PDA

View Full Version : gun permits holders names published, IA


vantec08
04-21-2011, 11:05 AM
http://wireupdate.com/wires/16820/des-moines-paper-publishes-over-5000-names-of-gun-permit-holders/

Lost.monkey
04-21-2011, 11:27 AM
NOT COOL

:no:

N6ATF
04-21-2011, 11:36 AM
Go directly to jail. Do not pass Go, do not collect $200.

Southwest Chuck
04-21-2011, 11:38 AM
What I own and/or privately carry, legally, is no ones business but my own. This a blatant invasion of privacy. This is one case, where I hope they pass a law preventing this type of disclosure. You should not have to give up your right of privacy to excercise another right, even if it is currently a "Licensed by the State" right, IMO.

Untamed1972
04-21-2011, 11:42 AM
What I own and/or privately carry, legally, is no ones business but my own. This a blatant invasion of privacy. This is one case, where I hope they pass a law preventing this type of disclosure. You should not have to give up your right of privacy to excercise another right, even if it is currently a "Licensed by the State" right, IMO.

I concur.....when will they be publishing a list of names and what religion they are or their sexual preference?

Although I am still of the camp that says "It's not yet a right....If you have to get a permission slip from the state."

IEShooter
04-21-2011, 12:20 PM
This is unfortunately common. The San Bernardino Sun newspaper has been persistently trying to pry the names of all CCW permit holders from the Sheriff's Office for quite some time now.

To their credit the SO refuses to release the names, but that doesn't deter those who want to find out and use the list to further their agenda.

Caladain
04-21-2011, 12:25 PM
Hrm...I wonder what legal options you'd have if you were on that list.

I further wonder what legal options you'd have if your name were on that list and shortly after someone tried to steal your stuff/guns and failed/succeeded.

yellowfin
04-21-2011, 12:29 PM
So let's see...privacy is a right when they say it is, but not when they don't want it to be. Interesting.

Funtimes
04-21-2011, 12:36 PM
I'd love to see who has permits in Hawaii :P but the law prohibits it.

wildhawker
04-21-2011, 12:45 PM
In re the article:

1. The article admits that carry is more popular than media represents and affirms public interest is economically (and politically) tangible.

2. Effect of harassment techniques (like this is) is likely that privacy interests will be asserted in court, if not in legislation. How many constituent gun owners, esp with political influence, will demand protections? I'm thinking quite a lot.

3. The people on the list should create and publish a list of addresses that do not have guns (vis delta registered gun owners and USPS database). Public records work both ways.

This is unfortunately common. The San Bernardino Sun newspaper has been persistently trying to pry the names of all CCW permit holders from the Sheriff's Office for quite some time now.

To their credit the SO refuses to release the names, but that doesn't deter those who want to find out and use the list to further their agenda.

Unfortunately, California law is clear that licensing authorities cannot withhold names (and even addresses) of applicants. Nearly 100% of the application - including any outcome documents, such as a denial letter or a copy of the issued CCW itself - are disclosable public records.

-Brandon

Cowboy T
04-21-2011, 1:17 PM
Oh, I'm hoping there's a class-action lawsuit that bankrupts that particular newspaper for what they did...and that sheriff's office for releasing that list to them.

And now I have just one question:

Where is the ACLU NOW?

J.D.Allen
04-21-2011, 1:58 PM
Ummm...isn't this kind of like the info that CGF is requesting as part of the sunshine initiative?

Window_Seat
04-21-2011, 2:02 PM
Hmmmm... I made a suggestion long ago regarding what to do about this issue, but decided later to take the high road.

What Brandon said...

Erik.

Blackhawk556
04-21-2011, 2:21 PM
Seriously, how exactly is this going to help at all? How is this going to benefit the community? This is just one more way to screw with gun owners.

IllTemperedCur
04-21-2011, 2:36 PM
Seriously, how exactly is this going to help at all? How is this going to benefit the community? This is just one more way to screw with gun owners.


It's intended to "shame" those who hold CCWs, outing them so that their neighbors, friends, family, employers and co-workers will do the dirty work of anti-gun harassment.

The safety thing of identifying people/homes where criminals might attempt to steal guns is just an afterthought to the antis.

safewaysecurity
04-21-2011, 2:41 PM
This is why we need constitutional carry. But I think it's funny that we use the ability to obtain CCW applications for good while the media uses it to put people in danger.

MP301
04-21-2011, 3:00 PM
There is no valid reason to publish this info that I can see.

But what I find interesting is that maybe 10 or even 5 years ago, this would be worse then it is now. Because now, many more people are smart enough to own or be pro gun and the hypocrites that pew pew guns in public but carry themselves will be exposed

This means the hypocrites will have to change their tune about guns or give them up or lose credibility with both sides of the issue I'm thinking.

