Mediaboss Marketing

Floridians looking to amend the state Constitution to expand Medicaid or allow recreational cannabis will face a more costly and complicated process under a bill headed to Gov. Ron DeSantis.

The Florida House on Wednesday voted, 73-45, for a bill (SB 1794) that would impose new barriers for citizen groups seeking to collect enough voter signatures to put a proposed constitutional amendment on the ballot.

The Senate voted, 23-17, for the bill earlier in the week. Both votes were along party lines, with the Republicans in support and Democrats in opposition.

The bill will make it harder for citizen groups to trigger a Florida Supreme Court review of the ballot measures by increasing the required number of voter signatures from 10 percent of the total voters in the last presidential election to 25 percent. Court approval is a critical step in placing an amendment on the ballot.

This year, citizen petition groups, like those trying to legalize recreational marijuana or expand Medicaid coverage, had to collect 76,620 validated signatures to qualify for a court review. Under the bill, they would have needed to collect nearly 192,000 signatures.

Other changes include requiring citizen initiatives to collect signatures in more congressional districts in order to trigger the court review. It would increase from at least a quarter of the 27 congressional districts to at least half, which would mean 14 districts.

The bill also prohibits citizen groups from using voter signatures gathered in one election for a later election. Currently, the signatures are valid for two years after they are collected.The bill would allow local supervisors of elections to charge the actual cost of verifying the voter signatures that are submitted for review.

And the bill would give the state Supreme Court the authority to decide whether the ballot measures are facially invalid under the U.S. Constitution.

Opponents said the measure is another attempt to limit the use of citizen petition drives that have led to constitutional amendments that limited class sizes in schools, linked a state minimum wage to an inflation index, authorized the use of medical marijuana, established voting rights for ex-felons, and directed lawmakers to spend more money on conservation lands.

Voters will get a chance this fall to vote on another citizen initiative that would raise Floridas minimum wage to $15 an hour over a period of several years.

Sen. Jose Javier Rodriguez, a Miami-Dade County Democrat who opposed the measure, said the bill adds more barriers to the petition process that will effectively eliminate the ability of grassroots groups to put issues before the voters.

Were just making the citizen initiative process more costly and more complicated, forcing operations from grassroots to professional, Rodriguez said. Its taking a system that was meant for citizens to act when this Legislature would not and flipping it on its head and making it something that only the billionaires can access.

In the House, Democrats said the increased regulations were an infringement on the First Amendment rights of voters to petition their government.

I just cant sit quietly by while we are taking power away from the people, said Rep. Margaret Good, a Sarasota Democrat. We dont have to have constitutional amendments, if we do what the people wanted us to do.

But Rep. James Grant, a Tampa Republican who supported the bill, said the legislation would not prevent citizen groups from advancing constitutional amendments, although he acknowledged the measure was increasing the signature threshold and adding more regulations.

I stand ready to have lawsuits again filed against this Legislature. I welcome the argument that this would violate the First Amendment, Grant said. Im confident in that argument, our product is sound because nobody here is telling voters that they cant engage or cant speak. What were actually saying is speak louder.

Here is an earlier Florida Phoenix story on the issue.

Read more:
Lawmakers send a bill to governor making it harder for citizen groups to advance constitutional amendments - Florida Phoenix

3/11/2020

Well, that didnt take long, thankfully. It seems last Thursday afternoon, a piece of legislation was filed by local state senators Sandra Cano and Betty Crowley, along with others. The Stop Guilt by Accusation Act was meant to ban media from selectively reporting certain facts.

Legislators noted that the First Amendment to the Constitution, the first and most important article in the Bill of Rights, said Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of the press. Then came the bill, abridging freedom of the press and promising $10,000 fines for non-compliance.

The senators had filed the bill at the request of Rep. Grace Diaz, of Providence, who met a man last year who felt he had been mistreated by the media.

Our editor, Ethan Shorey, upon learning of the bill, immediately tweeted it out, and the race was on as WPRIs Ted Nesi and others began asking questions.

