Ammo For Sale

« « Chicks and Guns | Home | Acronyms » »

Publishing CCW Names

David looks at the issue

Eugene Volokh:

Nothing in the First Amendment stops states from keeping these sorts of records private. That, for instance, is the norm with regard to income tax records, to psychiatric and medical records kept by government-run hospitals, and a good deal of other data. And the government may criminalize government officials’ leaking of the records, as the federal government has done for income tax records.

But once the data is placed in the public record and then copied by private parties — which is what happened in Tennessee, prompting this proposal — the First Amendment protects people’s right to redistribute it.

2 Responses to “Publishing CCW Names”

  1. Chas Says:

    “Of course, there is another obvious solution, and that is not to create a record in the first place.”

    David is dead on. Efficient government demands Vermont carry. No fees, no cost to the public, no records, no government record keepers, no public controversy over records – no nonsense.
    Government might keep a database of prohibited persons to which they can compare a person who they find with gun, but for everyone else there should be no problem. Why jail otherwise law-abiding citizens for merely taking the sensible precaution of being armed? Oh, yeah, there are those pesky Marxists who want to disarm all private citizens, but I do not think that their America-hating views make for good public policy.

  2. Windy Wilson Says:

    And, in California, drivers license information including addresses is confidential, thanks to a tragic event involving the actress Rebecca Schafer and an obsessed fan (remember, “Fan” is short for “Fanatic”).

    Good reason to keep CCW information confidential.

Remember, I do this to entertain me, not you.

Uncle Pays the Bills

Find Local
Gun Shops & Shooting Ranges