Call this a "silver lining in ever cloud" kinda deal.

MasterYong
04-21-2011, 3:24 PM
The Northcoast Journal did the same thing up here in Humboldt County a year or so ago.

Folks were pissed. I'm on the fence. I'm more upset that it's LEGAL than I am that a paper would take advantage of the fact it's legal. Permit holder records are public, at least in CA, but criminals may not know that until they see a full list published.

vantec08
04-21-2011, 3:26 PM
This would be the exact same thing as the paper publishing your choice of computers, or what type of religious medallion you wear.

wildhawker
04-21-2011, 3:41 PM
Vantec, only if you use religious medallions for self-defense...

vantec08
04-21-2011, 3:45 PM
Vantec, only if you use religious medallions for self-defense...


ummm . .. wild . . . some do

AJAX22
04-21-2011, 3:45 PM
How exactly is the ccw list a 'public record' and the nfa list 'priviliged tax records'

Why not call the processing free a tax on ccw and make it private (then sue to make it free since taxing fundamental rights is illegal ;))

CavTrooper
04-21-2011, 3:54 PM
Easy fix.

If you dont want your name released, dont apply for the privilege to carry.

If you believe you have the right to carry, just go ahead and carry and be prepared to assert your rights in court. Either you will win or you will lose, at least you will know where you stand in regards to rights vs. privileges.

AVS
04-21-2011, 4:13 PM
Ummm...isn't this kind of like the info that CGF is requesting as part of the sunshine initiative?

Sunshine initiative doesn't want nor need names.

wildhawker
04-21-2011, 6:18 PM
ummm . .. wild . . . some do

We'll talk after Maloney gets his Nunchaku. /silliness

I'm very confident, however, that medallions are not going to be found 2A protected arms (though they are expression under 1A).

How exactly is the ccw list a 'public record' and the nfa list 'priviliged tax records'

Why not call the processing free a tax on ccw and make it private (then sue to make it free since taxing fundamental rights is illegal ;))

Fed. tax code vs. CA penal code.

Sunshine initiative doesn't want nor need names.

We don't publish names.

yellowfin
04-21-2011, 6:59 PM
It's intended to "shame" those who hold CCWs, outing them so that their neighbors, friends, family, employers and co-workers will do the dirty work of anti-gun harassment.

The safety thing of identifying people/homes where criminals might attempt to steal guns is just an afterthought to the antis.According to them, discrimination is ONLY wrong when it's racial and ONLY if the people being discriminated against are certain specific races being discriminated against ONLY by one specific race, and they ONLY deserve certain pre-approved civil rights and ONLY if they're NOT gun owners.

AVgunGUY
04-21-2011, 7:13 PM
I do find it funny that the headlined advertisement for CityView is "Equip 2 Conceal Firearms Group" who is there to help "get your concealed weapons permit today".

It would be even funnier if the result of the article was to alert residents to the fact that they can get their CCWs and should contact their advertiser immediately.

Drey
04-21-2011, 7:20 PM
So the criminals can know where the guns are and go from there...
Unf.......ngbelievable.

Pred@tor
04-21-2011, 8:13 PM
glad I dont live there but its close...

dantodd
04-21-2011, 9:13 PM
How exactly is the ccw list a 'public record' and the nfa list 'priviliged tax records'

Why not call the processing free a tax on ccw and make it private (then sue to make it free since taxing fundamental rights is illegal ;))

An NFA stamp is a procedural function of the government. A CCW (in CA) is an exercise of privileged discretion. The need to prevent the exercise of "discretion" is much greater than the need to open up a process that is open to all non-prohibited U.S. citizens.

This is also the primary difference between CA and Iowa. Iowa is "shall issue" and the issuance of a CCW permit is a procedural function that requires no "discretion" as to the suitability of the applicant. Therefore the need to keep the process from becoming encumbered by "loyal friends" and contributors of the .gov employee is not pertinent.

In CA if we don't know who is being approved and denied and on what basis the sheriff is basing that judgement we will not know if there is corruptoin.

Wherryj
04-21-2011, 9:16 PM
http://wireupdate.com/wires/16820/des-moines-paper-publishes-over-5000-names-of-gun-permit-holders/

Is it any wonder that the media is failing? With such clear lack of respect for the privacy rights of individuals and such a clear intent to make money by whatever means, they have marginalized their own profession to the point of obscurity.

I wonder how many of those 5,200 people will EVER purchase ANY product from that media source? Other than a clear anti-2A agenda, and the undying animosity of those named, just what does this paper feel that it has to gain by printing these names?

