Under the law, only journalists -- not the general public -- can obtain the information but they cannot copy it. The requests highlight the increasingly murky definition of journalists in the age of the Internet...So basically, under Ohio law, a free citizen who carries on the tradition of the early pamphleteers of the Republic is not an "authorized journalist," but a propagandist for, say Al-Jazeera or People's Weekly World (or something really subversive, like The Los Angeles Times) is...
Ohio law says a journalist is a person who works for a newspaper, magazine, radio or television station "or a similar medium."
Isn't it great, that "The Only Ones" get to decide who the government watchdogs are? And we've seen how responsible and devoted to liberty their "appointees" have turned out to be...
I could help out, but have mixed feelings--yes, I am one of those dreaded "AJs" I'm constantly railing against--I fit the definition of Ohio's law, right alongside my Pravda colleagues: I work for a magazine and have a press card (which I've never used), so technically, I could requisition the names on their behalf. But I'm so dead set against the idea of lists that--even if the Ohio gun activists intend to use the information to promote a greater good, I'd struggle with the ends justifying the means. It boils down to it's really none of my damn business if you or anyone else carries concealed, and just because I could get access doesn't mean I should--not that anybody has asked me to stick my big, fat nose in this, mind you.
I'd be interested in feedback on this. If you had "press credentials," would you volunteer to help get this information? Why or why not?
[Via Buckeye Firearms Association]