Is our state's CHP List safe from journalists?

[OctopusHighball]

In light of this article (http://dailycaller.com/2014/01/24/newspaper-conglomerate-considers-building-massive-database-of-gun-owners/), do laws exist in Colorado to prevent the public disclosure of such information?

[newracer]

Short answer is yes. We don't have a list.

[BuffCyclist]

Through public records act requests, we will attempt to build state-by-state databases that list those who have the right to carry a concealed weapon,” Lawitz wrote in the email. When reached for comment by Buckeye Firearms Association, Lawitz said the news conglomerate currently has no plans to publish the database. “We do not typically publicly comment on internal propriety communication. However, we have no plans to publish any names on any lists. Further, we are open to discuss any published reports,” Lawitz said


First, the article contradicts itself by stating they will list the people (meaning actual names) in a database but they have no plans to publish any names.

Second, any "database" that lists those who have the "right" to carry a concealed weapon would be nearly every citizen legally able to own a firearm.

I have no idea if CO law protects that information and makes it unavailable to the public or not.


However, in New Mexico where the law applies to ME, this was taken directly from the CCW Application Packet NMSA 29-19-6 Subsection B:

B. Information relating to an applicant or to a licensee received by the department or any other law enforcement agency is confidential and exempt from public disclosure unless an order to disclose information is issued by a court of competent jurisdiction. The information shall be made available by the department to a state or local law enforcement agency upon request by the agency.

eta: clarified the statute that I listed was for New Mexico only, as in, don't misunderstand that it applies in any way shape or form to Colorado, only what the law looks like for me and where you might go to find out if you are truly protected or not.

[Teufelhund]

Second, any "database" that lists those who have the "right" to carry a concealed weapon would be nearly every citizen legally able to own a firearm.



Not necessarily true in CO. The CO Constitution explicitly calls out concealed weapons, making it subject to approval/permitting:

"The right of no person to keep and bear arms in defense of his home, person and property, or in aid of the civil power when thereto legally summoned, shall be called in question; but nothing herein contained shall be construed to justify the practice of carrying concealed weapons." Art. II, § 13 (enacted 1876, art. II, § 13).

[TFOGGER]

Not necessarily true in CO. The CO Constitution explicitly calls out concealed weapons, making it subject to approval/permitting:

"The right of no person to keep and bear arms in defense of his home, person and property, or in aid of the civil power when thereto legally summoned, shall be called in question; but nothing herein contained shall be construed to justify the practice of carrying concealed weapons." Art. II, § 13 (enacted 1876, art. II, § 13).

Meaning that concealed carry is not guaranteed as a Constitutional concern, however CRS18-12-203 states that the Sheriff Shall Issue a permit to people that meet the following criteria:


18-12-203. Criteria for obtaining a permit



(1) Beginning May 17, 2003, except as otherwise provided in this section, a sheriff shall issue a permit to carry a concealed handgun to an applicant who:

(a) Is a legal resident of the state of Colorado. For purposes of this part 2, a person who is a member of the armed forces and is stationed pursuant to permanent duty station orders at a military installation in this state, and a member of the person's immediate family living in Colorado, shall be deemed to be a legal resident of the state of Colorado.

(b) Is twenty-one years of age or older;

(c) Is not ineligible to possess a firearm pursuant to section 18-12-108 (http://web.lexisnexis.com/research/buttonTFLink?_m=dc08ba5eed6471a908cd378a5ff04060&_xfercite=%3ccite%20cc%3d%22USA%22%3e%3c%21%5bCDAT A%5bC.R.S.%2018-12-203%5d%5d%3e%3c%2fcite%3e&_butType=4&_butStat=0&_butNum=2&_butInline=1&_butinfo=COCODE%2018-12-108&_fmtstr=FULL&docnum=1&_startdoc=1&wchp=dGLzVzk-zSkAl&_md5=79bd57962a673e3b3dd1389e975a3f36) or federal law;

(d) Has not been convicted of perjury under section 18-8-503 (http://web.lexisnexis.com/research/buttonTFLink?_m=dc08ba5eed6471a908cd378a5ff04060&_xfercite=%3ccite%20cc%3d%22USA%22%3e%3c%21%5bCDAT A%5bC.R.S.%2018-12-203%5d%5d%3e%3c%2fcite%3e&_butType=4&_butStat=0&_butNum=3&_butInline=1&_butinfo=COCODE%2018-8-503&_fmtstr=FULL&docnum=1&_startdoc=1&wchp=dGLzVzk-zSkAl&_md5=769ece0c25268553759578f306230cfc), in relation to information provided or deliberately omitted on a permit application submitted pursuant to this part 2;

(e) (I) Does not chronically and habitually use alcoholic beverages to the extent that the applicant's normal faculties are impaired.

