Comments on: once more into the breach (again)

By: walls of the city

walls of the city — Tue, 03 Mar 2009 19:44:17 +0000

commercial appeal compilation

(I tried to make an independent, non-dated “page” containing this information, but I seem to have broken that aspect of my weblogging engine. I will strive to keep this page updated as best I can, so feel free to refer…

By: walls of the city

walls of the city — Sun, 01 Mar 2009 11:12:26 +0000

proliferation

I find it somewhat ironic that the shortest month of the year is also my most prolific, and that it received the highest amount of traffic, ever, for my website. I guess I should thank the staff of the Commercial…

By: Linoge

Linoge — Sat, 28 Feb 2009 15:55:13 +0000

Except, as our opponents frequently point out, the level of training required to acquire a driver’s license and the level of training reuqired to aquire a carry license are remarkably different. In any case, training or not, this current shooter knew what he was doing was both wrong and illegal – a license, training, or whatever else would not have changed or added to that situation. And, despite that knowledge, he still did what he did. The license had no bearing on the situation, even to the point of not necessarily ensuring he would or would not have a firearm on him – because no one carries or transports a loaded firearm without a license…
And, you are right – if this was reported from both directions of the equation, I would be far less irritated by it. But, as it is, it is only used as leverage to demonize law-abiding citizens, and thus not actually relevant to the case at hand – only the newspapers’ agendas.
Regarding the data itself, I am still at a loss as to why it is not protected under the Priavacy Act of 1974, and see its protection from publication as the same idea – after all, I had to provide social, full name, and a variety of other specific, identifying information to get my permit. Were it the Federal Government that released as much as the State of TN did, there would be hell to pay…

By: Sevesteen

Sevesteen — Fri, 27 Feb 2009 22:58:16 +0000

We tend to assume that most people driving have a valid driver’s license. If the driver in a newsworthy accident did not, I would expect that fact to be reported.
Ideally the news would report both ways–”Additionally, Mr. Perp did not have a carry license”. Problem is, that isn’t really newsworthy, it would be in almost every story of gun crime. It is newsworthy when we screw up that badly, precisely because it is so rare.
It was probably in The Volkh Conspiracy that I read about the constitutionality of laws regarding publishing the list once they have it, and I pretty much agree. It is bad for them to publish the list, it is worse for the government to get more control of what they can publish. On the other hand, I have no problem with restricting their access to the list.
“Congress shall make no law” from the 1st amendment is just as valid as “Shall not be infringed”.

By: Linoge

Linoge — Fri, 27 Feb 2009 21:37:52 +0000

Except it is not really relevant… do they publish whether or not he has a driver’s license? Whether or not he smokes? What he has for breakfast? Publishing that he has a license only leads to one thing – using that as leverage to paint all permit holders with the same brush. Sure, it is the truth, but the journalists of America have been misusing and absuing the truth for so long now, it is about time for it to be able to fight back occasionally.
From what I have read from Volokh, once they have the list, there is nothing that can Constitutionally be done to keep it from propagating or being reprinted. That is not to say that Tennessee will not try, and that it will not stand until challenged. But at least we can stop this kind of gos-se in the future.
I am seriously thinking about sending Chris Peck (the editor for the CA) a basket of flowers if the bill passes… Yes, I am that vindictive .

By: Sevesteen

Sevesteen — Fri, 27 Feb 2009 20:35:17 +0000

News organizations should be able to print the names of individual license holders when it is relevant. Shooting someone, whether lawfully or not makes it relevant. I am not in favor of a law that restricts their ability to report that this ass has a license. I want the truth reported, even when I don’t like it.
The part I object to is printing the entire list, or even portions big enough to be considered a list. I don’t know if you can constitutionally restrict them from publishing the list once they acquire it, I think you have to prevent them from acquiring more than individual names–This is why I favor Ohio’s method where they can inquire about an individual name, but can’t copy the name down.
That said, the Commercial Appeal has no right to complain, since it was their own abuse that prompted the law.