Invasion of Privacy

[Carl N. Brown]

Direct editorial page contact is

http://www.commercialappeal.com/staff/otis-sanford/contact/

 

[INMY01TA]

I corresponded with Chris Peck (on the list). Got a canned response the first time. Then he sent me this:

Come on,.

I'm a big boy and have no problem with people take pokes at me, My phone number is the book.

But posting my kids photos, phone numbers and addresses on pro-gun Web sites and linking them to this whole discussion?

You know that's wrong.

Or do you?

Chris Peck, Editor
The Commercial Appeal
495 Union Ave.
Memphis, TN 38103
[email protected]
901-529-2390

Here is another:

No, I didn't say that. You said that.

For the record, in Tennessee, the database of who has a permit to carry a handgun is a public document. Anybody can see it.


That's different from what the gun groups are doing. They have taken photos of my wife and kids are put them up on a pro-gun Web sites as a means of intimidation.

Is that what you are all about?

And if that's your definition of fair play, why not send me photos of your family to post?

Except we wouldn't do it. It wouldn't be right.

Chris Peck, Editor
The Commercial Appeal
495 Union Ave.
Memphis, TN 38103
[email protected]
901-529-2390

I don't think he's too happy about all this. Nor does he seem to think that anything he did is wrong.

 

[Duke of Doubt]

What a Peck. Keep it up, boys.

 

[Lightninstrike]

What a Peck. Keep it up, boys.

Yep, it works, doesn't it?

 

[spartywrx]

So apparently they've added their addresses and phone numbers to the list of "curse words."

Simple fix, put a space or "." behind the first number of their addresses.

eg
Chris Peck, Editor
21 Belleair Dr
Memphis, TN 38104
901-276-8314
901-529-2390, Office

becomes

Chris Peck, Editor
2 1 Belleair Dr
Memphis, TN 38104
9 01-276-8314
9 01-529-2390, Office

 

[Duke of Doubt]

Those newspaper fellows sure must be fielding an awful lot of questions to bother doing something like that.

I fired off an e-mail to their direct editorial contact earlier today.

 

[divemedic]

I did a public records search of my own:

http://street-pharmacy.blogspot.com/2009/02/public-records.html

ETA: this is what he had to say about gun owners on April 3, 1997 while doing an interview with PBS:

CHRIS PECK, Editor, Spokane Spokesman-Review: I think there's a spider web of interactivity that is--that is connecting these people in a way that they haven't been connected before. And that's what really different. I mean, there's always been right wing and paranoid action in this country, but what's different now is that they are connected in a loose way but in a much more real way than ever before.

 

[Old Fuff]

That's different from what the gun groups are doing. They have taken photos of my wife and kids are put them up on a pro-gun Web sites as a means of intimidation.

Of course when they printed the database of concealed license holders they didn't ever think that it would be a form of intimidation - designed to alert neighbors, friends, and of course employers who might object to someone having a license.

These lift-wing media people like to dish it out, but they can't take it when the tables are turned.

 

[Art Eatman]

Peck doesn't seem to realize that all most folks want is to be left alone. You go to poking a nest full of sleeping wasps who are minding their own business, and you can regret waking them up.

As regards "warning" about CHL folks: We have police-agreed clean histories in life. The FBI says so. All the data says we're the least-problem group of all, to the cops.

Can Peck say that about newsies?

 

[bondmid003]

Any of you know if its legal to post this same information about Florida CC holders?

 

[foxfire]

there's hope for us Tennesseans yet
this was on the front page of the CA this morning:

http://www.commercialappeal.com/news/2009/feb/19/tennessee-house-advances-bills-dealing-guns/

Gun laws get push in Tennessee House committee
Bills would OK firearms in bars, parks; ban printing names of permit holders
By Richard Locker (Contact), Memphis Commercial Appeal
Thursday, February 19, 2009

NASHVILLE -- The legislature began fast-tracking bills Thursday to let people with carry permits take guns into state and local parks and establishments serving alcohol -- all places where they are currently banned.

The House handgun study committee also recommended making secret the list of Tennessee's 219,236 gun-carry permit holders and to penalize any publication of their identities. Shelby County has 32,934 permit licensees.

The panel recommended four bills on which Chairman Joe McCord, R-Maryville, said there is broad consensus to approve. All four are set for the criminal justice subcommittee next week and could reach floor votes in March.

Lawmakers said the parks bill would prohibit cities and counties from restricting handguns in their local parks, playgrounds and ball fields.

Current Tennessee law outlaws guns in all state and local parks, playgrounds and ball fields other than by law enforcement officers.

The bill allowing guns in places serving alcohol, including restaurants, was recommended with a provision forbidding guns after 11 p.m.

