Would you care if your CCW status was published?

[SamV]

In light of this topic, new questions come to mind.

Are some states better than others about having legislation preventing this "outing" of permit holders?

Could the potential harm be somewhat prevented by getting a permit from a state that you do not reside in?

 

[Zundfolge]

In reality publishing my name in the paper wouldn't do any real harm to me (hell, you could put my photo on the cover of the paper showing my ccw piece and it wouldn't have any negative affect on me) ... but I would still be extremely pissed if the local paper published such a list (frankly my local paper is the last one that would post the list and has in fact editorialized for CCW against publishing such lists. But what do you expect from a newspaper owned by libertarians.)

I currently work for a small company and they know I CCW (as do some of my co-workers). I'm pretty open about the fact that I carry, and most who know me know I'm packing.

But at my last job I wouldn't have been comfortable with my employer knowing I carried (there was no policy against it, but I'd rather not give HR any ideas). I also know several people that carry that WOULD be hassled by their employers if such a list was published.

 

[foghornl]

The Cleveland "Plain Dealer" and the Akron "Beacon-Journal" HAVE printed such lists, and captured miscreants in both cities have admitted to using said lists in planning crimes...for use as both 'shopping lists' and 'Who NOT to mess with.'

Cleveland "Plain Dealer" Editor Douglas Clifton has said that they published those lists "...Because the Public has a right to know who may have a gun...", but refuses to publish Convicted Sex Offender Lists, "...Because even criminals have a right to privacy..."

 

[Justin]

Would you care if your CCW status was published?

I sure did when it was.

 

[SkiLune]

I would care. What is the point of concealed carry if there is a public list with your name and address on it?

Where does this end??? Motor vehicle records are also public. Perhaps next the RT could publish home addresses, cross referenced with vehicle types and license plates, description of the driver (printed on the license), pictures, and types of weapons purchased.

Why not?? Its all public information. Still angry and I live 500 miles away...

 

[flashman70]

As one who was on the list I did care. This was not just a list of names. It was a searchable database. You could plug in a town and get names and addresses of CHP holders in that town. Kinda made it easy for bad guys to narrow down their search for likely burglary sites. This was very irresponsible and yes, it was an attempt to create an aura of criminality around CHP holders.

 

[Kimber1911_06238]

yes....don't want people to know where i live or what is in my house. that's an invasion of privacy and should be illegal. how would everyone else like it if i published a list of everyone who had a plasma tv?

 

[tinygnat219]

Yup, I definitely care. As one of those 135K plus people who were just exposed here in VA, I am livid about it.

 

[beaucoup ammo]

Born Too Late

I tend to view this from Flashman's perspective. As a rule, the only "lists" published in the paper project negative connotations: dead beat dads, sex offenders, etc.

By printing the names of CCW holders, the image presented.. however subliminal..is that of an undesirable.

I detest the revelation of any information pertaining to myself: what I read, the fact I live in a certain area, what I drive..on and on. I would, in fact, love to "drop off the radar" but don't know where to begin, or if it's even possible any more: No more subscriptions (any mail for that matter), credit cards, paying bills by mail, private internet surfing, etc. Would I trade electricity and penicillin for anonymity? In a heart beat.

Would I care if my CCW status was published?? Oh, HELL yes.

 

[yhtomit]

context matters

This isn't the only reason to oppose, just the one that's most obvious to me: I don't want to see a Registry of Houses Worth Robbing.

In that regard, knowing that guns are a) inherently valuable and b) useful in the commission of further crimes, if I were a burglar intent on an interesting score, I'd be interested in knowing which houses have gun-owning residents, for two reasons:

1) Hey, rob this one when it's nice and *empty*!

2) I bet most CCW permit holders (and "many" is an even safer bet) have more than one gun.

Anyone with a concealed carry permit almost certainly has a handgun, and (In Pennsylvania, outside large cities) probably at least one long-arm as well.

For anyone who says they'd not mind so much having their info published, consider a parallel question: Would you like to see a list published in grid format with checkmarks to show which householders have any *other* particular goods? (I know, CCW and gun ownership aren't the same, but I think they're close enough here.) Imagine finding yourself and your neighbors on a list for ...

Large-screen LCD TVs
Recent model laptops
Expensive, pawnable power tools
High-end stereo equipment
Jewels

Unlike commodity electronics, guns really are closer to jewels or (other) art objects, in that their value sticks or increases.

