Handgun Carry Permit Database

[Guest db99wj]

Here is the latest from the Commercial Appeal, Section V Page 4, from Chris Peck

http://www.commercialappeal.com/news/2009/feb/15/inside-the-newsroom-case-for-gun-permit-listings/

Inside the Newsroom: Case for gun-permit listings trumps emotional opposition

By Chris Peck

Sunday, February 15, 2009

Misunderstandings with people who carry guns can turn ugly.

This past week it has been ugly at the newspaper, after passionate gun owners latched onto three very wrong ideas about why The Commercial Appeal's Web site now lists all those in Tennessee who have a permit to carry a concealed weapon.

-- Wrong idea No. 1: The newspaper is against the Second Amendment that gives Americans the right to keep and bear arms.

-- Wrong idea No. 2: The newspaper is invading people's privacy by posting the permit-to-carry-guns list on its Web site.

-- Wrong idea No. 3: Posting the list is empowering criminals.

The Tennessee Firearms Association and others have fanned the frenzy against our Web site posting of the permit-to-carry list. Pro-gun groups orchestrated a protest campaign that has spread nationwide. By late last week, Commercial Appeal executives were receiving as many as 600 e-mails a day, along with dozens of phone calls at home, at work and on their cell phones. Maps to their houses, with ominous warnings, had been posted online.

Our crime? Putting up a Web-only database that allows people to search by name or ZIP code for those who have a permit to carry a concealed weapon in Tennessee. The list came from the Tennessee Department of Safety and is available to anyone who wants it, simply by contacting the agency's office. The state of Tennessee, to this point, has decided that the right to carry a concealed weapon comes with the responsibility of agreeing to have a public record of who is packing.

The newspaper did edit the state's publicly available list. We removed street addresses and birth dates from the information to lessen any chance that somebody might use information on the list for identify theft. As a result, our posted list of permit holders for concealed weapons has less information about individuals than the phone book, your voter registration form or the credit card you use to buy dinner at a restaurant.

No matter. The posting of this list somehow conjured up deep fears about personal safety, criminals and the media being soft on crime and hard on the Second Amendment.

This newspaper isn't soft on crime. We know that crime is the No. 1 issue that needs to be addressed in Memphis. We urge public officials to get tough on crime. We back Republican-led efforts to take a hard line on gun crimes and repeat offenders. Only last week we gave prominent coverage to Shelby County Mayor A C Wharton's call for a tougher gun-offender registry in Tennessee. We hope that proposal comes to pass so we can post the names of all who commit gun offenses and the names of all those arrested for carrying a gun without a permit.

And we're not enabling criminals by posting the list of Tennesseans who have carry permits.

Think about it for a minute. Many, if not most, households in Memphis possess a firearm. So you don't really need a list to find a house with a gun.

And, if criminals were checking the permit-to-carry list before picking a target, would they likely choose a house where they know the owner could be carrying a gun, or would they more likely steer away from that house to avoid a possible confrontation?

Neither logic nor common sense is carrying the day on this issue. It's emotion. After listening to dozens of phone calls, it seems that the issue, for them, boils down to a simple core equation: I have a constitutional right to possess a firearm; any effort to infringe on that right will be opposed.

For all those who are a notch or two away from a strict black-and-white view of gun rights, there's a powerful case to be made both for a permitting process to carry concealed weapons and for keeping that permitting process public.

To begin with, the permit-to-carry law helps identify responsible gun owners. If you are a felon, have committed a crime with a gun, have a history of mental problems, etc., you can't get a permit. That's good for society.

Next, violation of the permit-to-carry law can lead to an arrest. In other words, somebody stopped for a traffic violation or frisked at a bar, who has a gun but no permit, can be busted right there. Another plus.

Finally, when somebody who has a permit for a concealed weapon messes up with a gun, they lose their right to have that concealed weapon. For example, Harry Raymond "Ray" Coleman, the Cordova man charged recently with shooting a man to death after an argument about whether the dead man's SUV was parked too close to Coleman's vehicle, will lose his permit to carry a concealed weapon. Isn't that the way it should be?

That's a good segue into why the permit-to-carry list needs to stay public.

News events like the Feb. 6 shooting at Trinity Commons shopping center led many people to wonder, logically and instantly, who else might be packing a gun. At the point of that shooting, the online list of who is licensed to carry a concealed weapon became a matter of deep public interest. That's why, during the past week, thousands of people looked at the list that had been sitting mostly unnoticed on the Web site for two months.

A mom might now check the list to see if the parents at her kid's sleep-over next door had a concealed weapon permit. If so, maybe it would be worth talking to them to make sure the gun is locked up.

A school official, concerned about whether teachers were bringing guns onto school grounds, might check the list to see whether anyone on the staff has a permit to carry, and then have a discussion about it.

