Bill Would Take Away Public Access To Gun Permit Database

[X_Digger]

http://www.indianasnewscenter.com/news/local/84984057.html

INDIANAPOLIS (Indiana's NewsCenter) - A controversial bill that would take away public access to the state's gun permit database has been approved by Indiana lawmakers.

Both the State House and Senate have overwhelmingly approved the bill.

Legislators looked into the matter after gun owners complained that newspapers used the database to examine how permits were issued.

Supporters say it's simply a matter of privacy.

The update to this article is that the governor signed this bill into law on Friday.

[spin]

1. Privacy is important ...

Bloomington, IN:

“This week, HeraldTimesOnline.com will launch its new gun permit database. You’ll be able to search gun permit records by county, city or town and street.”

Anyone who visits the newspaper website will be able to search the number of permits on a given street or neighborhood. Although at this point the names and house numbers are not listed, the newspaper’s website treats law-abiding Indiana Gun gun owners like sex offenders on a searchable database.

So, what does the NRA have to say about this:

It is NRA’s firm belief that there is no public good served by the publishing or cataloguing private citizens’ gun ownership information, and that more harm is done by such an action. Law-abiding Hoosiers should not be subjected to the same treatment as sex offenders

Some rural or suburban streets have only a few houses, so listing a street with five homes and four permit holders provides gun thieves with a shopping list of homes to rob.

On the flip side……a street with no permit holders also informs criminals which homeowners are likely to have no method of self-defense, making them easy target victims.

No public good is served by “journalists” publishing or cataloguing private citizens’ gun permit information; in fact, more harm is done by such an action.

It doesn’t matter what your position is on gun ownership. What matters is that this stupidity of journalist are now putting a lot of people in danger for no reason. Yes, this is public information but do you know how to get that information? Most don’t, even criminals. But now, all they have to do is go to their local newspaper database and get all the information in one place. AND it will be current and up to date information – yippee!

Good Grief. What the hell is happening around us?
http://www.2secondsfaster.com/2009/12/database-of-gun-owners-just-plain-stupid/

The NRA does make a valid point as publishing such a searchable database opens BOTH gun owners and non gun owners to an unnecessary threat.

[shadowrider]

2. IIRC, there was a state that wanted to publish CCW holders

Addresses. It was voted down, but letting people know who's carrying kinda defeats the purpose of CCW.

I honestly don't remember which state it was.

[JDPriestly]

3. I oppose public access to gun databases because I don't own a gun and don't

want to own a gun. I also don't want criminals to be able to find out that I don't own a gun.

[spin]

4. Exactly. Many people who do own firearms also don't want criminals..

to be able to find out.

The newspaper has its head up its ass. Its actions endanger both those who own guns and those that don't.


edited for grammar.

[pipoman]

5. Exactly why

Bloomberg, Daley, and several media outlets would love to see the so called Tiahart Amendment repealed....so they could exploit and harass gun owners and ffl dealers.

[Name removed]

6. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

7. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[PavePusher]

8. I'll allow such public access...

when you agree to public records of all your books and papers (edit) and medical records.

You first.

[shadowrider]

9. So you don't care that by publishing such a list

On which your name does NOT appear, criminals know you're unarmed (and therefore an easy target)?

[depakid]

11. +1

[gorfle]

14. See post #3.

[friendly_iconoclast]

17. Don't you have an unsubstantiated rumor that needs retracting?

Ah, yes. Here it is:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=118&topic_id=303311&mesg_id=303625

Just to remind you, your assertion there appears to be inaccurate....

[friendly_iconoclast]

20. I notice you wisely avoid posting your address in your profile.

After all, we know what harm could be done with that information if it were publicly available.

But when gun owners do the exact same thing, it's paranoia...

Sauce for goose, meet gander!

[depakid]

21. It must be really difficult living with that kind of fear and paranoia

You can get a shooter's license here provided that you have a bona fide reason for owning a gun though you have to jump through a couple of hoops:

http://www.atsc.com.au/pages/faqs.htm

I assume they're public records- as they ought to be in the states.

