Results 1 to 25 of 25

Thread: APPEALS COURT SAYS "Release CHL holder lists"

  1. #1
    Regular Member We-the-People's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    White City, Oregon, USA
    Posts
    2,234

    Post imported post

    The Oregon Appeals Court has ruled that Jackson County Sheriff Mike Winters must release the personal information of all holders of Concealed Handgun Licenses in the county. Sheriff Wintershas fought the issue since the Medford Mail Tribune first demanded release of the information after a Medford school teacher filed suit to carry her concealed handgun. Apparently the news paper doesn't have any problem exposing the identities of all CHL holders.

    I'm not sure if this is the last step, I would assume that the Sheriff could file an writ of certori to the Oregon Supreme Court.
    "The Second Amendment speaks nothing to an unfettered Right". (Post # 100)
    "Restrictions are not infringements. Bans are infringements.--if it reaches beyond Reasonable bans". (Post # 103)
    Beretta92FSLady
    http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/sh...ons-Bill/page5

    Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, nothing in any of my posts should be considered legal advice. If you need legal advice, consult a reputable attorney, not an internet forum.

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,605

    Post imported post

    In my State, Georgia, holders of Georgia Weapons Licenses are exempt from disclosure under any Freedom of Information Request.

    What is Oregon's Law as it pertains to this matter?

  3. #3
    Regular Member We-the-People's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    White City, Oregon, USA
    Posts
    2,234

    Post imported post

    We apparently don't have that protection. I'm sure there will be a big stink about putting it before the legislature when they next meet.


    "The Second Amendment speaks nothing to an unfettered Right". (Post # 100)
    "Restrictions are not infringements. Bans are infringements.--if it reaches beyond Reasonable bans". (Post # 103)
    Beretta92FSLady
    http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/sh...ons-Bill/page5

    Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, nothing in any of my posts should be considered legal advice. If you need legal advice, consult a reputable attorney, not an internet forum.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    21

    Post imported post

    Actually members of the legislature did try to create legal protections last session but the legislation didn't make it out of committee.

  5. #5
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Scappoose, Oregon, USA
    Posts
    394

    Post imported post

    I thought when this whole thing started, the judge stated that there was no request by the permit holders to remain private. Therefore all of the sheriff's amended their forms and sent out forms to address this by requesting that our personal information be kept private. yes/no? Did this ruling null this?





  6. #6
    Regular Member AL Ranger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Huntsville, Alabama, USA
    Posts
    238

    Post imported post

    What you need to do is get the names, addresses, phone numbers and children's names of every working for the newspaper and release that info onto web source you can find...or maybe just threaten to do it. Or boycott/sue the paper for invasion of privacy.
    Check out my home page @ www.alabamaopencarry.com and Carry On!

  7. #7
    Regular Member We-the-People's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    White City, Oregon, USA
    Posts
    2,234

    Post imported post

    Puddin99 wrote:
    I thought when this whole thing started, the judge stated that there was no request by the permit holders to remain private. Therefore all of the sheriff's amended their forms and sent out forms to address this by requesting that our personal information be kept private. yes/no? Did this ruling null this?



    Apparently this ruling nullifies all of those forms we all filled out. So....for Oregon.... the solution is to not renew the CHL and Open Carry. They won't like that either of course. SMILE
    "The Second Amendment speaks nothing to an unfettered Right". (Post # 100)
    "Restrictions are not infringements. Bans are infringements.--if it reaches beyond Reasonable bans". (Post # 103)
    Beretta92FSLady
    http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/sh...ons-Bill/page5

    Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, nothing in any of my posts should be considered legal advice. If you need legal advice, consult a reputable attorney, not an internet forum.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    21
    When those confidentiality certificates first came out I consulted a practicing attorney in this state who has a lot of experience in defending armed citizens and was told that unless the public records law is changed, that certificate was not worth the paper it was printed on. The sheriff had no legal standing to protect identities outside of what is established by current statute law.

  9. #9
    Regular Member We-the-People's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    White City, Oregon, USA
    Posts
    2,234
    Of course since the Sheriff runs the jail and IS THE TOP LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER in the county....who would arrest him for ignoring the judge?

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Cottage Grove, Oregon, USA
    Posts
    348
    Quote Originally Posted by We-the-People View Post
    Of course since the Sheriff runs the jail and IS THE TOP LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER in the county....who would arrest him for ignoring the judge?

    i would hope that every LEO officer with a VALID warrant would arrest him.....

    i agree that the ruling sucks, and as an INDIVIDUAL, i would applaud his ignoring the ruling.....

    BUT as the TOP LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER he should NEVER pick and choose which laws to enforce, he is there to enforce all of them, if he cant, he should resign.

    and join us , in righteous indignation...

    btw, if the judge holds him in contempt, any baliff will make the arrest WITHOUT a warrant.

