Illinois: Release Names of All Gun Owners

reply to post by Skewed

But, isn't everyone authorized to have a gun according to the Constitution, provided the person has no felonies or domestic violence charges?

Authorized by whom? Are you suggesting that the right to keep and bear arms is a legal right granted to people by the Constitution?

reply to post by EyeHeartBigfoot


This only illustrates just how bad the idea of gun registration is to begin with. If I were the commander of an invading army, invading the United States, the very first thing I would do is obtain gun registration records. It was a mistake for "law abiding" people to go along with this imprudent method to begin with. Gun registration does not keep guns out the hands of criminals, it only makes those people are no threat to anyone more vulnerable. Interesting times indeed.

Coming from the Chicago Mob this makes perfect sense! Just about as much sense as creating free fire zones by making it illegal to carry a legal firearm arm in certain places. Safest place for any person bent on mayhem or terror is our schools. When seconds count, the police are minutes away...sometimes hours!


Zindo

I wonder if this decision by Madigan will encourage, or discourage, Illinois residents to follow the law next time they need to renew that f.o.i.d. card?

Seriously, though,
this won't go far,
and here's why:

The A.P. likely requested the names of foid card holders to run criminal background checks.
Illinois more than likely has some bad eggs in possession of a foid card.

Madigan will soon realize that both she and the IL. State Police will have some explaining to do when A.P. goes to press,
so I suspect Madigan will let this issue go quietly into the night.

reply to post by Oaktree


You make a very valid point I had not thought about! It not unusual for cronies of the worst boro chiefs, ward supervisors (not sure what they call them there) to have FOID cards as well as the actual permit to carry! Union thugs also find it much easier to have than the plebe citizens!

Zindo

reply to post by Oaktree


The AG was responding to a FOIA request for the data by The New York Times. They already did this in New York and decided they would do it in Ill as well. I do not think he was looking to find bad eggs at all. Just allowing the information to be released to satisfy the press inquiry.

Originally posted by wayouttheredude
reply to post by Oaktree

 

The AG was responding to a FOIA request for the data by The New York Times. They already did this in New York and decided they would do it in Ill as well. I do not think he was looking to find bad eggs at all. Just allowing the information to be released to satisfy the press inquiry.

You honestly do not see this as a Privacy Concern?

Because the NY AG did it, does not make it automatically right.

I am all about freedom of the press but why is it necessary to request this information and is the release of the information in the best interest of the people?

I Am Truly Concerned...

t

reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
you sir or mam need to run for the president of the NRA you have just read what it is meant to mean, i will be the first to vote for you.

reply to post by EyeHeartBigfoot


I think it was a terrible breach of public trust for gun owners to be outed like this. I was stating that the assumption made by member Oaktree was not supported by the fact is all. I would like to know why the New York Times is going around asking for this information? What is their motivation? What is their agenda? They are notorious for being a liberal rag but this is way too far for them.

reply to post by wayouttheredude

it might be the fact that the UN is holding it's UNODA Feb 28 March 4th 2011 Ny Ny , i can see the question now "Mr Sec, how do feel having X amount of citizens being armed?" UN small arms gun ban, ya right dis arm treaty is more like it.

reply to post by wayouttheredude


Thank you for answering my post in a respectful, accurate and informative manner. I am almost afraid to post questions when I am unsure of another posters views in fear of creating a rift that draws the thread away from its main point.

Your a great asset to ATS,

Veneratio,

t

Originally posted by wayouttheredude
reply to post by EyeHeartBigfoot

 

I think it was a terrible breach of public trust for gun owners to be outed like this. I was stating that the assumption made by member Oaktree was not supported by the fact is all. I would like to know why the New York Times is going around asking for this information? What is their motivation? What is their agenda? They are notorious for being a liberal rag but this is way too far for them.

edit on 2-3-2011 by wayouttheredude because: dyslexic

The 'Grey Lady' happens to be captained by friends of Bloomberg and are the No.1 anti-firearm rag of this country. They out shine all others in that respect!
Zindo

reply to post by ZindoDoone


Not questioning your comments about the "Grey Lady" But do you have any sourcing you could provide so I could do some further research?

Thank you for bring up this view.

Regards,

t

Back in the news.

www.foxnews.com...

llinois Officials Spar Over Order to Make List of Gun Owners Public
By Judson Berger
Published March 02, 2011
| FoxNews.com

In a showdown over the privacy rights of gun owners, the Illinois State Police are refusing to release a list identifying all firearm permit holders in the state after Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan determined that the information "must" be made public.

The dispute, which soon could come before a judge, has been building since last fall when a reporter for The Associated Press made a Freedom of Information Act request to the police for the names of cardholders as well as information about the weapons each permit holder is authorized to carry.
...
If the state publishes a list of gun owners, Republican Rep. Ron Stephens said, "You are by design also publishing a list of everyone who doesn't" carry a firearm.

