PA Bill Number: HB335
Title: In inchoate crimes, further providing for prohibited offensive weapons.
Description: In inchoate crimes, further providing for prohibited offensive weapons. ...
Last Action: Removed from table
Last Action Date: May 1, 2024
Closing the door on gun records in Ohio; Push for Second Amendment at odds with First Amendment :: 06/17/2015
Public records are supposed to be public, period. Closing them ought to be reserved for exceptional cases, where there is a compelling reason for confidentiality.
Simply declaring that they are better off being kept "private" doesn't cut it.
As the Ohio Senate finalizes the biennium budget, a measure that's been tacked onto it by State Sen. Joe Uecker would close the door entirely for journalists seeking access to concealed-carry permits, ostensibly to protect the identity of gun owners.
The current law is somewhat Orwellian. Concealed-carry permits, which are unquestionably public records, are off-limits to the general public, but journalists are allowed to view them -- as long as they do not take notes or make copies. The presumption apparently is that journalists can commit to memory what they "need" to see, but that all but precludes any serious investigatory reporting.
Uecker would eliminate even that limited access. Concealed-carry permits would be classified as confidential documents, and the release of information relative to the issuance, renewal, suspension or revocation of a concealed handgun license would be prohibited. Journalists couldn't even look at them.
The rationale for this apparently is that some gun-permit holders want their concealed-carry status to remain private, and their right to privacy ought to be paramount to the right of access to a public record.
That's a slippery slope. "Privacy" could be broadly defined to exclude the public from other records.
Journalists play an important watchdog role, peering over government's shoulder at times on behalf of the public. Access to gun records can be important if, for example, a question has been raised whether a concealed-carry permit has been granted improperly. Why shouldn't the public have a right to know if that has occurred? And the only way of knowing that is if the gun records are accessible.
The Ohio Newspaper Association is urging the Senate to drop Uecker's measure. Barring that, the hope is that Gov. John Kasich will use his line-item veto to strike it from the final budget.
As ONA executive director Dennis Hetzel points out, "the law in Ohio couldn't be clearer that it is an open record unless there is a compelling reason to close it."
And, Hetzel adds, "there is no convincing reason as to why county sheriffs should be allowed to maintain secret files of permit holders -- or revoked permit holders -- available only to government officials with no transparency or meaningful outside scrutiny of how they're operating the program."
Closing the door on public records breeds secrecy. And secrecy, in turn, can be a breeding ground for abuse.
The limited-access law now on the books restricts journalists seeking concealed-carry information to the point of being almost laughable, but it's better than nothing. We understand the need for Second Amendment rights, but they shouldn't be used as a club against the First Amendment.