[cowman]

22. Well thank

god we are not like the Aussies, BTW, why do you or someone like you have a need to know if I have a CCW or even own a gun, answer, you or someone like you have no damn reason to know

And oh BTW, I don't live in fear or paranoia because I know if I am forced to use lethal force I am prepared to do so

[friendly_iconoclast]

23. We have a different metric, to which you need to adjust. Or become politically irrelevant.

I believe George Bernard Shaw's Julius Caesar had an apt description of people such as yourself:

"He thinks that the customs of his tribe and island are the laws of nature"
to Theodotus, from "Caesar and Cleopatra".

I assume they're public records- as they ought to be in the states.

Yeah, yeah, we know already: "If you have nothing to hide you have nothing to worry about"

If it makes you feel any better, I didn't buy it from the Bush/Cheney Administration and its supporters, either

[depakid]

24. LOL- you're the one who lives in the paraboid nuthouse.

where people shoot each other to settle disputes or "show their employers, coworkers or clasmates" or ambush cops or carry guns to presidential events!

And reject even the most modest efforts to regulate firearms proliferation and keep appropriate data on their harmful effects.

We on the saner side of the world simply shake our heads- or increasingly, laugh at the craziness and thank our lucky stars that we had the good sense to turn away from that kind of culture.

[cowman]

25. you never did

answer my ?, why should people like you know whether I carry concealed or not?

It's nobody's business if I carry or not.

Personally it's really none of your business as you don't even live in this country

[depakid]

26. It's a matter of public record- and should be, just as any other public record

Like the makes and models of the vehicles you own, for example.

Personally, I think you should be subject to far more stringent licensing requirements updated at appropriate intervals.

[cowman]

28. Not where

I live, and it should NOT be a matter of public record as the public has no business knowing if I carry or not. The only reason I can see for making our license public is so people like you can harass us or so criminals will know who is armed and who is not.

Tell me, what good does it do to know if I am armed or not?

[friendly_iconoclast]

29. Your attitude would not have been out of place in the Bush/Cheney Administration

Fortunately, we got rid of that crowd. It seems you are still bitter about it...

[pipoman]

33. Uh, no

not in most states. Vehicle registration info isn't public record. Why? Because road rage assholes would be running the tags of the people who they believe dissed them on the road and showing up at their house. So, no, in most states vehicle registration isn't public record...at least not instantly available..

[SteveM]

40. In Texas, they stopped the practice of public access to vehicle registration...

quite a few years back. Why? Because any stalker, road-rager, B & E thug, and rapist could take down a license plate #, phone the DMV, and get the car-owner's name and address. And they did, with predictable consequences. Aiding and abetting crime should not be a function of the state.

[Euromutt]

38. For your edification, the federal Driver Privacy Protection Act!

18 USC § 2721-2725 http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode18/usc_sup_01_18_10_I_20_123.html

So no, you can't just walk into the local DMV and ask to see the records of some other person. That is, you can ask, but unless you can demonstrate a reason permitted under § 2721(b), they're not legally permitted to release any information to you.

[friendly_iconoclast]

27. Here's some news from that "saner side of the world":

This is from one visit to the Sydney Morning Herald's site. For the really lurid stuff, you need to go to the
Murdoch-owned sites.

And remember-these are just aberrations in the paradise that is Sunnybrook-Farm-With-Marsupials (because the dead are somehow less dead when guns aren't used.Just take it on faith, alright?), while the accounts of Yanks with guns prove America is sick. Supposedly.


Anyway, off we go:


http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/doctors-knew-killer-girlfrien...

Doctors knew killer girlfriend dangerous: father March 23, 2010 - 1:32PM

The father of a man stabbed to death by his mentally ill girlfriend on Christmas Day says he feels let down by doctors who knew she was a danger to the community.

Tamie Melehan, 29, had been diagnosed with paranoid schizophrenia in 2002, admitted to hospital 20 times in seven years and had previously told doctors she wanted to commit mass murder.

She killed David Vaughan in the shower of her apartment on December 25, 2008.


Qantas kept sick pilot in the sky

PAUL BIBBY A MENTALLY ill Qantas pilot was allowed to continue flying passenger jets for nearly three years despite repeatedly complaining of his urges to crash the planes he was flying.


Arrested while visiting victim at hospital
GLENDA KWEK 11:22am The de facto partner of a man who was allegedly stabbed in the stomach has been charged with attempted murder, with police arresting her while she visited him in a Sydney hospital.


Charged with robbing quadriplegic at Sydney shopping centre
11:22am A man who allegedly robbed a quadriplegic at a shopping centre in Sydney's east has been remanded in custody.


