Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

discntnt_irny_srcsm

(18,591 posts)
Thu Jun 30, 2022, 07:09 AM Jun 2022

Cross post: California gun data breach exposes personal info...10 years of concealed carry permits

Original OP: https://www.democraticunderground.com/10142936767

https://www.kcra.com/article/california-data-breach-exposes-personal-info-for-concealed-carry-permit-holders-sheriffs-office-says/40462232
Personal information for Californians who were granted or denied a concealed and carry weapons permit over a period of 10 years, as well as the personal information of people associated with several other gun dashboards, was disclosed online this week, the state's Department of Justice confirmed.

DOJ said it is reaching out to those whose data was exposed and will provide credit monitoring services.

The data breach left the unauthorized information accessible to the public for "less than 24 hours" in connection with an update of the state's 2022 update of its Firearms Dashboard Portal on Monday afternoon.

[ Added emphasis is mine. ]

This is one of the reasons why so many are against similar data collections related to firearms.
17 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Cross post: California gun data breach exposes personal info...10 years of concealed carry permits (Original Post) discntnt_irny_srcsm Jun 2022 OP
Good The Magistrate Jun 2022 #1
Supremes say 2nd A gives right to have guns sanatanadharma Jun 2022 #2
Pregnant woman can't be private why should these gun humpers get to be secret? onecaliberal Jun 2022 #3
So you're okay with pregnant women having no privacy? n/t discntnt_irny_srcsm Jun 2022 #4
Wow, you just inferred quite a bit about what I think. It's too early for this nonsense. onecaliberal Jun 2022 #6
Wow... discntnt_irny_srcsm Jun 2022 #8
Perhaps your question was a trillion miles off and yes you did infer that I had a specific thought.. onecaliberal Jun 2022 #13
re: "...call you on it." discntnt_irny_srcsm Jun 2022 #15
You can walk into a Planned Parenthood clinic and ask for a list of abortion patients. JustABozoOnThisBus Jun 2022 #5
Consider it the price of freedom . . . AndyS Jun 2022 #7
I consider it facilitating identity theft. discntnt_irny_srcsm Jun 2022 #9
And I consider allowing paranoids to carry loaded guns in AndyS Jun 2022 #10
I consider your opinion there... discntnt_irny_srcsm Jun 2022 #11
Can they really call it a breach? PTWB Jun 2022 #12
Breach would be kind but completely inaccurate term for this. discntnt_irny_srcsm Jun 2022 #14
Can those whose information was released sue the state ? MichMan Jul 2022 #16
That's question for an attorney. discntnt_irny_srcsm Jul 2022 #17

The Magistrate

(96,043 posts)
1. Good
Thu Jun 30, 2022, 07:28 AM
Jun 2022

It ought to be public knowledge who carries concealed weapons, or has attempted to and been barred from doing so. Just like I want to know if the person moving in next door molests children, or a new hire is a thief. It's a matter of public safety. I will make my own judgement regarding the weight I give the information, but I want it, and it ought to be public. I damned sure want to know if the guy down the block prances about with a pistol under his shirt-tail.

sanatanadharma

(4,074 posts)
2. Supremes say 2nd A gives right to have guns
Thu Jun 30, 2022, 07:28 AM
Jun 2022

Where is the right to privacy about owning guns?
No right to privacy means States (Feds) can require gun owners to register their guns.
Can't call up the militia if they and their arms are unknown.

Supreme Court may have opened the way to gun registration by arguing no constitutional right to privacy.

onecaliberal

(36,052 posts)
6. Wow, you just inferred quite a bit about what I think. It's too early for this nonsense.
Thu Jun 30, 2022, 08:02 AM
Jun 2022

Enjoy the dust bin.

discntnt_irny_srcsm

(18,591 posts)
8. Wow...
Thu Jun 30, 2022, 08:32 AM
Jun 2022

Technically, I believe inference would require at least a statement on my part. Perhaps you missed the question mark.

Have a nice day.

onecaliberal

(36,052 posts)
13. Perhaps your question was a trillion miles off and yes you did infer that I had a specific thought..
Thu Jun 30, 2022, 09:36 AM
Jun 2022

About women's privacy. Maybe you can’t comprehend what you wrote. If you’re going to go there don’t be surprised that someone will call you on it.

discntnt_irny_srcsm

(18,591 posts)
15. re: "...call you on it."
Thu Jun 30, 2022, 10:10 AM
Jun 2022

I specific, my opinion is that ALL medical information is absolutely private privileged information. From your reply, "Pregnant woman can't be private why should these gun humpers get to be secret?" it CAN BE INFERRED that you are accepting of that information being compromised if the data released by CA DOJ on guns is also released. I asked a question. Infer what you wish from the question but I absolutely affirm that ALL personal private be safeguarded and not subject to publication by a rogue government actor.

Sorry for any offense.

JustABozoOnThisBus

(23,785 posts)
5. You can walk into a Planned Parenthood clinic and ask for a list of abortion patients.
Thu Jun 30, 2022, 07:55 AM
Jun 2022

Wait, no, HIPAA rules forbid such disclosure. Hacking is the only way to get these secrets. Or by constant surveillance.

discntnt_irny_srcsm

(18,591 posts)
11. I consider your opinion there...
Thu Jun 30, 2022, 08:54 AM
Jun 2022

...an absolute right under the 1A.
I consider California's digital brain fart a violation of the 4A and 14A.

FYI, this was not hack, this was simply all the personal info publicly available on the web.

YMMV

 

PTWB

(4,131 posts)
12. Can they really call it a breach?
Thu Jun 30, 2022, 08:59 AM
Jun 2022

They compiled all of the information into a database and then connected that database to a public facing portal. Then the CA attorney general sent out a press release touting that they were releasing the information to the public in the interest of research, science, and transparency.

Just because there was extreme backlash and releasing the data may turn out to have been a violation of California law does not make it a “breach” or a “leak.”

These folks were intentionally doxxed. How many victims of domestic violence had their new address published? How about stalkers / abusers using this list to see if their victim is armed or not? If they’re not on the list, chances are they’re unarmed.

The backlash from this will be extreme. This incident will be the poster child that the gun rights movement uses for many, many years to show that the government should not be trusted to maintain a database or registry of firearm owners.

I cannot overstate how big of a disaster this was for those of us who would like to pass common sense gun control.

What a nightmare.

discntnt_irny_srcsm

(18,591 posts)
14. Breach would be kind but completely inaccurate term for this.
Thu Jun 30, 2022, 09:39 AM
Jun 2022

IMO, this is a clear and dangerous violation of the 4th and 14th Amendments. IMNSHO, this is a clear and deliberate criminal act.

The AG said that he is 'deeply disturbed and angered.'
"DOJ was made aware of a disclosure of personal information that was accessible in a spreadsheet on the portal," the statement said. "After DOJ learned of the data exposure, the department took steps to remove the information from public view and shut down the Firearms Dashboard yesterday morning."


Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Gun Control & RKBA»Cross post: California gu...