  11. #11
    Regular Member We-the-People's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    White City, Oregon, USA
    Posts
    2,234
    Quote Originally Posted by Teddybearfrmhell View Post
    i would hope that every LEO officer with a VALID warrant would arrest him.....

    i agree that the ruling sucks, and as an INDIVIDUAL, i would applaud his ignoring the ruling.....

    BUT as the TOP LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER he should NEVER pick and choose which laws to enforce, he is there to enforce all of them, if he cant, he should resign.

    and join us , in righteous indignation...

    btw, if the judge holds him in contempt, any baliff will make the arrest WITHOUT a warrant.

    Actually, the Sheriff is THE LAW in his county. He can deny federal agents and agencies any authority, he can do the same to STATE agents and agencies, he is "THE man". He has WAY more power than most people realize. Any doubts, read Sheriff Mack's book.

    IT'S THE LAW, IT'S JUST NOT USED. Kind of like open carry, forgotten until someone is audacious enough to bring the light to the subject.

  12. #12
    Centurion
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Yuma, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    923

    Enforce all laws, and violate your oath of office?

    Quote Originally Posted by Teddybearfrmhell View Post
    i would hope that every LEO officer with a VALID warrant would arrest him.....

    i agree that the ruling sucks, and as an INDIVIDUAL, i would applaud his ignoring the ruling.....

    BUT as the TOP LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER he should NEVER pick and choose which laws to enforce, he is there to enforce all of them, if he cant, he should resign.

    and join us , in righteous indignation...

    btw, if the judge holds him in contempt, any baliff will make the arrest WITHOUT a warrant.
    The sheriff takes an oath of office to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States and, usually of the State. If the legislature passes an unconstitutional law, it is his duty not to enforce it.

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Cottage Grove, Oregon, USA
    Posts
    348
    Quote Originally Posted by We-the-People View Post
    Actually, the Sheriff is THE LAW in his county. He can deny federal agents and agencies any authority, he can do the same to STATE agents and agencies, he is "THE man". He has WAY more power than most people realize. Any doubts, read Sheriff Mack's book.

    IT'S THE LAW, IT'S JUST NOT USED. Kind of like open carry, forgotten until someone is audacious enough to bring the light to the subject.
    if that is the case, why did he originally care about the court ruling in his favor, deny the newspaper regardless of the court and go on about business.

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Cottage Grove, Oregon, USA
    Posts
    348
    Quote Originally Posted by ccwinstructor View Post
    The sheriff takes an oath of office to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States and, usually of the State. If the legislature passes an unconstitutional law, it is his duty not to enforce it.
    the court is who decides if a law is unconstitutional, not the local sheriff. an unjust law is a different story.... if our contstitution allowed for the arrest and extermination of a racial minority.... a law requireing the sheriff to do just that would be constitutional, but still unjust.

    the courts decide the legal terms, we decide the moral ones.... the two dont always mesh.

  15. #15
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Brentwood, Tennessee
    Posts
    1,956
    What's the problem? Why shouldn't people know to whom the government has issued permits to carry firearms?
    There shouldn't be a permit process to carry arms in the first place, but since there is all the records should be public just like all the others.

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Cottage Grove, Oregon, USA
    Posts
    348
    Quote Originally Posted by kwikrnu View Post
    What's the problem? Why shouldn't people know to whom the government has issued permits to carry firearms?
    There shouldn't be a permit process to carry arms in the first place, but since there is all the records should be public just like all the others.
    not all records are made public, anti stalking laws stopped that.... but if you are a crack head, wondering where to steal guns, wouldnt a wonderful source of info be the list of concealed license holders?.... just stake out the house, and when they leave, go steal any weapons left in the home? statisicly the household has multiple firearms and the permit holder will most likely carry only one at a time....

    good enough reason?

  17. #17
    Regular Member We-the-People's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    White City, Oregon, USA
    Posts
    2,234
    Quote Originally Posted by kwikrnu View Post
    What's the problem? Why shouldn't people know to whom the government has issued permits to carry firearms?
    There shouldn't be a permit process to carry arms in the first place, but since there is all the records should be public just like all the others.
    So should we also release all the public records from the DMV, the county mental health department, etc? How about the records that have the names of rape victims in police reports? It's a government, therefore "public" record is it not?

  18. #18
    Regular Member Window_Seat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Vacaville, California, USA
    Posts
    123

    Cool

    How 'bout we find out who the reporters are for the newspapers, and then post their names & addresses, phone numbers, vehicle make/model, license plates (all public information), where their spouses work, what kind of vehicles they drive, etc. Do this on as many boards as possible, including NRA & other GR publications What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

    Erik.

  19. #19
    Campaign Veteran gogodawgs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Federal Way, Washington, USA
    Posts
    5,666

    Out of State...

    I am very curious to how this will affect an out of state CHL holder. I live in the Seattle area and would love to be contacted by some hippie form Oregun or some leftist newspaper reporter. Wouldn't that be a hoot!

    Perhaps a class action lawsuit by all of the out of state CHL holders will be necessary as it would relate to a federal violation of my 4th amendment rights.
    Live Free or Die!