Soon after, the bill was withdrawn. Well done! But then came the Friday Providence Journal story, and the headline and story became more about the man who asked for the bills filing than about the First Amendment. It seems the man, Chris Sevier, of Atlanta, is an anti-abortion and anti-LGBT activist. Wrote the Journal: According to a March 2 story about Sevier on the website Mississippitoday.org:He sued Apple for their laptops not blocking porn that he said killed his marriage. Hes drafted anti-LGBT bills that have been pushed by lawmakers in several states. He tried to marry his laptop in three states in apparent protest over same-sex marriage.

OK, so hes a right-wing activist making some very strange claims (and thats being kind).

But I was disappointed to read Diaz say, My feeling is beyond what I can express, after learning of Seviers history. If I knew, I would run ten-thousand-million miles away from that guy.So her sin, apparently, was talking to a right-winger, and not trying to limit press freedom. Wow. Lets never do that again!

Let me just say this: Obviously, I stand with journalists who were horrified by this bill. Every legislator should know from Civics 101 that there will never be a case or reason to abridge the free press. Period! There will never, ever be a circumstance where people would come to trust government censors and busybodies over their own ability to sort through news.

That said, I think Sevier has a point. His complaint was that the media did stories on accusations about him, but never followed up when he was acquitted. Sevier was left, he said to Diaz, with a damaged reputation and no recourse to set the record straight.

I wont speak for anyone beyond myself, but yes, this happens. And it can be damaging, especially in the new world of Google, where facts live online forever.

It would be a huge undertaking for any news outlet to track down every arrest they ever reported and then be forced to report the follow-up facts. But as a publisher, I can see where those accused unjustly would expect exactly that. I didnt begin this newspaper 24 years ago to anger and hurt my neighbors, but it can happen. It is a challenge.

Still, the government will have to live with the medias best efforts at self-policing, as well as monitoring by our readers and those accused. We must do our best, case by case. And yes, even if the complainer is on the fringe of the right-wing. He may be extreme, and I dont support his limits on a free press, but it doesnt mean he doesnt have a point.

Ward is publisher of The Valley Breeze

More here:
TOM WARD Beyond the headline, complainer had a point - Valley Breeze

from the fuck-the-drafting-of-residents-into-Dan-Patrick's-war-over-words dept

Another challenger to the First Amendment has appeared. And his name is Dan Patrick, Lieutenant Governor of Texas.

Apparently offended by a Senate hearing witness garbed in an anti-police t-shirt, the Lt. Governor welcomed all challengers via Twitter to sue him for violating people's free speech rights.

In case you can't see the tweet, it says:

Outraged to see this T-shirt at a Senate Hearing Thur. Future witnesses beware. No one will ever be allowed to wear such a vulgar shirt in a Senate hearing again-especially one that denigrates the brave men & women of law enforcement. Want to take me to court? Ok. Make my day.

If you can't see the shirt (and you can't, because Dan Patrick blurred out the offending words/images), it's a hand with the middle finger extended above the phrase "Fuck the police."

Clearly of the belief that Supreme Court precedent almost exactly on point has no bearing on Texas Senate proceedings, the state's second-in-command has promised to ban any t-shirt he subjectively feels is "vulgar," but "especially" the ones that "denigrate" law enforcement.

The Supreme Court precedent -- delivered nearly 50 years ago -- dealt with a 30-day jail term given to a courthouse attendee who wore a "Fuck the Draft" jacket. That clearly denigrated the brave men and women who decided who was eligible to go die for their country in the United States' most infamous losing effort. The Supreme Court ruled that the government violated the First Amendment by demanding citizens only wear/make the most innocuous of statements while in the government's presence.

Patrick's proposal sounds exactly like a content-based ban on speech, which is exactly the sort of thing the First Amendment guards against. But there are those who believe time-and-place restrictions could allow Patrick's ban to bypass the First Amendment. Why? Because the state legislature can do whatever the hell it wants, apparently.

Chuck DeVore, vice president of the Texas Public Policy Foundation, a conservative think tank based in Austin, disagrees with Patricks critics.