(II) The prohibition specified in this paragraph (e) shall not apply to an applicant who provides an affidavit, signed by a professional counselor or addiction counselor who is licensed pursuant to article 43 of title 12, C.R.S., and specializes in alcohol addiction, stating that the applicant has been evaluated by the counselor and has been determined to be a recovering alcoholic who has refrained from using alcohol for at least three years.

(f) Is not an unlawful user of or addicted to a controlled substance as defined in section 18-18-102 (5) (http://web.lexisnexis.com/research/buttonTFLink?_m=dc08ba5eed6471a908cd378a5ff04060&_xfercite=%3ccite%20cc%3d%22USA%22%3e%3c%21%5bCDAT A%5bC.R.S.%2018-12-203%5d%5d%3e%3c%2fcite%3e&_butType=4&_butStat=0&_butNum=4&_butInline=1&_butinfo=COCODE%2018-18-102&_fmtstr=FULL&docnum=1&_startdoc=1&wchp=dGLzVzk-zSkAl&_md5=d15dcb825b0fb765e171a152f294a082). Whether an applicant is an unlawful user of or addicted to a controlled substance shall be determined as provided in federal law and regulations.

(g) Is not subject to:

(I) A protection order issued pursuant to section 18-1-1001 (http://web.lexisnexis.com/research/buttonTFLink?_m=dc08ba5eed6471a908cd378a5ff04060&_xfercite=%3ccite%20cc%3d%22USA%22%3e%3c%21%5bCDAT A%5bC.R.S.%2018-12-203%5d%5d%3e%3c%2fcite%3e&_butType=4&_butStat=0&_butNum=5&_butInline=1&_butinfo=COCODE%2018-1-1001&_fmtstr=FULL&docnum=1&_startdoc=1&wchp=dGLzVzk-zSkAl&_md5=9551de53ea186641431b75638407f799) or section 19-2-707, C.R.S. (http://web.lexisnexis.com/research/buttonTFLink?_m=dc08ba5eed6471a908cd378a5ff04060&_xfercite=%3ccite%20cc%3d%22USA%22%3e%3c%21%5bCDAT A%5bC.R.S.%2018-12-203%5d%5d%3e%3c%2fcite%3e&_butType=4&_butStat=0&_butNum=6&_butInline=1&_butinfo=COCODE%2019-2-707&_fmtstr=FULL&docnum=1&_startdoc=1&wchp=dGLzVzk-zSkAl&_md5=45ef45d1932d4ddad03ed92ce2bdd819), that is in effect at the time the application is submitted; or

(II) A permanent protection order issued pursuant to article 14 of title 13, C.R.S.; or

(III) A temporary protection order issued pursuant to article 14 of title 13, C.R.S., that is in effect at the time the application is submitted;

(h) Demonstrates competence with a handgun by submitting:

(I) Evidence of experience with a firearm through participation in organized shooting competitions or current military service;

(II) Evidence that, at the time the application is submitted, the applicant is a certified instructor;

(III) Proof of honorable discharge from a branch of the United States armed forces within the three years preceding submittal of the application;

(IV) Proof of honorable discharge from a branch of the United States armed forces that reflects pistol qualifications obtained within the ten years preceding submittal of the application;

(V) A certificate showing retirement from a Colorado law enforcement agency that reflects pistol qualifications obtained within the ten years preceding submittal of the application; or

(VI) A training certificate from a handgun training class obtained within the ten years preceding submittal of the application. The applicant shall submit the original training certificate or a photocopy thereof that includes the original signature of the class instructor. To the extent permitted by section 18-12-202 (5) (http://web.lexisnexis.com/research/buttonTFLink?_m=dc08ba5eed6471a908cd378a5ff04060&_xfercite=%3ccite%20cc%3d%22USA%22%3e%3c%21%5bCDAT A%5bC.R.S.%2018-12-203%5d%5d%3e%3c%2fcite%3e&_butType=4&_butStat=0&_butNum=7&_butInline=1&_butinfo=COCODE%2018-12-202&_fmtstr=FULL&docnum=1&_startdoc=1&wchp=dGLzVzk-zSkAl&_md5=9c607d610c9d174070ede70af8e198de), in obtaining a training certificate from a handgun training class, the applicant shall have discretion in selecting which handgun training class to complete.

(2) Regardless of whether an applicant meets the criteria specified in subsection (1) of this section, if the sheriff has a reasonable belief that documented previous behavior by the applicant makes it likely the applicant will present a danger to self or others if the applicant receives a permit to carry a concealed handgun, the sheriff may deny the permit.

(3) (a) The sheriff shall deny, revoke, or refuse to renew a permit if an applicant or a permittee fails to meet one of the criteria listed in subsection (1) of this section and may deny, revoke, or refuse to renew a permit on the grounds specified in subsection (2) of this section.

(b) Following issuance of a permit, if the issuing sheriff has a reasonable belief that a permittee no longer meets the criteria specified in subsection (1) of this section or that the permittee presents a danger as described in subsection (2) of this section, the sheriff shall suspend the permit until such time as the matter is resolved and the issuing sheriff determines that the permittee is eligible to possess a permit as provided in this section.

(c) If the sheriff suspends or revokes a permit, the sheriff shall notify the permittee in writing, stating the grounds for suspension or revocation and informing the permittee of the right to seek a second review by the sheriff, to submit additional information for the record, and to seek judicial review pursuant to section 18-12-207 (http://web.lexisnexis.com/research/buttonTFLink?_m=dc08ba5eed6471a908cd378a5ff04060&_xfercite=%3ccite%20cc%3d%22USA%22%3e%3c%21%5bCDAT A%5bC.R.S.%2018-12-203%5d%5d%3e%3c%2fcite%3e&_butType=4&_butStat=0&_butNum=8&_butInline=1&_butinfo=COCODE%2018-12-207&_fmtstr=FULL&docnum=1&_startdoc=1&wchp=dGLzVzk-zSkAl&_md5=71cc4c54c3b660c8ec6d7410fe6b6b23).


So, that's a pretty broad list they're gonna have to make...

[RCCrawler]

We don't have a list.

Yea, right, you believe that?

[newracer]

Yea, right, you believe that?

I am sure each county keeps a list but we no longer have a statewide list. In addition I do not think the county list is public record.

[merl]

I am sure each county keeps a list but we no longer have a statewide list. In addition I do not think the county list is public record.

And they don't share them with each other? CBI doesn't keep a list of people who have gotten the BG checks? I'm with RC on this, there may not be a public list but I'm sure there is a single list LE can access (and not just LE in this state).

[milwaukeeshaker]

NO states constitution is allowed to override the bill of rights. Thus the Colorado constitutions barring of concealed weapons is unconstitutional. SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED!!!! What part of this cannot be understood?


Not necessarily true in CO. The CO Constitution explicitly calls out concealed weapons, making it subject to approval/permitting:

"The right of no person to keep and bear arms in defense of his home, person and property, or in aid of the civil power when thereto legally summoned, shall be called in question; but nothing herein contained shall be construed to justify the practice of carrying concealed weapons." Art. II, § 13 (enacted 1876, art. II, § 13).

[newracer]

And they don't share them with each other? CBI doesn't keep a list of people who have gotten the BG checks? I'm with RC on this, there may not be a public list but I'm sure there is a single list LE can access (and not just LE in this state).

There was a law that allowed sheriffs to enter the information into the CBI database. That law expired and they were supposed to remove all the data and not have a list any longer.

[Teufelhund]

NO states constitution is allowed to override the bill of rights. Thus the Colorado constitutions barring of concealed weapons is unconstitutional. SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED!!!! What part of this cannot be understood?

That's an interesting point. While I am of the opinion that every legal restriction regarding firearms is repugnant to the Second Amendment (and therefore not a valid law at all), I have never put any thought into whether the Second Amendment prohibits the government (at any level) from imposing restrictions on concealed carry. I think you are correct, though every government at every level seems to disagree with us.

ETA: I don't read the text in the CO Constitution as "barring" of concealed weapons, but rather a statement that it is not considered a right. See TFOGGER's post above.

[OneGuy67]

Each Sheriff maintains a list of permits they've issued. They no longer share that list via CCIC. However, it is plausible that a newspaper could file suit in court to have the list turned over to them if the judge agreed that it is public information, no different than emails or internal memos circulated within the agency.

[TFOGGER]

I'm already on so many lists that I'm on a list of people who are on an implausible number of lists...

[Eric P]

My hope is that a criminal will check this list before breaking into my house and decides to move on to an easier target. A target that does not have personal defense.

[OctopusHighball]

My hope is that a criminal will check this list before breaking into my house and decides to move on to an easier target. A target that does not have personal defense.

I'm not too sure that is how it would play out. More likely is that criminals of opportunity would target folks on the list, recon to see when folks are not likely to be home, and strike then. If you are home all the time, perhaps they won't strike you...

Why any organization that has a intended purpose of keeping firearms out of the hands of bad guys would publish a map to where the bad guys could easily acquire such firearms is beyond my comprehension.

But, then again, I have a brain.

EDIT: I see I am a possible for-sale forum troll! Ha!

[Aloha_Shooter]

With the Democrats in control of so many of the administrative organizations and two sheriff's departments, there's a lot of room for illicit social engineering. With the current examples of how Obama and Holder have misused and distorted national instruments of power and law enforcement, I have no faith in the privacy of CCW license holders anywhere.

[Aloha_Shooter]

NO states constitution is allowed to override the bill of rights. Thus the Colorado constitutions barring of concealed weapons is unconstitutional. SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED!!!! What part of this cannot be understood?

Mmm ... no. The Constitution guarantees your right to keep and bear arms, it doesn't guarantee that you can conceal them when out in public. Easterners and Californians freak out at the open display of firearms but Westerners have always been more wary of the men who hide them (I believe this is why Art II is written the way it is). Much as I prefer the premise behind Shall Issue licenses or Constitutional Carry states, it is well within the right of the State to regulate said licenses.

Remember, the Tenth Amendment reserves significant powers to the States -- that includes the powers to reasonably regulate firearm use for public safety as well regulate medical and legal practices -- as long as said "reasonable regulations" don't amount to de facto bans ala Illinois or DC..

[DavieD55]

It is another good reason to pass Constitutional Carry in Colorado.

[ChadAmberg]

I read that there are only about 10 states that have laws allowing the information to be released to the public/news. The vast majority don't allow it.

[hatidua]

With the current examples of how Obama and Holder have misused and distorted national instruments of power and law enforcement, I have no faith in the privacy of CCW license holders anywhere.

That more or less sums up my thoughts on it.

As an aside, and as against the grain as it runs here, I really don't care if I'm listed on the cover of the local paper as having a concealed carry permit. Yes, I own a gun, I'm not even slightly ashamed to admit it. I'm relatively certain the NRA sticker on the back of my vehicle already achieves what publishing a list would in terms public perception.

Anyone can find out exactly how much I paid for my house, my marital status, DMV records, arrest records, Etc. I never had an expectation of privacy when I applied for a carry permit (maybe I didn't read the fine print where that was stipulated) or when I purchased any of my NFA items. I can appreciate the fact that some people are in a position where this info would be detrimental to their professional lives and for them I would hope that no list would be published. However, I don't care if I am on a published list, it just isn't a public 'outing' I care about.

[The Rat]

http://www.civitasmedia.com/article/20140124/HOME02/140129999



Statement from the CEO 1 hours ago | | (http://www.civitasmedia.com/article/20140124/HOME02/140129999&template=emailthis) | (http://www.civitasmedia.com/article/20140124/HOME02/140129999&template=printart) |


Civitas Media never had any plans or intentions of publishing in print or online lists of holders of “conceal and carry” permits. Nor will Civitas Media develop databases of permit holders. A poorly crafted internal memo meant to highlight editorial discussions and planning incorrectly indicated that such a database was being planned; it has been considered and rejected.

[rbeau30]

I guarantee you there is records of some kind.

When I met with Sherriff Robinson o ask for my permit back, he had a rather thick file from CBI on me.

[roberth]

Did you fill out forms to obtain your CHP?

Do public officials lie to the public as standard policy and procedure?

Are journalists pals with public officials?

If you answered NO to these three questions then I want to know what the color the sky is in your world.

[james_bond_007]

Meaning that concealed carry is not guaranteed as a Constitutional concern, however CRS18-12-203 states that the Sheriff Shall Issue a permit to people that meet the following criteria:

So, that's a pretty broad list they're gonna have to make...

...but having a CCW permit is not a right (at least in the manner I understand the term "right").

It is more of a privilege.
If the criteria is met, the sheriff is bound, by law, to issue; however, the sheriff has the authority to deny issuing or revoke the CCW permit, under certain conditions.

There is a subtle difference between rights and privileges.
I'm sure there are many interpretations, but the way I know it :
A right is typically bestowed unconditionally upon birth. One inherits certain rights at the time of being created at birth, that can't be denied.
A privilege is grated after birth by the state (legal system) and is typically conditional. That is, certain criteria must be met in order for one to obtain the privilege, and upon failure to meet that criteria, the privilege can be revoked.

The example that always comes to mind is that a driver's license is a privilege, not a right, even though almost everyone can get one.

...but all this is just my understanding/interpretation.

As far as the article, I think we might be debating the "quality, or lack of quality" of the writing, grammar and usage.

To me, by my interpretation, the "list", as stated, would contain "0" names, as no one has a "right" to have a CCW permit.

From the context, the statement should have read something like "...a list of those people that hold a CCW permit..." (only those permit holders on record)

The very LARGE/BROAD list would be "...a list of those people that can qualify or have qualified to hold a CCW permit..." (practically everyone)

[james_bond_007]

I would wonder if your CCW application is considered a public record or not ?

Although there is no statewide "list", I would consider the file cabinet in your local sheriff's office containing the CCW applications a "list" or "database" of CCW permit holders residing in that county.

At the point you submit the application, the application becomes property of the county.
Is it/can it be considered a public record ?
Can they do what they want with it (i.e., publish some info from it ) ?

After all, the arrest reports are published and "name names" , often appearing in the "Police Beat" section.

[Big E3]

I talked to a sheriff don't remember what county and his explanation of a list of CCW holders was like this. We don't maintain a computer list of just CCW holders, if you enter a specific name in the system there would be record of that person having a permit. He said it would be like how your driver license says corrective lenses required, but there is not a list of everyone who wears glasses. Now maybe he just wanted me stop concerning myself, I don't know.

[merl]

I talked to a sheriff don't remember what county and his explanation of a list of CCW holders was like this. We don't maintain a computer list of just CCW holders, if you enter a specific name in the system there would be record of that person having a permit. He said it would be like how your driver license says corrective lenses required, but there is not a list of everyone who wears glasses. Now maybe he just wanted me stop concerning myself, I don't know.

ha! "there is a database but there isn't a search defined to just dump it." (but one could be coded in minutes) Thats just like the ATF "We don't have a database of gun owners, we have a database that can search serial numbers (https://www.atf.gov/sites/default/files/assets/statistics/tracedata-2012/2012-trace-data-colorado.pdf)."

Back to the OP the real concern is not being outed in the media, it is the situation for the FL resident in MD. If a cop in IL can ask about CCW info along with DL info (call up CO and say "is this DL valid and do they have a valid CCW?") then having a CCW makes you an instant suspect in other states.

[newracer]

I talked to a sheriff don't remember what county and his explanation of a list of CCW holders was like this. We don't maintain a computer list of just CCW holders, if you enter a specific name in the system there would be record of that person having a permit. He said it would be like how your driver license says corrective lenses required, but there is not a list of everyone who wears glasses. Now maybe he just wanted me stop concerning myself, I don't know.

That is not true any longer. Before 2011 a CHP would come up on the CBI database when they ran you for warrants.