The Memphis Commercial-Appeal has published a searchable database of Tennessee Handgun Carry Permit holders

[youngod 1,357]

Latest update.

 

From TFA Member

 

 

From TFA Member

 

 

Chattanooga Newspaper

 

 

TFA Member

 

 

And last but not least The commercial Appeals response to the pressure being put on them.

 

 

Link were also posted for the FACEBOOK pages for Chris Pecks wife, son, and daughter. I have removed them for this post as I do not believe it is his families fault that their father is a dumbass. I am sure that they love him any way.

 

And to clearify some crap in thier rebutal

 

 

 

Public parks -- Consistant with currnent federal law as we all know.

colleges and universities -- As we all know collages and universities may span several acres with multiple plublic streets and some medical schools even have hospitital emergency rooms. Want to get a felony for having you gun in your holster when the ambulance brings you in barley alive?

high schools -- No such attempt has been made other than to have you gun in your car while conducting buisness on teh grounds. Buisness like picking up your kids or dropping off at a book drive, or even giving blood during a blood drive. There is no attempt bing made to carry in the school.

 

If it is that importatant ASK THEM if not you probally dont know them well enough to let them drive your kid around.

 

 

 

Thanks for all the help for the folks on this forum. If you live in alaska let me know I can send you a phone card if you will call these creeps every night right before you go to bed.

 

Pepe has had his numbers changed or disconnected. Just called "Chris and Kate" and let him know his information was available on line now too. Hope he didn't mind the call. If I have to get up to pee tonight I might call and see what the weather is like in Memphis. Then I think I will call his house and order some ribs from the Rendevous. And then I might call can see if BB King is in town. And then I might call if see if Graceland is open tomorrow........and then I might call and see if.....

[redbarron06 3,341]

Pepe has had his numbers changed or disconnected. Just called "Chris and Kate" and let him know his information was available on line now too. Hope he didn't mind the call. If I have to get up to pee tonight I might call and see what the weather is like in Memphis. Then I think I will call his house and order some ribs from the Rendevous. And then I might call can see if BB King is in town. And then I might call if see if Graceland is open tomorrow........and then I might call and see if.....

[redbarron06 3,341]

Commercial-appeals rebutal

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.

 

I am sure you guys can pick most of the BS out of that without any help

 

Reply from Rep. Glen Casada

 

Recently the Commercial Appeal, a Memphis-based newspaper, published the list of handgun carry permit holders in an easily searchable online database. Not surprisingly, Tennesseans across the state were outraged and expressed this, calling their lawmakers’ offices and demanding action.

 

While I recognize that the list is currently public information and the Commercial Appeal was acting legally, I sympathized with the many citizens contacting my office because I understand the importance of what is at stake.

 

The Commercial Appeal’s desire to make this list public intrigued me. What was their reasoning behind publishing it? Perhaps there was a perfectly good explanation that just escaped me. Then, in this week’s Sunday edition of the paper, the CA responded to the criticism and defended their action.

 

The arguments were weak, even flawed. From the editorial, it seems as though one goal was to cast suspicion on the legal, responsible gun owners of this state.

 

The paper states: “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.”

 

That the Commercial Appeal would encourage a school official to target teachers who are legal gun owners is disconcerting.

 

The paper also seems to be confused as to why non-gun owners would be outraged with the publication of the list. An attempt is made to defend this: "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?”

 

The answer to their question is most likely ‘yes.’ A criminal would steer away from a home that almost certainly contained a gun. The problem is that the same criminal will probably steer themselves directly toward a home where there is likely not a firearm. And therein lies the problem: their complete and utter disregard for the safety of those Tennesseans.

 

For the many lawmakers in the Tennessee General Assembly who are staunch defenders of your Second Amendment rights, this is unacceptable. I understand the outrage. The Commercial Appeal seems content to brush this outrage aside, claiming the pleas from Tennesseans to remove the list from their website were ‘emotional.’ I will concede that many Tennesseans were emotional about the issue; people tend to react that way when their safety and their family’s safety is threatened.

 

Finally, as if conscious of the fact that these arguments in favor of publishing the list are weak, they offer up another: that everyone else is doing it. If not them, they claim, then Google, or other websites, or other online newspapers. I would implore them not to follow suit should other papers start fabricating the news. Even if everyone else was doing it, that wouldn’t make it right.

 

House members will be working to ensure that gun owners enjoy a right to privacy. But it will also be for the protection of those who do not possess a firearm in their household. Legal, responsible gun owners should not be penalized for following the law. Those who decide they do not want a firearm in their home should not be penalized either. We look forward to working together to make this important measure a reality for Tennessee.

[TomJefferson 3,141]

OH what a great response, NOT.

 

I don't see them listing arsonists, robbers, burglars, HIV positive people, TB positive people, or even kidnappers but they have to protect them self from folks who passed a TBI, FBI, and local background check.

 

In fact, the only public searchable database in TN is really sex offenders. Nice to ranked right up there with a sex offender, huh?

 

 

 

I think we need to start a Libtard Database. Would be kind of nice to know who wants to take the things you worked hard for to give to people who wouldn't work in a pie factory.

 

Tj

 

BTW< If I recall FL has a law prohibiting such lists already.

[redbarron06 3,341]

I think we need to start a Libtard Database. Would be kind of nice to know who wants to take the things you worked hard for to give to people who wouldn't work in a pie factory.

Man I can not afford a hard drive that big.

