List of celebrities in NY with carry permits

[ericire12]

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/madoff_son_of_gun_LDcUvEw9PXY0rS1oNFfl1J

The following have NYPD pistol permits:

Howard Stern, satellite shock jock

Don Imus, syndicated shock jock

Harvey Keitel, actor

Sean Hannity, TV host

Donald Trump, developer

Donald Trump Jr.

Eric Trump

Ronald Lauder, Estee Lauder heir

Carlos Delgado, ex-Mets first baseman

David Wright, Mets third baseman

Lee Mazzilli, former Met and Yankee

Barry Levinson, director

Tommy Mottola, recording exec

John Mack, CEO of Morgan Stanley

John Catsimatidis, Gristedes CEO

Alexis Stewart, Martha’s daughter

Dr. Robert Jarvik, artificial heart inventor

Richard Brown, Queens DA

Janet DiFiore, Westchester DA

Barry Slotnick, lawyer

Raoul Felder, lawyer

Pat Cooper, comedian

Anthony Carbonetti,Giuliani Partners

If you live in a “may issue” state, there MUST be some way for those have been denied a permit to see who did get approved. Without at least that minimum level of accountability, the potential for abuse is just too great.

http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/2009/12/02/no-right-to-know/#comment-54036

[r_w]

Short list. 

[CDR]

Short list. 

Certainly the case.  "The Post" received all 36,040 NYC permit holder names earlier this week from the NYPD.  Now lets see what they do with it.  Was it for purposes of celebrity identification, as per this article, or some other disturbing reason like a public list of names and addresses that puts us at risk?

[fightingquaker13]

Certainly the case.  "The Post" received all 36,040 NYC permit holder names earlier this week from the NYPD.  Now lets see what they do with it.  Was it for purposes of celebrity identification, as per this article, or some other disturbing reason that puts us at risk?

I think Eric had it right in the OP. In "shall issue" states these records should be sealed as they are not my business. In "may issue" states/localities, it is my business as we do have the right to know why our neighbor got a permit and we didn't.
FQ13

[ericire12]

I think Eric had it right in the OP. In "shall issue" states these records should be sealed as they are not my business. In "may issue" states/localities, it is my business as we do have the right to know why our neighbor got a permit and we didn't.
FQ13

No, either it endangers lives or it doesnt. If you are suing because your rights have been infringed then you should have the right to subpoena the list.... it still should not be public just because the local govt is loony.

[Sponsor]

[CDR]

No, Either it endangers lives or it doesnt. If you are suing because your rights have been infringed then you should have the right to subpoena the list.... its still should not be public just because the local govt is loony.

+1 Eric, I agree completely.  Well stated.

As I am on that list the NYPD was forced to provide the "NY Post", I will be VERY upset if my name and address appears in the newspaper somewhere down the line.

[tombogan03884]

 I think Eric is right, but there is a draw back, as I understand it documents that are subpoenaed and used in a court case become public records and therefore the privacy disappears any way.

[CDR]

I think Eric is right, but there is a draw back, as I understand it documents that are subpoenaed and used in a court case become public records and therefore the privacy disappears any way.

I think Eric's premise is correct in that such documents should NOT be made public if it endangers lives. The publishing of any list of names and addresses regarding pistol permit holders, in any manner whatsoever, should never be made public....period.  Subpoenaed or not.

[tombogan03884]

I think Eric's premise is correct in that such documents should NOT be made public if it endangers lives. The publishing of any list of names and addresses regarding pistol permit holders, in any manner whatsoever, should never be made public....period.  Subpoenaed or not.

I know there are ways of protecting sensitive info, they are used to protect infomant identities and National security info.

[fightingquaker13]

No, Either it endangers lives or it doesnt. If you are suing because your rights have been infringed then you should have the right to subpoena the list.... its still should not be public just because the local govt is loony.

Heres the the thing Eric, and this isn't an argument, just a question. If you live in a "may issue" area and are told no, how do you know whether you have a case? Lets set the 2A aside and just assume " fundamental fairness" as the guiding Con. law principle, eg., like cases should be treated alike.This is covered under the 14A and is relatively non-controversial and settled law. Without being able to see who DID get the permits and then be able to make a claim based on the holders receiving them based on political patronage, nepotism etc., you don't have a leg to stand on. This is one of the many reasons "shall issue' is prefferable, the 2A aside, as it states all people meeting x,y and z requirements are treated the same. There is no room for favoritism here.  I agree that I don't like disclosure of CCW holders, but without FOIA access to the records of a "may issue" state/city it seems that you are without recourse.
FQ13