I think that would be a good bet.  You'll notice they push, "we're the ONLY 'no compromise" grassroots gun rights org in the state", angle too.

The websites, FB pages, etc are all run by the national org, if the whois for our version (MGR) is any indicator.  They've hidden some of the registrations.

http://www.redstate.com/diary/freedomrepublican/2015/04/09/rand-paul-strong-second-amendment-according-nra/?hc_location=ufi

Couldn't have anything to do with the fact that Rand Paul is a stooge for NAGR,
which
is  
a scam?

No, that couldn't be it.  Must be that he's too extreme for the NRA...

Page 2 edit:  check out https://www.facebook.com/trueiowaigo and give 'em a like.

Also check out iagunowners.org/

Since their very first public statement on the bill, Iowa Gun Owners has been up in arms about the database provisions found in the latest version of the omnibus bill, SF427 as amended by the house:



That'd be pretty damning if any of it was true.  Let's break down every element of their propaganda on the subject and compare it to what's actually in the bill, and what the current law actually is.

First off, they use the word "codify" quite a bit.  As if currently, we're in some sort of legal gray area where a newspaper can print lists of gun owners because... there are no laws?

This is the kind of stuff they peddle to people who ask on Facebook:



And this is what they sent out to their mailing list on April 17th:



Sounds real scary.  The bill would "codify" access and give media and criminals carte blanche to do things that they wouldn't have done before.

Well, it would do IGO some good to actually read the code.  Of course when I said earlier that "there are no laws" I was joking.  Iowa has something called the Iowa Open Records Law (or Act), which exists in the code as Chapter 22.

To wit:



As Chapter 22 says, it applies "unless otherwise provided for by law" and to records "which are not confidential records".

So how does that apply to weapon permits outlined in the current version of Chapter 724?



Everything that is on your application, full name, DL, address, place of birth, date of birth, and your SSN if you provided it - is public record.  And simply because it does not qualify for the exemptions of the Iowa Open Records Law, it is accessible via the Iowa Open Records Law.  Also known as, the code.  That's right, it's "codified." (BOO!)

So what does the Omnibus Bill, SF427 as amended by the house, change?  First of all, 724.23 Subsection 2, paragraph a:



and paragraph f:



The first key phrase here is "commissioner of public safety and any issuing officer", which in sum includes the DPS commissioner and all 99 Sheriffs.

The second key phrase is "shall keep confidential" - remember Chapter 22?  "Confidential" records are specifically exempt from the Iowa Open Records Act.

Paragraph f provides even more restrictions, in that it requires a court order unless the conditions in b, c, d, or e are met.

There are exceptions directly after paragraph a, and they are as follows:

• Paragraph b allows for the release of statistical information.  This is a good thing, Iowa is pretty much on top in terms of per-capita carry permit issuance and we want to be able to continue to observe that grow.


• Paragraph c allows law enforcement to access the records for the purpose of investigations, determining permit validity, and lawfully authorized background investigations.  They can do this currently, and if this subsection weren't in place, law enforcement would not even be able to ask your sheriff if you have a permit.


• Paragraph d allows employers to ascertain the validity of a Professional permit to carry weapons.  The vast majority of us have Non-Professional permits, so this paragraph doesn't apply to the public at large.


• And finally, paragraph e:
  
  

This was the ONLY part that was added to the original omnibus bill, HF527.  More on that later.  For now, simply know that HF527 was passed by the house but failed to gain support in the senate.  It was killed by the funnel through inaction.

Why was it killed?  There were two main objections: they didn't like making permits to acquire pistols and revolvers optional, and they ostensibly didn't like that someone who knows you couldn't check to make sure you have a valid permit.

So in SF427 as amended by the house, they walked back those two things to save the rest of the bill.  They catered very narrowly to those two points - remember this is an omnibus bill that also includes legalization of suppressors, repeal of the youth handgun shooting ban, and more.

Importantly though, consider this:

• Under current law, someone can get your DL number, address, DOB, place of birth, even your SSN if you gave it.  The omnibus bill would restrict that to a yes/no answer on whether you have a permit.


