And it's not in the hands of FEMA or some other evil gumment agency!
While the National Rifle Association publicly fights against a
national gun registry, the organization has gone to incredible lengths
to compile information on “tens of millions” of gun owners — without
their consent.
But in fact, the sort of vast, secret database the NRA often warns of
already exists, despite having been assembled largely without the
knowledge or consent of gun owners. It is housed in the Virginia offices
of the NRA itself. The country’s largest privately held database of
current, former, and prospective gun owners is one of the powerful
lobby’s secret weapons, expanding its influence well beyond its
estimated 3 million members and bolstering its political supremacy.
That
database has been built through years of acquiring gun permit
registration lists from state and county offices, gathering names of new
owners from the thousands of gun-safety classes taught by NRA-certified
instructors and by buying lists of attendees of gun shows, subscribers
to gun magazines and other sources.
More here
Yeah, sure if you believe it then it must be so. Texas does NOT release gun permit information to ANYONE or any organization even if its the NRA. Only law enforcement, judges and state officials that have a need for that info are privy to it.
ReplyDeleteYou sound very gullible.
DeleteAs I asked Joan, do you have evidence Texas violates its own laws, or just insinuations, Mike?
DeleteTexas, That's great that they have such a law. In Tennessee, the information is public record, and a couple years back a Memphis paper published, online, a database of everyone with a carry permit, their birth date, and their residential address.
I've heard it said that in today's internet age, nothing is private. But, of course that wouldn't apply to the Great state of Texas.
DeleteVery few things are truly private anymore, true, but that doesn't mean that everyone who has information on people will release it. Texas has provided explanations about the law and how it is obeyed and enforced there. Sarge has provided similar information on Minnesota. Unless you or the article can show evidence of those states violating their laws, it would not seem that this is how they've built their database up, at least as far as these states are concerned. This doesn't mean they haven't found a different way to build it up.
DeleteMike, its one of the reasons that we call it "The GREAT State of Texas"!
DeleteThe interesting thing is that you don't believe it Texas Colt carry. Are you sure that information is not released to the NRA?
ReplyDeleteFor Texas, they just add all the residents to the list.
DeleteIn all seriousness, do you have evidence that Texas violates its own laws, or just insinuation?
Tennessean says,,,,,
Delete"For Texas, they just add all the residents to the list."
Lols, I have seen a map of red dots for gun owners in Texas, the map contains one dot, the state!
Seriously tho, with the population of CHLs estimated to go beyond 700,000 this year, that could give an estimate of how many UN-licensed gun owners there are here.
And no, japete, in Texas you are not required to have a CHL or any other kind of permit to simply own guns here. There are FAR more gun owners than those licensed to carry. Since no permit is required to own guns, how in the hell would the NRA know about them??
Don't say NICS checks, those are only estimate numbers. A NICS check may be performed for one gun purchase or fifty on a single NICS check. Or not for a gun purchase but for some other reason such as apply for a CHL. Or to get your gun back from a repair shop. Or to get your gun back from a pawn shop. And so on. NICS check information is not available to anyone and that info is destroyed after 48 hours per federal law. How about private sale of guns, The NRA knows about them too? Give me a break, that article is bogus.
Japete,
DeleteI'm pretty confident they aren't getting the information from Minnesota. For example, fairly recently there was quite a ruckus raised when it was discovered that drivers license data was being accessed for nonofficial reasons. People fired, talk of law suits, etc.
And you have also complained that the state won't release data to the media, suggesting the powers that be are hiding something. I'm pretty sure a data dump of all 114,000 permit holders' data might be noticed.
Positive japete. Its against state law to release such information. Anyone, or any official that has that information and releases it to anyone not authorized by the state to have it will be prosecuted by law.
ReplyDeleteThe only information available is the population numbers and demographics of license holders. That info is directly available from the Texas official web site. No personal information is available. Unless the CHL holder himself willingly gives his own information out, that would be the only way anyone else would have it. There are a lot of NRA members that don't have a CHL for example, I am sure that many are, but nowhere on a NRA membership do they require or ask for CHL info to be a member. There are NRA polls that ask if your a CHL holder, but those polls do not ask who you are. They simply are compiling permit population numbers, not personal info of each permit.
