• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

A website listing pistol permit owners

sv_libertarian

State Researcher
Joined
Aug 15, 2007
Messages
3,201
Location
Olympia, WA, ,
imported post

Pretty sure CPL holders are exempt from disclosure.

Several years ago some moonbat here in Olympia tried to get the OPD and others to release the names of CPL holders because he argued it was in the interest of safety to know who is armed. The records were refused in the interest of the privacy of the CPL holders.
 

Tomas

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2010
Messages
702
Location
University Place, Washington, USA
imported post

I have steak knives, because...

theres_no_such_thing_as_a_chicken_knife.jpg
 

oneeyeross

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 28, 2010
Messages
500
Location
Winlock, , USA
imported post

deanf wrote:
When they post personal addresses which can include domestic, assault and crime victims is a clear disregard to others safety.

Public oversight of our government is more important.
How is it public oversight of the government to let John Doe, Public Citizen, have my address? Just curious as to your logic, not trying to be confrontational at all. I could understand if this was a "may issue" state, so you could show how it was only given out to "special people" but since this is a "shall issue" state, where just any citizen without a felony/domestic assault issue can get it....you should just assume everyone has one (or could get one)....
 

Whitney

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2010
Messages
435
Location
Poulsbo, Kitsap County, Washington, USA
Disclosure of CPL Information

I received my public disclosure of Washington State CPL holders today. You may, or may not be pleased to note they did not release names of individuals or addresses as cited in the quoted RCW. The population data in my comparison is old but it is interesting to see. I thought the percentages would be higher.

Whitney
 
Last edited:

swatspyder

Regular Member
Joined
May 25, 2009
Messages
573
Location
University Place, Washington, USA
I received my public disclosure of Washington State CPL holders today. You may, or may not be pleased to note they did not release names of individuals or addresses as cited in the quoted RCW. The population data in my comparison is old but it is interesting to see. I thought the percentages would be higher.

Whitney

http://www.google.com/publicdata?ds...te+population#met=population&idim=state:53000

Roughly 6,664,195 people in the state of Washington and only 279,133 permit holders...

That means only ~4.2% of the people living in Washington have a CPL. :eek:
 

1245A Defender

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 7, 2009
Messages
4,365
Location
north mason county, Washington, USA
pleased!

I received my public disclosure of Washington State CPL holders today. You may, or may not be pleased to note they did not release names of individuals or addresses as cited in the quoted RCW. The population data in my comparison is old but it is interesting to see. I thought the percentages would be higher.

Whitney

i was pissed that someone would try to violate my privacy in this sensitive matter..
i was doubly pissed that a member of this forum would try to do that..
i suppose, that i should be grateful, that you at least warned us of your quest (to violate our privacy)..
i will always wonder, when i see you post, just what side of our rights you are, preserving, protecting, or defending!
 

gogodawgs

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Oct 25, 2009
Messages
5,669
Location
Federal Way, Washington, USA

heresolong

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 4, 2007
Messages
1,318
Location
Blaine, WA, ,
i was pissed that someone would try to violate my privacy in this sensitive matter..
i was doubly pissed that a member of this forum would try to do that..
i suppose, that i should be grateful, that you at least warned us of your quest (to violate our privacy)..
i will always wonder, when i see you post, just what side of our rights you are, preserving, protecting, or defending!

Actually I think it is useful that we now know that our information can not be obtained by anyone who files a FOIA request.
 

Dem0072

Regular Member
Joined
May 24, 2010
Messages
42
Location
West Coast
they say "the server company for www.whospackingny.com has told the association that it doesn't know who launched the website."Dont people have to register to put up web sites? Maybe that should be public information. Put his address up for criminals to see.

Its a domain registered and forwarded to the Google sites page "http://sites.google.com/site/nymasterpistoldb/"

There is no contact information provided on the website. However the domain is registered with 1&1 Hosting, one of the largest hosting companies on the internet. The nameservers are set to ns51.1and1.com and ns52.1and1.com updated as of the 19th of June, 2010. The domain was originally registered on the 26th of April, 2010. Normally these nameservers being pointed to the 51st and 52nd server(s) of 1&1's network would indicate that a website could have at one point in time been created and hosted on their network corresponding with the domain in question, but this may not have been the case. At this time the content is is hosted through Google sites and only uses a domain for the simplicity of accessing the site.

The domains owner is unknown and they probably opted in for an ID protection plan on their registration contact info.

You might be able to get a few scraps of information by filing a Freedom of Information Law request.

The Records Access Officer
New York State Police
1220 Washington Avenue
State Campus, Building 22
Albany, New York 12226

Another forum has a user suggesting that a request can be made to disclose anyone who has filed a request to get the names of everyone who has asked for that list from the month of March to present. Looking for names that appear on a recurring basis could narrow down the results further, especially if they are consistent with the date stamps on the official list published by whospackingny.com.

