In an attempt to “improve transparency and information sharing,” the California Attorney General’s office published a firearms data dashboard Monday. Yes, despite the fact that California’s state government isn’t interested in transparency in any other area, they spent tax dollars to get information on CCW permit issuance, Gun Violence Restraining Orders (GVROs), “assault” weapon registrations, and Dealer Record of Sales (DROS). The data contained personally identifiable information (PII), for every CCW holder, as well as judges, prosecutors and defense attorneys. It was also available online and accessible to anyone.
Some PII was also included in the Firearms Safety Certificate stats (FSC), and Dealer Record Of Sales (DROS).
RedState accessed Tuesday’s website and found that the downloadable data did not contain the PII. Since the AG’s office has not responded to questions from journalists regarding the breach, we don’t yet know how many times the database was downloaded while it contained the PII.
Redditor:
Through a process that we will be not discussing, but is relatively easy and not even slightly hidden to do, you can access the names, addresses, and DOB’s of all CCW holders in the state of CA. This includes reserve officers and judges as well as random individuals like yourself. FSC stats, with DOB and ID/DL number, were released. A file also included DROS information. This includes DOB, race, gender and the dealer at which a gun purchased from since at least 2012. This is a serious breach of privacy for gun owners. It’s fairly trivial to begin cross referencing data between these three documents to determine who owns what guns with decent accuracy, especially if they have a CCW that already says where they live.
Attorney Konstadinos MOros works in California gun rights cases. He reviewed the video evidence that showed the PII in the database, but decided not to publish it for obvious reasons. Journalist Stephen Gutkowski writes:
The Reload reviewed a copy of the Lost Angeles County database and found 244 judge permits listed in the database. Each file contained the names of all judges, their addresses and date of birth. This was also true of seven custodial officer, 63 individuals with a place-of-employment permit and 420 reserve officers.
Los Angeles County standard license holders (2891) also saw their data compromised. However, the database may contain duplicate entries. The databases with detailed information were initially available for download via a button on the website’s mapping feature. On Tuesday afternoon they appeared to have been taken from public view and replaced by spreadsheets devoid of individualized identifying information.
CCW permit information in California is public, but PII of criminal justice employees can be kept private.
Here’s the only CCW info that can be (but isn’t necessarily required to be) withheld from public disclosure. All other information, such as application documents, fingerprints and copies of licenses are open for disclosure. Cal. Cal. Const. Art. I Sec. 3(b). pic.twitter.com/QSyl8pnKqP
— Firearms Policy Coalition (@gunpolicy) June 28, 2022
It reads:
This chapter doesn’t require any disclosure, other than as required by Sections 6254.7 or 6254.13.
(u) (1) Information contained in applications for licenses to carry firearms issued pursuant to Section 26150, 26155, 26170, or 26215 of the Penal Code by the sheriff of a county or the chief or other head of a municipal police department that indicates when or where the applicant is vulnerable to attack or that concerns the applicant’s medical or psychological history or that of members of their family.
(2) The home address and telephone number of prosecutors, public defenders, peace officers, judges, court commissioners, and magistrates that are set forth in applications for licenses to carry firearms issued pursuant to Section 26150, 26155, 26170, or 26215 of the Penal Code by the sheriff of a county or the chief or other head of a municipal police department.
(3) The home address and telephone number of prosecutors, public defenders, peace officers, judges, court commissioners, and magistrates that are set forth in licenses to carry firearms issued pursuant to Section 26150, 26155, 26170, or 26215 of the Penal Code by the sheriff of a county or the chief or other head of a municipal police department.
As the tweet from Firearms Policy Coalition correctly notes, information from the CCW permit and/or license for other Californians, including fingerprint data, is subject to public disclosure – but it shouldn’t be, since we know that the information will be used to target and harass gun owners.
Surprisingly, the databases relating Gun Violence Restraining Orders do not contain any PII.
This isn’t the first time that the California DOJ “accidentally” published personal data relating to gun owners. Back in 2016, under Attorney General Kamala Harris (seriously, she’s so full of fail), the entire list of firearms instructors in California, including name, date of birth, and California drivers license or ID number, was accidentally released in response to a Public Records Act request. At that time the state had to inform those whose information was compromised about the leak and offered 12 months of identity protection – and that leak contained less personal information than was included in the CCW database.
The leak comes just days after the Attorney General’s office was forced to issue a directive instructing CCW issuing authorities that they “should no longer require proof of good cause for the issuance of a public-carry license.”
BREAKING NEWS: California Attorney General states that issuing authorities no longer need to prove good cause in order to issue a public-carry licence. pic.twitter.com/8GfQqXuvlJ
— Firearms Policy Coalition (@gunpolicy) June 25, 2022
RedState contacted the Attorney General’s press office with a list of questions about the leak, including what checks were in place to ensure that personal information was not included in the database files. No response was received by press.
About Post Author