Wherryj
04-21-2011, 9:19 PM
Sunshine initiative doesn't want nor need names.

I might have missed that thread, but I also seem to have missed the posting of the names collected in the Sunshine initiative. I would tend to agree that the data is being collected and used in a much different manner by CGF.

gunsmith
04-21-2011, 9:55 PM
I have stopped newspapers from doing the same using google and telephones.

I cant do it now because I'm off grid and no phone ( 50 mile or so round trip to get in cell range)

What I've done is call the paper and ask the person answering their name, they usually answer then ask why I want it. I tell them I'm publishing their name on various gun owner websites ( it really freaks them out! ) they try to protest but then I say turnabout is fairplay, you publish our names & we will publish yours.

I've called publishers at their homes to complain, they hate that.

What works really great is calling their advertisers AT HOME, tell them since they support racist anti gunners you are publishing their personal info on internet gun websites, these kind of tactics work great.

If we turn the heat at them & their advertisers it works FAST. They're roaches and hate the light.

markw
04-22-2011, 12:01 AM
That's just the people who have applied since Jan 1st. There are more people than that who have CCW in Polk County. It doesn't mention neighboring counties. It also doesn't list people who already held permits.

ALSystems
04-22-2011, 6:29 AM
I'm very confident, however, that medallions are not going to be found 2A protected arms (though they are expression under 1A).

What if you wear a six-sided star with sharp edges as a religious medalian? :confused:

Dreaded Claymore
04-22-2011, 11:14 AM
What if you wear a six-sided star with sharp edges as a religious medalian? :confused:

I'll have to make a razor-sharp pentacle to wear. :43:

scarville
04-22-2011, 12:20 PM
This would be the exact same thing as the paper publishing your choice of computers, or what type of religious medallion you wear.
You don't have to get a permit to use a computer (yet) nor to wear a religious medallion. Like it or not, any government held data is subject to being released to the public that paid for it to be gathered. It maybe illegal to release it today but laws can change. Also government databases are administerd by bureaucrats who can be cajoled, blackmailed or bribed. Don't fool yourself; those records are not even remotely secure.

The real problem is the whole idea of a having to ask permission to practice a fundamental human right. Even worse is having to ask permission from an organization that loves to keep records.

Munk
04-22-2011, 12:43 PM
Isn't there some legal recourse... like emotional damage, or something. I've seen people sued for posting true things online because it damaged a person's ability to do business, or hurt their feelings. Can't we turn that crap around on them?



I have stopped newspapers from doing the same using google and telephones.

I cant do it now because I'm off grid and no phone ( 50 mile or so round trip to get in cell range)

What I've done is call the paper and ask the person answering their name, they usually answer then ask why I want it. I tell them I'm publishing their name on various gun owner websites ( it really freaks them out! ) they try to protest but then I say turnabout is fairplay, you publish our names & we will publish yours.

I've called publishers at their homes to complain, they hate that.

What works really great is calling their advertisers AT HOME, tell them since they support racist anti gunners you are publishing their personal info on internet gun websites, these kind of tactics work great.

If we turn the heat at them & their advertisers it works FAST. They're roaches and hate the light.


You're off the grid... yet are online? Phone calls are as easy as e-mail thanks to google voice. Speakers + Microphone = phone calls through the computer.

Dreaded Claymore
04-22-2011, 12:53 PM
I don't like things like this but I suspect that the CCW Sunshine Initiative and this list of names have the same legal principles at their roots.

J.D.Allen
04-22-2011, 3:33 PM
Sunshine initiative doesn't want nor need names.

But you or I could do the same thing and publish the names.

gunsmith
04-22-2011, 4:29 PM
Isn't there some legal recourse... like emotional damage, or something. I've seen people sued for posting true things online because it damaged a person's ability to do business, or hurt their feelings. Can't we turn that crap around on them?






You're off the grid... yet are online? Phone calls are as easy as e-mail thanks to google voice. Speakers + Microphone = phone calls through the computer.

I work/live on a ranch with a primitive satt internet connection, most of the broadband is sucked up by the ranch owner for his publishing company , I also have less than 500 MB of RAM & am lucky to even see my threads emails etc... to be honest I like not having a phone too - the only people who call me are bill collectors and I'm to broke to do anything right now. thanks to the liberals sacking the economy I may never recover

bussda
04-23-2011, 1:36 PM
How exactly is the ccw list a 'public record' and the nfa list 'priviliged tax records'
...


I think California CCW records are defined as a part of CBS v. Block and NFA list 'priviliged tax records' as a part of Treasury regulations and the federal privacy act.