I just read through Rob's post about being followed and agree, sometimes having a gun for personal protection is a prudent thing. After all the work Rob has done to his car the last thing anyone wants to see is it being carjacked.

Here in Jackson County Oregon a judge made what I believe is a bad decision. The local newspaper wanted to see a list of all the people who have a concealed carry permit due to an issue over a school teacher carrying. That issue was resolved, but the newspaper wanted to see if any other teachers had permits. The county Sheriff said no, that information should not be public knowledge. The Judge ruled against the Sheriff. So now the list of who has a permit is available with a Fredom of Information Act request.

 

This is exactly what I despise - making info that should be private, public. The school district could have got what they wanted right from the office granting the CCP's. Why the heck is the newspaper even involved in those details? Geez.
And perhaps that info will provide addys and license numbers, too!
Actually, the latter i heard can be had online - which is a dang scary thought!!

Time to replace the motion sensing lights and cameras around the house with motion activated machine guns... Maybe a moat with some piranahas would be nice...

 

My thoughts exactly Rob. So if the bad guys need a new piece, they'll get this list and go shopping when people aren't home.

 

I thought a carry permit was like AmEx. I never leave home without it.
Alb

 

Alb, I agree but most people I know who own guns have more than one, sometimes many more than one.

 

the judge made the correct decision.

 

The Judge was correct for making a shopping list for criminals/thieves?

 

When you fill out a concealed carry permit it should only be used to approve or deny your request. If many people knew there permits would be come public and there rights to privacy violated there would be less permits, which is fine for those who like to control others. The judge has a right to validate carry permits he does not have the right to make them public. There will be some nice lawsuits over this if released in print.

 

You would fit in well in Chicago. They would welcome you and it would be a good fit.

 

I do support Conceal Carry Weapons permits and I'm in 1 of the 2 final states that STILL to this day will NOT allow it. Wisconsin and Illinois. However, with that being said, no teacher should be allowed to carry on a schools premises IMHO. The solution was very simple really......a school drafts regulations that dictate no teachers can carry on campus. Problem solved. Teachers lead by example, and students aren't allowed to carry on campus either.

The Appalaichan School shooting is one you NEVER hear about in the news even though it happened right in between Columbine and Virginia Tech.

Instead, the judge did this the bass ackwards way and made public everyone's PRIVATE and TRUSTED information the state should have held under strict confidence. I think the State shouldn't have released the information because it violates the privacy rights of the citizens. That's like publicizing everyone's medical records which are protected by HIPAA. Whoever said the judge created a shopping list for criminals was absolutely right.

What's next ?? Every registered weapon is made public with a FOIA form ?? It's bull and 99.9% of Americans with common sense know that.

Wanna bet ?? Lifetime NRA member here.....

I moved out of the city thou because of King Richard and his corrupt cabinet of liberal douchebags.
Thank God for McDonald VS Chicago for the citizens still subjected to living in the city......

 

In Washington State you do not need a weapons permit if you carry you gun in a holster on your belt in plain site. Who wants to mess with a guy who has a gun on his hip. I won't get a permit because then "They" have a record of gun ownership. Screw that

 

Open Carry is 50 / 50 IMO. While it can deter a would be thief, it can also attract them.
Any thug who see's you have a nicer weapon then he does just has to corner you alone and pull a gun on you to take it.
You're an easier target when you open carry for those kinds of would be thieves.

http://www.todaystmj4.com/news/local/95999354.html

It's better to be unseen and unheard and make them guess who is carrying and who isn't.

 

think about what you say online

you don't know a thing about me

 

The Sheriff may have been acting based on common sense and experience, but perhaps not according to the law as written. I don't believe it is a good idea to advertise to the public who owns and/or carries a weapon - for the reasons stated above. The judge however is compelled to act according to the written statutes. This sounds like a problem with the law.

Of course it is possible that the judge (is a leftist liberal and) is interpretting the law to suit his own convictions on the matter. This tends to happen a lot in smaller jurisdictions; particularly when the judge thinks the chances of a challenge to his ruling are slim. Unfortunate as it might be too many judges nowadays forget the principles of separation of powers and tend to assume they have legislative as well as judicial provenance.

 

Depending upon the state whether or not you have a right to carry is irrelevent, if you defend yourself or your property the liberals will send you to jail.

 

Sorry. I think it is best we close this post.