Memphis News Site Publishes Tennessee Concealed Carry Permit Holder List

[red states rule]

Talk about a slap in the face for those of people who went about the law abiding way of getting a permit so we can carry a handgun



Call CommercialAppeal.com today and urge them to remove this intrusion on personal information!

A Memphis based online news website, CommercialAppeal.com, has posted Tennessee’s right to carry permit holder list online! CommercialAppeal.com apparently feels that the “public’s right to know” outweighs your right to privacy. Their irresponsible decision to publish this list has made it easier for criminals to target law-abiding gun owners.

Shockingly when the list was first published, it even included permit holders' home address! However, bowing to criticism, CommercialAppeal.com removed the address but still included a permit holder’s full name, birth date, city, zip code, and the issue and expiration date of their permit.

Let’s keep the pressure on to have this list removed completely by contacting CommercialAppeal.com IMMEDIATELY, as well as its President and Publisher, Joseph Pepe.

CommercialAppeal.com can be reached at (901) 529-2345 or 1-800-444-6397.

Joseph Pepe, President and Publisher, 901-529-2205


http://www.nraila.org/legislation/read.aspx?id=4416

[moderate democrat]

did this news site LEGALLY obtain the list?

Is the list in the public domain, or is it not?

[red states rule]

did this news site LEGALLY obtain the list?

Is the list in the public domain, or is it not?

Look for more of this kind of thing in the near future as the media in concert with the government aid it's goal to disarm their enemies of the 'counter revolution' as Saul Alinsky refers us.

Personal information published. Personal information given to nasty individuals. Harassment. Intimidation. Threat. Reprisals. Media character assassinations.

I know how people react when personal info is sent to their employers and local paper. Information they did not want to see the light of day

[moderate democrat]

Look for more of this kind of thing in the near future as the media in concert with the government aid it's goal to disarm their enemies of the 'counter revolution' as Saul Alinsky refers us.

Personal information published. Personal information given to nasty individuals. Harassment. Intimidation. Threat. Reprisals. Media character assassinations.

I know how people react when personal info is sent to their employers and local paper. Information they did not want to see the light of day

can you answer my question or not?

[red states rule]

can you answer my question or not?

I am sure it was legal, but so are other instances where personal info about people was made public - and it caused those people porblems

In this case, criminals know who are armed and who are not. Enstranged husbands now know their wives are armed. So much for the left showing their support for privacy

I wonder if we should publish a list of addresses for every politician and news paper editor. Then when they do something that doesn't please everybody (it's said you can't please all the people all the time) they too will have to watch their backs as they enter and leave their homes.

[Kathianne]

can you answer my question or not?

Why don't you do your own research?

[Nukeman]

did this news site LEGALLY obtain the list?

Is the list in the public domain, or is it not?
Despite the fact that it is "likely" legal to have the list it is objectionable at best to actually publish the list.

I am sure you would agree (since you see nothing wrong with publishing this list) that with the freedom of information act the newspaper should also obtain the home address of ALL the law enforcement officials in the area and list that as well, since after all they also carry guns in a concealed manner.......RIGHT???????

[red states rule]

Despite the fact that it is "likely" legal to have the list it is objectionable at best to actually publish the list.

I am sure you would agree (since you see nothing wrong with publishing this list) that with the freedom of information act the newspaper should also obtain the home address of ALL the law enforcement officials in the area and list that as well, since after all they also carry guns in a concealed manner.......RIGHT???????

The paper has a major lawsuit waiting for them the minute anything happens to anyone on that list.

[moderate democrat]

If the information is in the public domain, it is, and publishing it is not wrong, imo.

[Nukeman]

If the information is in the public domain, it is, and publishing it is not wrong, imo.
just because you can "DO" a thing does not mean you should. You have to use "GOOD" judgement. How does this information benefit the readers of this publication other than publicity????????

[red states rule]

just because you can "DO" a thing does not mean you should. You have to use "GOOD" judgement. How does this information benefit the readers of this publication other than publicity????????

How about obtaining the names of the people involved in the composition of this list (including law makers and law enforcement authorities) and printing their names and addresses for public access?

If I'm a thug I'm going to assume most of these folks are less likely to have self-defense weapons and their property will be easier to steal, huh?

[moderate democrat]

If my crazy neighbor has a concealed weapons permit, I think I might like to know about it...IF the information is in the public domain. Nobody has answered my question about that yet.

[red states rule]

If my crazy neighbor has a concealed weapons permit, I think I might like to know about it...IF the information is in the public domain. Nobody has answered my question about that yet.

