Odd choice of language USA Today uses for this article.
South Carolina last week became the latest in a growing number of states to make the names of people who have a license to carry a concealed weapon a state secret.Five other states might not be far behind in a battle that pits a public policy of open government against the right of people to keep their gun ownership records private.
A few choices phrases from our friends at the Brady Campaign:
Weaver, of the Brady Campaign, said there’s no evidence to show that open records put people who carry concealed weapons in greater danger.
“We feel that the greater danger is putting concealed-weapons permits in the hands of convicted felons and people that should not be allowed to have them,” he said.
One wonders whether Colin Weaver would feel similarly to have his wife’s jewelry collection published in the local paper. Look, guns are valuables, and you would think the Brady Campaign would support these laws, which deny firearms traffickers a convenient list of which houses have firearms. More particularly, a license holder house is more likely to have a handgun, which are most in demand on the streets.
The “felon” issue is completely laughable anyway. Can the Brady Campaign name a single instance of the public availability of permit records being a factor in a getting a permit that was misissued recinded in a shall-issue state?  I know that happens in may-issue jurisdictions like New York City, where the criteria for being issued is basically whether the police feel like it, but in shall issue states, where everyone goes through the background check, I’ve never heard of it happening.
