Things you see at 4:00 am

Like many of my friends I work nights and thus I have the misfortune of being awake for a lot more hours than most people and get time to think and write accodingly. These are just reflections on the curent state of everything I have an opinion about.

Tuesday, February 28, 2006

Taft's veto threat on the CCW amendments.

There are two amendments being discussed for Ohio's CCW law. The first amendment is restricting how journalists can go about finding out who has a CCW permit. As of right now they could just obtain a list of all of the permit holders for a county and publish it as they saw fit. The amendment would change the law so journalists could only find out if specific people have CCW permits by asking one name at a time. Hmm sounds like a logical Improvement to me after all are there not privacy laws in place to protect people from things like identity theft? Then why should those of us that have a CCW permit have our privacy violated every day by having a list with our names published and circulated. People who fear guns and the people who carry them won't bother to think that because we have a CCW permit we are trained and responsible, no they will just see a big scary gun. Its bad enough that we are discriminated against by every business that puts up a no carry sign, Taft wants to have us discriminated against in our homes nad on the streets as well. The Ohio State News paper The Lantern has published an opinion page about how Tafts veto is a good thing The section of the opinion piece reads,
"restricting journalists' access to the names of those with conceal-carry
permits - but changing these provisions is not in the best interest of
conceal-carry and the public. One of the proposed changes to the
provisions would limit journalists' access even further to conceal-carry
information. Instead of being able to obtain an entire county list of
conceal-carry permits, journalists would only be able to ask if a specific
person has a permit. Advocates fear that publishing names deters people
from getting permits and tells criminals who has a gun."
Well it has been a while since I took beginning English but when writing an opinion essay isn't kind of important to back up your opinion with some facts or at the very least support it with some reason? Here is the logic and reason they quote.
"But Gov. Taft is right to fight for accountability in the permit process.
Further restricting access to conceal-carry permit information limits a valuable
check to ensure accountability for those who undertake the responsibility and
privilege, not the right, to a concealed-carry permit. Journalists, are not
criminals, and should be given the benefit of the doubt that they will use the
information they obtain responsibly to serve the public"

Where is the check in having the public know who has a CCW permit? As for the part about the Journalists being given the benefit of the doubt the nation used to give journalists the benefit of the doubt, But Mr. Dan Rather proved that journalistic integrity has taken second place to bias and personal motives. The least the person could have done after they wrote this article is attach their name to it instead they took the cowards way out and Published it under the generic Editorial board. They also didn't give a link to reply or give a chance for an open discussion forum. Now if that doesn't smack of Journalistic integrity I don't know what does...

3 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

I thought you guys wanted people to know you had a gun. Just remember, if you endorse privacy in this case you are also endorsing the guaranteed right of privacy as granted in Griswald Vs. Connecticut as well as Roe Vs. Wade.

9:51 PM  
Blogger Christopher A. Lee said...

First let me say a few things Frrom now on people who wish to leave a comment must leave an identity i.e. no more anonymous posts if I am willing to leave my name and a link on your blog I expect the same courtesy Secondly I have an will never endorse the court decisions of Griswald Vs. Connecticut or Roe Vs. Wade. There is a difference between privacy and the right of life. That being said the idea of a concealed carry permit should make it pretty obvious that I don't want it to be obvious that I am carrying a gun. The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines concealed as 1 : to prevent disclosure or recognition of
2 : to place out of sight

If I am being approched by someone that intends to do me harm I would rather have an ace in the whole then let them have all of the advantage.

3:44 AM  
Anonymous triticale said...

If they publish a list of those who have carry permits, and criminals use that information in victim selection, would a permitless person who is raped or mugged as a result have a basis for a lawsuit?

9:24 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home