Alert about CHP information

One of the few things worse than an illogical lobbyist is an angry illogical lobbyist. Remember, these folks consider themselves to be "in the right", and they consider any means as justification to their "moral" ends.

These folks are stinkin' mad, and they will be yelling and screaming and lying at the top of their lungs.

I think one of our strongest points to use here is the fact that the full Senate AND the anti-gunners had no problem with this bill as it was originally written.

So we need to force the question to the front of the room, exactly what has changed? What about the many more people who are in just as much danger as those with protective orders, but who do not have the money, the time or knowledge sufficient to get one put in place? Are those lives not worth as much? If those with protective orders are worth protecting, the facts would dictate that there are many others who are in just as much danger, who also need protecting.

Also, the original bill was only protecting the information during the exact time that the order was in effect. What is to keep someone wishing to do harm from obtaining the information before the order is placed or after the order expires? Do they expect these folks to move at the expiration of each protective order?

TFred

I generally devote my energy to open carry, not concealed carry, but this is such a stupid situation, that in Virginia driverss license information is shielded but concealed carry information is not.

Too bad wikileaks doesn't hack the DMV and release the personal information contained therein for the senators and their families. They should see how it feels before they give honest gunowners their stupid excuses.

Thundar said:

I generally devote my energy to open carry, not concealed carry, but this is such a stupid situation, that in Virginia driverss license information is shielded but concealed carry information is not.

Too bad wikileaks doesn't hack the DMV and release the personal information contained therein for the senators and their families. They should see how it feels before they give honest gunowners their stupid excuses.

Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure that it's Federal law that protects the privacy of drivers' licenses. But it would appear that this protection is constantly under attack as well.

http://epic.org/privacy/drivers/

TFred

SB 1335 is on the Full House calendar today for Second reading.

If I'm not mistaken, this is where there is usually the most discussion. If anyone has the time, it might be interesting to watch the live video stream of the House floor today to see if any effort is made by the Democrats to change the bill again.

http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?131+cal+HC10211

http://virginia-house.granicus.com/ViewPublisher.php?view_id=3

TFred

Well, apparently they ran through about 1/3 of the scheduled calendar and then just stopped and adjourned until tomorrow.

I have no idea why.

I hope tomorrow's calendar will cover it.

TFred

Ok, I'm officially confused now. I watched the live stream video this afternoon, they ran the calendar through "House Bills with Senate Amendments," then they adjourned until tomorrow at Noon.

But I've seen reports and the bill's history was updated to say that it passed the second read today.

When would they have done this, and why would it not have been during the live stream time?

TFred

02/12/13 House: Read third time
02/12/13 House: Committee substitute agreed to 13104716D-H1

Bill SB 1335 passed the house: 76 Yea, 23 Nay

Sesrun said:

02/12/13 House: Read third time
02/12/13 House: Committee substitute agreed to 13104716D-H1

Bill SB 1335 passed the house: 76 Yea, 23 Nay

Click to expand...

If the Senators will hold to their principles, we could have a 20/20 split with Bolling holding the tie breaking vote - his chance to be in the lime light with gun owners. Don't see that there is any chance of our governor vetoing this - that would be political suicide.

Lots of work has gone into this, there was some fancy footwork by the sponsors - we're almost there.

Grapeshot said:

If the Senators will hold to their principles, we could have a 20/20 split with Bolling holding the tie breaking vote - his chance to be in the lime light with gun owners. Don't see that there is any chance of our governor vetoing this - that would be political suicide.

Lots of work has gone into this, there was some fancy footwork by the sponsors - we're almost there.

Click to expand...

I don't think it's going to split Grape.
I think it's going to pass without Bolling. There has been a lot of pressure on the Legislators from CHP Holders and Privacy Advocates. Megan is a little out numbered I think.

I hope... but remember last year it was Norment who defected. I hope there are some Ds out there who will make up for him.

TFred

I very much don't want to count the chickens... but it will be interesting to see what happens if this does pass.

Imagine the run on the Clerks offices around the state by all the folks wanting to get a copy of the list before the law goes into effect!

TFred

TFred said:

I very much don't want to count the chickens... but it will be interesting to see what happens if this does pass.

Imagine the run on the Clerks offices around the state by all the folks wanting to get a copy of the list before the law goes into effect!

TFred

Click to expand...

Good point. Could it still be passed as an emergency measure, to go into effect immediately?

Grapeshot said:

Good point. Could it still be passed as an emergency measure, to go into effect immediately?

