have an impact on public safety, according to the draft report. Other reasons to recommend against adopting the five policies cited that other statewide laws already prevent such efforts, such as having a local handgun registry.

As for the proposal of mandatory reporting of lost or stolen guns within 72 hours, the board suggested to not recommend for or against the issue, rather it was expressed that the village board could lobby state officials to pass a law on this matter so it would be dealt with in all communities.

Margaret Provost-Fyfe, Oak Park's public health director is the staff liaison for the health board. She said in an interview Thursday that each of the draft proposals will be looked at as a way for the health board to decide how the village could mitigate the issue.

"They are really concerned about violence as a public safety issue," she said, "And how [the legislation] can impact violence in the community."

Overall, she said the board's findings and recommendations were based on more than two years of research that stems from evidence from medical and health journals and studies.

Moving forward, Provost-Fyfe said the language of the draft proposals will be looked at and discussed by the health board at a future meeting. The health board's recommendations will then be relayed to the village board once proper documents are prepared and a procedural vote is taken by the health board. The village board, however, may not see the issue on its agenda until sometime in the fall, she said

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From The Oak park Patch - a Chicago Sun Times local paper...

 

http://oakpark.suntimes.com/opinions/sassone/12227887-452/a-concealed-pitch-for-concealed-weapons.html

 

 

A concealed pitch for concealed weapons

 

By Paul Sassone Columnist April 30, 2012 2:16PM

 

 

Paul Sassone

 

 

I am against crime.

How the Illinois Sheriffs’ Association knows this, I can’t say.

Lucky guess.

Anyway, because I am against crime and — as the letter the group sent me puts it — “ ... fed up with people who turn to crime as an easy way to make a living with no responsibility to society,’’ I should send $20 to become an associate member of the Illinois Sheriffs’ Association.

I was intrigued. I really am sick of people who illegally make money with no responsibility to society. So, I assumed the Illinois Sheriffs’ Association was going to arrest and put in jail all those speculators and bad-mortgage brokers and Ponzi-schemers and recklessly greedy Wall-streeters who brought our economy to its knees and ruined the lives of millions.

About time, too!

But as I read the letter I didn’t see anything about that kind of crime. One whole side of the two-sided letter urged me to support pending Illinois legislation that would permit us to carry concealed weapons. The legislation would, the letter stated, “ ... allow law abiding citizens to possess and carry a concealed firearm for the purpose of protecting their life and families — although each Sheriff has his own position, a majority of Illinois sheriffs are in favor of concealed-carry legislation.’’

Passing this legislation, the letter went on, is a priority for the Illinois Sheriffs’ Association.

I would have thought that law-enforcement officials would want fewer people to be walking around toting iron. It seems to me that if we all carried concealed guns a law-enforcement officer’s job would become that much more dangerous.

But what do I know?

I’m one of those goofy Oak Parkers who thought it was a good idea to ban the sale and ownership of handguns in town.

As a resident of Cook County, I wanted to find out if the Cook County Sheriff supports the concealed-carry legislation.

So, I sent the sheriff an email and asked.

It’s been a couple of weeks now and I haven’t heard back.

Maybe the county board president doesn’t let the sheriff have computer privileges.

An economy measure, probably.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Latest commentary...

 

My link

 

Trainer is a moron. Every article he writes is pure propagandist garbage. I can't stand listening to any more of his verbal diarrhea. And it sounds like Sassone is the same way. These morons ignore fact, and argue pure emotion, without anything backing it up. They use nothing but old hackneyed phrases to try and fool you into agreement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is the latest commentary (hot of the presses as it is):

 

http://www.oakpark.com/News/Articles/05-01-2012/Oak_Park_health_board_was_right_to_stand_down_on_guns,_for_now

 

 

Oak Park health board was right to stand down on guns, for now

Tuesday, May 1st, 2012 10:00 PM

 

By Editorial

 

The moment will come again when it is right for Oak Park to join a wider battle to eliminate the scourge of handgun violence in our country. But in this moment of perverse partisanship in the national arena, the levers of power are set just too firmly in the pro-gun direction for this village to tilt again at expensive windmills.

The Oak Park Board of Health got it right last week when it made preliminary recommendations that the village forego restrictions on handgun ownership following the 2010 Supreme Court ruling, which overturned Oak Park and Chicago's brave effort at handgun control.

The health board was right in noting that Oak Park, standing alone or with a handful of like-minded communities, is not going to be effective in reducing violence through a series of limited restrictions on owning a handgun. The highest court in the land, now tucked neatly in the pocket of the NRA, is not going to allow any substantive handgun restrictions.

Despite living on the edge of a tough West Side riddled with gun mayhem, this is a time for Oak Park to seek other means to protect its citizens — and we are not referring to concealed carry laws. We need to wait for, and work for, the tide to turn, for new Supreme Court members to arrive.

