Reporter wants to talk to gun owners

[Panama]

I just got off the phone with Lt Berky with ISP firearms licensing division, we had a very nice and very informative conversation, the jist was;

The LTCH "list" is public information, he (Micheal Malik) can apply for and receive the "list", he may also publish it online or in the daily paper, if he so chooses. Publishing the information contained in the LTCH "list" is perfectly legal. Irresponsible, but legal.
Lt Berky also said, the only recourse is through legislation to prevent future publications, currently, as the law is written (right or wrong) he can publish it legally. I relayed the Roanoke story to him and he said, Mr Malik would NOT be immune from litigation, should something nefarious happen through his use/release of public information.
He suggested contacting your State Representative as he would be the only person with any ability to do anything about this, it is completely outside his control.

 

[jsharmon7]

In regards to private phone numbers and security issues: publishing this information will only make it easier for lazy criminals to steal guns. Most people would be shocked to know how easily information can be found if you know how to find it. I'm not saying I support publishing this information, but please be careful at all times, not just when you think someone may know where you live. If you're truly concerned about people knowing you have guns and knowing where you live, get rid of those INGO stickers, NRA stickers, and anything else pro-2A on the back of your vehicles. If you're not concerned, carry on.

As for Nate and Techres, good luck with the range trip. I only hope that the trip isn't "post-writing" and you may have an opportunity to show gun owners positively.

 

[Sthunter987]

Disagree with Ryan

So when some of you guys were marching around down town Indianapolis with your family, guns, friends, were calling media outlets and "educating" the public, I didn't notice all this shyness I'm seeing now.

About every other month some one posts some form of thies sign like they just discover bread and butter.

Then there's a six page thread of back slapping and claims to have one just like it in their own yard and what a great idea it is.

Must be 10 threads bragging up open carrying guns every where from church to weddings and barbeques along with crying around about how they want to be "flashing" their barbeque gun to the kindergarten as well.

Instead of all the crocodile tears I'd think you'all would be embracing the spot light. Get strapped up and march around down town Bloomington. "I'm your friends, I'm your neighbor, I'm armed and I carry, I'm the guy on this list you are crapping your liberal panties over. Get used to it, get over it."

You want to be the pro gun hero with his face on TV at the Obama party and then you don't want the media to know your name. Fickle as 13 year old girls.

Nothing personal Jack Ryan, but I few disagreements with you on this.

1.) I believe I was one of the first people to call this reporter and get the facts. Not only that but I was also one of the first to make my "stand" with him. I did not sit on the "sideline" or the "fence".

2.) My issue with this article is very basis. THE DATABASE. While I have had my LCTH for many years, my wife and childern do not. At this time my wife does not have a LCTH nor was she open to handguns. After many years of numerious talks, I have her finely open to this issue.

The point of getting my LCTH was to LEGALLY carry my firearm. It was my personal choice to carry concealed. I did not want to make this "public knowledge" and advertise that I own a firearm. That is my right. This database "steals" this choice form me. If the databse did not have my personal information on it I would not mind be apart of a "grouping". But to advertise my address and other personal information, I have a real problem with.

Should my family pay the price for my choice to legally carry a firearm? Think about scene:

One early Feb morning I have left for work, my oldest son has already gone to school and my wife is alone in the house with my youngest child (3 yrs old). She hears a knock on the door, just as she's opening it someone (or three, you chose) pushes the door open and enters my house.

Now "harms way" is in my home with my family alone. They can do anything they wish to do to my family. I will not contunie with this outcome as I can tell you can see were this is going.

All this happened due to a database being published with my address. Not my wifes nor childerns. My personal choice to be safe has effected my family. Just as I was thinking I was doing "the right thing" for my family, has indeed placed then in this situation.

I will not sit on the "sideline" or "fence" when it comes to my family. Thus I got my LCTH many years ago.

 

[Bill of Rights]

As promised, I have the reply regarding the LTCH database: My notes are in green, the reply is in blue.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:
Sent: Tuesday, November 10, 2009 9:36 PM
To: Berkey, Jerry
Subject: LTCH database
Good day, Lt. Berkey,
It has been some time since I wrote to you, however, it's come to my attention that there have been a couple of recent newspaper stories done in which the reporters seem to have gotten hold of the database of who holds an IN LTCH. I may be misremembering, but I seem to recall you telling me that that information was not available other than on an individual basis; that is, if someone was to call and ask if John Smith of 123 Main St. in Anytown Indiana had a LTCH, they might be told yes or no, but that the whole list would be off limits except in aggregate.
Am I remembering correctly? Has there been a policy change? Or have the newspapers been given area totals without specific LTCH holder data? After the fiasco created when the Roanoke Times published ALL of Virginia's list on their website a few years ago, I would have thought this would be something Indiana would not want to get anywhere near, much less in the middle of.
I look forward to hearing from you, and thank you in advance for any light you can shed on this.
Stay safe!
(name redacted)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Berkey, Jerry"
To:
Sent: Thu, November 12, 2009 10:10:42 AM
Subject: RE: LTCH database
I think you are not remembering correctly or not putting my comments into the right context. The database is public and can be purchased and some news agencies/businesses purchase it annually. This is not a copy of the actual application though, just what is in the database.
Lt. Jerry A. Berkey
Indiana State Police
Records Division, Rm 302
100 N. Senate Avenue--IGCN
Indianapolis, IN 46204
317-232-8263
MW2498
See the Firearms Section's FAQ page for more info on Indiana handgun laws at: http://www.in.gov/isp/files/firearms_FAQ_02_08.pdf .
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Very well. Thanks for the clarification. I think it's always better to go back to the source to confirm something.

