Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Web site allowing lookup of New York residents with concealed weapons permits has been shut down

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Guns Donate to DU
 
slackmaster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-20-10 08:53 PM
Original message
Web site allowing lookup of New York residents with concealed weapons permits has been shut down
http://www.whospackingny.com/ gets redirected to some kind of gossip site now.

Well done, everyone who worked to shut that bad boy down!

:toast:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Hoopla Phil Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-20-10 08:56 PM
Response to Original message
1. Good news.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madrchsod Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-20-10 08:58 PM
Response to Original message
2. one of the dumbest ideas ever....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MadMaddie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-20-10 08:59 PM
Response to Original message
3. Why would those permits be viewable to the public?
I don't understand how this information would not be private?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slackmaster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-20-10 09:02 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. The law isn't really clear on who should have access to it and how hard it should be to get
The assclown who put up the site apparently thought anyone should be able to look up anyone else to see if that person had a permit.

Many state and local politicians appeared in the database, which was kind of amusing, but so did stalking victims and people who have been threatened by others.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheWraith Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-20-10 10:24 PM
Response to Reply #4
12. Including the stalking victims complete and current address, one should note.
Edited on Tue Jul-20-10 10:49 PM by TheWraith
Gotta love that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Statistical Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-20-10 09:04 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. Supression of rights via invasion of privacy.
A newspaper tried that in VA.

http://www.roanoke.com/gunpermits/

Turns out the law allowed the permit data to be obtained by public records request. The Roanoke times (often has anti RKBA editorials) decided it would be cool to out everyone who has a permit.

VA changed the law after the fact to make the law less ambiguous.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slackmaster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-20-10 09:08 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. The Roanoke Times also changed its tune after the home addresses and phone numbers of its editor...
...and several reporters and other staff members were published.

Just because something is in the public record doesn't mean it's OK to publish it without a specific justification.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HockeyMom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-20-10 09:19 PM
Response to Original message
7. My name was on the Internet because I was fingerprinted
in order to work in NY Public Schools. Isn't that an invasion of privacy too? No, I am not giving the web address for it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
benEzra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-21-10 07:10 AM
Response to Reply #7
21. Ah, but if you had obtained a restraining order because an abusive ex was stalking you...
maybe you wouldn't want the state to publish the RO on a public website with your current address, and let on what security precautions you'd taken, would you?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
county worker Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-20-10 09:30 PM
Response to Original message
8. I'm no fan of concealed weapons, but publishing names of people with permits is just plain
wrong. There are people who would do something to intimidate or injure people with permits.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
oneshooter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-20-10 09:37 PM
Response to Original message
9. Won't happen in Texas. That info is open for LE only. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hangingon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-20-10 09:38 PM
Response to Original message
10. That is great news
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Statistical Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-20-10 09:39 PM
Response to Original message
11. A good reason why conceal carry should be without permit (aka VT, AZ, AK).
Criminals already carry and it is against the law. When they are caught they are posecuted.

No reason why law abiding need to jump through hoops. I am not going to fight CCW simply because there are many (hundreds) of better targets but optimally CCW would be subject to no licensing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
X_Digger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-20-10 10:40 PM
Response to Original message
13. Is it CHL or 'pistol permits'??
http://thedailystar.com/localnews/x371478747/Pistol-permit-website-sparks-debate

A website listing pistol permit owners in New York state has sparked a debate about constitutional rights, public information and privacy.

Any New Yorker interested in knowing if a neighbor has a pistol permit may check online at www.whospackingny.com, a recently anonymously launched website.
...
In New York, the Pistol Permit Bureau, established in 1936, has records of every legal handgun transaction in the state, according to state police website. Current ownership and the legality of a person's possession of the weapon can be determined, the site said, and at the end of 2006, information on 1,200,980 firearms was on file.





domain: whospackingny.com
created: 26-Apr-2010
last-changed: 19-Jun-2010
registration-expiration: 26-Apr-2011

It didn't expire, and looks like it was pointed to new nameservers yesterday @ 2:38pm.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheWraith Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-20-10 10:50 PM
Response to Reply #13
14. A pistol permit in New York State is both.
You need a permit to own one, even in your home. In most places, the permit also allows you to carry concealed, unless the issuing officer specifically limits it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
X_Digger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-20-10 10:53 PM
Response to Reply #14
15. This is the same site that had 1.2M records..
.. knowing enough folks in NY who've tried to get permits to carry, I have a hard time imagining that there are 1.2M CHL licensees in NY.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheWraith Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-20-10 10:57 PM
Response to Reply #15
16. 1.2 million pistols, not people.
Once you have a permit, you can add pistols on to it... I'm not aware of any limit. Theoretically a collector could probably have a few hundred pistols on the same permit, but even if you stipulated the average of being two, that's 600,000 permits instead of 1.2 million.