Oak Park and its taxpayers still wait for clarity on just what the legal costs of the joint City of Chicago/Village of Oak Park defense of handgun bans at the Supreme Court will cost us. It has the potential to be substantial. While we remain troubled that Oak Park's financial exposure was not more clearly set in advance, we don't begrudge the village's long-shot defense of the local gun ban.

But we do know in the present circumstances — financial and political — that discretion in making this fight is the better part of valor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is the latest commentary (hot of the presses as it is):

 

http://www.oakpark.com/News/Articles/05-01-2012/Oak_Park_health_board_was_right_to_stand_down_on_guns,_for_now

 

 

Oak Park health board was right to stand down on guns, for now

Tuesday, May 1st, 2012 10:00 PM

 

By Editorial

 

 

At first when I read that I was mad at all the BS coming at me, then I realized this moron is basically admitting defeat. Then I wasnt so mad anymore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Here is the agenda for the May meeting:

 

 

http://www.oak-park....alth_agenda.pdf

 

If you require assistance to participate in any Village program or activity, contact the ADA Coordinator at 708.358,5430 or e-mail building@oak-park.us at least 48 hours before the scheduled activity.

 

AGENDA

Oak Park Board of Health

May 22, 2012, 6 PM

Village Hall – Room 101

1) Call to Order

2) Approval of Agenda

3) Approval of Minutes of April 24, 2012

4) Public Comment

5) Old Business:

 

a) 2012 Work Plan

  1. Board of Health recommendations regarding potential handgun legislation: vote on final recommendations to Village Board
  2. Cycling Safety : Bicycle Helmet Safety in Oak Park:: What the Evidence States presentation, Dr. Ravi Grivois - Shah

6) New Business

7) Adjourn

 

Here is a link to the minutes from the March meeting:

 

http://www.oak-park.us/public/pdfs/Boards_Commissions%20Agendas/Board%20of%20Health/2012/minutes/03.27.12_board_of_health_minutes.pdf

 

1

 

Board of Health

 

March 27, 2012

 

Village Hall – 101

 

Meeting Minutes

 

1. Call to Order: @ 6:05 PM

 

Present: Chair; Commissioners Diakite, Bernstein,

 

Dr. Grivois-Shah, Miller, Rechs, Pimentel, (Deno Andrews, ex-officio)

 

Absent: Dr. Mbekeani

 

2. Approval of agenda: Agenda approved.

 

3. Approval of Minutes: Minutes of February 28, 2012 meeting approved

 

4. Public Comment: None

 

5. New Business: Karen Rozmus, VOP Waste Reduction Coordinator

 

Composting pilot project in 1200 homes in southwest Oak Park

 

Composting of kitchen waste including meat, bones and other composting

 

materials

 

Composted material will be available to residents

 

6. Old Business:

 

a) Work Plan – updates

 

i) Cycling safety – Ravi Grivois-Shah will make a presentation on his

 

research at the June BOH meeting.

 

ii) Chronic disease

 

a. Childhood obesity - Margaret advised that the PHC will present to

 

the Village Board their strategic plan to address obesity on Monday

 

April 2. The Health Department is involved in researching

 

recommendations to enhance the current child care nutrition

 

standards

 

b. Rhoda advised that the tanning bill legislation is up for the third

 

reading in the Illinois House

 

iii) Mental health

 

a. Anti-stigma campaign – Rhoda will follow-up regarding the progress

 

of this campaign

 

b. Substance Abuse – Margaret advised of the ordinance before the

 

Village Board addressing possession of tobacco, alcohol and

 

cannabis by minors

 

iv) Access to health and dental care: Margaret advised of planned

 

Village website overhaul which will facilitate residents finding

 

information on health and dental care

 

v) Create packet of materials for new commissioners: David Rechs is

 

assigned to this task.

 

2

 

B) Comments on recommendations for local regulation of firearms:

 

Margaret advised BOH members of the plan and timeline for moving

 

recommendations on firearms regulations to the Village Board.

 

David Schweig introduced individuals to speak:

 

i) John Erickson: recommends and training of residents on safe gun use

 

ii) George Sanders: states that there is no causal relationship

 

between gun and suicides; state and federal laws already

 

address domestic violence/gun ownership

 

iii) Joe Lowrie: discussed guns and suicide rates

 

iv) Harold Stoetzner: recommends

Child Guard USA and Eddie

 

Eagle

education programs

 

v) Mary Ucinski: States that education (on firearms) is most

 

important

 

Questions from BOH members.

 

7. Motion to adjourn at @ 7:45 PM

 

Respectfully submitted,

 

Margaret Provost-Fyfe, Health Director

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...