They just can't leave us be. The Roanoke Times, the same newspaper that earlier in the year made public a list of every person in VA who had a concealed carry permit (showing their name and area of residence) caught a bit of trouble for publishing such a list. Why was it published? Because the writer of that story believed that responsible and law abiding citizens were more dangerous than mass-rapist sexual predators, and believed that everyone should know who in their area was carrying a firearm.
Many people who carry such a concealed firearm were victims of crime and may be in fear of reprisal from a criminal, or may be in hiding from a stalker ex, or some other security issue. Many of those people were put in danger by the newspaper. Some even wrote in saying things like "Thanks, now my stalker ex husband knows where I am and I need to move again."
The Newspaper, under a flood of complaints stemming from NATIONAL recognition of their horridly stupid and (in my view) illegal act, eventually took out the link from their online article to the database.
Did they apologize for ruining some people's lives, or for comparing legal and responsible concealed carry permitholders to sexual predators? No.
In fact, here is another editorial from that same Roanoke Times, not just defending their original publishing of the database, but also suggesting that we shouldn't have "legislative overreaction" in response to the "hullabaloo this newspaper stirred up in March"
Hullabaloo? You published the names and locations of concealed carry permitholders (who had not broken any laws, but had legally received a concealed carry permit from the state), then compared them to sexual predators, and you call the angry reaction "Hullabaloo"?
This editorial is calling for people to oppose a draft for legislation from the State Freedom of Information Advisory Council which would prohibit public access to the concealed carry permitholder list.
Remember, people on the concealed carry permitholder list are not criminals. They have broken no laws, they are not sexual predators, they do not diddle little children. In fact, all of those things KEEP someone from getting a concealed carry permit. These are every day citizens, responsible gun owners, who have sought out a permit to legally carry a firearm for self defense, in a concealed location, in order to provide for their own security (The responsibility that goes with the Right of the 2nd Amendment, recognized to the individual), but the Roanoke Times feels that THOSE are the ones who should have their names and locations made public.
The purpose of a concealed carry permit is that no one knows that you are carrying a firearm. This is done for everyone's safety. Making public this list can place these permitholders in great danger.... and they have done nothing wrong to deserve such risk.
The editorial claims that the only people on the list who shouldn't be made public are those who have a restraining order against someone else.
I wholly disagree. As none of those legal and responsible concealed carry permitholders are criminals, then none of their names should be made public. Especially not for the sake of making the anti-gun nuts happy.
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
I just love it when you use strong rhetoric.
Another beautifully passionate blog.
heh, heh, heh, heh. Hullabaloo. ror. I love that word...
I do agree with you. The obvious purpose of having a concealed carry purpose is so you can have a weapon without making people nervous. This would just cause tension between people, even if we ignore the whole pretador aspect of it.
"A casual stroll through the lunatic asylum shows that faith does not prove anything."
Friedrich Nietzsche
Some states do have Open Carry laws, which let someone carry, but ONLY if the firearm is in full view.
I don't necessarily have a problem with that, my state doesn't have one though.
I just find it unsuprising that the same newspaper that caused the "hullabaloo" is now coming out against legislation that would make private such information....
They never actually did apologize, nor did they (as they claim) remove the link because they understood people's need to be private if they're hiding from a stalker. They removed the link when legal action was threatened on behalf of those who were in hiding from stalkers. Even when they removed it, they still defended their action as the right thing to do.
Amazing what a few months of forgetting can let a spin-story get away with.
I was one of those whose name and address was published by CHRISTIAN TREJBAL of the Roanoke Times. As a resident of Virginia, a good site for CHP and open carry is...
www.vcdl.org
Virginia Citizens Defense League
What is your opinion of their current editorial stance on public access to that information?
(Your opinion is very valid as you're more affected by it than I am as an Oklahoma boy.)
Some people are so fucking stupid....
Nicholas Aden
Self-Promotion
you said it mister
Your Funeral Guy
R.Brian Burkhardt
http://lowercostfuneral.com
You are correct, this is not a liberal or conservative issue.
It is a constitutinal and self protection issue. While working in liberal land Falls Church, VA ( next to the mosque where 911 hijackers worshipped. I actual worked at a good safe place.) the Falls Church, VA city council tried to ban conceal and carry. The senior citizens in mass showed up at a city council meeting in mass with guns showing.
The subject was not brought up again.
If the victims of the mall shouting a t Van Mauer in Nebraska had concealed guns we probably would have more life with us today and not un needed grief and death!
my momma told me, watch out for the people with the guns, sometimes the police have more guns and sometimes not!
One of the drawbacks to my state's concealed carry law is that I cannot carry in posted places.
In many states, you can carry in a posted place, but if they see that you're carrying, they can kick you out. (And if you refuse to leave, it is tresspassing)
In my state, carrying into a posted building is an 'unlawful carry' . .. akin to carrying in a school.
As such, a simple but ill-informed company policy can wholly disarm someone from when they leave their homes early in the morning until they get home late in the evening, 5 days a week.
I don't know if you are asking me specifically, but I think if an INDIVIDUAL wants to go to the trouble, go to the courthouse and pay a fee to the county, to find if I have a CHP or not, I guess I'm ok with that. It is a government issued permit...FOIA and all that jazz. But for a newspaper to plunk down money for a list of everyone in the state and print those names and addresses, for whoever looked at that web site, is beyond the pale. It was agenda driven, if only to compare us to sexual predators. I am not hiding from any domestic problem or criminal, so my name would not have been deleted from a "sanitized" list, that the Roanoke Times threatened to reprint. Although I contacted my local congressman, he said it would be best addressed by State Delegate Clay Athey and claimed to have forwarded my letter to Mr. Athey. I never heard from Mr. Athey. It is my understanding that the state of Virginia will look at the matter in 2008, whether that information should be kept public or made private, only for police matters. Of course, I'd like the info to remain private.
I received several phone calls, after that list was published, from someone in a county jail. Very disconcerting. And I believe related to the information made public. I finally figured out how to block future calls from that jail.
Day late and a dollar short, as always. LOL
That's just the problem.... you've broken no law, so there is no reason for anyone to see if you have a concealed carry permit.
You can't control who goes to the government offices and looks you up on their computer system. And while the government can make forms to sign and fill out explaining why the information is being requested..... people lie.