Further research has an unconfirmed claim by another user of another forum that mentioned his experience trying to access whospackingny.com actually redirected him to a site by the designation of cryptome.org. Cryptome.org is a known organization for the release of detailed information that some agencies or authorities may treat with inter-agency information security protocols being flagged as "sensitive" or "priviliged". Looking into Cryptome.org produced the following information -

Admin ID:24163306-NSI
Admin Name:Cryptome
Admin Organization:Cryptome
Admin Street1:251 West 89th Street
Admin Street2:
Admin Street3:
Admin City:New York
Admin State/Province:NY
Admin Postal Code:10024
Admin Country:US

A vague shot in the dark but its a New York organization, with a New York address and a consistent M.O. with the principle of Freedom of Information. In my personal judgment this is enough to articulate suspicion of a potential connection with whospackingny.com. There is also a release of the registration roster on Cryptome.org, 110mb.com and Archive.org (which I have reason to believe Archive.org may have removed the content from its database out of respect or legal concerns).

To have the content removed or concealed from being easily accessed you could consider the following ethical approaches:

1. Send formal complaints to the distributors or hosts that are providing this content (at the service provider level, using the abuse department if available and quoting any violations of their Acceptable Usage Policy/Terms of Service).

2. Petition the providers that host the material to have it removed.

Then there are less-than-ethical approaches which I will leave to the imagination of the very resourceful and industrious.
 

swatspyder

Regular Member
Joined
May 25, 2009
Messages
573
Location
University Place, Washington, USA
Its a domain registered and forwarded to...

There is no reason to go after the website or try to eliminate the information from the web. It has been copied and pasted way too many times now to be eliminated. The people who are on that list should file a lawsuit for a breach of what should be private information. Sue the crap out of the state of New York.
 

Dem0072

Regular Member
Joined
May 24, 2010
Messages
42
Location
West Coast
There is no reason to go after the website or try to eliminate the information from the web. It has been copied and pasted way too many times now to be eliminated. The people who are on that list should file a lawsuit for a breach of what should be private information. Sue the crap out of the state of New York.

Though I do generally agree with you, suing a state entity (or anyone) can prove costly and difficult. I'm sure many of the people who manage the state records in New York do everything they can to be professional and responsible. When you have a principle that encourages freedom of information to the general public, it promotes an aspect of liberty and transparency. The one downside is many people don't understand the risks involved with a breach of information security, so they don't have an understanding of what can happen when the smallest pieces of information are gifted into the wrong hands.

So equally on principle I believe that the best interest of a just outcome for anyone who has suffered headaches as a result of this organizations project, is to find who is accountable for broadcasting it. The big thing to consider is that even though the state of New York may have been exploited in order to obtain that list - forcing some measure of responsibility onto them, there is most likely a paper trail of everyone who has requested that information. There is no paper trail or signature for who looks at the leaked roster - meaning that there will be zero accountability for the issues that it creates. Even more so, most of the people who suffer probably wouldn't have the time, money or resources to do anything about it, and that is precisely the core idea behind my original post.

The worst case scenario we could face is a theatrical play out of this situation that demonstrates its capacity to harass and over burden lawful gun owning citizens, which may be leveraged, abused and replicated in different locations in the name of an over politicized infringement on personal rights. If someone were to combat the movement and achieve a decisive victory it could go a ways to discourage this sort of thing from happening again. Even if a victory didn't gain much tangible ground, it is probably better than not doing anything.

We're all in it together.
 

1245A Defender

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 7, 2009
Messages
4,365
Location
north mason county, Washington, USA
recant

Actually I think it is useful that we now know that our information can not be obtained by anyone who files a FOIA request.



pleased!

Quote Originally Posted by Whitney View Post
I received my public disclosure of Washington State CPL holders today. You may, or may not be pleased to note they did not release names of individuals or addresses as cited in the quoted RCW. The population data in my comparison is old but it is interesting to see. I thought the percentages would be higher.

1245a defender wrote
Whitney
i was pissed that someone would try to violate my privacy in this sensitive matter..
i was doubly pissed that a member of this forum would try to do that..
i suppose, that i should be grateful, that you at least warned us of your quest (to violate our privacy)..
i will always wonder, when i see you post, just what side of our rights you are, preserving, protecting, or defending!



just exchanged PMs with Whitney, he explained that he intention was to test the privacy of the info, NOT to expose our records!!
he is also contesting the emergency powers act in kitsap county!!
i apologize here for questioning his dedication to the cause.
i refuse to beat myself with a wet noodle, but i will eat some, and maybe some Crow!!
 
Last edited:

dj_fatstyles

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 14, 2009
Messages
53
Location
renton, ,
i have an automatic turkey carver that i bought in '83 with a shroud. i should be okay since it was bought in '83. i got upgraded to wireless in march of '93. and got a longer blade installed in december of '04. what a bunch of tards ny has employed for city counsel. and im sure new york is a GREAT place to live if you are a homeless bum and love living in garbage. california for that matter too.
 
Top