Legislative chambers, DeVore said, have the power to set their own rules of decorum as a co-equal branch of government. While the courts have the power to review laws passed by a legislature, they cannot tell lawmakers how to pass those laws or run their affairs, he said.

Well, that assertion aside, the desire to ban things that offend one government official sure sounds like something a court should rule on. The Lieutenant Governor is on (Twitter) record as welcoming legal challenges to his "won't someone think of the cops?" content-based restriction. These are the oh-so-brave words of a man willing to spend other people's money to defend a move many of those people likely don't agree with. That's the luxury legislators have: the ability to force people to defend indefensible positions by proxy (but also directly via their tax dollars).

At some point, Patrick and his stupid new rule triggered by his triggering will have their day in court. And it seems highly unlikely he'll prevail. When he's done blowing money on forcing the public to respect cops, maybe the state's residents will be kind enough to vote his censorial ass out of office. Until then, the lieutenant governor will remain dissed like the cops he loves so much that he's willing to violate the Constitution for them.

Filed Under: 1st amendment, dan patrick, free speech, fuck the police, texas

Originally posted here:
Lt. Governor Of Texas Gets Offended By An Anti-Police Shirt, Decides He Needs To Start Violating The First Amendment - Techdirt

A thing about writing a newsletter about technology and democracy during a global pandemic is that technology and democracy are no longer really at the forefront of everyones attention. The relationship between big platforms and the nations they operate in remains vitally important for all sorts of reasons, and Ive argued that the platforms have been unusually proactive in their efforts to promote high-quality information sources. Still, these moves are a sideshow compared to the questions were all now asking. How many people will get COVID-19? How many people will die? Will our healthcare system be overwhelmed? How long will it take our economy to recover?

We wont know the answers for weeks, but Im starting to fear the worst. On Wednesday the World Health Organization declared that COVID-19 had officially become a pandemic. A former director for the Centers for Disease Control now says that in the worst case scenario, more than 1 million Americans could die.

This piece by Tomas Pueyo argues persuasively that the United States is currently seeing exponential growth in the number of people contracting the disease, and that hospitals are likely to be overwhelmed. Pueyos back ground is in growth marketing, not in epidemiology. But by now we have seen enough outbreaks in enough countries to have a rough idea of how the disease spreads, and to understand the value of social distancing that is, staying behind closed doors. So I want to recommend that everyone here reads that piece, and consider modifying your behavior if youre still planning events or spending a lot of time in public.

* * *

One risk of having the world pay attention to a single, all-consuming story is that less important but still urgent stories are missed along the way. One such unfolding story in our domain is the (deep breath) Eliminating Abusive and Rampant Neglect of Interactive Technologies (EARN IT) Act, which was the subject of a Senate hearing on Wednesday. Heres Alfred Ng with an explainer in CNET:

The EARN IT Act was introduced by Sen. Lindsey Graham (Republican of South Carolina) and Sen. Richard Blumenthal (Democrat of Connecticut), along with Sen. Josh Hawley (Republican of Missouri) and Sen. Dianne Feinstein (Democrat of California) on March 5.

The premise of the bill is that technology companies have to earn Section 230 protections rather than being granted immunity by default, as the Communications Decency Act has provided for over two decades.

For starters, its not clear that companies have to earn what are already protections provided under the First Amendment: to publish, and to allow their users to publish, with very few legal restrictions. But if the EARN IT Act were passed, tech companies could be held liable if their users posted illegal content. This would represent a significant and potentially devastating amendment to Section 230, a much-misunderstood law that many consider a pillar of the internet and the businesses that operate on top of it.

When internet companies become liable for what their users post, those companies aggressively moderate speech. This was the chief outcome of FOSTA-SESTA, the last bill Congress passed to amend Section 230. It was putatively written to eliminate sex trafficking, and was passed into law after Facebook endorsed it. I wrote about the aftermath in October:

[The law] threatens any website owner with up to 10 years in prison for hosting even one instance of prostitution-related content. As a result, sites like Craigslist removed their entire online personals sections. Sex workers who had previously been working as their own bosses were driven back onto the streets, often forced to work for pimps. Prostitution-related crime in San Francisco alone including violence against workers more than tripled.

