In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.
Options
OH: Why we printed the list
Josey1
Member Posts: 9,598 ✭✭
Why we printed the list
The media are the public's only access to concealed-carry permit records
Friday, July 30, 2004
In the past two days, The Plain Dealer ran a list of the Northeast Ohioans who applied for and got a license to carry a concealed weapon.
We were able to do so because the state legislature, bowing to Gov. Bob Taft's threat to veto a bill with no public access provision at all, gave the news media access to the list. The general public is not allowed to see it.
Advertisement
From the start, The Plain Dealer opposed that media-only provision, and so did most news organizations. We don't believe the media should have access to records that the general public is denied.
And, like the governor and millions of others across the country, we believe licensure in-
formation of all kinds should be open to public view.
Concealed-carry advocates have a decidedly different view. That became abundantly evident during the negotiations to pass the law and exceedingly so after we published the list.
Ohioans for Concealed Carry, the lobbying arm for proponents, posted my name, home phone number, address and a map to my home on its Web site. It also reported what I paid for my house in 1999 - $550,000 - my wife's name - Peg - and that I have two children and two grandchildren (in fact, I have three).
The posting, I gather, had two purposes. The first was to say "turnabout is fair play": Public records are public records, and you're not exempt.
The second was to intimidate. Why else run a map?
Calls home began flowing shortly after the posting went up at noon on Wednesday. Because I was at the office, my wife bore the brunt, though most of the callers were polite. (One apologized to her and told her it was "just your moron husband" he had a problem with.) A few, predictably, were ugly.
The majority asked a version of this question:
"Why did you single us out? Why don't you publish the names of sex offenders or people convicted of carrying an unlicensed concealed weapon, or other holders of other licenses?
The answer is that as the law is now written, the one and only way the average citizen can learn the identity of a concealed-weapon permit holder is if the news media publish it.
Thank the legislature for that.
Want to know if a sex offender lives next door? The state will send you an e-mail.
Want to know if your co-worker has a prison record? You can look it up.
Want to know how much my house costs? Ditto.
Want to know who has a fishing license - indeed, virtually any license? Correct, you can look it up. It's all public record.
License to carry a gun? Nope. The average Joe has only the slim reed of the news media to help him on that count.
Would we publish those names if the record were public? Of course not. There would be no need. Why? Because you could look it up.
You can do that in many of the other states that have concealed-carry laws. In one - Delaware - the entire process of getting a permit is a public record. And there, the law requires that the names of permit holders be published.
Ohioans for Concealed Carry is urging the legislature to negate the "privilege" the news media have to see the names of permit holders. We agree. That "privilege" (I would call it a right) belongs in the hands of the general public.
As it's now written, the only people truly "privileged" are the holders of concealed-carry permits, because they can shield their identities from the pub- lic.
That's a privilege most other license holders in the state can't claim.
Clifton is the editor of The Plain Dealer.
Contact him at:
dclifton@plaind.com, 216-999-4123
c 2004 The Plain Dealer. Used with permission.
http://www.cleveland.com/search/index.ssf?/base/opinion/1091179853288690.xml?occli
GEORGE WASHINGTON (First President)
"Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the people's liberty teeth keystone... the rifle and the pistol are equally indispensable... more than 99% of them by their silence indicate that they are in safe and sane hands. The very atmosphere of firearms everywhere restrains evil interference. When firearms go, all goes, we need them every hour." (Address to 1st session of Congress)
The media are the public's only access to concealed-carry permit records
Friday, July 30, 2004
In the past two days, The Plain Dealer ran a list of the Northeast Ohioans who applied for and got a license to carry a concealed weapon.
We were able to do so because the state legislature, bowing to Gov. Bob Taft's threat to veto a bill with no public access provision at all, gave the news media access to the list. The general public is not allowed to see it.
Advertisement
From the start, The Plain Dealer opposed that media-only provision, and so did most news organizations. We don't believe the media should have access to records that the general public is denied.
And, like the governor and millions of others across the country, we believe licensure in-
formation of all kinds should be open to public view.
Concealed-carry advocates have a decidedly different view. That became abundantly evident during the negotiations to pass the law and exceedingly so after we published the list.
Ohioans for Concealed Carry, the lobbying arm for proponents, posted my name, home phone number, address and a map to my home on its Web site. It also reported what I paid for my house in 1999 - $550,000 - my wife's name - Peg - and that I have two children and two grandchildren (in fact, I have three).