[youngod 1,357]

Man, that reply from the CA is weak. I still can't find a reason in it why they say they published it. If it is available from the state department of safety, why publish it online. Those same principles, neighbors etc. can go online and check it themselves if they have those questions. So why publish it? Of course it is an attempt to draw the wrath of anti-gunners against the law following CCP owners. And the part about if we don't do it, someone else will.....what a crock of ----! Why don't you jump off the I40 bridge over the Mississippi before someone else does that too! Or why don't you post the names or pictures of those walking into an abortion clinic...they do it in public. Or Chris better yet, why don't we post the bus route and schedule of your children? Public knowledge right? Stupid logic!

[ProvidentOne 0]

I found a similar database online listing all the Arkansas permits at arkansasgunpermits.com

Edited February 20, 2009 by ProvidentOne

[redbarron06 3,341]

I found a similar database online listing all the Arkansas permits at arkansasgunpermits.com

Folks from Arkansas need need to start putting pressure on thier folks to stop this.

[redbarron06 3,341]

Again making National News.

 

Too Much Information? Critics Decry Sites That Mine Public Data

 

Friday, February 20, 2009

By Joshua Rhett Miller

 

If you want to know the names of people in Tennessee who have permits to carry concealed weapons ... or the folks who contributed their money in support of California's ballot measure to ban gay marriage ... the answers are just a few keystrokes away.

 

And that's too close for comfort, some privacy law experts say.

 

To some, it's all about the public's right to know. But for others, it's too much information. Transparency, they say, can lead to intimidation, harassment and even death threats.

 

Increased listing of public information by political activists and media organizations has led some to question whether posting data made public through state campaign finance disclosure laws and other methods exceeds the public's right to know.

 

Some also fear that the burgeoning pool of public information will ultimately discourage people from participating in the political process — precisely what the regulations were intended to promote.

 

In Memphis, Tenn., executives at the daily newspaper The Commercial Appeal said they received as many as 600 e-mails per day and dozens of phone calls after they posted a database on their Web site that listed every resident who has a permit to carry a concealed weapon in the state.

 

"Maps to [the executives'] houses, with ominous warnings, had been posted online," Commercial Appeal Editor Chris Peck wrote in an article defending the newspaper's decision.

 

Peck, who did not respond to numerous requests for comment, cited public safety as a key reason the newspaper decided to produce the database.

 

"It's a tiny bit of local information, and we're in that business of gathering and distributing local information," Peck wrote. " … 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."

 

One such Web site, eightmaps.com, provides a "mash-up" of a Google map and the names and ZIP codes of people who donated to California's Proposition 8 ballot measure. In some cases, even the donor's employer is provided.

 

Several supporters of Prop 8 told FOXNews.com last month that they expected harassment to continue after a federal judge denied a request to keep private the names of donors to the initiative. One donor who gave $30,000 to support the measure recalled a voicemail he received saying, "What goes around comes around, and now you're going to experience the comes around part."

 

Some legal experts say they expect hundreds of Web sites like eightmaps.com to appear, and that federal legislation will be needed to control the mining of public data.

 

"Just because it's public information doesn't mean it should be aggregated and shared. This is a problem," Dr. Anita Allen, a professor of law and philosophy at the University of Pennsylvania, told FOXNews.com.

 

Allen said she could envision lawsuits arising from the Commercial Appeal's database. While the information listed is indeed public, she said, it's scattered in various public sources, giving it "practical obscurity."

 

"If you can show a direct, causal link between the posting of that data on the Web site and a crime, I could imagine liability," she said. "If I were a personal injury lawyer, I would consider accepting such a case."

 

John Harris, executive director of the Tennessee Firearms Association, said no instances of threats or intimidation have been reported by his members in connection with the newspaper's database, but he cited a "tremendous" amount of anti-gun owner activity on local blogs.

 

"The public disclosure is clearly driven for either intimidation purposes or as a general deterrent, saying unless you don't want to see your name, don't get a gun permit," Harris told FOXNews.com. "Is it more destructive than relevant?"

 

The potential for harm has led State Sen. Mark Norris to introduce a bill that would make it illegal to disclose the names of people who have permits to carry concealed weapons.

 

"This is going to be a catalyst, at least in Tennessee, to force the passage of legislation to make this information confidential and protected," Harris, a Republican, said. "We feel certain the state Senate will pass it quickly."

 

But some privacy law experts say that a "true threat" must be established for such a site to be held liable, and they cite a Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals decision in 2002 that shut down the Nuremberg Files, a Web site that published the names, addresses and telephone numbers of abortion providers.

 

"Absent that, publishers are free to republish public information," said Chris Jay Hoofnagle, director of the Berkeley Center for Law & Technology's information privacy programs. "If it appears in the public record, courts will likely not intervene."

 

Hoofnagle continued, "This is the modern problem of public records. They are public, but they exist in practical obscurity. It's much like how music companies didn't foresee that consumers would rip CDs. It was thought that their sheer size would make ripping CDs impractical. Something similar happened with public records."

 

Despite calls since 2002 by privacy experts like George Washington University Law School Professor Daniel Solove to analyze the constitutionality of public record systems and problematic digital biographies, the problem remains largely unabated, legal experts say.

 

"We need to rethink our notions of public versus private," Allen said. "Maybe we need to put a privacy cloak around even more public data. If you really want to attack this problem, you might want to think about a federal law about mining public data."

 

pokey