No rational reason for gun permit secrecy

The late Erwin Knoll, editor of The Progressive magazine, used to say he not only believed in unilateral disarmament, he practiced it. In a world where it seemed like everyone was armed, he didn't own a gun.

Neither do I. (We have two fiercely barking dogs, though, so don't get any ideas.)

Knoll's quote came to mind while reading of the debate over whether to not only let people in Wisconsin carry concealed weapons, but to keep the list of permit holders secret, even from law enforcement.

The discussion produced some of the most unbelievable statements I've heard in awhile, as the bill's sponsors, State Sen. Dave Zien, R-Eau Claire, and State Rep. Scott Gunderson, R-Waterford, explained why it is so important to keep the names secret.

"It's silly to think we should have a list of permit holders available to the public," Gunderson said. "The beauty of the bill is that the criminal will not know who is or who is not carrying a weapon."

Of course, we don't know now who's carrying a weapon, either. Feel safe? Will you feel safer when another 100,000 people are carrying them?

Zien and other proponents said if the names and other information of concealed-carry permit holders were public, thieves would know where to find guns - a highly sought-after item in burglaries.

And if a criminal learns you don't carry a concealed weapon, "some people might see you as easy prey to rob, rape or murder," Zien said.

Talk about arguing both sides. If criminals know you don't have a gun they are more likely to rob, rape and murder you. And if criminals know you do have a gun they are more likely to break into your house.

Those arguments are plain lunacy.

Records of who has a hunting license are public, and presumably anyone with a hunting license has a gun in his or her home.

Do we think that burglars are checking the list of homes to rob against the hunting license list? Does anyone think they will check the list of permit holders? Get real. This is a bogus argument.

Unfortunately, it is being used as an argument to deny access to the list by people who actually need it -- law enforcement officers who are sent to the scene of a domestic dispute or other potentially dangerous situation. They will be dispatched to the scene without being able to check and determine whether they are likely to encounter someone with a gun.

But there is really no reason we all shouldn't have access to that information. It's bad enough to put tens of thousands of more guns on the street, without also keeping it a secret.

Fortunately, this bill is headed for another veto.