He would only be crazy to you if he was a conservative, and/or if you tried to rob him

[Nukeman]

If my crazy neighbor has a concealed weapons permit, I think I might like to know about it...IF the information is in the public domain. Nobody has answered my question about that yet.

Look dumbass, If you obtain a license you are in the regestry so it is subject to the "Freedom of Information Act".

Just because "your crazy neighbor" has a carry permit doesn't mean he actually has a gun at this time. If he is crazy he is just as likely to stab you with a kitchen knife as shoot you...

YOU have not answered our question as to if YOU believe they should also publish the list of ALL public officials and law enforcement officers, since after all they are in the public eye and most carry guns or have them for their work....

[red states rule]

Look dumbass, If you obtain a license you are in the regestry so it is subject to the "Freedom of Information Act".

Just because "your crazy neighbor" has a carry permit doesn't mean he actually has a gun at this time. If he is crazy he is just as likely to stab you with a kitchen knife as shoot you...

YOU have not answered our question as to if YOU believe they should also publish the list of ALL public officials and law enforcement officers, since after all they are in the public eye and most carry guns or have them for their work....

Well, we can also look at it this way, the riff raff will now know who to target and who to leave alone.

If you are printed on that list, then don't try to perpetrate a crime against that person. The rest of the sheep, fair game.

[moderate democrat]

Look dumbass, If you obtain a license you are in the regestry so it is subject to the "Freedom of Information Act".

Just because "your crazy neighbor" has a carry permit doesn't mean he actually has a gun at this time. If he is crazy he is just as likely to stab you with a kitchen knife as shoot you...

YOU have not answered our question as to if YOU believe they should also publish the list of ALL public officials and law enforcement officers, since after all they are in the public eye and most carry guns or have them for their work....

why the abusive langage? I don't think there is anything wrong with the media publishing anything that is already in the public domain.

[red states rule]

why the abusive langage? I don't think there is anything wrong with the media publishing anything that is already in the public domain.

Well then, who ever published this, should remember what he said. Then find out everything "private" about his personal information and make it public.

[Nukeman]

why the abusive langage? I don't think there is anything wrong with the media publishing anything that is already in the public domain.
Why the abusive language??? would you prefer if I just stated your being obtuse??? YOUR going out of your way to be a dumb ass plain and simple.

SO once again is it appropriate to publish the names and address of ALL law enforcement officers and public figures even if they have unlisted numbers???? After all it is public domain......

[Yurt]

seems moderate dem is a hypocrite, tells others to do their own research while DEMANDING others answer his questions....

so then i guess he also agrees that once in the public domain, the internet would be in the public domain, that the information is no longer private. so if someone posts their personal information on the internet (employer info etc) on a message board and then makes disgusting public posts and somebody then either gives the posts to their employer or the employer finds the posts, that person has no right to complain....

would you agree with that moderate democrat? yes or no.

[red states rule]

Why the abusive language??? would you prefer if I just stated your being obtuse??? YOUR going out of your way to be a dumb ass plain and simple. SO once again is it appropriate to publish the names and address of ALL law enforcement officers and public figures even if they have unlisted numbers. After all it is public domain......

Or publish a list of names and addresses of all Interim Ministers of the South Parish Congregational Church

[Yurt]

Why the abusive language??? would you prefer if I just stated your being obtuse??? YOUR going out of your way to be a dumb ass plain and simple.

SO once again is it appropriate to publish the names and address of ALL law enforcement officers and public figures even if they have unlisted numbers???? After all it is public domain......

abusive language from the one who ethnically slurred me with an FU....he is a hypocrite

[red states rule]

A gun-rights group should obtain a list of all the local members (including the newspaper staff) of gun-control activists and publish that list of names and addresses as a notice of locations with safe working conditions for burglars and other criminals

[DragonStryk72]

If my crazy neighbor has a concealed weapons permit, I think I might like to know about it...IF the information is in the public domain. Nobody has answered my question about that yet.

Well, you haven't answered any the other ones asked of you, and don't seem to be getting ready to at any point, and btw, No, it is not legal to publish people private addresses complete with their full name, birth date, city, state, and zip code in a public news format. this is called 4th amendment rights, you may want to look at them again.

These people legally registered their firearms, and I'm guessing they didn't want the entire state, or especially not anyone in the world with an internet connection able to find them, and procure enough of their personal information to be able to start going for identity theft on them.

Now, as to Nukeman's point, should we not also publicly list all the cops' full names, with addresses, since, as these people's are, I mean, it is our right to know right? Or how about the reporters, as speakers to the public, they should be accountable in their personal lives, right?

