I support most all of Hugh's comments. However, I think the bigger picture
is that some individuals want to push their political agendas by using
Public Records to personally attack or attempt to embarrass individuals with
whom they disagree. This difference in political tactics has been
extensively discussed on Fox News due to their well-known support for Fair
and Balanced debate - having both sides of an issue generally addressed
without spin and personal attacks. Conservatives also personally attack
people for their opinions at times, as well, but it seems more common coming
from those on the left. The media research institutes have this thoroughly
documented. However, any blatantly partisan slanting or misuse of public
information should be questioned. The challenge is that Public Records are
(hopefully accurate) facts, but their use can and should be questioned at
times.

The newspaper in Memphis Tennessee (another liberal Democrat editor) pulled
this stunt with similar effect a few years ago. Gun ownership opponents
thought it was great. Gun owners were furious at their invasion of privacy
by the alleged misuse of Public Records. The pros and cons about "knowing"
where some individuals owned firearms based on concealed carry permits was
debated then as well - knowing who had personal protection guns could make
the houses subject to break in, or more likely, make other individuals homes
more likely to be broken into due to the lack of their owning a handgun for
concealed carry. Etc. Etc.  I personally do have a concealed carry permit
and it does not bother me if someone wants to put my name in a newspaper. It
says much more about the publishers' tactics in promoting their political
agendas than it does about me. And I can tell you from personal experience
that "when seconds count, the police are minutes away."  35 minutes to be
exact, after a 911 call to get a Sheriff's deputy to arrive on the scene,
when I had to intervene once in a domestic dispute taking place on a public
roadway. But, that debate, and the debate about media-promoted senseless
violence, is best pursued in other discussion forums, so don't get me
started.

There is a bigger issue here than guns and concealed carry permits. It has
to do with the use/misuse of Public Records to push political agendas and
attack those with whom we may disagree. It also is clear evidence that just
because something is legal does not make it the right thing to do. We now
limit access to the architectural diagrams of the hallways in many public
buildings, for instance, because the information presents a potential
security risk for individuals using those hallways. The concept of "need to
know", as most of us are aware, indicates that there are consequences for
distributing information that exceeds the seemingly simple value of some
information. So, the debate in this case, is now centering around the intent
of publisher in publishing the records vs the right to privacy of
individuals about their lifestyles or personally legal decisions, rather
than the actual value of the records in informing the public about any
alleged danger from gun owners.  It might be shown by some "think tanks"
research that houses having alcoholic beverages stored within pose a
statistically significant increased danger to children, even though the
individuals in those houses have a right to buy and consume those beverages.
Does this mean we need to perform publically funded records tracking of all
alcoholic beverage purchases and put those people's addresses on a Google
map? Mothers Against Drunk Drivers might lobby for such legislation and
publication. Is this really a good use of Public Records? Or a
not-so-cleverly-disguised attempt to use Public Records and funding to
promote a personal perspective?

Fortunately , Records Managers can offer a balanced approach to managing
records based on the declared Value (content) of the records and their
associated retention requirements. Who better to explain that there are
Privacy, cost of creation, cost of storage, and cost of retrieval issues, as
well as,  potential misuse consequences, from Public Records laws and
retention requirements? But it must be a debate about records issues, costs,
and values, not political agendas.

John

***************************
John Phillips
Information Technology Decisions
www.infotechdecisions.net



-----Original Message-----
From: Records Management Program [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf
Of Hugh Smith
Sent: Friday, January 04, 2013 11:57 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Newtown shootings: Debate Begins Early Over Bill To Disclose
Handgun Owners' Names, Addresses - Courant.com

It would be helpful if people would not politicize these issues based on
political beliefs but instead try to develop an effective solution.

In these shootings we often find that the people involved were disturbed and
they also had access to very violent shooter games and often watched violent
movies.

So it is a matrix of things that seems to be an indicator of future
behavior.  As records managers, it should be simple to create a recipe and
keep records of those people who have seen X number of violent movies.  (We
should create something more effective than PG-13 and R. If you have 10
killings then it is R-10. Anyone under 18 should not be able to see more
than an R-1. )  So again records management could track the number of
violent scenes and once a person had attended X number of violent scenes and
owned a shooter game, that person would be brought in for counseling and all
weapons removed from their household.

Again, vandalism and outbursts in school foretell violent outbursts, so once
a student starts to develop a rap sheet of sorts, they would be brought in
for counseling and all guns removed from their homes.

Guns don't shoot people, people shoot people.  In fact, last year in over
2,500 situations, a citizen with a carry or concealed handgun permit stopped
a shooter and saved lives.   But apparently there are no records managers
keeping track of this; or the Press refuses to track the effects.

As a point of records keeping news, England has 3.5 times more violent crime
than the U.S. on a per capita basis  and they have strict guns laws. So gun
laws are not the solution unless they are tied into reining in Hollywood.  I
think locking Tarrantino is in order since he is the leader of the violence
is good fraternity.  Make it illegal to show actual violence in movies.  Go
back to the Hitchcock approach where you only imagine it.

But it seems that a group of 2,000 records managers could pull together the
appropriate statistics on all sides to suggest an intelligent solution.  The
most dangerous thing in the world is congested cities so we should disperse
people to the country.  Eliminate the ghetto as we know it.  ( I know we
cannot do that but why not discuss how we could have some impact.  I bet
more kids are killed in DC and NYC every year than happened in Connecticut.
Where is the records manager to track this? Why is killing these kids not an
issue?)

The same people that want to gather up every gun thinks that movies and
gaming that are extremely violent has no effect on their kids. Movies do
have an effect on your thoughts. After seeing "Man on Fire" and "Taken" I
could barely stand to see my kids walk out the door.  I spent a fortune on
pizza and taking kids out to dinner to keep my daughter and her friends
under my watchful eye for as many hours as I could make happen.

I watched Roy Rogers shoot the gun out of the hand of the bad guy or the
Lone Ranger catch them with his lasso.  None of those made me want to be
violent. Anything more violent than Mongo in "Blazing Saddles" should be
banned.  

Hugh Smith
FIRELOCK Fireproof Modular Vaults
[log in to unmask]
(610)  756-4440    Fax (610)  756-4134
WWW.FIRELOCK.COM

List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance To unsubscribe from
this list, click the below link. If not already present, place UNSUBSCRIBE
RECMGMT-L or UNSUB RECMGMT-L in the body of the message.
mailto:[log in to unmask]

List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
To unsubscribe from this list, click the below link. If not already present, place UNSUBSCRIBE RECMGMT-L or UNSUB RECMGMT-L in the body of the message.
mailto:[log in to unmask]