Niki Kelly, writing for the Fort Wayne Journal Gazette, has an article on the Senate passage of HB 1068 which makes government gun licensure information not subject to public disclosure.
I have mixed feelings on this one, I guess. I think Democracy requires public access to government records. After all government is us. They’re our records. And, I don’t see anything particularly special about guns. Whether a record is public or not doesn’t hinder a person’s ability to bear arms. (The right is not one to bear arms in secret.) On the other hand, it’s adding insult to injury that, by jumping through government hoops to engage in legal activity, your personal business is opened to public scrutiny. Maybe a broader law would be appropriate, one that more generally shields private information provided to the government. Though, I’m not sure how you write that law in a way that doesn’t unduly shield government activity from public scrutiny.
Why keep the records private/secret? Why have a list at all? Red Dawn. One of Ron’s favorite movies. He thought he starred in it with Patrick S. This explains why we should never have a list.
These self armed people have bought into the myth of the old west where all men were armed and ready to defend their farm and family–not. And remember, even our founding fathers in the colonial era did not carry guns, unless hunting–they kept them above the fireplace.
The only reason I can see keeping the private is to prevent the creation of a “shopping list” for someone that is going to steal a gun. The Red Dawn fear may be valid, but that is still an issue even if the list is private.
For the response that people wouldn’t try to rob a home that has a gun owner for fear of being shot, check out this website: http://pleaserobme.com/
I’m with Doug, I don’t have a good answer for this one. I could be convinced on No list/private list/public list, but I think my default would be no list.