[DannyR]

this is called 4th amendment rights, you may want to look at them again.I believe 4th amendment rights apply only to the government, not a private organization.

The publishing of that info however is outlawed by separate laws extending similar prohibitions.

[moderate democrat]

Well, you haven't answered any the other ones asked of you, and don't seem to be getting ready to at any point, and btw, No, it is not legal to publish people private addresses complete with their full name, birth date, city, state, and zip code in a public news format. this is called 4th amendment rights, you may want to look at them again.

These people legally registered their firearms, and I'm guessing they didn't want the entire state, or especially not anyone in the world with an internet connection able to find them, and procure enough of their personal information to be able to start going for identity theft on them.

Now, as to Nukeman's point, should we not also publicly list all the cops' full names, with addresses, since, as these people's are, I mean, it is our right to know right? Or how about the reporters, as speakers to the public, they should be accountable in their personal lives, right?

I am not sure it is our right to know the names and addresses of police personnel. I am not sure that such information is in the public domain. If it IS, I have no problem with publishing it. I have no problem with publishing ANYTHING in the public domain, because once you start to restrict any of it, you are shackling the freedom of the press, imo.

[Nukeman]

I am not sure it is our right to know the names and addresses of police personnel. I am not sure that such information is in the public domain. If it IS, I have no problem with publishing it. I have no problem with publishing ANYTHING in the public domain, because once you start to restrict any of it, you are shackling the freedom of the press, imo.

OK if it's in the public domain than people can look it up by requesting the information. NO ONE has said to deny the information but when it comes to blanketly publishing EVERYONE it is wrong.

If I have to request information than there is a paper trail in case I am planning on doing harm, when you allow the publication of EVERYONE for no other reason than because you can, you leave no recourse.

ANYONE and I mean ANYONE can take that information without having to go through the proper channels and use it now!!

I see you don't think we have the right to know the identities of our law enforcement officials, but your all for the common citizen that grants those officers their right to do what they do... hmmmmm how telling...........

[moderate democrat]

OK if it's in the public domain than people can look it up by requesting the information. NO ONE has said to deny the information but when it comes to blanketly publishing EVERYONE it is wrong.

If I have to request information than there is a paper trail in case I am planning on doing harm, when you allow the publication of EVERYONE for no other reason than because you can, you leave no recourse.

ANYONE and I mean ANYONE can take that information without having to go through the proper channels and use it now!!

I see you don't think we have the right to know the identities of our law enforcement officials, but your all for the common citizen that grants those officers their right to do what they do... hmmmmm how telling...........

I said...I did not KNOW if the personnel rosters of police departments were, in fact, in the public domain. Quite frankly, no one has sufficiently answered my question as to whether this list of concealed weapons permit owners is in the public domain either. If it is not, then I certainly am against publishing it.

[Joe Steel]

Talk about a slap in the face for those of people who went about the law abiding way of getting a permit so we can carry a handgun


Call CommercialAppeal.com today and urge them to remove this intrusion on personal information!

A Memphis based online news website, CommercialAppeal.com, has posted Tennessee’s right to carry permit holder list online! CommercialAppeal.com apparently feels that the “public’s right to know” outweighs your right to privacy. Their irresponsible decision to publish this list has made it easier for criminals to target law-abiding gun owners.

Shockingly when the list was first published, it even included permit holders' home address! However, bowing to criticism, CommercialAppeal.com removed the address but still included a permit holder’s full name, birth date, city, zip code, and the issue and expiration date of their permit.

Let’s keep the pressure on to have this list removed completely by contacting CommercialAppeal.com IMMEDIATELY, as well as its President and Publisher, Joseph Pepe.

CommercialAppeal.com can be reached at (901) 529-2345 or 1-800-444-6397.

Joseph Pepe, President and Publisher, 901-529-2205

http://www.nraila.org/legislation/read.aspx?id=4416

It's about time!

Gun nuts have been sneaking around long enough. It's time they came out of the closet and let the community know who they are. Let's hope this catches on. Our neighborhoods will be safer.

[Nukeman]

It's about time!

Gun nuts have been sneaking around long enough. It's time they came out of the closet and let the community know who they are. Let's hope this catches on. Our neighborhoods will be safer.

Your so fucking stupid at times, if they were "sneaking" around then they would be registered now would they genius???

Its the criminal element that does the sneaking around.

Laws only affect the LAW ABIDING.

How does publishing the names of LAW ABIDING citizens make a community safer? why don't you instead call for the publishing of any and all criminals in a community, that way we will know who our neighbors are and keep a better eye on them eh comrade!!!!

