Herald Times Online to publish carry permits

[techres]

Guys, when speaking about this with your reps, or advertizers, the issue is not guns: it is about privacy and victims rights. People on that list expect the data to be private in part because it is required to be accurate and current by force of law. But in addition, many on that list are there because they were previously victims of crime and are still under threat. This exact scenario happened in other states and now stands to happen here.

Privacy and Victims RIghts.

People may be opposed to guns, and people might not like carry.

But Privacy? Everyone should be concerned when the state has a database and hands it out.

Victims RIghts? Everyone should be concerned when the state requires a database (under threat of imprisonment) and that includes the home addresses of women hiding from abusive ex-husbands. Any database that is effectively a map to a victim is nothing that should ever be available to the public, even if that public is a newspaper.

Keep it up. But remember, Privacy and Victims Rights.

That's how we will win.

 

[snapping turtle]

I look at it as a list not of gun owners/permit holders but of unprotected locations.

I think of things weird sometimes but don;t think that mister burglar does not see those address and stay away.

 

[SavageEagle]

Keep it up. But remember, Privacy and Victims Rights.

That's how we will win.

Good. I'm pretty sure my letters focused on this. Just from a different point of view. My letter basically asked them to put themselves in those people's shoes and asked them if it would be ok to publish their names and addresses and whether or not their homes are armed. I asked them if it would be ok to publish the list on every light pole on the East Side of Indy. I was respectful, but I probably could have been more polite. Then again, nice guys finish last, right?

 

[ssgjason]

I think this is important enough to bring to the top
I have called everyone I could at the Herald Times. Most are not answering, some have had their lines disconnected.
I have written letters to my Reps.

 

[Bill of Rights]

Guys, when speaking about this with your reps, or advertizers, the issue is not guns: it is about privacy and victims rights. People on that list expect the data to be private in part because it is required to be accurate and current by force of law. But in addition, many on that list are there because they were previously victims of crime and are still under threat. This exact scenario happened in other states and now stands to happen here.

Privacy and Victims RIghts.

People may be opposed to guns, and people might not like carry.

But Privacy? Everyone should be concerned when the state has a database and hands it out.

Victims RIghts? Everyone should be concerned when the state requires a database (under threat of imprisonment) and that includes the home addresses of women hiding from abusive ex-husbands. Any database that is effectively a map to a victim is nothing that should ever be available to the public, even if that public is a newspaper.

Keep it up. But remember, Privacy and Victims Rights.

That's how we will win.

I would be OK with the data in a specific person's record being accessible to that person as well, but I agree that no one else should have access other than a LEO involved in an active criminal investigation. I'd personally like to see the verification of licensure be by an officer putting in the licensee's name or address and it returning either a number or a "not found" message, though that may be asking too much. It's not that I don't trust LEOs but rather that the easier it is for the LEO to get my full record, the easier it is to hack the system and someone else do likewise.

I do agree with Techres, though. Appealing on the basis of gun rights does not resonate with anyone who is not a gun person. Address privacy and victims's rights issues, however... everyone wants privacy to some degree and I don't know of anyone who doesn't want the victim of a crime to have access to his/her rights.

Blessings,
Bill

 

[bwframe]

Today's Opinion Section

HeraldTimesOnline.com

Monday morning

H-T targeted over gun permit database

NRA action alert on gun story leads to hundreds of angry calls, e-mails from across the country

By Bob Zaltsberg H-T Editor
December 7, 2009

The NRA used its muscle against The Herald-Times last Tuesday, sending to its supporters an e-mail that was widely misunderstood by those who received it.

The e-mail took issue with the database published on HeraldTimesOnline.com that included minimal information about personal protection handgun permits held by people in Indiana. The NRA said the database treated law-abiding gun owners like sex offenders.

That unfair and unfounded characterization set off an angry reaction. Hundreds of calls and e-mails flooded in from all over Indiana and, among other identifiable locations, from Maryland, Ohio, North Carolina, Virginia, Illinois, Tennessee, Wisconsin and Texas. One e-mail signature was from Chile, another the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad.

What a vast majority of the NRA supporters who contacted the H-T didn’t realize was that the data we made available to the public was much, much different than any information the state would make available on sex offenders. The comparison was inaccurate and incendiary.

The information we published did not include any names, any specific addresses, and would have been difficult if not impossible to use to identify any law-abiding permit holder in the state.

Some of the people who contacted us asked a good question: “What is your purpose?”

As with a lot of items we publish, our purpose was to provide information we believed would be of interest to our readers. We believed and still believe that many people would be interested in knowing how many permits have been issued in their county, or the neighboring county, or their city, or on the street where they live.

This data base was published in conjunction with stories by reporter Michael Malik last week that explored the increase in permits issued in the last year and about how those permits are distributed through our circulation area.

Between us, publisher Mayer Maloney and I returned calls or e-mails to roughly 1,000 people. A vast majority of them misunderstood, from what the NRA had sent them, that we planned to publish names and addresses, which was never under consideration. Most were relieved and satisfied when they learned the truth.

E-mailer John had called us “stupid” in his original note, but when informed of the truth said: “Thank you for clarifying. I think you should inform the NRA Web site that they are distributing misinformation ... . I stand corrected.”

Patricia, who started her original note with “How dare you,” wrote: “I accept and thank you for your explanation. Sorry for any misunderstanding.”

Steve, who wrote that he had “never been more upset with any of your policies,” followed up with: “Thank you for the clarification. Perhaps something similar, placed on the front page, would be helpful to many others who are upset with this.”

Of course, some didn’t agree with our explanation and still believed we had made too much information available. Others were incensed, abusive and threatening, and nothing would change their viewpoint that we were slime, “un-American,” and other things not printable in a family newspaper.