And where do those people you know live? It's hard to get a permit in Buffalo, and impossible in NYC unless you're Chuck Schumer or Donald Trump, but in most upstate counties it's not too difficult if you don't mind the invasive nature of it, with the fingerprinting, background check, and hefty fees.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
X_Digger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-20-10 11:10 PM
Response to Reply #16
17. Ahh, the site used to say 1.2M names, but some of them could be dupes, I suppose.
IIRC, some of it was very sketchy information, like T. JACKSON, ZIP 25007.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
X_Digger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-20-10 11:13 PM
Response to Reply #17
18. Link to previous discussion..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
X_Digger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-20-10 11:30 PM
Response to Reply #18
19. Annnnd.. the db is still available, you just have to look harder.
There are some duplicate names, but a majority are single entries.

Quite a few names have no address at all, such as-

------- ELIZABETH W NY

^Name changed to -'s.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slackmaster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-21-10 08:31 AM
Response to Reply #19
22. For every site you find, tell 4chan the owner puts live kittens in a blender
:hide:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
X_Digger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-21-10 09:11 AM
Response to Reply #22
24. Only one site, but it's a dumping ground for 'controversial' issues & files.
So I doubt they'll take it down anytime soon.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
proteus_lives Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-21-10 12:54 AM
Response to Original message
20. Good news!
:thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nuclear Unicorn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-21-10 08:56 AM
Response to Original message
23. Wait a minute. You're telling me...
...law-abiding citizens who have complied with every legal obligation set before them are being treated like...

...registered sex offenders?

Is this what I'm being told?

*grumbles*
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rrneck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-21-10 09:38 AM
Response to Reply #23
25. Well, not exactly...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_offender_registration

Additional restrictions beyond public notice

Sex offenders on parole or probation are generally subject the same restrictions as other parolees and probationers.

Sex offenders who have completed probation or parole may also be subject to restrictions above and beyond those of most felons. In some jurisdictions they cannot live within a certain distance of places children or families gather. Such places are usually schools, churches, and parks. It could also include public venues (stadiums), airports, apartments, malls, stores, shopping centers, and certain neighborhoods.

Some states have Civil Commitment laws, which allow very-high-risk sex offenders to be returned to prison or forced to live under very heavy supervision after the end of their normal sentences. See also: Child Sex Offender penalties.

The State of Missouri now restricts the activities of registered sex offenders on Halloween, requiring them to avoid Halloween-related contact with children and remain at their registered home address from 5PM to 10:30PM, unless they are required to work that evening. Regardless of whether they are at work, offenders must extinguish all outside residential lighting and post a sign stating, "No candy or treats at this residence."<37>

Registration and homelessness

People who are registered in offender databases are usually required to notify the government when they change their place of residence. This notification requirement is problematic in cases where the registered offender is homeless.

The state of Washington is among those that have special provisions in their registration code covering homeless offenders, but not all states have such provisions. A November 2006 Maryland Court of Appeals ruling exempts homeless persons from that state's registration requirements, which has prompted a drive to compose new laws covering this contingency.

News reports in 2007 revealed that some registered sex offenders are living outside or under the Julia Tuttle Causeway in Miami, Florida because Miami-Dade County ordinances, which are more restrictive than Florida's state laws, made it virtually impossible for them to find housing. <3><4><5> The colony at the causeway grew to as many as 140 registrants living there as of July 2009, but eventually became a political embarrassment and was disbanded in April 2010, with the residents moved into acceptable housing in the area.


Gun owners are not being required to live in certain places or avoid contact with certain groups of people. They were just having their privacy compromised for no reason other than paranoia and bigotry.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SteveM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-25-10 03:07 PM
Response to Reply #23
26. I believe the Democratic Party would not allow platform amendments...
from the floor if amendments dealt with, among others things, child pornography, drugs, guns, etc.

I don't have the source, but someone should have that here. This may give you an indication of anti-gun virulence within the bureaus of the DNC.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri May 03rd 2024, 01:55 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Guns Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC