In Illinois, there's a struggle going on between attorney general Lisa Madigan and the Illinois State Police. The police apparently issue Firearm Owner Identification Cards (FOID) for all individuals licensed to carry guns in the state. The Associated Press submitted a Freedom of Information request seeking the names of all FOID holders. Madigan believes that this information should be made public while the police believe that its disclosure would violate state privacy laws - and endanger gun owners. See the Trib for more info.
This raises an interesting issue by implication. If we take seriously the right of individuals to carry guns - but we continue to imagine that states have a right to regulate them - to what degree should licensing information be allowed to be made public? I suppose there are practical questions. Disclosure of this information might make individuals safer. After all, now you know who not to fool with. On the other hand, it also might provide information useful to burglars seeking repositories of valuable goods.
But some people might not want this information public. For example, in some social circles, possessing a gun is taboo. And many protective parents might not want their kids on a play date in a home with weapons. (At minimum, it might spur serious conversations with other parents about how guns are stored - conversations that might actually be quite productive.) There might even be conservative gun supporters who don't carry themselves - for personal reasons - but wouldn't want to disclose that fact to other gun advocates.
Does the right to possess a gun include the right to do so secretly? Does public disclosure burden the right significantly?
You ask: "Does the right to possess a gun include the right to do so secretly? Does public disclosure burden the right significantly?"
I say no and no. But then again, I take issue with the starting premise. The "right" is a step in the wrong direction (in a civilized society).
Posted by: Miriam A. Cherry | March 02, 2011 at 06:01 PM