Business people who sell goods and services that might be of interest to those who carry concealed weapons might use the list to generate new leads.

But there is one overriding, enduring reason the permit-to-carry list needs to be public. Once a concealed weapon is pulled out at a shopping center, a hospital or a business, what happens next with that gun becomes a matter of public concern to everyone.

That's why commercialappeal.com posted the list. It's a tiny bit of local information, and we're in that business of gathering and distributing local information.

Granted, news organizations do have some things to learn about this changing media world where print is about stories and online is about data and search. We need to learn how to massage databases more efficiently to tease out particular information, such as how many convicted felons in Shelby County have a concealed weapons permit. (Nine, as it turned out when we did this story back in August 2008.)

We'll learn. The feedback, flaming and otherwise, from gun owners concerned about this issue has been helpful. But there isn't much room to go back on this mixing of news in print with data online. If it's not The Commercial Appeal doing this, then it will be Google or a hundred Web sites. As more news and information gathering shifts online, local newspapers like this one simply must make sure that those who are searching for information about local communities are directed to newspaper-based information sources. That's why we continue to add databases to our Web site for people to use. We've already got restaurant cleanliness scores, missing IRS refund checks and school test score results. We're working on addresses of sex offenders, real estate transactions and more.

So can we exhale on this?

The newspaper isn't anti-gun. We are pro-news and information. That's our job, and we want to do it right.

Chris Peck is editor of The Commercial Appeal. Contact him at 529-2390 or at peck@commercialappeal.com.

[Guest cornbread1]

this info should not be out there for the public.

[Guest RISC777]

But there is one overriding, enduring reason the permit-to-carry list needs to be public. -- Once a concealed weapon is pulled out at a shopping center, a hospital or a business, what happens next with that gun becomes a matter of public concern to everyone.

And "the list" correlates with "when a concealed weapon is pulled out" how ??

A concealed knife. A concealed can of pepper spray. A weapon, by definition, is not just a gun/firearm, rather any thing used for offense or defense. My wife's purse could be considered a weapon in some instances. A weapon is offensive or defensive, sometimes both.

I may not be the brightest, but I'm not getting the reasoning in the above quoted text.

[Punisher84]

To begin with, the permit-to-carry law helps identify responsible gun owners. If you are a felon, have committed a crime with a gun, have a history of mental problems, etc., you can't get a permit. That's good for society.

Next, violation of the permit-to-carry law can lead to an arrest. In other words, somebody stopped for a traffic violation or frisked at a bar, who has a gun but no permit, can be busted right there. Another plus.

I agree with that more or less, but the statement about teachers with guns and kid's sleepovers in laughable. I wonder how many sleepless nights that idiot sat at home trying to figure out what to right without sacrificing his liberal readers and keeping us at bay.

Sorry Chris, EPIC FAIL!

[Guest VolMickey]

Ditto, Chris, EPIC FAIL.

[Guest HVAC Worker]

And they wonder way their readership is falling like a rock.Mr. Peck's reasoning somehow goes right together with using the Comical Appeal for a bird cage.He is full of it and so are the birds :poop:.They couldnt understand why I cancelled my subscription due to the database being made public.

[Guest Fenris]

If Mr. Peck and company were really concerned about public safety rather than sensationalism and furthering a liberal anti-gun agenda, then they would find it within their budget to shell out $80 every month for a new list instead of publicizing an out of date permit list.

I'm not putting that in a comment list because I'm not for giving any ideas, but I'm just saying the logic fails on all counts.

[creeky]

Interesting how they fail to mention that originally they DID post date of Birth and street address, but ONLY removed them after HCP holders called them on it.

Funny how they spin it as if THEY were the ones that decided to adjust that part of the database.

You guys see how thsi is geeting spun? They basically admit that they are using it for a bulling reason. Inviting employers to "search" for employees that have HCPs, for parents and community members to "Search" to find out if you have a HCP. And let's not forget about the principal searching teachers to see if... heaven forbid... they might have a HCP! Becuase, as they passively point out... they need to be talked to!

This responce is bull. They screwed up. Big time. Now it's spin time. Time to put on the "We're a community resource", or "we're providing a service" face. When in fact by their letter they are lumping us in with Sex offenders and restaurants that fail health scores! Outrageous!

The mere mention of HCP holders in the same paragragph as sex offenders and restaurant that fail health inspections is insulting!

The newspaper industry is in a hurt. And smaller papers (unsire if Gannet owns them or not) are feeling the pinch as well. Their is huge pressure in the industry now to remain solvent. I say, which is only my opinion... continue with pressure against the Editorial Baord, notifiy all advertisers, and spread the word to all subscribers.