Meanwhile, evidence that the law reduced sex trafficking is suspiciously hard to come by. And there is little reason to believe that the EARN IT Act will be a greater boon to public life.

Yet, for the reasons Issie Lapowsky lays out today in a good piece in Protocol, it may pass anyway. Once again Congress has lined up some sympathetic witnesses who paint a picture that, because of their misfortune, whole swathes of the internet should be eliminated. It would do that by setting up a byzantine checklist structure that would handcuff companies to a difficult-to-modify set of procedures. One item on that checklist could be eliminating end-to-end encryption in messaging apps, depriving the world of a secure communications tool at a time when authoritarian governments are surging around the world. Heres Lapowsky:

The EARN IT Act would establish the National Commission on Online Child Sexual Exploitation Prevention, a 19-member commission, tasked with creating a set of best practices for online companies to abide by with regard to stopping child sexual abuse material. Those best practices would have to be approved by 14 members of the committee and submitted to the attorney general, the secretary of homeland security, and the chairman of the Federal Trade Commission for final approval. That list would then need to be enacted by Congress. Companies would have to certify that theyre following those best practices in order to retain their Section 230 immunity. Like FOSTA/SESTA before it, losing that immunity would be a significant blow to companies with millions, or billions, of users posting content every day.

The question now is whether the industry can convince lawmakers that the costs of the law outweigh the benefits. Its a debate that will test what tech companies have learned from the FOSTA/SESTA battle and how much clout they even have left on Capitol Hill.

The bills backers have not said definitively that they will demand a backdoor for law enforcement (and whoever else can find it) as part of the EARN IT Act. (In fact, Blumenthal denies it.) But nor have they written the bill to say they wont. And Graham, one of the bills cosponsors, left little doubt on where he stands:

Facebook is talking about end-to-end encryption which means they go blind, Sen Graham said, later adding, Were not going to go blind and let this abuse go forward in the name of any other freedom.

Notably, Match Group the company behind Tinder, OKCupid, and many of the most popular dating apps in the United States has come out in support of the bill. (Thats easy for Match: none of the apps it makes offer encrypted communications.) The platforms are starting to speak up against it, though see this thread from WhatsApp chief Will Cathcart.

In the meantime, Graham raises the prospect that the federal government will get what it has long wanted greatly expanded power to surveil our communications by burying it in a complex piece of legislation that is nominally about reducing the spread of child abuse imagery. Its a cynical move, and if the similar tactics employed in the FOSTA-SESTA debate were any indication, it might well be an effective one.

Trending up: Amazon and the Gates Foundation might team up to deliver coronavirus test kits to Seattle homes. The test kits include nose swabs that can be mailed to the University of Washington for analysis.

Trending up: Amazon will give all employees diagnosed with coronavirus or put into quarantine up to two weeks of paid sick leave. The policy includes part-time warehouse workers. COVID-19 has really been a watershed for tech giants treating their contract workers like the human beings they are.

On the policy front:

The White House met with Facebook, Google, Amazon, Twitter, Apple, and Microsoft to coordinate efforts over the coronavirus outbreak. (Reuters)

YouTube will begin letting creators make money from their videos about the coronavirus. Its a reversal of an earlier decision the company made to automatically demonetize videos that talked about the outbreak. That decision angered creators, and now the company has walked it back. (Julia Alexander / The Verge)

On the economy:

Apple is closing all 17 of its retail stores in Italy until further notice as the coronavirus pandemic sweeps the country. (Mark Gurman / Bloomberg)

The coronavirus outbreak is hurting Airbnb hosts as travel screeches to a halt. The economic downturn is also impacting airlines and hotels, but hosts have fewer resources to cope. (Erin Griffith / The New York Times)

Travel influencers also say the spread of COVID-19 has impacted their lives and bottom lines. (Tanya Chen / BuzzFeed)

On the office front:

Google is asking all employees in Europe, the Middle East, and Africa to work from home due to coronavirus concerns. Employees in North American have already been given the same advice. (Isobel Asher Hamilton and Rob Price / Business Insider)

