Why is having a CCW License public information?

A

anand

New member
I don't understand the logic in making public, who has a CCW License. If a LEO wants that info he can get it from the State Bureau of Licensing and usually can obtain that info by running a Drivers License on his computer.

In India, that sort of information is strictly confidential and the Police Department concerned, will not let it out to anyone including other Licensees.
And thats to prevent any bad guys from stealing guns from the licensees(and that happens quite a lot)

Has anyone taken this up with the NRA?
Regards,
Anand
 
Why is it that owning a home makes you a public person? Ever have those telemarketers call you for vinyl siding? Where do you think they got your name and number? I can tell you where, the county sells that info.

Register to vote and its the same deal. Your info can (and will) be sold. The idea of "privacy" is pretty much null and void.
 
Well, the cops are always gonna have access to CCW records, under both shall-issue and discretionary plans.

Some states make CCW data public record, available to the public by special request. This is far more controversial. In shall-issue states, it shouldn't happen but in discretionary states you can make a case that it's necessary to reveal equal protection violations and other legal abuses on the part of law enforcement.

That's what the Calif Supreme Court decided in "CBS vs. Block" available here: http://www.ninehundred.com/~equalccw/cbsvblock.html

To see what kind of fun somebody with sufficient determination can have with that sort of data, goto my site and pull up "The Contra Costa Cronies Roster".

In Massachussets, CCW records are sealed and police departments are doing discretionary "crony issuance" up the wazzoo without any possible oversight.

Jim March
Equal Rights for CCW Home Page http://www.ninehundred.com/~equalccw

[This message has been edited by Jim March (edited July 25, 2000).]
 
DPS says CCW records in Texas are not subject to the Freedom of Information Act. I don't know how that would be!!!

The public can not access CHL records here.
 
To quote the court in CBS vs. Block:

"The interest of society in ensuring accountability is particularly strong where the discretion invested in a government official is unfettered, and only a select few are granted the special privilege. Moreover, the degree of subjectivity involved in exercising the discretion cries out for public scrutiny. For example, the sheriff of Orange County has issued over 400 licenses; in Los Angeles County only 35 licenses
have been issued. Ostensibly, both sheriffs are applying the same statutory criteria for granting or denying these licenses. The apparent discrepancy indicates that something may be amiss. If the information on which the decision to grant can be kept from the public and the press, then there is no method by which the people can ever ascertain whether the law is being fairly and impartially applied."

This is radically different from the circumstances in TX under shall-issue...therefore TX CCW records are (and should remain) private, while California records under the current freakshow of a system must be public, as the court noted.

Jim
 
A few years ago in TN, the state revamped the carry issue. The Nashville paper Tennessean published all names and addresses of permit holders in the midstate area. The looks I got from all my nieghbors was priceless. What was it TDR said "Walk softly and carry a big stick"? Seems to work here.
 
Years go in New York "Newsday" otained a list of pistol permit holdrs in suffolk county NY (I live there) . While they did not publish the list of names the fact that they were allowed access to the names indictes that nothing is safe. Criminal elements could esily get the list of names and thereby know where to go to steal firearms.

Any information the government obtains about you is and should be considered public knowledge.

In my line of work I am required to turn over the list of my clients, their addresses and the type of work I perform for them. The state assures me that this information will be kept confidential. But my customers have all been approached by my competition and offered the same work at a slightly reduced price. Wonder how they knew who they were and what to offer them?

Geoff Ross

------------------
One reason to vote in the next Presidential election.

It's the Supreme Court, Stupid!
 
It would seem that making these records public defeats the meaning of "concealed".

The training I had drubbed into us "concealed means concealed" and understandably so. Many of the shall issue states make it an offense if you do not conceal properly.

Possibly, if one of these states that is making the records public also makes it an offense to not conceal properly, a gifted lawyer could charge the state with breaking their own law.

Regards
 
Bunkster, that's a really slick concept but for God's sake don't anybody pull it in a "discretionary state" until AFTER we reform the rules to at least shall-issue.

Because the "forces of good" need this data if we're ever gonna get the reforms.

Jim
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top