Surf star rides into storm of outrage
CAROLINE MARCUS SYDNEY'S Jewish community has been deeply offended by a magazine that quotes world champion surfer Mick Fanning calling a journalist a ''f---ing Jew''.

[friendly_iconoclast]

30. I was wrong- it was Richard Hofstadter, not Shaw, who best described people like you

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=103x521301

"The...spokesman," Hofstadter wrote, "is always manning the barricades of civilization...Like religious millennialists he expresses the anxiety of those who are living through the last days and he is sometimes disposed to set a date for the apocalypse...He does not see social conflict as something to be mediated and compromised...Since what is at stake is always a conflict between absolute good and absolute evil, what is necessary is not compromise but the will to fight things out to a finish."

So, for all your wowserism and frequently proclaimed Australian-ness- your style is very American!

[SteveM]

42. And Hofstadter should know first-hand...

when he copped D. H. Lawrence in describing the American gun-owner as "hard, isolate, stoic and a killer."

"America as a Gun Culture," American Heritage, October, 1970.

[friendly_iconoclast]

44. Probably true when Lawrence said it, arguable in 1970, and untrue now

Lawrence was writing in the 1920's, when most gun owners were hunters (who are by definition killers, neh?)

Now, there are ca. 80 million gun owners in the US, most are not hunters, the number is rising and the murder rate is declining.

If American gun owners are killers, they seem to be remarkable lackadaisical about it, given their numbers...

[pipoman]

32. In the words of Larry King

'Wha'da'ya'care?'..for someone who lives in Shangrala half way around the planet, are there no issues for you to involve yourself a little closer to home? Even if you want to worry your pretty little head about guns, there would be the proliferation of arms, there are problem areas much closer to your home...so why here? You remind me of the dopey neighbor who worries about the length of their neighbor's grass, the number of guests their neighbor has, where the neighbor parks their car, what the neighbor is eating for supper, and what time the neighbor goes to bed....just lives for the tinkering in the issues of others.

[depakid]

34. Unfortunately, pathological little shitheads halfway around the world can affect other people

halfway again around the world.

As well as reasonable people in their own country.

[cowman]

36. Tell you what

you worry about your country and we'll worry about our country

You can rant and rave all you want but your opinion of us is just that, an opinion and it means dick to us, you may not like guns and that is your right but here in the states we do have the 2nd amend which is here to stay so get over it and move on

BTW I notice you always seem to resort to name calling, is that because you are a very insecure person?

[pipoman]

41. Oh, but nevermind

the eastern block full autos in your own back yard..No, I think you must not have much to do there if your concern is so rabidly on US policy..

[friendly_iconoclast]

43. I think it's the idea of people owning guns without prior approval that has you going Full Cartman

Since even you haven't claimed that guns are being smuggled into Australia from the States, I'd venture to say that
our promotion of the following ideas is apparently what has you so upset. Don't want these dangerous notions to gain any traction Down Under, do you?:

1) The ordinary person has a right to keep and bear commonly used firearms without being allowed to by the
authorities first, and cannot be deprived of this right without due process of law.

2) People who are not hunters and do not live in rural areas can have guns, if they so wish and are not otherwise under legal prohibition.

3) While the number of guns and gun owners in the US has skyrocketed in recent years, the murder and violent crime rates
have gone down.

That's what you don't want to hear, and that is why you alternate between posting anecdotal reports of violent crimes and bigoted remarks about the supposed 'inferiority' of American society.

The facts don't fit your prejudices, and can't be made to conform to them

[friendly_iconoclast]

46. A US concealed handgun permit holder is less likely to commit a felony than an Australian...

...or other Americans as a whole, statistically speaking.

Now, which group was it that we are supposed to be worried about?

[friendly_iconoclast]

48. CORRECTION: They are about as safe to be around as Australians...

...due to recent declines in Australia's murder rate. Depending on what time period one uses, it's pretty much a wash.

Still, I would ask our distinguished Australian DUer:

Why such venom directed towards these people, when they are demonstrably no more dangerous than the inhabitants of the
"fine society"?