On the conference front:

The Council on Foreign Relations had to cancel a roundtable discussion about doing business under coronavirus due to, well, the coronavirus. Its one of many events that have been canceled or rescheduled in recent weeks to do the viruss spread. (David Welch / Bloomberg)

The biggest trade show in video games, E3 2020, was canceled due to coronavirus concerns. The event was supposed to take place at the Los Angeles Convention Center this June. (Jason Schreier / Kotaku)

On the misinformation front:

A Facebook group called U.K. Preppers & Survivalists is trying to stop misinformation about the coronavirus pandemic from spreading. One of the moderators said that while people should question news and politicians, questioning doctors isnt helpful. (Hussein Kesvani / Mel)

Hackers are sending emails with fake HIV results and coronavirus information that infect computers with malware, according to cybersecurity researchers at Proofpoint. The fake HIV emails are designed to look like they come from Vanderbilt University. (Jane Lytvynenko / BuzzFeed)

WeChat users in China are evading censors by translating a viral interview from a coronavirus whistleblower in Wuhan, China. Theyre rewriting it backward, filling it with typos and emojis, sharing it as a PDF, and even translating it into fictional languages like Klingon. (Ryan Broderick / BuzzFeed)

We need to combat misinformation about coronavirus the same way were combating the virus itself: with a communitarian focus. This strategy emphasizes the needs of the community rather than just focusing on the individual, this piece argues. (Whitney Phillips / Wired)

Elsewhere:

Microsoft, Google, and Zoom are trying to keep up with demand for their software, which allows people to work remotely. The companies have also started giving it away to companies and schools for free, as the coronavirus pandemic intensifies. (Rani Molla / Recode)

Heres the case for why coronavirus quarantines could be good for memes. Finally, some good news! (Brian Feldman / Intelligencer)

Maryland, Nebraska, and New York have all proposed taxes that would force tech companies to hand over a portion of the revenue generated from digital advertising. The proposals mirror taxes countries like France have also considered. Ashley Gold at The Information has the story:

The proposals vary in approach and scope, but they all center around the idea that big internet companies, having built their fortunes in part through the use of consumers personal information, should be contributing more to government coffers. The bills, which face mixed prospects for adoption, have drawn the ire of tech companies and other business groups, who say it could be challenging to determine precisely how much of their ad revenue comes from each state. In addition, tax experts said, the proposals could run afoul of federal law.

But lawmakers and other advocates believe the proposals might find favor with voters concerned about the power wielded by Silicon Valley and large corporations in general.

Also: The UK government confirmed that it will levy a 2 percent tax on the revenues of search engines, social media services and online marketplaces which derive value from U.K. users starting on April 1st. The United States government has been strongly opposed to the plan. (Shakeel Hashim / Protocol)

After 2016, Americans are alert to Russian election interference and outside attempts to spread discord. But conspiracy theories and vitriol are now coming from influencers in the United States verified users, many from within the media, and passionate hyper-partisan fan groups that band together to drive the conversation. (Rene DiResta / The Atlantic)

Joe Biden has more than tripled the amount of money his campaign is spending on Facebook ads following a strong showing on Super Tuesday. His spend on Facebook ads in March has exceeded that of Bernie Sanders and President Trump. (Salvador Rodriguez / CNBC)

As big tech companies struggle to moderate content with a mix of algorithms, fact-checkers, and policies, Wikipedia is quietly managing to stave off misinformation with an army of anonymous volunteers. (Alex Pasternack / Fast Company)

Clearview AI let multiple people associated with the Trump campaign use its facial recognition app. Venture capital firms including SoftBank, Sequoia Capital, Kleiner Perkins, and Founders Fund also ran searches. Clearview previously tried to claim that the app was only for law enforcement. (Ryan Mac, Caroline Haskins and Logan McDonald / BuzzFeed)

Microsoft organized 35 nations to take down one of the worlds largest botnets malware that secretly seizes control of millions of computers around the globe. The move was unusual because it was carried out by a company, not a government. (David E. Sanger / The New York Times)