Here are some lessons learned:
The NRA is a powerful voice. The way it portrayed what we did put us in the crosshairs of a lot of very angry people. Like a lot of organizations, its members are not all alike. Some were thoughtful and reasonable in their contacts with the newspaper. Many were not.

A lot of gun owners do not trust the media, and they really don’t trust government. Ironically, I heard dozens of times that if an individual had a gun permit, only the government should be able to know it.

A lot of people believe society is on the verge of collapse, and those with the guns have the best chance to survive. I can only surmise this is because of economic realities, the recent failings of institutions, and serious distrust of government — as well as, for some, plain paranoia.

A lot of people who are dedicated to the Second Amendment don’t have a clue about the First Amendment. One caller said he couldn’t believe we would provide such an easy way for the government to find out where all the guns are. He clearly didn’t understand government provided that information to us, and that information held by the government belongs to the people. One recent president put it well.

“We believe that the more transparency there is in the system, the better the system works on behalf of the American people.”
Well said, George W. Bush.

 

[SavageEagle]

Apparently no one in the article gets it. It's not about showing EXACTLY who has the guns, but about which streets have the best chance of NOT encountering a firearm for burglars. Maybe SOMEONE can write them and tell them...

 

[Cygnus]

2 Crazy facts about Massachusetts gun laws

I spoke with the people at GOAL.ORG as I may be accepting a job in MA or CT.

Two crazy facts are:

1. I can bring ANY of my guns obtain legally (all of them) in a move to the state with NO registration; IF I apply for and get a Class A (carry ) license. (A class A exempts you from their AWB)

2. It is ILLEGAL for ANYONE to provide the names, adresses , etc. of ANYONE's gun license no matter the class of the license. Only LEO's know it based on a need to know. The irony that MA is on the right side of the topic of this thread blows me away.
I'll bet they went privacy and victim's rights on this one....

 

[longbow]

F I R E MISSION!!! HELP ARFCOM- get-Herald Times newspaper to remove gun owner database-update - AR15.COM

interesting

the link is cold

who got it banned......geesh

 

[longbow]

Guess the HT didn't like all the attention

 

[Lars]

Calling the Newspaper is/was/will remain a loosing battle.

The solution is in the Statehouse.

 

[mettle]

I read the article today in the paper that published reader responses. The quality of writing ranged from scattered thought to clear and concise. It just boils my blood to be portrayed as a Pedophile...

 

[techres]

There are two groups currently acting on different approaches to this problem:

Group A: Legislative

These guys are calling reps and working with reps they already know. Keep a close eye on the 2A Patriots and if you are not on their email list - get on it! We have a few members here who have some direct connections and they are doing their best to talk with people one on one. Each of you should be calling and writing. Remember - Privacy and Victims Rights. If you are 100% sure they are a gun person, then fine too, but that is not the lead.


Group B: Advertisers and Suppliers of the HT

This is another group and if you want to work in this effort, PM me. It is not the best long term solution as legislation fixes the hole, but it does have it's place. I would say more here, but that is unwise. Best to say that if you are interested in helping here, PM me and I will put you in with others working on the same task.


Please make the calls and write the letters! Privacy, Victims Rights & Protections.


The article in the paper today, complete with HUGE picture of a pistol, was intended to paint us as ignorant, paraniod, and misled morons who hate the 1A as much as we love the 2A. It was yet another attempt to close this chapter and end their mistake. But, again, this is far from over.

Keep going!

 

[SavageEagle]

Thanks tech for the heads up. I will continue to fill email boxes with my letters. Hopefully we can get something done about this. The list should never have been public in the first place!

 

[Lars]

First response:

Dear Mr. ........:



Thank you for your e-mail to Governor Daniels regarding parts of the handgun permit database being published in The Bloomington Herald-Times. He appreciates the time you took to share your concerns and has asked me to respond on his behalf.



The Indiana State Police Department is required under Indiana Code 5-14-3 to release the handgun permit file when the agency receives a request. The I.S.P. cannot withhold this information when a public request is received.



Legislative change must occur to exempt the handgun permit database from being public record. You may wish to contact your State Representative with suggestions for changes to existing laws.



Please do not hesitate to contact Governor Daniels or the State Police with future questions or concerns.



Sincerely,



Douglas E. Shelton, Major

Indiana State Police Department

 

[techres]

FYI: Appleseed Radio is interviewing Jim Tomes of the 2A Patriots tonight. He will be calling in in just a bit. If you are interested in listening to the guy who is pivotal in getting change in the privacy laws, this is the guy to get helping us.

https://www.indianagunowners.com/forums/appleseed/64888-indiana_s_jim_tomes_on_appleseed_radio_now.html#post710032

If you have the time, come down and listen. He will call in for his interview after a bit.

 

[bwframe]

Michael Bane of Downrange TV and Downrange Radio put out a bit of a blurb about this in his podcast today.

DOWN RANGE TELEVISION with Michael Bane - Down Range Radio

7:40 in.

 

[MTC]

The Indiana State Police Department is required under Indiana Code 5-14-3 to release the handgun permit file when the agency receives a request. The I.S.P. cannot withhold this information when a public request is received.

Thanks, Lars. It helps to have specific code sections or bill numbers to cite when contacting reps about existing or proposed legislation.

 

[jdhaines]

New NRA Email...going to cause another sh!tstorm for the paper. You can tell the NRA really has their tit in a ringer over this one. I'll be emailing all of the advertisers to let them know where I stand.

 

[Boilers]

Nothing good comes from Bloomington.

(Said the WL Purdue grad and Boiler fan! )