• Under current law, the media can request en masse from each Sheriff a list of all permit holders with all identifying info, and they can even make a map like what happened in New York.  The omnibus bill would prevent them from doing this.


• Under current law, there is no accountability.  The omnibus bill would force them to leave their name and the reason for their request in writing so as to prevent harassment.

That's undeniably a step forward, not backward.

In addition, making an easily searchable electronic database for LEO's will help satisfy the reciprocity requirements of certain states, most notably bordering Minnesota.  I'd sure like to carry in MN on my IA permit.  But IGO won't let that nugget out.  They only spread fear and lies.

The lies by Iowa Gun Owners and Aaron Dorr don't stop there.  They would have you believe that the bill creates a database that can be abused by future legislators.

They promulgate this same thing repeatedly.  Again, from their first public statement on the bill:



When responding to questions on Facebook:



In their message to their email list on April 13th:



In another message to their email list on April 17th:



There are almost too many examples of this to list.

Let's start with the claim that this bill creates a database.

The current law, with regard to DPS is as follows:



The opening section of 724.23, before it gets into the sections I already covered above, is revised by the omnibus bill as follows:



The "permanent record" already exists and has existed since at least 1983.  The bill digitizes that record and provides privacy measures in paragraphs 2 a and f as I covered above.

Counties have already created digitized databases of their own.  Some are even banding together to link their systems up.  I know for a fact that in my county, all it takes is a call to dispatch to verify my permit in seconds.  They're not rifling through file cabinets, they're accessing a computer.  I know this because I've talked to deputies about it and I've been pulled over for something minor and overheard the conversation.

That's all well and good.  I'd rather a traffic stop go smoothly than be detained for hours while somebody looks for a piece of paper that says I'm not breaking the law by having a gun on my hip.

What IGO doesn't want you to know, and won't tell you, is that these databases are completely unregulated, and just as exposed as any other public record.

The system established by the omnibus bill would provide protection for the identifying info on your permit and permit application, period.  The same privacy requirements would apply to the existing county databases thanks to the "any issuing officer" phrase in subsection 2 paragraph a.

And what about the consistent claim that anti-gun legislators of the future might abuse this?  Guess what, they already have plenty to abuse:  the extant permanent record kept by the commissioner of DPS and all of the records kept by the sheriff are no more or no less ripe for Connecticut-style abuse than anything in the bill.  This is a fear tactic, plain and simple.

IGO has gone so far as to claim that the bill creates a registry of guns and gun owners, from their email on April 13th:



"database of firearms and firearms owners" - just not true, there will be no firearms listed in the database.  Again, from a Facebook message on April 16th:



Again, not true.  There will be no list of guns to give to "the politicians in Des Moines."

IGO and Aaron Dorr keep saying that they originally supported the bill, but the database was slipped in

Again for reference, from their message on April 13th:



And from their email on April 17th:



This simply isn't true.  The exact quote they took from SF427 as amended by the house is also found in the original omnibus bill, HF527.

Here's the relevant bit from HF527:



And here's the same thing in SF427 as amended by the house:



When compared with HF527, the original omnibus bill, the only addition was an extra paragraph in 724.23 subsection 2, paragraph e, which I covered above.

IGO/Iowa Gun Owners and Aaron Dorr won't tell you the truth, because the truth doesn't inspire fear quite like a good lie will.

So the asshole that whelped Dudley Do-Nothing gasped forth another?  Goody.

They have SEVERAL affiliates in other states.  I don't know if they're quite as annoying as IGO, but I bet they're aspiring to be.

Bump for gun rights in corn country!

bump to get these ass clowns out of town...

Bump!

This thread needs more like.

Bump because IGO is still being IGO.

bump for Friday night

Bump... expose these dick dastardly con artists.

PAGE ADDRESS CHANGED SLIGHTLY by whoever runs it, probably to make search engine results hit it better: https://www.facebook.com/trueiowagunowners

for the love of all things holy, hit this page and share it around fbville...  these guys are scamming little old ladies, raiding the social security checks of the elderly, and fucking up the legislature for us in iowa on a daily basis...