The new Republican majority has made the bills' passage a virtual certainty after years of defeat. McCord said The Commercial Appeal's posting of a searchable database of permit holders on its Web site also prompted swift action.

"We've been working on this for several years, actually, but there has been a tremendous outcry to legislative offices from constituents across the state in response to that. They don't think the lists should be published."

National Rifle Association lobbyist Heidi Keesling discussed scheduling the bills in committees with lawmakers after the committee adjourned.

Rep. Curry Todd, R-Collierville, who moved for approval of the secrecy bill, said "It's no concern of mine" when asked afterward if the bill's penalties for publishing raised First Amendment concerns.

Chris Peck, editor of The Commercial Appeal, said, "Clearly, the Second Amendment gives Tennessee citizens the right to be armed. That's not the issue here. People of Tennessee need to think about whether there is a public interest in knowing who is permitted to carry a weapon in the state.

"I think there is. When a concealed or carried weapon comes out public, what happens next with that gun can affect the lives of everyone within range of that firearm."

Peck said commercialappeal.com's link to the data has attracted more than 500,000 page views in the last three months.

"To me, this shows the level of public interest in this public information," he said.

Officials in Memphis and its suburbs expressed differing views on the guns-in-parks bill.

Memphis City Councilman Shea Flinn, a member of the parks committee, said he understands allowing licensees to take guns into large state parks but questioned the wisdom of allowing them in smaller city parks.

"If you feel like you can't take your kid to the swing sets without packing heat, we've got a much bigger problem than just throwing more guns at it," he said.

Arlington Mayor Russell Wiseman said, "Personal protection is something that people feel strongly about, but I don't know why it should be so pressing to extend that to parks."

Germantown Mayor Sharon Goldsworthy said making it easier to bring guns into city parks and ball fields "feels ill-advised. This is not a good mix of where guns should be.

"We've worked hard to create an environment that feels safe."

Gun bills

A Tennessee legislative study committee on handguns recommended approval of four bills to serve as the basis for legislative action this year, all subject to debate and amendments:

HB962: Allows handgun-carry permit holders to take guns into places serving alcohol until 11 p.m., unless owners post signs banning guns.

HB959: Makes gun-carry permit records confidential and levies fines for publishing them.

HB960: Allows permit holders to carry guns into all state and local parks.

HB961: Allows permit holders to carry handguns into state wildlife management areas.

More info: For more details and to contact lawmakers, go to capitol.tn.gov.

--Richard Locker: (615) 255-4923
**********************************************************

ff

 

[Old Fuff]

I wonder if Editor Chris Peck has ever considered that there a lot of people now who are carrying concealed guns in public places, and without question they are endangering all sorts of men, women and children. It's unlikely that his publication of "the list" will do anything stop them, and without doubt they "can affect the lives of everyone within range of that firearm."

They are called "criminals," and they respect neither laws nor newspapers. Maybe he should turn his attention toward them and stop worrying about licensed carriers that have a well-established record of responsible behavior.

 

[rainbowbob]

"Personal protection is something that people feel strongly about, but I don't know why it should be so pressing to extend that to parks."

I've had several potential problems in local parks in the last couple of years. Ya know what?...I'm not going to give up my parks.

They can't have 'em.

I'm not talking about vigilante nonsense...but I'm not ceding that ground.

 

[Old Fuff]

It always interests me the way certain people, the mass media, and politicians agonize and whine over the idea of licensed law-abiding folks carrying arms in various places, and ignore the fact that criminals are doing all of the time. When is the last time that a victim was mugged by a thug who was legally carrying under the color of a state-issued license? How many of the various shooting that happened in schools were done by someone who had a CCW – and just how did “no guns allowed” regulations and laws deter the individuals that did do them?

Apparently these metal midgets actually believe that it’s unnecessary or undesirable for potential victims to be armed, because criminals will obey they’re laws!

Obviously there is no cure for dumb… :banghead:

 

[edSky]

Sad to say, but some blogger in Arkansas just published a complete list of CHL holders here. I sure hope he broke some law in doing so. From the Arkansas Concealed Carry Association we have:

Arkansas Times Publishes List of Arkansas State Concealed Carry Holders
02 20 2009, 13:07

UPDATE - Arkansas Code 5-73-307 states, "The Department of Arkansas State Police shall maintain an automated listing of license holders and this information shall be available on-line, upon request, at anytime, to any law enforcement agency through the Arkansas Crime Information Center." This does not sound like the list would be subject to the "public document" argument and used to attack the privacy of law abiding gun owners and people who have orders of protection does it?

The Arkansas Times blogger and uber leftist Max Brantly, gleefully put up a link to the excel file that holds every Arkansas Concealed Carry License holders name & address.