Content related to far-right candidates in Poland makes up a greater percentage of general Facebook content than of content on mainstream outlets Facebook pages, according to researchers at Stanford. Evidence suggests this might be because far-right pages are especially good at boosting engagement on Facebook by posting content simultaneously across their networks. (Daniel Bush, Anna Gielewska, Maciej Kurzynski / Cyber Policy Center)

TikTok is launching a Transparency Center in Los Angeles to give outside experts more insight into how the company makes content moderation decisions. Its one of many moves the company has made in recent months to quell the concerns of US regulators and lawmakers. This ones interesting. Reuters explains:

The center would later provide insights into the apps source code, the closely guarded internal instructions of the software, and offer more details on privacy and security.

Several U.S. agencies that deal with national security and intelligence issues have banned employees from using the app, whose popularity among teenagers has been growing rapidly.

According to a 2017 Chinese law, companies operating in the country are required to cooperate with the government on national intelligence.

Egon Durban of Silver Lake is the latest Twitter board member to have never tweeted before joining the board.

Rihanna just announced shes opening a Fenty Beauty House for TikTok creators as part of a promotion for her makeup line. Creators will be able to raid the fully stocked Make-up Pantry to create their own beauty-focused content. What a fun time to be trapped together in a house with a bunch of people you barely know! Dont share make-up brushes yall! (Bianca Betancourt / Harpers Bazaar)

Alphabet was supposed to help Google invent its next blockbuster technologies. But nearly a half-decade has passed since it launched, and the breakthrough new businesses havent materialized. (Nick Bastone and Jessica E. Lessin / The Information)

Google has pressured TV manufacturers not to use Amazons Fire TV system. The strategy has slowed Amazons efforts to expand its Fire TV platform. (Janko Roettgers / Protocol)

Googles sibling company Sidewalk Labs is walking back plans to create a futuristic city in Toronto. The plans, which combined environmentally advanced construction with sensors to track residents movements, raised privacy concerns. In May, the government will announce if the project will proceed. (Ian Austen / The New York Times)

Send us tips, comments, questions, and EARN IT Act worse-case scenarios: casey@theverge.com and zoe@theverge.com.

The rest is here:
A sneaky attempt to end encryption is worming its way through Congress - The Verge

Although the topics did not appear on Tuesdays agenda, the Second Amendment and gun control legislation dominated the first hour and a half of the county board meeting. Thirty-five people some more than once spoke during open forum. Most implored county commissioners to pass a resolution declaring Crow Wing Countys dedication to protecting residents Second Amendment rights, including potential legal action and the appropriation of public funds.

This isnt about guns. This is about due process. I cant rely on the federal system to protect me. I cant rely on the state system to protect me. So Im looking to my county to stand up and defend due process, said Emily resident Michael Starry. ... This is your opportunity to stand with your fellow citizens and tell us that youve got our backs the same way we have yours. Due process matters, the Constitution matters and our right to be free from tyranny, from oppression from any kind of madness that can take place that matters.

Supporters of a bill to make Crow Wing County a Second Amendment sanctuary county spoke to the Crow Wing County Board Tuesday, March 10, during the open forum segment of the meeting. Steve Kohls / Brainerd Dispatch

Starry is one of five administrators of a Facebook group called Patriots for Crow Wing 2nd Amendment Dedicated (Sanctuary) County, which sought to organize residents to attend Tuesdays meeting en force. The grassroots effort is among dozens coalescing across the state and hundreds nationwide, organized in response to gun control legislation many view as too restrictive or outright unconstitutional.

In Minnesota, the target is two bills passed by the state House of Representatives one expanding background checks to online sales and gun shows, and red flag legislation that would allow police officers to seize a persons firearms if a judge determined they were a threat to themselves or others.

