C &P Roanoke Times, Concealed Handguns, and Privac

This is a C&P from May/June THE BULLET. There is no shortage of enemies of the Second Amendment here in Virginia. You may think this is just a local issue, and take no interest in it. I suggest if you haven't had a similar problem in your area, you might want to take a look at ours to try to avoid the same.



PRESIDENT'S COLUMN

Roanoke Times, Concealed Handguns, and Privacy
By David Adams

On March 11th, an editorial writer for the Roanoke Times, Christian Trejbal, penned an editorial to begin the paper's annual celebration of "Sunshine Week." Sunshine Week is apparently something the paper regularly observes to inform their readers on the importance of open government and public records.

Trejbal wrote: "To mark the occasion, I want to take you on an excursion into freedom of information land. We're going to find out who in the New River Valley has a concealed handgun permit." After going through a litany of local folks who have concealed handgun permits (CHP), he ended his piece by informing the reader that as "a Sunshine Week gift, The Roanoke Times has placed the entire database, mistakes and all, online..." and gave the web site address.

To add insult to injury, Trejbal justified his belief that because those were government records, and should be open to all who want to know, by comparing CHP holders to sex offenders. He wrote "A state that eagerly puts sex offenders data online complete with an interactive map could easily do the same with gun permits, but it does not."

Newsflash Mr. Trejbal, the public, especially those with children, has a need to know if a pedophile is living among them. CHP holders are law abiding citizens and thus no danger to anyone. Most gun owners I know have no desire to advertise that they are carrying a firearm.

Rightly so, this caused an immediate firestorm that the paper did not expect, nor was it prepared to handle. By the end of the day on Monday the 12th, the list was taken offline. The paper went into immediate spin mode. On Wednesday the 14th, Laurence Hammack wrote, "the list was removed from the site because of concerns that state police might have inappropriately included the names of crime victims on a list it provided to the newspaper."

Not to be made the scapegoat, the state police trotted out spokeswoman Corrine Geller to say that not only had they complied with requirements of the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) but she jabbed back at the Roanoke Times by saying, "It is up to the recipient of that information to be a responsible guardian of the information."

And that is exactly what the Roanoke Times refuses to admit - that Trejbal was irresponsible and had no compelling reason t release the information except to fulfill some need he had to twist a knife in the back of gun owners. We need look no further for proof of this than Trejbal's own words, where he wrote he was posting the information so its readers could, "search to find out if neighbors, carpool partners, elected officials or anyone else has permission to carry a gun."

Just because the newspaper had the information is not reason enough to publish it and this is exactly what Edward Wasserman, a professor of journalism ethics at Washington and Lee University said when asked about the stunt.

The Times' Hammack quoted Wasserman as saying "Maybe there's a point there. [The information] is instructive and I don't want to be completely dismissive of that. But it's coming at a real cost, and I don't think the invasive nature of it is sufficiently outweighed by its instructional value."

Virginia's "Shall Issue" CHP statute has been in the code for 12 years. So, for 12 years, the permit information of over 100,000 citizens who have CHPs has been available. While some groups have submitted FOIA requests for the list for membership or fundraising purposes, at no time has the list been made public on the Internet or in a newspaper t the degree that the Roanoke Times made the information available.

Now that you have the background, what did VSSA do about this breach of privacy? As your President, I contacted legislators who have been good friends of Virginia's gun owners to let them know the reaction that those of you who contacted me by email. You did not read about this in the media because VSSA does not operate in that manner. Yes, we want our members and gun owners in general to know that we are working on behalf of their interests, but e have found over the years that we get better results if legislators know they are not going to be used for some PR stunt. This publication and the VSSA web site is what we use as our first point of contact. When necessary, we do send an email alert calling you to action but after receiving the positive response from the legislators I contacted, I did not believe it was necessary to ask you to contact your legislator at this time.

One of the legislators I contacted on your behalf is the Chairman of the FOIA Council. Senator Edd Houck, a Spotsylvania County Democrat and good friend of VSSA and gun owners, requested a study of whether the identities of Virginians who have permits to carry concealed handguns should remain public. On March 19, the Council created a subcommittee to study the protection of "personal identifying information." Among other things, the group will consider the merits of allowing public access to a state police database listing the names and addresses of every Virginian with a permit to carry a concealed handgun. Senator Houck told the Roanoke Times that the group has its work cut out for it.

On April 7, Attorney General Bob McDonnell responded to a request to an opinion on the matter that was submitted by Delegate Dave Nutter. In a three-page opinion released on the 7th, McDonnell wrote that state police have "discretionary authority" to release the list -- but that doesn't necessarily mean they should.

The Attorney General raised two concerns about making the information public: First, the list includes the names of crime victims and witnesses that should be withheld from public view for safety reasons.

A second and broader reading of the law by McDonnell is that the entire list should be off-limits to the public because the data is compiled only for use by police in their investigations.

State police have "the responsibility to refrain from releasing sensitive personal information when the interests of public safety demand discretion," McDonnell wrote.
"Further, it is my opinion that the express language [of Virginia state law] limits the use of concealed carry permit information t law enforcement personnel for investigative purposes."

Because McDonnell acknowledged that police have "discretionary authority," some observers -- including Nutter -- had speculated the opinion would give them enough wiggle room to continue releasing a reduced list.

But state police spokeswoman Corinne Geller said Friday that acting on the attorney general's advice, the agency will no longer release the information, which over the past two years was the subject of 17 FOIA requests by the news media, political organizations and gun-rights groups.

On April 9th, Delegate Nutter announced he will introduce legislation in the 2008 Session of the General Assembly to codify the Attorney General's opinion.

It is telling that the Roanoke Times article announcing the decision of the state police led with the statement -- "An editorial writer's botched attempt to highlight an open record -- the list of Virginians licensed to carry a concealed handgun -- resulted Friday in the record being closed."

Some are trying to have it both ways -- limiting the ability to release the information that results in its wholesale publication, but wanting to retain the ability to use the list for political activism on behalf of gun rights. Speaking only for myself, it is either public information or it is not. My fear is that if the list remains public but limits the media's ability to disseminate the information, it will end up in the courts and I frankly do not want to put my privacy in the hands of a judge.

Senator Houck has promised to keep VSSA informed on the progress of the study group. As I receive updates, they will be posted on the VSSA web site and for those who do not have access to the Internet, you will be able to receive updates in the Bullet.

This is just one example of VSSA moving into action to protect the rights of gun owners. Whether it is at the General Assembly, local Boards of Supervisors, or local Planning Commissions, VSSA is working hard to ensure that your right to keep and bear arms and your ability to exercise that right is protected.

Thank you for your support of VSSA and I urge you to recruit your friends and family that are gun owners and sportsmen to become VSSA members today.