by Thorentis on 6/28/22, 3:01 AM
So criminals can look up addresses before deciding which homes to break and enter? How is this not a good thing for criminals? Sure, less criminals may get shot. But then who are we trying to actually protect here?
Consider an absurd second order effect where, if it's true that you're less likely to be robbed by being on this register, it encourages more people to buy guns, even if it means they don't have to use them.
by pseudo0 on 6/28/22, 3:25 AM
Example #1001 of why gun owners hate registries. The safest way to handle sensitive PII is to simply not retain it in the first place.
by anigbrowl on 6/28/22, 9:10 PM
Bullshit headline edit
Original was 'Attorney General Bonta Releases New Firearms Data to Increase Transparency and Information Sharing'. They absolutely leaked data by failing to secure it properly via tableau, but the headline as written here implies that this was done deliberately. I looked at it last night, you wouldn't have known about it unless you were digging through the page source looking for ways to scrape it.
Negligent at best, possibly deliberate at worst. But that doesn't justify the false impression created by this headline.
by takklz on 6/28/22, 2:37 AM
by Blackthorn on 6/28/22, 3:34 AM
Exactly why we fight tooth and nail against registries in other states. And people call us hysterical.
by ciabattabread on 6/28/22, 3:10 AM
Is this one of those situations where it's conceptually a public record in that it's always been available via a filing cabinet at a public library, but when placed on the global internet, it causes problems?
by Rebelgecko on 6/28/22, 3:02 AM
Well that's one way to "Increase Transparency and Information Sharing". I can't get the portal to work any more, but supposedly it also shared PII for FSC cardholders (a.k.a. pretty much every law-abiding gun owner in California).
by LinuxBender on 6/29/22, 5:27 PM
I thought about getting a CCW when I was in California. I would have had to donate upwards of $20K to the local sheriff based on what other CCW's I knew had to do otherwise the form just sits in a pile for years. I found it was cheaper to move to a state that does not require a CCW to carry concealed. The only reason I would apply for one here would be if I planned to drive across the state border while carrying.
In hindsight I am glad I took the path I did. Things are getting weird(er). Politics are really starting to impact citizens in ways I had not imagined would happen in my lifetime. Surely these events are eroding what little trust and confidence people have in their governments? I am seeing too many "Ooops did I leak that?" events and blaming cloud configuration errors. It's a broken record at this point and I am not buying it.
by mgarfias on 6/28/22, 4:42 AM
Just wait til companies start using this as part of their background checks of employees.
by rhexs on 6/28/22, 3:09 AM
What's the goal here? Convince law abiding citizens to leave California?
by daenz on 6/28/22, 3:04 AM
I don't see anything on this page that indicates the headline. A quick search on Twitter doesn't yield any results either. Are there redacted screenshots as proof? Anyone covering the leak?
by macinjosh on 6/28/22, 3:12 AM
What an unmitigated disaster. Some problems with this off the top of my head:
1. Criminals can see which houses to avoid burglarizing.
2. Criminals can see where to find weapons to steal when owners are away.
3. Stalkers can easily find their victims home who may be carrying for self defense.
4. Will the addresses of every police officer be published too? They carry a gun at all times, even off duty in most cases.
by salawat on 6/28/22, 3:25 AM
by hnburnsy on 6/28/22, 2:34 PM
Does this include the address of LEOs, many of whom are CCW holders?
by _-david-_ on 6/28/22, 3:04 AM
Revealing information on private citizens is transparency?
by pensatoio on 6/28/22, 4:50 AM
Ok, I read it, and I'm still confused. The CA govt is doxing people who went through the arduous process of legally obtaining a CCW?
by trhway on 6/28/22, 4:01 AM
Society considers it useful to have a sex offenders registry, like where they live, etc. I think gun owners are also a potential threat, ie. there is similar compelling public interest, and thus I don't see why it should be treated differently. For example if a scum of a "law abiding gun owner" like Rittenhouse is living next door you definitely would like to know if it has a gun.