[Yurt]

If my crazy neighbor has a concealed weapons permit, I think I might like to know about it...IF the information is in the public domain. Nobody has answered my question about that yet.


can you answer my question or not?


seems moderate dem is a hypocrite, tells others to do their own research while DEMANDING others answer his questions....

so then i guess he also agrees that once in the public domain, the internet would be in the public domain, that the information is no longer private. so if someone posts their personal information on the internet (employer info etc) on a message board and then makes disgusting public posts and somebody then either gives the posts to their employer or the employer finds the posts, that person has no right to complain....

would you agree with that moderate democrat? yes or no.

are you going to continue being a hypocrite or are you going to answer other people's questions?

[moderate democrat]

are you going to continue being a hypocrite or are you going to answer other people's questions?


when they are on topic. your problems with former posters are not on topic. I suggest you take those problems up with them and not me.

[Yurt]

when they are on topic. your problems with former posters are not on topic. I suggest you take those problems up with them and not me.

huh? i did not mention a former poster, bizarre you got that from a hypo....it is a hypothetical question why can't you answer it? it relates directly to what you think is public domain and what you think should be released to the public....

i am not surprised you refuse to answer it as it would destroy your credibility on the argument at hand.

[moderate democrat]

huh? i did not mention a former poster, bizarre you got that from a hypo....it is a hypothetical question why can't you answer it? it relates directly to what you think is public domain and what you think should be released to the public....

i am not surprised you refuse to answer it as it would destroy your credibility on the argument at hand.

we both know what you are talking about. don't play dumb...it is unbecoming.

As to this topic... I think that if there is a public document produced by our government and that document is in the public domain, then there is nothing wrong with publishing that document in the media.

[gabosaurus]

What is wrong with it? I want to know who out there is a carrying a gun. If a "sex offender" list is public information, why not a gun carrying list?

[Abbey Marie]

I'll bet the same people who are in favor of this breach of privacy, have fits when a list is printed of men who are convicted of using the services of a prostitute.

[Yurt]

I'll bet the same people who are in favor of this breach of privacy, have fits when a list is printed of men who are convicted of using the services of a prostitute.

but abbey, to most dems a gun is a crime of moral turpitude and prostitution is none of our business

[Yurt]

What is wrong with it? I want to know who out there is a carrying a gun. If a "sex offender" list is public information, why not a gun carrying list?

geeee....for one, one has been convicted of a serious crime and the other has not been convicted :poke:

[Yurt]

we both know what you are talking about. don't play dumb...it is unbecoming.

As to this topic... I think that if there is a public document produced by our government and that document is in the public domain, then there is nothing wrong with publishing that document in the media.

would you want your home address, value, taxes etc...published, tax records are afterall public information....

so you would not mind if this information was published by a newsource or any source (or do you only allow this publishing if they are """news""")??

[hjmick]

What is wrong with it? I want to know who out there is a carrying a gun. If a "sex offender" list is public information, why not a gun carrying list?

Are you fucking serious?!

Read Yurt's response, since he beat me to it:


geeee....for one, one has been convicted of a serious crime and the other has not been convicted

[moderate democrat]

would you want your home address, value, taxes etc...published, tax records are afterall public information....

so you would not mind if this information was published by a newsource or any source (or do you only allow this publishing if they are """news""")??

would I want MY information published? probably not. Does that mean that it ought to be illegal for a news media source to publish my information merely because I would prefer it not be?

I personally think that the press has a right to determine what it feels is newsworthy. I would rather have the press publish too much because it has the unfettered freedom to do so, than have it publish too little because it was constrained by government censorship.

[Kathianne]

Well then, who ever published this, should remember what he said. Then find out everything "private" about his personal information and make it public.

You know what is funny? Some people claim everything in the 'public domain' can come out, unless it's about them. Go figure.

[Kathianne]

why the abusive langage? I don't think there is anything wrong with the media publishing anything that is already in the public domain.

and anything printed by the media is in 'the public domain.'

[Nukeman]

What is wrong with it? I want to know who out there is a carrying a gun. If a "sex offender" list is public information, why not a gun carrying list?Lets start with you gabbs. Tell us your NAME, SS#, ADDRESS, DOB, TYPE OF FIREARM.

You have publicly stated that you have handguns in your home so lets see your pertinent information or is that private??????? If you are unwilling to divulge this information here you are nothing more than a lying hypocrite!!!!

