I disagree. Don't you think it would be useful to know if an unbalanced individual in your neighborhood had a permit for a semi automatic rifle?
How are you going to determine who's unbalanced? Mental health records are not available to the public.
Why should that be a secret? In this case it appears just to be those who have pistol/revolver permits. I presume one can get lists of people with pilot's licenses or liquor licenses. Why should gun owners be treated differently?
They aren't treated differently. Those are public records and are available to all. However, you rarely see names of people with pilot's licenses or liquor licenses or driver's licenses published in the paper unless they did something wrong, are up for review, or are involved in an altercation.
I'd want to know if there was a gun in a house that one of my kids was likely to be playing in. I'd take the opportunity to ask the parents in that house how they secured the weapon. If it didn't meet my standards for safety I'd simply not let my kid go there. Why shouldn't I have that information?
You don't run a background check on the parents of every classmate that your child goes to attend a birthday party at, do you? No. You get to know the parents of your child's peers through interaction at school functions, sporting events, friends of friends, church, talks over the fence, by the mailbox, etc...These are things that you are supposed to ask a child's playmate's parents before you send them over to play unsupervised if its something you are concerned about. Do you ask them if they have unsecured steak knives, fireworks, gasoline and matches, too?
No. You observe the parents and families of your children's friends and make judgements as you go.
Publishing the names and addresses of all the people that have a legal permit to carry a firearm will do absolutely nothing to prevent anything.
Take the case of the mass school shooting two weeks ago....
The firearms were legally owned by the mother, not the son.
He didn't use the gun show loophole to obtain them.
No background check would have caught him because he got the guns from his mother.
A waiting period to purchase would not have prevented it.
The assault weapons ban wouldn't have prevented it as there are literally hundreds of thousands of these weapons already on the market.
A ban on large capacity magazines would not have prevented it. He would have just carried more 10 round clips for any large caliber semi-automatic hunting rifle.
The woman had the proper permits. That made no difference.
The woman was trained to use the firearms, yet the son got them from her and killed her. Training made no difference.
With over 300 million guns legally possessed by citizens in the U.S. do you really think you can ever remove them from circulation? The guns are not the problem. Homicide is the problem. You are more likely to be blown up by a mass murderer than shot by a mass murderer.
Sick individuals have always been and will always be. They will find ways to commit homicide. Publishing the names of people that are concerned enough with their own personal safety to go through the proper and legal process to obtain a permit to carry a firearm for personal protection is just sensationalist journalism by a writer or newspaper trying to stir readership for personal financial gain.
