Information War Heats Up

Information War Heats Up In Erie County

When an Ohio newspaper editor published private information about thousands of gun permit owners, The Buckeye Firearms Association fired back with a broadside of private information they found on the county website about the editor.

Originally Published as Firearms Follow-up by Robert Franco

Reprinted with permission

July-21-07

After my post, The Information War, I received an email from the Buckeye Firearms Association challenging my statement that "the Buckeye Firearms Association had no good reason, other than spite, to publish their findings on Mr. Westerhold." They claim that their purpose behind publishing personal, although public, information from Mr. Westerhold's real estate and divorce records was to provide an example of the harm that can be caused by publishing such information.

In past instances where media have abused their privilege of access to private information, gun owners have responded to "what's the harm?" taunts with examples (anecdotal and in a few cases actual) where harm has been caused by the release of such information. The typical response is "no criminal is smart enough to do this" or "the last place a criminal is going to target for burglary is the home of someone he knows has a gun". We decided the only way to prove our point about how damaging the release of this private information can be was to use an example. Westerhold made the perfect example, because he believes so much in making sure he has access to any type of information the government may possess, no matter how private.

While I can see their point, we differ on what is a legitimate purpose for publishing this type of information. As title professionals, we use those same Public Records to facilitate transactions involving real estate. The information we use generally serves a purpose that benefits the individual whose public information we are gathering. We also take care in maintaining some degree of confidentiality. When we do a title search, we provide it to the parties that need it to complete their transaction. We don't post our searches on the Internet for the world at large.

To use a firearm analogy, publishing sensitive information on the Internet, knowing that it can cause harm, to prove the point that it can be harmful is akin to shooting someone to prove that it hurts to get shot. Obviously that is an exaggeration, as the latter is illegal and the former is not - but maybe they should both be criminal.

The Buckeye Firearms Association does make another good point, however. The Sandusky Register went a step beyond publishing Public Records; the information they published is considered confidential and not public record by statute. Access to that information can only be obtained by journalists by filing a request stating that disclosure of the information is in the public interest.

ORC 2923.129
...
(B) (1) Notwithstanding section 149.43 of the Revised Code, except as provided in division (B)(2) of this section, the records that a sheriff keeps relative to the issuance, renewal, suspension, or revocation of a license to carry a concealed handgun or the issuance, suspension, or revocation of a temporary emergency license to carry a concealed handgun, including, but not limited to, completed applications for the issuance or renewal of a license, completed affidavits submitted regarding an application for a temporary emergency license, reports of criminal records checks and incompetency records checks under section 311.41 of the Revised Code, and applicants' social security numbers and fingerprints that are obtained under division (A) of section 311.41 of the Revised Code, are confidential and are not Public Records. Except as provided in division (B)(2) of this section, no person shall release or otherwise disseminate records that are confidential under this division unless required to do so pursuant to a court order.

(2) Upon a written request made to a sheriff and signed by a journalist on or after the effective date of this section, the sheriff shall disclose to the journalist the name, county of residence, and date of birth of each person to whom the sheriff has issued a license or replacement license to carry a concealed handgun, renewed a license to carry a concealed handgun, or issued a temporary emergency license or replacement temporary emergency license to carry a concealed handgun under section 2923.125 [2923.12.5] or 2923.1213 [2923.12.5] of the Revised Code. The request shall include the journalist's name and title, shall include the name and address of the journalist's employer, and shall state that disclosure of the information sought would be in the public interest.
...

In an interesting follow-up article, Sandusky Register's error-filled list of CHL-holders' private info, on the Buckeye Firearms Association Web site, they point out that much of the information published by the Sandusky Register was incorrect.

The problem with newspapers taking on the role of being a de facto registrar of CHL records is that they are doing the distributing of information on the World Wide Web part, but aren't accepting any of the maintaining, responsibility or accountability part. In other words, newspapers are taking no responsibility for the accuracy of the information they maintain and make available!
...
Buckeye Firearms Association can now report that it won't take the passage of time for The Register's list of CHL-holders to become erroneous - thanks to carelessness on the part of the newspaper, the list of CHL-holders contained erroneous information from the moment it was first published!

Shortly after The Register published these confidential records, Buckeye Firearms volunteers began spot checking the list for accuracy. The Sheriff's offices were able to confirm that they had supplied correct information to the newspaper, and the paper printed wrong information, which continues to be available to the public on the Internet at SanduskyRegister.com.

Without having the accurate list of CHL-holders to compare to, it is impossible to know how many times the newspaper published false information, but judging by the rate of error determined by our investigation, the number of errors could be in the hundreds.

They also posted a fine example in that article of a specific harm that could be caused to those who had their information published in the newspaper:

In cases where the confidential information has been published on the Internet, it has the potential to follow a person long after the information is no longer valid. For example, assume that Jane Doe was issued an Ohio CHL in 2007 in Seneca County, and the Sandusky Register published that confidential information on its website. In 2008, Jane decides to move to California, and turns in her Ohio CHL, which will no longer be valid when she becomes an out-of-state resident. Upon arriving in California, Jane begins applying for employment, but because The Register continues to maintain a list of CHL-holders from 2007 on its website, Jane's name keeps turning up as a gun owner during Internet searches conducted by potential employers, and Jane can't even get an interview. (Before anyone tries to convince themselves that potential employers would not discriminate against gun owners, consider that Ohio gun-ban extremist Toby Hoover is on record encouraging employers to consider whether or not a potential new-hire is a CHL-holder before hiring.)

I don't want to get too bogged down in the debate over the 2nd Amendment - that fight has been raging for a long time and will not likely end anytime soon. The purpose of my blog is to point out that the availability of confidential information, whether public or not (as in the case of the licenses here), has the potential to be abused. The potential abuses become much more likely when the information is easily accessible by anyone on the Internet.

The point I made in the original post was that "our Public Records laws are too outdated to deal with this type of abuse of the Public Records." I'm sure the Buckeye Firearms Association would agree that handguns need to be respected and carefully handled. The same should be said about our Public Records. Our government needs to take some action to protect people from potential abuses of the wide dissemination of records that they require to be kept. While there is certainly a need for "Public Records," just how public they should be needs to be addressed by our legislature.

In closing, I would like to thank the Buckeye Firearms Association for their feedback. Their follow-up article contains another example of a newspaper that has published a list of concealed handgun license holders. It is an interesting article that I would recommend reading.

While I do not condone the manner in which they chose to use the Public Records, they made a strong point and have represented their membership well. After all, the information they posted was "public" and there is no law prohibiting its use in such a way... yet.

For more on this please read The Information War