The American Spectator

WRTolkas| 3.5.09 @ 7:46AM

Thank you for the interesting article on 2nd Amendment Rights. Unfortunately there is trouble on the horizon. One of the Anointed One's acolytes from Illinois has drafted a bill which is a direct assault on the 2nd Amendment. Please read H.R. 45, The Blair Holt's Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act of 2009.

People, we've got to nip this one in the bud. Write to your congressman/congresswoman ASAP.

frost| 3.5.09 @ 7:53AM

Points well taken, including Mr. Tolkas' letter. Picked up another "brick" (500 rounds of Remington's finest) a week or two ago, and shall continue doing so until satisfied (if ever, given the wimpyness of the Republicans) that the entire country hasn't caved in to the Gun Control freaks.
Things are mighty scary - - anyone for a Tea Party?

ClaudeM| 3.5.09 @ 8:54AM

Please indulge a pedant for a moment. I am sick and tired of the frequent misuse of the phrase "beg the question." [ e.g., Nicole Russell]. It does not mean "raises the question." To beg the question is to use a faulty argument in which someone assumes what he sets out to prove. "I like only good art." "What is good art ?" "Good art is what I like."

Thomas| 3.5.09 @ 9:47AM

I realize that the point of the story was about unintended consequences [an anti-gun publisher strengthening gun owner's rights], but it should really be about privacy rights. The problem here is not that the names of concealed carry permit holders are available, but that their other information, such as their address, phone number and possibly their social security number is also readily available to the public. Now most permit holders really do not care if anyone else knows that they are armed. In fact, most favor open carry to allow everyone to see that they are armed. Publishing, or even making available, their addresses and possibly personal identification information places them at needless risk from criminals. Most states have made vehicle registration information private just so that criminals can not drive through airport parking lots, jot down tag numbers on expensive cars and then obtain registration records and burglarize their homes while they are out of town. Or to obtain the address of an attractive young woman from her tag number and go to her home and attack her.

The general public has no legitimate need for this information and its availability places the holder of a license at risk if disseminated. When the government demands information from a citizen, it assumes a responsibility to provide basic safeguards for that person's privacy.

james wilson| 3.5.09 @ 11:47AM

If the State wishes to demand that an individual must jump through their several hoops in carrying a concealed firearm , the State can go to the trouble of concealing the permit.
To demand a thing with one hand and give it away with the other is the product of a disturbed ideology.

Nicole Russell| 3.5.09 @ 2:12PM

ClaudeM,

Point taken. The petitio principii is the more accurate use of the phrase. Hopefully that didn't distract you from the point of the piece.

Thomas,

I agree with you to some extent. The basis--or how I was made aware-- of this piece started with the privacy issue. But to be honest there wouldn't be much else to say on it other than the obvious. Brantley exposed what shouldn't be readily available. The state legislature has seen the error in that and consequently will remedy it with a bill. So what? So I thought it would be even more interesting to take that a step further and look at what the legislature is doing as a whole, the privacy bill being just an example.

Thanks for your comments.

Nicole

Joyce| 3.5.09 @ 3:34PM

I find the pettyness of some "journalists" beyond belief. Publishing the names of concealed carry permit holders was a childish act.
As for seat belt laws, here in Arkansas as in most states we still have a large number of deaths resulting from ejection of persons during a collision and from impact with vehicles interior.
I can understand the thinking behind the seat belt law. Another law proposed in Arkansas was written by State Senator Kim Hendren (R) Gravette, which would require motorcyclists not only wear helmets but carry additional health insurance. Mr. Hendren obviously dislikes motorcycles and probably wrings his hands saying "Oh dear, we must do something."

Peasantcrat| 3.5.09 @ 3:40PM

Brantley's arrogance will doubtless result in mayhem vis a vis targeting of CC permit holders whether at home or in public. He'd better hope he does not get named as an accessory in any criminal act antecedent to his publication of personal information.

Ted| 3.5.09 @ 11:08PM

It seems interesting to me that Brantley would draw public attention to law-abiding permit holders. But more interesting would be a piece of actual journalism where Brantley performed some research on (ex-)felons who are carrying concealed weapons illegally and publish those names.

Reaganite| 3.6.09 @ 12:20AM

Here's the brilliance of our Arkansas State Legislature:

They have just passed a new .56 per pack tax on cigarettes to fund a network of state trauma centers.

Now I ask you, who is more likely to need a trauma center, a smoker or a drunk driver (alcohol consumer)?

Another legislator just had a grandparents rights bill signed by the Gov. The bill allows for grandparents to sue custodial parents for the right to visitation. I believe the Supreme Court ruled on the matter back in 2000. Said bill sailed through unopposed even though nothing precluded grandparents from bringing a visitation request to the Chancery Courts already.

On the Brantley issue though, the guy has long been a bitter local liberal. I'm sure he sees himself as the liberal print version of Rush Limbaugh. Only without the humor, talent, common sense, and readership that Limbaugh might command.

Otter| 3.6.09 @ 10:47AM

Is he also going to publish a list of all BATFE permit holders permitted to own machine guns?