The posting, I gather, had two purposes. The first was to say "turnabout is fair play": Public records are public records, and you're not exempt.
The second was to intimidate. Why else run a map?
Calls home began flowing shortly after the posting went up at noon on Wednesday. Because I was at the office, my wife bore the brunt, though most of the callers were polite. (One apologized to her and told her it was "just your moron husband" he had a problem with.) A few, predictably, were ugly.
The majority asked a version of this question:
"Why did you single us out? Why don't you publish the names of sex offenders or people convicted of carrying an unlicensed concealed weapon, or other holders of other licenses?
The answer is that as the law is now written, the one and only way the average citizen can learn the identity of a concealed-weapon permit holder is if the news media publish it.
Thank the legislature for that.
Want to know if a sex offender lives next door? The state will send you an e-mail.
Want to know if your co-worker has a prison record? You can look it up.
Want to know how much my house costs? Ditto.
Want to know who has a fishing license - indeed, virtually any license? Correct, you can look it up. It's all public record.
License to carry a gun? Nope. The average Joe has only the slim reed of the news media to help him on that count.
Would we publish those names if the record were public? Of course not. There would be no need. Why? Because you could look it up.
You can do that in many of the other states that have concealed-carry laws. In one - Delaware - the entire process of getting a permit is a public record. And there, the law requires that the names of permit holders be published.
Ohioans for Concealed Carry is urging the legislature to negate the "privilege" the news media have to see the names of permit holders. We agree. That "privilege" (I would call it a right) belongs in the hands of the general public.
As it's now written, the only people truly "privileged" are the holders of concealed-carry permits, because they can shield their identities from the pub- lic.
That's a privilege most other license holders in the state can't claim.
Clifton is the editor of The Plain Dealer.
Contact him at:
dclifton@plaind.com, 216-999-4123
c 2004 The Plain Dealer. Used with permission.
http://www.cleveland.com/search/index.ssf?/base/opinion/1091179853288690.xml?occli
GEORGE WASHINGTON (First President)
"Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the people's liberty teeth keystone... the rifle and the pistol are equally indispensable... more than 99% of them by their silence indicate that they are in safe and sane hands. The very atmosphere of firearms everywhere restrains evil interference. When firearms go, all goes, we need them every hour." (Address to 1st session of Congress)
Comments
E D I T O R I A L S
A new report shows 7,000 people should have been banned from purchasing guns, but were able to due to background check delays.
We're disturbed that more than 7,000 people who should have been barred from buying guns were able to buy them in 2002 and 2003.
Equally troubling is the fact the government rarely prosecutes such cases, a new Justice Department report says
Obviously there's something wrong with the system when this many people can buy firearms.
Federal law stipulates that gun buyers might have to wait up to three business days before receiving their weapons; under a system of instant FBI background checks instituted in 1998. Most sales are approved much quicker. Of the 17 million gun purchases in the last two years, 122,000 were denied because of the checks.
Herein lies part of the problem: If the background check isn't completed within the period, however, the law says the purchase must go through. In 2002 and 2003, there were a combined 7,030 "delayed denial" cases in which the FBI found that a prohibited person was able to get a gun after the period expired.
Several reasons were cited by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives for its failure to retrieve the guns more quickly, including staffing shortages, technology problems and lack of adequate timeliness standards. The review also found that ATF agents did not consider it a priority to track down the illegal gun purchasers because they are not viewed as dangerous.
"We were also told that 'bad guys' generally do not purchase their firearms through legitimate dealers" but instead do so illegally, at unregulated gun shows or flea markets or through other means, the review said.
This is another big part of the problem. Unless and until these gun shows and other locales are regulated, the waiting period will be little more than a joke.
Those in Central Ohio who use firearms to hunt or protect themselves are not the targets. Nor should they be.
But those criminals who purchase guns for illegal means are not being effectively checked under the present system. That's obviously a big problem.
http://www.newarkadvocate.com/news/stories/20040730/opinion/947565.html
GEORGE WASHINGTON (First President)
"Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the people's liberty teeth keystone... the rifle and the pistol are equally indispensable... more than 99% of them by their silence indicate that they are in safe and sane hands. The very atmosphere of firearms everywhere restrains evil interference. When firearms go, all goes, we need them every hour." (Address to 1st session of Congress)