The Times didn't even bother to scrub the address of the permit holders, have they ever heard of identity theft? And what about my privacy rights?

As Arkansas Project Contributor and State Representative Dan Greenberg notes, "Max’s glee in communicating public information wasn’t in evidence a week or two ago, when my bill to make the criminal records of public officials available to the public came before the House Judiciary Committee. At that point, Max said that that bill “simply has an aura of meanness.” (Of course, he’s hardly the only person who didn’t like the idea; the bill got voted down by the House Friday.)What drives Max’s shifting moods on the freedom of public information? Is it just a matter of what he had for breakfast that day?"

Not only is Max obviously biased in his intrepetation of freedom of public information he seems to have quite a distaste for the privacy rights of lawabiding gun owners.

Maybe we should look at getting a bill through that keeps law abiding gun owners personal information private?

 

[Old Fuff]

Well there is plenty of information available in this thread concerning methods of counter attack. I would start by doing some deep research on Mr. Brantly & family. Since he believes in full disclosure he should get to see some.

Generally Lefties can hand it out but aren't so good a taking it.

 

[MT GUNNY]

I sent this Person (Chris Peck) an Email expressing my displeasure with his actions.
I received a Message back from him ;

Hey MT GUNNY - Let me get this straight. You're saying that there is no difference between posting the State of Tennessee's legal, public database on permit-to-carry gun owners, and posting pictures of my kids, with their addresses, on pro-gun Web sites?

So, should gun owners in Tennessee be be sending me pics of kids and wives to put on the pubic record database?

Of course not. That would be wrong and unfair.

But you condone it, right?

I wrote Back this;

What I'm saying is, Just because the "law" says you can Post the info does not make it RIGHT !!!

Just so you Know I didn't Post your Info. I am Upset that you Posted Personal Info of others and Emailed you so you could see that others didn't like it Either. This never would have happened if you wouldn't have done what you did. We pro Gunners are a Honorable Bunch If you were to Print a Apology I would Personally Get that Info off that Particular Website. As a matter of fact i will go there and announce that, I will ask for removal of your Info if you Post a Apology. You will have to show me Proof of that of course!

Are you Happy with the Outcome?
Do you take Pleasure showing Criminals Who has Firearms and Who Don't. You effectively gave Criminals a Map of who they could safely Rob! Do you not see that?


If this Person posts a apology and shows me Proof or if any of You see the Apology will the Moderators help me Remove his Info from this Thread under Honorable Conditions? To show him We are a Honorable Bunch!

 

[Carl N. Brown]

Sayeth the newspaper:

Lawmakers said the parks bill would prohibit cities and counties from restricting handguns in their local parks, playgrounds and ball fields.

The facts:
The bill would not allow cities and counties to bar permit holders from carrying in local parks, playgrounds and ball fields.
It would not prevent cities and counties from barring unlicensed carry.

Tennessee state law bars going armed in public for offense or defense, except you can carry a handgun for defense with a permit.

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

Peck's family put their personal info before the public on face book, etc. so how is that different from permit holders' info being made available by the CA? It isn't. The key is, is there a real need to know for the info posted by CA? Given the prejudice against gunowners in some of the comments in favor on the CA talk page on the article, I question the wisdom of allowing some of those anti-gunnuts to know who they can shun and ostracize for exercising a constitutional right.

 

[Duke of Doubt]

I'm unclear. Have we invited Mr. Peck to participate here, as LOKI participated?

 

[divemedic]

Let me get this straight. You're saying that there is no difference between posting the State of Tennessee's legal, public database on permit-to-carry gun owners, and posting pictures of my kids, with their addresses, on pro-gun Web sites?

So, should gun owners in Tennessee be be sending me pics of kids and wives to put on the pubic record database?

Of course not. That would be wrong and unfair.

But you condone it, right?

I disagree with his position. he is claiming that he posted that information because it is public record. When I posted the information that I did, I got that information from public sources, namely I googled his name, and the names of his family. What I posted is what those searches turned up. I see no difference between what I did, and what he did, with one minor difference: the information that he posted, I am required to give the government by law, whereas the stuff I got was in the public domain: facebook, a website listing the bios of reporters, and other similar sites.

His disclosure was voluntary, mine was required.

 

[Duke of Doubt]

divemedic: "His disclosure was voluntary, mine was required."

Powerful distinction, that. I've gone out of my way to keep my daughter off the internet, except as a carefully-trained anonymous participant. She's getting old enough that she can start to make her own decisions, but while in her more vulnerable years she had no public exposure at all. The Old Memphis Pecker put his own family out there, himself. Now he complains.

 

[Art Eatman]

Okay, enough venting and commentary. Face it, this isn't really on-topic for a legal discussion.