What information is in the database on a given licenseholder?

Has there been any thought given to the fact that publishing this information in its entireity (presuming it includes name, address, etc.)would put licenseholders as well as non-licenseholders at risk of robbery and home invasion respectively?

At present, I'm not aware of an IN newspaper that does publish everything though I know that the Bloomington paper does make aggregate info (to street level) available to all subscribers of their paper.

Further, I would be concerned that if this was published, the home addresses of battered spouses as well as those of any LEO or retired LEO would similarly be openly available.

I realize that you do not make this decision alone, however, I forward these concerns to you such that you might suggest them to those who do. This information should be no more public (and probably far less so) than the driver's license and vehicle registration information, which is to say, available to a LEO in the course of an actual investigation of a crime or a court in response to a subpoena, but otherwise unavailable to anyone.

I would be interested in your thoughts on this as well as the response of those who would be responsible to make the decision as to the availability of the database.
Thank you once again for your reply.

Most sincerely,
(name redacted)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Berkey, Jerry"
To:
Sent: Fri, November 13, 2009 8:36:32 AM
Subject: RE: LTCH database


The database has the basic information of the license holder—name, address, license type, etc. Whether information is released has to do with statute and open records laws. If you have concerns about the database, then you need to talk with law makers. When I said the database was purchased, they pay for the CD and the time of the consultant to transfer the info. They actually do not pay for the information.

Lt. Jerry A. Berkey
Indiana State Police
Records Division, Rm 302
100 N. Senate Avenue--IGCN
Indianapolis, IN 46204
317-232-8263
MW2498

See the Firearms Section's FAQ page for more info on Indiana handgun laws at: http://www.in.gov/isp/files/firearms_FAQ_02_08.pdf.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Understood... My concerns have been forwarded. May I ask the cost of the database copy (the CD and time, as you noted?)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

$32

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I can't speak for anyone else, but I am rather shocked that for less than the price of a dinner and movie for two, someone can get all of this very private information.

My email went out this morning to begin correcting this travesty.

Blessings,
Bill

 

[NateIU10]

$32 for a potential list of gunowners and their addresses???

Holy poop

 

[Panama]

I can't speak for anyone else, but I am rather shocked that for less than the price of a dinner and movie for two, someone can get all of this very private information.

My email went out this morning to begin correcting this travesty.

Blessings,
Bill

I could not agree more!
The conversation I had on the phone with Lt Berkey was very cordial and I got the feeling he DID NOT like it any better than most of us do, however, there was nothing he could do other than provide the information.

My State Legislator will be getting an email and a phone call shortly.

 

[Bill of Rights]

I could not agree more!
The conversation I had on the phone with Lt Berkey was very cordial and I got the feeling he DID NOT like it any better than most of us do, however, there was nothing he could do other than provide the information.

My State Legislator will be getting an email and a phone call shortly.

It seems you were on the phone with him while I was emailing him.

I prefer to handle such things in writing, that way there is no question as to what was said, by whom, or when. The error in my initial letter to him was an example of the kind of thing I prefer to avoid.

You'll be getting a rep as soon as I refill.

StHunter:

I do not speak for Jack Ryan, however, if I may jump in here, (and Jack, please correct me if I am mistaken), he was not addressing the whole of our community, but rather those who choose to Open Carry, those who participated in the Open Carry Walk that Savage Eagle organized around downtown Indy, and those who otherwise are very open about their choice to be armed.

It is his view that concealed is better. Personally, I agree, most times I think it is. HOWEVER! that is not my choice to make for anyone but myself. I happily defend their right to make their own choices as to how they carry, and to accept the benefits and detriments of those choices as they come.

Your example, StHunter, specifically that of your wife opening the door to a home invader, is a good one. God willing, neither you nor she will ever have to face that hypothetical becoming reality.

Blessings,
Bill

 

[Sthunter987]

I stand corrected. As I did state to Jack Ryan, it was nothing personal. Thanks for the correction Bill.