Thus far, six Minnesota counties have passed sanctuary resolutions, including nearby Wadena County, indicating county leaders would fight back against these kinds of laws. Starry said he and thousands of others want Crow Wing County to join that list, and the activists got one step closer Tuesday. Midway through the parade of residents approaching the microphone, Board Chairman Paul Koering said the county board would host a public hearing at 6 p.m. March 19 in the Crow Wing County Land Services Building meeting rooms. He added he would also champion the desired resolution, putting it up for a vote at the March 24 county board meeting.

--------------------------------

What: Public hearing on proposed resolution that would make Crow Wing County a Second Amendment-dedicated county.

When: 6 p.m. March 19.

Where: Crow Wing County Land Services Building, meeting rooms 1 and 2, 322 Laurel St., Brainerd.

--------------------------------

Although a show of hands indicated a large majority of those in the room sympathized with a sanctuary resolution, at least four people who spoke said they opposed such action. Barb McColgan of Brainerd questioned the need for such a resolution and expressed concern over the county potentially dedicating public funds collected from all county residents to advance the views of one particular group.

Barb McColgan spoke Tuesday, March 10, about her concerns of just selecting one amendment of the constitution and not placing the emphasis on the whole document at the Crow Wing County Board meeting. Steve Kohls / Brainerd Dispatch

I guess my question is, this is in our Constitution, we are going to have to follow the state laws and federal laws. And so I dont see a purpose for this. It seems to me like were looking at what one special interest group wants, McColgan said. Couldnt we just as well have a resolution to support the First Amendment, freedom of speech or freedom of religion? And, you know, we can go on and on, and why dont we just resolve to support the entire Constitution, instead of breaking it apart? I feel that this resolution is divisive. Its an issue that isnt going to change anything if its passed.

Emotions ran high at times as residents explained the importance of the county boards support of the Second Amendment to them.

Brainerd High School student Boston Hackbart said the issue was a big one to him, most of his classmates and fellow service members in the Army National Guard. While sharing those thoughts, Hackbart appeared to be overcome by emotion. After several seconds of silence while Hackbart collected himself, Starry joined him at the podium.

This young man has never been politically active and something generated that in him, Starry said. ... This movement to try to protect liberty, to try to protect due process, it matters enough that he got up here trying to do this, which in my opinion is fricking amazing.

Pam Johnson, a resident of northeastern Crow Wing County, told commissioners when she was in danger from her abusive husband years earlier, a red flag law would not have protected her. She said he bought a gun not from a store, but from the street corner.

You can say somebodys mentally unstable. You can say, hey, you know, a guy beats his wife. Hes got a restraining order, he said this and that, he cant have a gun. Go down to your corner and buy one. Its that easy, Johnson said.

Several others pointed to the potentially dangerous implications or ineffectiveness of red flag legislation. Arguments included the idea people could lose their guns because of false claims by a vindictive ex-spouse, for example, or fears over how mental health problems may be defined and by whom.

Megan Pence along with her son Caleb and daughter Isabel talks to the Crow Wing County Board Tuesday, March 10, during the open forum segment of the board meeting. Several people gathered at the meeting to talk about their concerns of the recent Red Flag laws that are being proposed about firearm ownership in the state. Steve Kohls / Brainerd Dispatch

Megan Pence, accompanied by two of her five children, said shes concerned she could be a target of red flag legislation, despite her desire to protect her family.

I have three kids with disabilities. Some of those disabilities put me in very vulnerable situations, Pence said. I also have a long background of depression and anxiety. And red flag laws start to make me nervous if were going to start saying who can and cant carry a firearm, who can and cant protect their kids. Then I might be one of the first that cant carry a firearm.

But the county board has no purview over bills in the state Legislature what commissioners do have, however, is the ability to send a message on behalf of Crow Wing County residents, activists said.

Brainerd resident Darin Schadt said hes not the type to get political, but this issue moved him to get involved.

The people in the Cities are not listening to what people got to say up here. Were being left behind because the seven-county metro has all the votes, and it aint right, Schadt said. So thats why were all standing here coming to you people to send a message down to them, This aint right, were not putting up for it. And we don't want it. Its up to you guys to say no, our constituents up here do not want these things.

The rest is here:
Crowd seeks Crow Wing County support of 2nd Amendment - Brainerd Dispatch