[friendly_iconoclast]

49. But it gets better- there are *SIX* million US CHP holders now:

Thanks to GreenStormCloud for finding this:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=118&topic_id=304374&mesg_id=304487

GreenStormCloud (1000+ posts) Wed Mar-24-10 11:58 AM
Response to Original message
30. Redo the math. There are six (6) million of us now.
That is according to http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34714389/ns/us_news-life /

From its beginnings in the 1980s, the “right-to-carry” movement has succeeded in boosting the number of licensed concealed-gun carriers from fewer than 1 million to a record 6 million today, according to estimates from gun-rights groups that are supported by msnbc.com’s research.

And the number is still climbing.

[Euromutt]

35. You "assume they're public records"

I'm not sure that assumption is entirely correct. The NSW Police Force, for example, has an "Internet Register of Licences and Permits to Acquire" (https://www.ebiz.police.nsw.gov.au/FPR/licenceCheck/search.jsp) but it's searchable only by the permit number. Moreover, the page states:

The Firearms Registry collects and uses personal information in accordance with the Privacy and Personal Information Protection Act 1998.
We may also use and disclose personal information for purposes related or ancillary to the main reason it was collected to a third party deemed appropriate by the Commissioner in conjunction with the approval of the individual to whom the information relates.

Italics mine. Under the NSW Privacy and Personal Information Protection Act 1998, a public sector agency may not release information for a purpose other than that for which it was collected, or directly related to such purpose, without the consent of the person involved or "in order to deal with a serious and imminent threat to any person’s health or safety" (http://www.lawlink.nsw.gov.au/lawlink/privacynsw/ll_pnsw.nsf/pages/pnsw_03_ppipact). I should hope that means that a firearms dealer can check to ensure that I'm licensed to acquire the gun I want to buy, or the gun club can check that I legally own the gun I want to shoot, but that if some bloke who claims to live in my street in Lithgow or Wagga Wagga wants to know what guns (if any) I have registered to me, the police cannot tell him without my consent (which, needless to say, would not be forthcoming).

[SteveM]

39. "fear and paranoia?" Projecting a bit? I got 9 hrs. sleep last night. nt

[safeinOhio]

50. Not really

they are only posting CCW permits. No permit is required to own a handgun or long gun. Any crook going by that is dumber than a box of rocks. Saying that, I am not in favor or making permit information public.

[Euromutt]

10. Yeah, those cowardly car drivers!

We should repeal the Driver Privacy Protection Act (18 USC § 2721-2725 http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode18/usc_sup_01_18_10_I_20_123.html) at the earliest opportunity! What's so important that any person with just your license plate number shouldn't be able to look up your name, address, telephone number, social security number, driver license or identification card number, medical or disability information, and emergency contact information? What have they got to hide? It's no like anyone might exploit that information for criminal purposes or anything.

[SteveM]

12. wruff! wruff! King of the forest!

[cowman]

13. Why should

people like you know whether or not I have a CCW permit? So people like you can harass me? I find that people who call other people cowards are the cowards themselves

[friendly_iconoclast]

18. Do you think we should allow access to records of those reported for STD's?

After all, some of those can and do kill people. I suppose all those HIV activists are just being paranoid as well...

[friendly_iconoclast]

19. You forgot the next part: "If they have nothing to hide, they have nothing to worry about."

FTFY

[gorfle]

15. Good.

I am all for respecting the privacy of firearm owners.

But really, the people most protected by this law are people without firearms.

If I were a criminal into robbing homes, the very first thing I'd do is run the address of my prospective target through this database. Why rob armed homes when you could rob unarmed ones?

[Taitertots]

16. Lets just hand criminals a list of where valuable items are

Who is so stupid that they want to give criminals an easy guide of where to steal guns from?

[ZombieHorde]

31. I agree this is a privacy issue. nt

[burrfoot]

37. It's a good move, that information should be private.

You guys have hashed out the reasons already, I really think they're pretty much self-evident anyway.

Didn't somebody a couple of months ago start posting the names of CCW owners that he got from a few state newspapers here on this site?

And, if I recall correctly, didn't the thread get deleted since we don't post personal information about each other here?


:shrug:

[SsevenN]

45. Good

Gun Ownership is a personal thing, like sexual preferance.

Forcing public exposure on a sub-group of citizens is never a healthy interest.

[votingupstart]

47. interesting - we will have to see where it goes n/t

[proteus_lives]

51. Good for my state.

It's a privacy issue.