Locker Room’s Julie Gilstrap describes her experience when obtaining a concealed carry permit:
There were four of us there being fingerprinted for concealed carry permits, and there were two people in handcuffs being fingerprinted and, seemingly, booked. Those in custody went first, which gave me plenty of time to consider the situation. In our society, we don’t routinely fingerprint people unless they’re suspected of committing crimes, and that’s a good thing. It protects individuals’ privacy. But here were the four of us, wishing to exercise what is a constitutional right, and we were funneled in with those suspected of crimes to have our identifying information entered into some big database. In order to exercise a constitutional right to gun ownership, we had to sacrifice our right to privacy.
I’ve chosen to make that trade-off, but it concerns me greatly that I’m asked to. The Constitution and the rights it protects are important. When we have to sacrifice some rights to gain others, we’re not made more free. People who want to carry a concealed handgun shouldn’t be treated as if they are suspects or criminals. They shouldn’t be fingerprinted and entered into a database. They shouldn’t have their right to privacy infringed. Instead, we should respect the principle of constitutional rights, which means all of them, whether gun ownership or free speech or jury trial. For when we accept that the government can limit some of those rights, we open ourselves up to the notion that perhaps they could limit them all.
Lost in last week’s debate over WRAL’s publication of the concealed carry database was the question of whether or not there should be a database at all. I think that question is now answered.
........As you post your comment, please conform to Piedmont Publius's simple comment policy: we welcome all perspectives, but require that comments be both civil and respectful. If you wouldn't say it to a co-worker in front of your boss, it probably is not civil and respectful. We will delete any comment that fails this test and issue a warning to the poster. A second offense will result in a ban on commenting on this site. In sum, disagreements, arguments even, are welcome; abusive behavior is not. Thanks.
02
2012 At 12:24 pm, jaycee Said:
What if “journalists” had to be qualified, approved, and vetted before they were allowed their “freedom of the press” under the First Amendment? What if they were only allowed to write one article a month? What if California banned some news articles because they didn’t like the way they looked? What if those “high capacity” word processors were banned, or required a special tax stamp for possession?
Nah, we’d never make someone go through that to exercise a constitutional right…would we?
02
2012 At 1:54 pm, Roch Smith Said:
Yeah, what if someone snuck their laptop into a crowded movie theater?
04
2012 At 1:25 pm, Jim Stegall Said:
Ms. Gilstrap, you’ve mistated your situation. You are not required to sacrifice your right to privacy in order to own a firearm. No one is required to provide fingerprints as a condition of gun ownership. What you were asked to do is provide fingerprints as a condition of being allowed to carry a concealed firearm, which is perfectly in keeping with the U.S. Constitution’s Second Amendment. In effect, by applying for a concealed carry permit you are volunteering to become part of the “well-regulated militia” to which that amendment refers. Welcome to the club, by the way.
And Jaycee, anyone can write and publish whatever they will, be they journalist or not. But if one wants to cover the White House, or the Super Bowl, or any of a host of other high-profile people or events, one must apply for a media pass, and that would most likely entail reasonable identification procedures. Hopefully not fingerprinting, but who knows?
04
2012 At 4:24 pm, Roch Smith Said:
Sam, Jaycee, you object to having to register with the government in order to exercise the right to vote too, right?
04
2012 At 8:17 pm, jaycee Said:
Jim Stegall Said:
“What you were asked to do is provide fingerprints as a condition of being allowed to carry a concealed firearm, which is perfectly in keeping with the U.S. Constitution’s Second Amendment.”
Really? Any evidence to back this up? I don’t recall seeing the word “fingerprint” in my copy of the Constitution.
“…by applying for a concealed carry permit you are volunteering to become part of the “well-regulated militia” to which that amendment refers.”
Nor do I recall anything in the Constitution about having to “volunteer” to do your duty as a citizen.
05
2012 At 11:51 pm, Stormy Said:
What does being able to conceal carry have to do with being part of a well-regulated militia? I do not see the connection. Yes, we do register to vote, so that the government knows that we are citizens and have the right to vote, but, at least for now, we are not fingerprinted.
Any more straw men out there, Roch?
05
2012 At 11:54 pm, Stormy Said:
Hey, Roch, what about someone sneaking in an unregistered bomb into the theatre? Much worse damage, so why no registering? And, we better register that fertilizer, too, it is dangerous.
05
2012 At 11:54 pm, jaycee Said:
Roch has once again publicly displayed his ignorance of the Constitution.
There is no Constitutional right to vote.
Voting is a privilege, not a right.
Eligibility to vote is determined by Federal and state law. Some states have exclusions, such as convicted felons, mental incompetents, etc.
The US Constitution and subsequent amendments merely enumerate the things that cannot be used to deny someone their vote, provided they are eligible.
06
2012 At 7:38 am, Roch Smith Said:
Your interpretation is indeed frightening, John. Yes, one has to put together provisions in the constitution that demand the People select their representatives and that people 18 and older be allowed to vote to comprehend that we have a right to vote. To suggest it is something “merely” less is supremely ignorant an un-American.
06
2012 At 3:41 pm, jaycee Said:
Roch, thanks for publicly admitting you were wrong.
We don’t often see that from those of your ilk.
07
2012 At 9:57 am, CCW Permit Holder Said:
Everything we do is becoming more and more regulated. The right to bear arms (the operative word being “bear”) is guaranteed by the Constitution. I wholeheartedly disagree that fingerprinting is part of the deal.
But there are cameras on every traffic light in Sarasota, FL. We have to be thoroughly searched before boarding an airplane. I mean, where does this governmental scrutiny end? It’s beginning to feel like 1984. (The book, not the year.)