I wasn't aware that this was still of concern since they couldn't publish the information as a list.. well the last leak in records access is now plugged.
Gov Kasich signed the budget bill that included this provision.
Give pay raises to many local officials; Block journalists' access to concealed handgun records;
Punish cities that defy new traffic-camera restrictions; and
Allow many Cleveland bars to remain open until 4 a.m. during next summer's Republican National Convention.
A budget provision added by a state Senate committee Tuesday would repeal part of Ohio's concealed carry law that allows journalists to review records on the issuance, renewal, suspension and revocation of state permits to carry a concealed handgun.
As the public as a whole already is blocked from viewing these records, the change would mean such records could only be obtained with a court order.
"Arms discourage and keep the invader and plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property. . . Horrid mischief would ensue were the law-abiding deprived of the use of them."
- Thomas Paine
"Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem."
If memory serves, some members of the media abused their "original" privilege regarding their use of these records. While I am a huge supporter of transperisy in government, I realize some records should be kept confidential.
Government should be as transparent as possible with THEIR info. MY info is another story.
Learn how Project Appleseed is supporting freedom through Marksmanship and Heritage clinics.
Samuel Adams wrote:If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or your arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.
The state maintains records on adoptions, for example, which are deemed to be confidential. The state, and political subdivisions keep confidential the home addresses of law enforcement officers. I have no issue with various levels of government keeping these and other such records confidential.
WY_Not wrote:Government should be as transparent as possible with THEIR info. MY info is another story.
What is "THEIR info"? If you do business with the government, you are a part of the whole. Real estate records, voting records, and court actions will all be available for public access through various web sites. I agree that there is good reason to protect CHL records, but people should not delude themselves as to availability of personal information to anyone who seeks it.
"An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life."
-- Robert A. Heinlein, Beyond This Horizon
"Remember that protecting our gun rights still boils down to keeping a majority in the electorate, and that our daily activities can have the impact of being ambassadors for the gun culture ..."
-- BobK Open carry is a First Amendment exercise.
The devil is in the details. If they want to release that X number of people have CHL, fine. If they even want to say that person X has a CHL, reluctantly fine. If they want to release person X's address, telephone number, etc, NOT fine.
The examples you gave do indeed have some valid reasons for being public records. Making the details of a CHL holder public serves no public benefit. It is simply a political club to be wielded by the less than scrupulous and yet another theft (identity or physical) waiting to happen.
Such protections are only going to become more important going forward in order to at least provide some miniscule amount of protection from identity theft. Just because the task is daunting does not mean the agencies shouldn't at least make the effort.
Learn how Project Appleseed is supporting freedom through Marksmanship and Heritage clinics.
Samuel Adams wrote:If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or your arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.
WY_Not wrote:The devil is in the details. If they want to release that X number of people have CHL, fine. If they even want to say that person X has a CHL, reluctantly fine. If they want to release person X's address, telephone number, etc, NOT fine.
The examples you gave do indeed have some valid reasons for being public records. Making the details of a CHL holder public serves no public benefit. It is simply a political club to be wielded by the less than scrupulous and yet another theft (identity or physical) waiting to happen.
Such protections are only going to become more important going forward in order to at least provide some miniscule amount of protection from identity theft. Just because the task is daunting does not mean the agencies shouldn't at least make the effort.
I agree with that, and I don't even think that the names of CHL holders should be released unless there is a pending case where it would be relevant.
"An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life."
-- Robert A. Heinlein, Beyond This Horizon
"Remember that protecting our gun rights still boils down to keeping a majority in the electorate, and that our daily activities can have the impact of being ambassadors for the gun culture ..."
-- BobK Open carry is a First Amendment exercise.
"This is the big one! You hear that, Elizabeth? I'm coming to join ya, honey!"
We're actually in agreement on something? Did hell freeze over and I missed the news report?
Learn how Project Appleseed is supporting freedom through Marksmanship and Heritage clinics.
Samuel Adams wrote:If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or your arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.
Who in Ohio is banned from getting a CCW beside a Felony or protection order charge?
Are people accused of brawls and fights and assaults banned from getting CCW permits?
That would be good to know. Well they could still carry an illegal weapon.
Is there a website that we can search and look up people for felony or assault records?
Ray81 wrote:Who in Ohio is banned from getting a CCW beside a Felony or protection order charge?
Are people accused of brawls and fights and assaults banned from getting CCW permits?
That would be good to know. Well they could still carry an illegal weapon.
Is there a website that we can search and look up people for felony or assault records?
"Arms discourage and keep the invader and plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property. . . Horrid mischief would ensue were the law-abiding deprived of the use of them."
- Thomas Paine
"Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem."
Tweed Ring wrote:If memory serves, some members of the media abused their "original" privilege regarding their use of these records. While I am a huge supporter of transperisy in government, I realize some records should be kept confidential.
Yes, my name was published in the Cleveland Plain Dealer in the first batch of CHL holders that they published. Almost forgot about that.
Glad they are not doing that anymore.
WY_Not wrote:The devil is in the details. If they want to release that X number of people have CHL, fine. If they even want to say that person X has a CHL, reluctantly fine. If they want to release person X's address, telephone number, etc, NOT fine.
The examples you gave do indeed have some valid reasons for being public records. Making the details of a CHL holder public serves no public benefit. It is simply a political club to be wielded by the less than scrupulous and yet another theft (identity or physical) waiting to happen.
Such protections are only going to become more important going forward in order to at least provide some miniscule amount of protection from identity theft. Just because the task is daunting does not mean the agencies shouldn't at least make the effort.
I agree with that, and I don't even think that the names of CHL holders should be released unless there is a pending case where it would be relevant.
I agree with Werz on this one, keep the names confidential unless there is a pending case. It's easy to find a person's address online by doing a simple a search. Even easier if you know what county they live in.