Also, how about a list of people with security systems?

timothy

 

[pharmer]

I sure didn't like it when local news published an excel sheet of everyone in the 8 local counties. All my info there. It was only up for a day or so but all you had to do was save a copy. It was interesting to find out about some local folks you'd never think would pack though. CCW should be private and without licenses. The lack of privacy and personal dignity we have lost "to be safe" is troubling. Joe

 

[arctictom]

In Alaska , it would be a violation of the State constitution, (your right to privacy ). And I would file a civil complaint.

 

[Master Blaster]

My application was published in the Legal notices of the News Journal Paper for a week as required by Delaware code. That way folks who may object can call the Superior court and object. AFIK renewals are not published.

And yes I object because its none of anyones damn business.

Suppose they passed a law requiring folks who have AIDS to have their names on a website or in the news paper? Do you liberals think that would be OK after all it is REALLY for public safety.

 

[Green Lantern]

The Cleveland "Plain Dealer" and the Akron "Beacon-Journal" HAVE printed such lists, and captured miscreants in both cities have admitted to using said lists in planning crimes...for use as both 'shopping lists' and 'Who NOT to mess with.'

Can the victims of these crimes sue the papers??? Since common sense and decency are sorely lacking in the news media, and laws take time to get changed, hitting them with a killing blow in their bank accounts may be only way to stop this from becoming more widespread!

 

[GaryP]

Damn straight I'd care. It's my business, and the state's. It's a concealed permit. It's nobody else's business, and could easily lead to negative circumstances if others know.

Yes, my sentiments exactly!

 

[Travis Lee]

Would you care if you were on a published list of people of a certain ethnicity? Would you care if you were on a published list of people of a certain religion? Would you care if you were on a published list of a certain political party?

While the information may be findable from public records, publishing in the newspaper is an act made with malice and should be civilly, if not criminally actionable.

--Travis--

 

[MikePGS]

If the person responsible felt comfortable posting his or her religious affiliation, deepest most personal fantasies, and greatest fears... still no.

 

[Lupinus]

I have no problem with open carry but my status is just that, mine. If I want the world to know i carry a weapon it is up to me to tell the the world, not a newspaper.

 

[romma]

I would care. I am certainly not a closet gunner, but I like the personal choice of disclosure if I so desire... What happened to the so called privacy act? Do these type of matters not fit the liberal criteria?

 

[.cheese.]

I really don't see how it provides any benefit, and if anything it hurts people.

The way I see it is as follows, society doesn't want to see us carrying, hence why in most places open-carry is illegal.... fine.... so we go to good lengths to make sure when we carry, nobody knows - but then society turns around and say, "Ok, well we don't want to know WHEN you're carrying, but we do want to know IF YOU CAN carry." - which is having your cake and eating it too.

I think it's unfair to us to publish our names, and could put us at risk as a list of CCW'ers is a who's-who of where to find guns if you're a home burglar. Could be a deterrant, could provoke... I don't know.

Bottom line though is that society can't have it both ways. You want a list, ok... then open-carry is legal.... you don't want open-carry? Ok.... then it's don't ask don't tell... including no lists.

 

[.cheese.]

would society feel at ease having a list of everybody and their religion published by the government?

No.... so until somebody can explain to me what benefit there is to be had publishing CCW'er names... I have no reason to support it.

 

[crebralfix]

I don't like being part of a list of "stores" for felons.

 

[FLA2760]

I would NOT want my CCW information to be available as a public record for anyone to see. It is like printing a list of homes to burglarize for theives.

 

[Oohrah]

I resissited for years to get a ccw for one reason. It immediately
becomes part of your DMV record that almost anyone could access.
Stopped by the law, he knows you have one before your wheels
stop rolling. That part I didn't have a problem. When the law
changed to a felony violation, yep went and got one five years
ago. Little more at ease when I found out a LOT of people in
this area have them and carry. So far I haven't heard of a posting
in the newspaper or any plans to do so. Why would they?

 

[Green Lantern]

Ok, THR, answer me this...

Is giving negative feedback to the papers that publish these lists, calling for the firing of those respobsible for putting many people in danger, and hoping that those who published the lists get their pants sued off when a criminal uses it as a "shopping list..."

"Attacking the FIRST Amendment????"

I used the following analogy to sum up my feelings on it:

If a bully at school learns something about a victim that's relatively common (like, the victim's parent's are getting a divorce) and puts it up on fliers all over the school's public bulletin boards, can HE claim "FIRST AMENDMENT" when he gets in trouble with school administators for harassing his victim?

Publishing CCW info in the papers is exactly the same. Bullies, trying to "stigmitize" a group of people who are doing a perfectly legal and normal thing!

The best solution is to change the laws and seal the records, but in the MEANTIME...convincing the papers of the HARM they are doing and holding them ACCOUNTABLE for any harm that does occur...seems like the way to go!

Am I missing something here???