Only a sincere apology, directed to all HCP holders printed in the paper and posted online signed by the whole Editorial board should end such actions.

[Guest JohnnyMac]

The Tennessee Firearms Association and others have fanned the frenzy against our Web site posting of the permit-to-carry list. Pro-gun groups orchestrated a protest campaign that has spread nationwide. By late last week, Commercial Appeal executives were receiving as many as 600 e-mails a day, along with dozens of phone calls at home, at work and on their cell phones. Maps to their houses, with ominous warnings, had been posted online.

This was not orchestrated by any organized group. Hell, I only joined this web-site a few days ago myself, and I'm not a member of the Tennessee Firearms Association. As for ominous warnings... BULLSH*T! I have been scanning every gun-hobbyist and Second Amendment Web-site I can find, and I haven't seen any sort of "ominous warning" posted on any of them. I have, however, seen my original post with Chris Peck's "expanded" contact information go around the world and back with amazing speed.

The newspaper did edit the state's publicly available list. We removed street addresses and birth dates from the information to lessen any chance that somebody might use information on the list for identify theft. As a result, our posted list of permit holders for concealed weapons has less information about individuals than the phone book, your voter registration form or the credit card you use to buy dinner at a restaurant.

It was only AFTER this protest began that the CA redacted the full birth-date information and street addresses. However, since they still left the zip-codes for the entries, it was amazingly simple for anyone to get an exact street address. The CA's purpose in posting the information was a not-so-subtle form of harassment of CWP holders.

Looks like we shook them up a bit. The next step is to get the boycott going against the CA's big advertisers, if the CA still refuses to take the list off-line.

JMc

[Guest Linoge]

Here is the latest from the Commercial Appeal, Section V Page 4, from Chris Peck

http://www.commercialappeal.com/news/2009/feb/15/inside-the-newsroom-case-for-gun-permit-listings/

*sigh* They are putting up nonsense faster than I can fisk it down.

[Guest JohnnyMac]

Is there any board member in Memphis willing and able to get a copy of the arrest report for Chris Peck's son Cody? I'll front the $15 via Postal Money Order for anyone willing to go down to MPD and get a copy.

http://www.memphispolice.org/How%20to%20obtain%20a%20Police%20Report.htm

Let me know!

Thanks,

JMc

[ZenDog]

An interesting comment on today's editorial- Evidently the CA has censored some of the data from the HCP database when it was posted on Peck's editorial yesterday....

Hmmmm. If they censored the publication of the data, does that not indicate that even they think that there is a problem with allowing anyone on earth to access it? I'm just sayin'....

Posted by Mary_Prankster on February 15, 2009 at 7:22 p.m.

Yesterday I posted some HCP database info that the CA has made publically available and it was removed by the CA staff from yesterday's comment section from Mr. Peck's editorial.

Why? The CA made it available to all of us so what's the big deal? Why would the CA desire to delete the info you allowed me to access on your website?

If it should not be published on your website, why do you allow anyone to find it?

If it does no harm to have this info public, why would the CA staff delete it from the comments?

Now, if the CA thinks that this HCP permit data should be deleted from the comments (like they did yesterday) does that not indicate that perhaps the CA should not make it available to anyone in the world with an internet connection?

Or, are some people in this database treated as special?

Yesterday I published 4 entries from the CA HCP database in the comment section - only two entries connected to the Tiger basketball team (private citizens) were deleted, the other two entries (politicians) were not deleted. If you shouldn't publish the private citizen data, why is the database available on your website?

If all of the the info is public and we have a right to view it, why did the CA staff delete the very data that they want us to have access to? Lack of backbone? Lack of integrity? Or..?

Two entries from the CA HCP database I found interesting that were deleted by the CA staff yesterday:

Last Name CALIPARI

First Name SUE

Middle Name ELLEN

Suffix

Birth year 1956

City MEMPHIS

State TN

ZIP 38111

Issue Date 7/12/2007

Expiration Date 7/12/2011

and:

Last Name HARDAWAY

First Name ANFERNEE

Middle Name DEON

Suffix

Birth year 1971

City MEMPHIS

State TN

ZIP 38125

Issue Date 5/3/2008

Expiration Date 5/3/2012

We'll see how long this data that the CA has made available to everyone in the world with internet access is allowed to stay published on their own website. If they censor it again, they are admitting it should not be public.

Edited February 16, 2009 by ZenDog
typo

[Guest Linoge]

Well, I actually got around to fisking that most-recent load of gos-se. This is getting kind of tiresome...

[G27]

Well, I actually got around to fisking that most-recent load of gos-se. This is getting kind of tiresome...

Nice. I just wish you had the circulation the CA does (not that that's saying much nowadays).