  20. #20
    Regular Member We-the-People's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    White City, Oregon, USA
    Posts
    2,234
    Quote Originally Posted by gogodawgs View Post
    I am very curious to how this will affect an out of state CHL holder. I live in the Seattle area and would love to be contacted by some hippie form Oregun or some leftist newspaper reporter. Wouldn't that be a hoot!

    Perhaps a class action lawsuit by all of the out of state CHL holders will be necessary as it would relate to a federal violation of my 4th amendment rights.
    I don't think the Sheriff is "done" yet. I suspect that he'll "comply" with the LETTER of the order but somehow do it in a way that both protects the CHL holders AND pisses off the newspapers and court....but is totally legitimate. That is, of course, if he can figure out a way to do that. He seems like this fight is worth while to him.

  21. #21
    Regular Member MarlboroLts5150's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    San Antonio
    Posts
    407
    Quote Originally Posted by kwikrnu View Post
    What's the problem? Why shouldn't people know to whom the government has issued permits to carry firearms?
    There shouldn't be a permit process to carry arms in the first place, but since there is all the records should be public just like all the others.
    While I agree that there Shouldn't be a permit process....think about this one for a second....just a hypothetical....

    Girl and guy going out for awhile, girl finds out guy is an A$$...violent temper...beats her a few times. They break up, he starts stalking her, threats, etc. She moves to a different part of town or different city to get away. At the same time she gets a permit for carrying a handgun, for protection.

    And now, the local news decides that Everyone should know just who has a permit, and where they live. Now, a$$hole has her new address. The courts and the news have now possibly put her life in danger.


    Now what?......
    "My dedication to my country's flag rests on my ardent belief in this noblest of causes, equality for all. If my future rests under this earth rather than upon it, I fear not."

    -Leopold Karpeles, US Civil War Medal of Honor Recipient

  22. #22
    Regular Member Thundar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Newport News, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    4,961
    Quote Originally Posted by We-the-People View Post
    The Oregon Appeals Court has ruled that Jackson County Sheriff Mike Winters must release the personal information of all holders of Concealed Handgun Licenses in the county. Sheriff Wintershas fought the issue since the Medford Mail Tribune first demanded release of the information after a Medford school teacher filed suit to carry her concealed handgun. Apparently the news paper doesn't have any problem exposing the identities of all CHL holders.

    I'm not sure if this is the last step, I would assume that the Sheriff could file an writ of certori to the Oregon Supreme Court.
    We have had the same problem in Virginia. The Virginia Citizens Defence League posted the Names, home addresses, telephone numbers and pictures of the homes of the newspaper people that were doing this crap. They stopped for a while.
    He wore his gun outside his pants for all the honest world to see. Pancho & Lefty

    The millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us....There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! ...The war is inevitable–and let it come! I repeat it, Sir, let it come …………. PATRICK HENRY speech 1776

  23. #23
    Regular Member Thundar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Newport News, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    4,961
    Quote Originally Posted by kwikrnu View Post
    What's the problem? Why shouldn't people know to whom the government has issued permits to carry firearms?
    There shouldn't be a permit process to carry arms in the first place, but since there is all the records should be public just like all the others.
    I don't agree kwik, except about the part about not needing a permit to carry.

    We have seen this very issue in Virginia. What we have learned is that there are many who are victims of violence and abuse that need to not have their name or address published.

    Drivers Licenses are exempted from FOIA in every state. Why can't firearms permits be the same?
    He wore his gun outside his pants for all the honest world to see. Pancho & Lefty

    The millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us....There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! ...The war is inevitable–and let it come! I repeat it, Sir, let it come …………. PATRICK HENRY speech 1776

  24. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Eugene, Oregon, USA
    Posts
    130
    Quote Originally Posted by Window_Seat View Post
    How 'bout we find out who the reporters are for the newspapers, and then post their names & addresses, phone numbers, vehicle make/model, license plates (all public information), where their spouses work, what kind of vehicles they drive, etc. Do this on as many boards as possible, including NRA & other GR publications What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

    Erik.
    Here is the staff list if anyone is bored and wants to start. I might myself.
    http://www.mailtribune.com/apps/pbcs...gory=CONTACT01

  25. #25
    Regular Member Superlite27's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    God's Country, Missouri
    Posts
    1,279
    Quote Originally Posted by TheHossUSMC View Post
    Here is the staff list if anyone is bored and wants to start. I might myself.
    http://www.mailtribune.com/apps/pbcs...gory=CONTACT01


    Hmmmmm. Maybe after you get the personal phone numbers and home addresses of the folks listed here......

    ....you could take up a collection and purchase a FULL PAGE AD in their paper to publish them with a big headline:

    THESE PEOPLE WANT TO RELEASE THE ADDRESSES OF HOUSES CONTAINING FIREARMS. DOESN'T THIS MAKE YOU WONDER ABOUT THEIRS?

    or something similar.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •