| The Crying Begins Over So-Called "Public Records" |
|
|
|
| Written by Jeff Garvas | |
| Saturday, 10 March 2007 | |
|
We all know that the media loophole that gave access to the personal information of concealed handgun license holders was never intended to become public record and available in bulk. Even The Cincinnati Enquirer's latest story, 7 Secrets Government Keeps, admits that Governor Taft "compromised" on a solution that made the records anything but public. Originally, the legislature intended to create a system where the news media could ask if an individual had a license to carry a concealed handgun and the Sheriff would respond with the name, county of residence, and date of birth. This was supposed to be a "check and balance" upon the system to ensure that criminals were not receiving licenses from dishonest Sheriffs. Since passing HB12 into law, some members of the news media have blatantly misused their loophole to acquire and publish complete lists of licensees with no other reason than to ostracize our law-abiding CHL community. The Enquirer's story goes on to evoke emotion over a shooting that occurred some time ago. A shooting, by the way, that was ruled as a justified use of self-defense force by Hamilton County Prosecutor Joe Deters. Effective Tuesday, however, a state law will impose new rules on viewing, making it more difficult for reporters to find out if someone has a concealed-carry permit.Sure, without those records, it's possible the police wouldn't release such information. They are not required to. That information is not public record! They also aren't releasing the medical history of the gentleman that had to shoot in self-defense. Why isn't the Enquirer enraged over that? The article also makes no mention of the fact that changes taking effect on March 29th (not this Tuesday as they erroneously reported) would not prohibit them from determining if someone like Bennie Hall Jr. has a license to carry a handgun for self-defense. In fact, what is really taking place that makes the records any less available to journalist than they were to begin with? Nothing... but it sure was good fodder for the latest Enquirer story on public records that were never public records to begin with. Unfortunately, this is yet another example of an anti-gun agenda that uses emotion and misdirection instead of fact and logic to attack the Constitutionally protected right of Ohioans to bear arms for their defense and security. Perhaps people around the state will join me in contacting The Cincinnati Enquirer and politely asking why they do not report the truth. |