That could be comparable to publishing a list of everyone who has, or doesn't have, a car alarm or home-security system, at least in the eyes of those who want to keep the records private.

"My gun ownership is none of your business," Stephens, who is pushing a bill in the General Assembly to lock down that list, told FoxNews.com. "I don't know what Lisa Madigan doesn't understand about that, but obviously she's confused."
...
The police had argued that they should not have to release the records because of an exemption for "information that would endanger the life or physical safety of law enforcement personnel or any other person."
...

reply to post by EyeHeartBigfoot


Arthur Ochs Sulzberger Sr. and Jr. are both bastions of the NY Democratic party. It's fairly common knowledge here in the NE corner of the US.

The board of directors:
NYT Board of Directors

Not a single person representing any other party is on that board! It's been that way since the 60's! They're editorial staff at times have been fairly diverse but the powers in the towers ain't!

Zindo

I'll give up my gun when.........you know the rest.

If firearm registrations should be classified as public knowledge (according to FOIA) then what's stopping peoples bank accounts numbers, working hours, vacation destinations and duration from becoming public knowledge?

The only thing left in this nation that is private is a persons birth certificate. What can you expect from a state where Obama hails from and elected Rahm Emanuel to be Mayor of Chicago (I know this wasn't a state matter).

I have only one thing to say to the remaining decent people of Illinois; Indiana could use a few good people.

Originally posted by Intelearthling
I'll give up my gun when.........you know the rest.

If firearm registrations should be classified as public knowledge (according to FOIA) then what's stopping peoples bank accounts numbers, working hours, vacation destinations and duration from becoming public knowledge?

The only thing left in this nation that is private is a persons birth certificate. What can you expect from a state where Obama hails from and elected Rahm Emanuel to be Mayor of Chicago (I know this wasn't a state matter).

I have only one thing to say to the remaining decent people of Illinois; Indiana could use a few good people.

As I read this, it doesn't say what guns who owns, it says who's eligible to own guns.

That's a much different kind of thing there.

reply to post by wayouttheredude

The AG was responding to a FOIA request for the data by The New York Times. They already did this in New York and decided they would do it in Ill as well. I do not think he was looking to find bad eggs at all. Just allowing the information to be released to satisfy the press inquiry.

I probably wasn't real clear in explaining why I believe this will not materialize, so I'll explain.

First, the relevant facts:
The Associated Press requested a list of all F.O.I.D. card holders from the Illinois State Police, who run the f.o.i.d system.
Il. State Police denied the request from A.P.
Attorney General, Lisa Madigan responded that ISP must turn over list to A.P.

Attorney General Lisa Madigan's public access counselor issued a letter Monday night rejecting state police arguments that releasing the information is an unwarranted invasion of privacy prohibited by the state public records law or that its disclosure would automatically endanger the lives of gun owners or those who don't have firearms.

State police determine who gets Firearm Owners Identification cards but have always kept the information confidential.

Through the Freedom of Information Act, The Associated Press requested in September the names of each FOID cardholder in the state and the expiration date of each card. State police denied the request, prompting the public access counselor's intervention.

On to my suspicions:
The A.P. requested this info, so that they (not the A.G.) could do background checks on the foid card holders.
More than likely, the A.P. would find some foid card holders with criminal, mental health, or domestic abuse issues.
The A.P. would then publish the story, reporting that out of x number of foid card holders, x amount had issues in their background that should have prevented them from getting a foid card, or resulted in the foid card being revoked.
Beyond that, politicians from Alderman up are allowed to conceal carry in Chicago, provided they have a foid card.

When the A.P. story breaks, and it is revealed that x number of "criminals" have foid cards, as well as the number of politicians, while on record, being anti-gun, also in possession of foid cards, Madigan and ISP will have a lot to explain regarding the "criminals", and most every anti-gun politician in Chicago will have to explain as to why they have a foid card, and presumably carry concealed weapons.

Therefore, when A.G. Lisa Madigan realizes the likely outcome of her decision to force ISP to release the names of foid card holders,
this issue go quietly into the night.

Or, even more likely, A.G. Lisa Madigan never expected the ISP to release the foid card holders names, nor does she care one way or the other about the issue,
she, unlike the entirety of the ISP, is an elected official,
so this was little more than political posturing on her part.

That is my in-depth opinion of how this will go away.

reply to post by HunkaHunka


Perhaps releasing the names of all people who have been prescribed pain killers, for fear that those drugs could eventually make their way to the streets?

I mean, the public has a right to know who the potential drug dealers are, right

There's nothing in the Constitution about Doctor Patient Privilege, so screw it, for the good of the children!

reply to post by EyeHeartBigfoot


wow these Mods are good, I made a thread too and they closed it and pointed me to this one, awesome! didn't know this existed.

back to the subject
Im in Chicago and this worries me.