Most of the states are this way about permit holders, still others are closing off this info as we speak. I think there are less than five states now that has this info readily available.
Also japette, the evidence is the lack of evidence of the state of Texas breaking its own laws. I would be heard about long and loud in the news if that were to happen. That CHL info is closely guarded and monitored. Those responsible for giving it out would face LONG prison sentences as it would cost the state untold amounts in re-issuing CLHs, in law suits by the CHLs and in court costs to say the least. Every other state also follows the same course.
Delete"I would be heard about"
DeleteSorry, that should be, "IT would be heard about".
Of course that not to they wouldn't hear from me tho if that info got out.
Hey Mike, got an edit button?
"That database has been built through years of acquiring gun permit registration lists from state and county offices, gathering names of new owners from the thousands of gun-safety classes taught by NRA-certified instructors and by buying lists of attendees of gun shows, subscribers to gun magazines and other sources."
ReplyDeleteAn interesting possibility. The next question might be IF they do have such a database, what do or can they do with it. Send junk mail? Many special interests have used similar sources to acquire potential customers. If they did get my information from me having a carry permit, they aren't making very good use of it since I've had my permit for a number of years and they haven't been sending me anything.
I'll second that. I have never received a cold solicitation from the NRA.
DeleteAnd what is the NRA going to do with this information? Confiscate guns? Or reach out to potential members and alert gun owners about upcoming legislative battles?
ReplyDeleteSSG: Are you really this dumb?
ReplyDeleteSeriously.
For some reason that defies all logic, you believe a database of this kind is terribly unthinkable in the hands of Govt bureaucrats. Yet, it's apparently hunky-dory in the hands of a lobbying firm that likes to make money.
This is what always amuses me about you black-helo-types.
Jade, Not saying its a good thing, just saying many places buy information from public sources for marketing.
DeleteKeep in mind, there is a difference in capabilities when we are talking about the collection of data. In New York, we saw probably the limit of power with private misuse at the hands of journalists. They also did it with the assistance of the local government.
And we have also recently seen what lengths the government can go to in the invasion of privacy. And these are the people who you want to trust with the power to decide who should possess firearms. And what other kinds of privacy we'll be allowed.
As I said in my posts here, I'm a bit skeptical about the claimed personal data from carry permit records. Japete has lamented on her blog that the information isn't available to the media, at least in Minnesota.
And if they did get the data, then who is worse? The NRA for collecting it? Or the government for releasing the data?
Uh, yeah. Trying to make money off me is not as bad as trying to put me in prison. But that's just me. Someone who hates capitalism and thinks the government is there to provide for everyone may love the idea of sitting in a free jail cell with free food and free medical care.
DeleteA lot of us don't like these databases in private hands either, but the reason we dislike it even more strongly in the government's hands is that governments make and enforce the law--corporations don't.
Delete"Trying to make money off me is not as bad as trying to put me in prison. "
DeleteTS, you're being hysterical again.Even if the government had a full registration of all gun owners, that would not be the same as "putting you in prison."
For Greg's education:
hys·ter·i·cal
/hiˈsterikəl/
Adjective
Deriving from or affected by uncontrolled extreme emotion: "hysterical laughter".
Extremely funny.
Synonyms
hysteric
For Mikeb's education: hysterical, from ancient Greek, hystera, womb. But hey, as long as a leftist uses it, it's not sexist, right?
DeleteMike, I don't think everyone who registers a gun will be thrown in jail. But government has the force of law, the have the power to imprison people, and there is a will among some factions of polititans to continually criminalize various aspects of gun ownership. There was just an attempt in California this year to criminalize the ownership of legally registered "assault weapons". In 2005 San Francisco passed a gun ban criminalizing the ownership of legally registered handguns. And what is the NRA going to do with a list? Try and expand their membership so they can help fight for my rights.
DeleteI want private lists to remain private too, but there is a huge difference in what can be done in government's hands.
Is there a reason that my comment wasn't posted? I oppose any lists of citizens' private information held by any corporation or non-profit organization that isn't given to them voluntarily--and I do mean voluntarily, not what is often called that--and I oppose government lists of this kind of thing, too.
ReplyDeleteAh, I made an error. This is Laci's posting of the same topic that you posted earlier today.
ReplyDelete