If we could pool some cash, we could get a billboard or something...

[DMark]

Had an interesting phonecall this weekend with an old college classmate. He is an executive VP for a bank HQ in Memphis.

Told him that I wasn't very happy about how a newspaper his bank runs ads in (Commercial Appeal) had posted the HCP data. Recommended that he should look into how the bank's advertising dollars may be seen as supporting a paper that is attacking many of his clients.

THEN - - - Reminded him that several of my CDs are coming up for renewal and that I am the Power of Attorney for my father's estate and how I would just hate for this action by the Commercial Appeal to affect the topic of discussion at the next alumni steering meeting.

He promised to get back with me after he calls the CA on Tuesday.

Developing.........

[Guest SUNTZU]

Her name is Mary (Merry) Prankster? Really?

[Oh Shoot]

Well, I actually got around to fisking that most-recent load of gos-se. This is getting kind of tiresome...

I actually enjoy your WallsOfTheCity, really; but could you possibly find more obscure euphemisms?

(I did have a general idea of what "fisking" was, but "gos-se" was pretty tough.)

Yours in obfuscation,

OS

[Guest SUNTZU]

, but "gos-se" was pretty tough.)

Jesus, you don't want to know, even though he spelled it wrong.

[Oh Shoot]

Jesus, you don't want to know, even though he spelled it wrong.

"gos-se" seems to be one of the accepted Mandarin transliterations according to the source I found.

- OS

[Guest SUNTZU]

Isn't it bad enough in English?

[Oh Shoot]

Isn't it bad enough in English?

I found it gently toned down to "crap", yes?

- OS

[RoDan]

"Misunderstandings with people who carry guns can turn ugly."

WTF? Why did he start out by saying this?

[ZenDog]

The Mary_Prankster posts are being censored- the anti-censorship CA is deleting from their website the very data they said should be open! Hypocritical, huh?

Mary reposted just a few minutes ago- we'll see if this one lasts.

Posted by Mary_Prankster on February 16, 2009 at 12:41 p.m.

Reply to this post | Suggest removal

Saturday and Sunday I posted some HCP database info that the CA has made publicly available and it was removed by the CA staff. I am reposting it for the 3rd time because it has been censored by the CA twice-

I thought the people have a right to know- what is wrong with them having this data? Will the CA once more censor the very data they say should be open? We'll see.

The CA made it available to all of us on earth with internet access, so what's the big deal?

Why would the CA desire to delete the info you allowed me to access on your website?

If it should not be published here in the comments on your website, why do you allow anyone to find it?

If it does no harm to have this info public, why would the CA staff delete it from the comments?

Now, if the CA thinks that this HCP permit data should be deleted from the comments does that not indicate that perhaps the CA should not make it available to anyone in the world with an internet connection?

Or, are some people in this database treated as special?

If the data I am publishing on your website should be deleted, then why is the database available on your website?

If all of the the info is public and we have a right to view it, why did the CA staff delete the very data that they want us to have access to? Lack of backbone? Lack of integrity? Or..?

Two entries from the CA HCP database I found interesting that were deleted by the CA staff:

Last Name CALIPARI

First Name SUE

Middle Name ELLEN

Suffix

Birth year 1956

City MEMPHIS

State TN

ZIP 38111

Issue Date 7/12/2007

Expiration Date 7/12/2011

and:

Last Name HARDAWAY

First Name ANFERNEE

Middle Name DEON

Suffix

Birth year 1971

City MEMPHIS

State TN

ZIP 38125

Issue Date 5/3/2008

Expiration Date 5/3/2012

[creeky]

Found this in the comments section of the CA, under Mr. Peck's editiorial response.

"From what I understand, those who can afford to have their retained attorney contact the CA are having their information removed from your hosted database. That's shameful. You can play your angles however you like -- it's your paper -- but try to fudge public information and you'll be busted every time."

I am unsure if this is true, but it is quite interesting. Something to think about huh?

[Guest Linoge]

Nice. I just wish you had the circulation the CA does (not that that's saying much nowadays).

Well, I just got Instalanched today, so that bumped me up to over 3000 hits for one day alone (compared to the 175ish I normally average). That should help the exposure.

I actually enjoy your WallsOfTheCity, really; but could you possibly find more obscure euphemisms?

(I did have a general idea of what "fisking" was, but "gos-se" was pretty tough.)

Well, the term "fisking" is a byproduct of me attending Georgia Tech, and flame-warring with my fellow nerds on the newsgroups there. "Gos-se" is a byproduct of being a Firefly junkie, and, honestly, I have found swearing in Mandarin to be quite liberating - you can say all manner of stuff, and call people all kinds of things, and no one is the wiser!

(Oh, and "crap" is a fairly accurate translation.)