[Yurt]

You know what is funny? Some people claim everything in the 'public domain' can come out, unless it's about them. Go figure.

kind of hypocritical isn't it. they don't want their information public, but don't care if others have their info public.

at least they admit that their public information can in fact be published and that they have no say in whether it is published as such information is in the public domain.

[Kathianne]

when they are on topic. your problems with former posters are not on topic. I suggest you take those problems up with them and not me.

What 'former posters'? I didn't see a mention of any.

[Kathianne]

kind of hypocritical isn't it. they don't want their information public, but don't care if others have their info public.

at least they admit that their public information can in fact be published and that they have no say in whether it is published as such information is in the public domain.

It seems in this case following the law has one pinned for open season. In truth it may 'help', in the sense the 'bad guys' may avoid their homes, but that is beside the point.

[bullypulpit]

Look dumbass, If you obtain a license you are in the regestry so it is subject to the "Freedom of Information Act".

That's not the same as being in public domain...Duh.

[Nukeman]

That's not the same as being in public domain...Duh.
The point I was attempting to make is that through the "Freedom of Information Act", if you are registered the information is available.

The media outlet was negligent in publishing the list, simple as that.... This idiot media outlet placed it in the "public domain......

[5stringJeff]

I would imagine that personally identifying information would be covered by the Privacy Act of 1974, and not under FOIA.

[Yurt]

I would imagine that personally identifying information would be covered by the Privacy Act of 1974, and not under FOIA.

seems the folks in OP got personally identifiable info and published it.

people's tax records, address, name, value of home are published and some counties, like in CA, post them online

[glockmail]

If my crazy neighbor has a concealed weapons permit, I think I might like to know about it...IF the information is in the public domain. Nobody has answered my question about that yet.In order to get the permit his psychological profile has to be reviewed to prove that he's not crazy. Perhaps it is you who are messed up in the head.

[glockmail]

seems the folks in OP got personally identifiable info and published it.

people's tax records, address, name, value of home are published and some counties, like in CA, post them online
Most counties publish that on line. Some even have abbreviated house plans and photos.

[Joe Steel]

I'll bet the same people who are in favor of this breach of privacy, have fits when a list is printed of men who are convicted of using the services of a prostitute.

Printing a list of such offenders serves no useful purpose.

Printing a list of gun-carriers identifies dangerously unstable persons.

[Joe Steel]

Your so fucking stupid at times, if they were "sneaking" around then they would be registered now would they genius???

Its the criminal element that does the sneaking around.

Laws only affect the LAW ABIDING.

How does publishing the names of LAW ABIDING citizens make a community safer? why don't you instead call for the publishing of any and all criminals in a community, that way we will know who our neighbors are and keep a better eye on them eh comrade!!!!

Try again, dumbass.

Anyone who carries a concealed gun, by definition, is "sneaking it around."

[red states rule]

Printing a list of such offenders serves no useful purpose.

Printing a list of gun-carriers identifies dangerously unstable persons.

Using the services of a prostitute is a crime in most cities

Carrying a gun with a permit is not

Big difference Joe

[Nukeman]

Try again, dumbass.

Anyone who carries a concealed gun, by definition, is "sneaking it around."
NO dumbass!!! Anyone who caries a concealed gun WITHOUT a permit is by definition "sneaking it around". The others are LAW ABIDING citizens that have the AUTHORITY granted to them by the law enforcement community and legislature of their respective states. Don't like CCP than move to another state where it is almost impossible to obtain one. try Michigan.......

[Nukeman]

Printing a list of such offenders serves no useful purpose.

Printing a list of gun-carriers identifies dangerously unstable persons.

What prey tell makes them "dangerous, or unstable"????

Is that your medical definitiion? when did you phsyco analyze everyone with a gun??:poke:

[Abbey Marie]

Printing a list of such offenders serves no useful purpose.

Printing a list of gun-carriers identifies dangerously unstable persons.

Oh really? If wives see this list, it can help prevent them from contracting STD's that their slimy husbands bring home from their activities. A much more likely consequence than someone with a legal permit going crazy on a innocent neighbor.

[red states rule]

Oh really? If wives see this list, it can help prevent them from contracting STD's that their slimy husbands bringing home from their activities. A much more likely consequence than someone with a legal permit going crazy on a innocent neighbor.

:clap::clap:

You hit it out the park once again Abbey

[Joe Steel]

Oh really? If wives see this list, it can help prevent them from contracting STD's that their slimy husbands bring home from their activities. A much more likely consequence than someone with a legal permit going crazy on a innocent neighbor.

I stand corrected.

Such a list could, indeed, serve a useful purpose.