Click to expand...

I don't think that would help. I don't think there's any way to keep this from happening. As soon as a common version passes both houses, those who want this info will know it's done, and the stampede will commence.

Even with an emergency provision, it still doesn't take effect until the Governor signs it (and all the Clerks are informed), and that would probably still be several weeks away.

TFred

TFred said:

I don't think that would help. I don't think there's any way to keep this from happening. As soon as a common version passes both houses, those who want this info will know it's done, and the stampede will commence.

Even with an emergency provision, it still doesn't take effect until the Governor signs it (and all the Clerks are informed), and that would probably still be several weeks away.

TFred

Click to expand...

Think there are those that might disclose the home addresses of those involved - not that I would support that, but it has worked before. The disclosure of public information is a two-way street is it not?

Grapeshot said:

Think there are those that might disclose the home addresses of those involved - not that I would support that, but it has worked before. The disclosure of public information is a two-way street is it not?

Click to expand...

That brings up some of my concern Grapeshot. Granted, the CHP issue now isn't FOIA, it's Supreme court rules but still the transparency issue.

Everyone wants an exemption. There is a bill in the works now to exempt the working papers of legislative assistants. If that had been in place when the VDOF stall was going on, I wouldn't have gotten emails between VDOF and McDonnel & Kaine.

There are a lot of exemption bills still cooking.

Now they want to exempt Disaster Prep information after a hard fought FOIA request showed massive mishandling of funds.

After several months and a series of rejections by state officials, The Virginian-Pilot in December obtained a copy of a publicly funded consultant's report that included a scathing assessment of Virginia's emergency shelter plans.
Two weeks after the newspaper printed an article about the study's conclusions, a bill was submitted for General Assembly consideration that would restrict the release of such documents, exempting "disaster preparedness plans and policies" from public disclosure.

Click to expand...

Everyone wants the Bert and Ernie alert exemption!

Surprisingly thorough coverage of this in the FLS today, if not a little bit sinister-sounding, but that's to be expected from this reporter:

http://news.fredericksburg.com/newsdesk/2013/02/12/gun-permit-info-secret-under-bill/

It still drives me nuts that they NEVER include the bill numbers in their coverage of the General Assembly.

TFred

peter nap said:

That brings up some of my concern Grapeshot. Granted, the CHP issue now isn't FOIA, it's Supreme court rules but still the transparency issue.

Everyone wants an exemption....

Click to expand...

I see and understand the concern, and I agree that generally we want open records.

I really don't think it's rocket science to draw a line between exempting details of the workings of the government machine, and the personally identifiable information of private individuals who either rightly or wrongly are subject to governmental oversight to conduct perfectly legal activities.

I don't think it's fair to draw the slippery slope argument when this particular line should really be a trench in the sand.

Process should be open. My name and home address should never be, as long as I keep the law.

TFred

TFred said:

I see and understand the concern, and I agree that generally we want open records.

I really don't think it's rocket science to draw a line between exempting details of the workings of the government machine, and the personally identifiable information of private individuals who either rightly or wrongly are subject to governmental oversight to conduct perfectly legal activities.

I don't think it's fair to draw the slippery slope argument when this particular line should really be a trench in the sand.

Process should be open. My name and home address should never be, as long as I keep the law.

TFred

Click to expand...

Your name and address are public information if you've registered to vote, or own property, or are a licensed professional (physician, nurse, attorney, engineer, etc.), to name but a few instances.

However, I don't think CHP info should be included in the list.

2a4all said:

Your name and address are public information if you've registered to vote, or own property, or are a licensed professional (physician, nurse, attorney, engineer, etc.), to name but a few instances.

However, I don't think CHP info should be included in the list.

Click to expand...

Nor should your religious affiliation, social security number, pass word to your bank account, nor copy of your driving license application. There are limits - some already are excepted. This is but another legitimate restriction. IMO law enforcement would NOT be blocked if part of a genuine investigation of a crime.

Grapeshot said:

Nor should your religious affiliation, social security number, pass word to your bank account, nor copy of your driving license application. There are limits - some already are excepted. This is but another legitimate restriction. IMO law enforcement would NOT be blocked if part of a genuine investigation of a crime.

Click to expand...

They really should be Grape. If it's going to be sealed, it should be sealed from everyone.
There is NOTHING in a CHP application that can't be gotten through avenues LE already has unless they decide to include Firearm information....which could happen, has happened in the past....but is not now the case.