 

[techres]

I agree that changing the law is important and I am in on it. But let's be careful in not pushing the reporter into a confrontational situation when he already has the law and our data in his hands.

I want to be sure that as he is learning so are we and a part of our learning is moving us to change law. I want his learning to bring him to the same conclusion that he HT came to the last time around and which led them not to publish the data. We need to be careful not to push them to a place where they decide to publish to prove their 1A rights.

We do not want create a self fulfilling prophecy. At the same time, we do want to make this not happen. You can bet that if the HT does this, the IndyStar will be next.

 

[ArmedProgrammer]

Thanks to all of those that keep moving this conversation forward. 32 bucks eh??? The original reporter made it sound like a lot of paperwork and pain was involved. That's clearly . Sounds like it's in the public domain. Color me surprised. For anyone marketing to the gun crowd in Indiana - it would seem like a great database to have! Send out mailers to people! Along with a note telling them how you got their information!

And the address and phone number of their state rep...

Uhhh Fenway??? Want to take the size of INGO to the next level??? I think one mass mailing should do the trick!

Privacy? What's that? Yeesh...

 

[ArmedProgrammer]

I just read Techres' post above... I totally agree. Two SEPARATE issues here. First, the HT article - and helping them make the right decisions with how to handle that data. Second, convincing the lawmakers that this is a pretty stupid thing to have running around out there - and JackAnyone can get their hands on the entire list, from the appearance of things.

Very important to keep the two issues/objectives each in their own camp. And I can see how we could push things the wrong way by mixing things together.

 

[ezdubbin97]

Uhhh Fenway??? Want to take the size of INGO to the next level??? I think one mass mailing should do the trick!

Privacy? What's that? Yeesh...

Not a bad way to help get that information private, send out a mass mailing that starts "guess how we learned you were a gun owner?" That would stir the pot. If the article was about why people carry illegally, I could think of one reason someone might...ridiculous that that info is so cheap and easy to obtain. Why don't they just make public lists of addresses of folks who are heavily insured against their valuables? or better yet, those who are in the witness protection program? Some things should just be left private. Think of the consequences.

 

[SirRealism]

Wow, this surprises me, as well. Thanks for the leg (errr... finger) work, BoR.

 

[Bill of Rights]

Not a bad way to help get that information private, send out a mass mailing that starts "guess how we learned you were a gun owner?" That would stir the pot....

Your idea has been forwarded on to some folks that I think could do some good with it.

Thanks very much!

Blessings,
Bill

 

[Panama]

I agree that changing the law is important and I am in on it. But let's be careful in not pushing the reporter into a confrontational situation when he already has the law and our data in his hands.

I want to be sure that as he is learning so are we and a part of our learning is moving us to change law. I want his learning to bring him to the same conclusion that he HT came to the last time around and which led them not to publish the data. We need to be careful not to push them to a place where they decide to publish to prove their 1A rights.

We do not want create a self fulfilling prophecy. At the same time, we do want to make this not happen. You can bet that if the HT does this, the IndyStar will be next.

Agree 100%
I have not contacted him and do not intend to at this time, it appeared to me, between you and Nate, that end of it was being handled quite well, and I thank you both for that.

I wanted the clarification that I received from Lt Berkey, that he in fact could publish this list, and that it did contain addresses of LTCH permit holders AND possibly even more disturbing, it is available for $32.00 to anyone that wants to fill the paperwork. Not good, in my opinion!

I am going to contact my State Rep just to make sure he is aware that HIS NAME too would be published, I doubt he will like that any more than the rest of us.

As Jack Ryan stated, I as well, really don't give flying ........ that most anybody knows I have a gun and a LTCH permit. I think the bigger implication is for a bad guy, ACORN, the ACLU or anyone with 32 bucks to be able to buy the list, and/or publish it. Just doesn't sit well or seem right to me!

Thanks to everybody who is staying on top of this!

 

[henktermaat]

Not a bad way to help get that information private, send out a mass mailing that starts "guess how we learned you were a gun owner?" That would stir the pot.

Good thinking... lots of possibilities there

 

[henktermaat]

So who is going to be the first one here to buy the list?

 

[Bill of Rights]

Interesting, isn't it, that you can buy a CD that a technician has taken the time to transfer all the information in that database onto for less money than it takes to get onto the list yourself, even with a 4-year license.

Yeah. Interesting. That's one of the words I use when I can't think of anything else civil and polite to say.

Blessings,
Bill

 

[henktermaat]

Yeah. Interesting. That's one of the words I use when I can't think of anything else civil and polite to say.

Blessings,
Bill

Bill, you should really be a pol... er... you're SO POLITE, I'M IMPRESSED

 

[Bill of Rights]

Bill, you should really be a pol... er... you're SO POLITE, I'M IMPRESSED

You're learning!