240
Gun Companies Gave Customers’ Sensitive Personal Information to Political Operatives (www.propublica.org)
submitted 2 months ago by HellsBelle@sh.itjust.works to c/news@lemmy.world
31 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Those operatives, in turn, secretly employed the details to rally firearm owners to elect pro-gun politicians running for Congress and the White House, a ProPublica investigation has found.

The clandestine sharing of gun buyers’ identities — without their knowledge and consent — marked a significant departure for an industry that has long prided itself on thwarting efforts to track who owns firearms in America.

At least 10 gun industry businesses, including Glock, Smith & Wesson, Remington, Marlin and Mossberg, handed over names, addresses and other private data to the gun industry’s chief lobbying group, the National Shooting Sports Foundation. The NSSF then entered the gun owners’ details into what would become a massive database.

all 32 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] dual_sport_dork@lemmy.world 40 points 2 months ago

The clandestine sharing of gun buyers’ identities — without their knowledge and consent — marked a significant departure for an industry that has long prided itself on thwarting efforts to track who owns firearms in America.

I was going to mention exactly this, but it seems the article already beat me to it.

[-] barsquid@lemmy.world 24 points 2 months ago

We need a HIPAA for regular data.

[-] blurg@lemmy.world 12 points 2 months ago

The EU has such, General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), works reasonably well. Pretty good place to start.

[-] Wiz@midwest.social 5 points 2 months ago

Depending on the type of data and where you live, you can have some of its benefits.

There's FERPA for student data.

Credit card companies require very strict controls over their data, and how charges are made and encrypted.

I'm Europe there is the GDPR, which grants a right to remove your data from a particular site, among other protections. Some US states have followed with lesser versions, like California, Colorado, and Virginia.

I don't think you want HIPAA-level data protections over normal data, because it's a passion in the ass to have that level of restrictiveness over mere ordinary data. It costs a lot to protect it - you'd need documented written permissions on every aspect of your data.

[-] barsquid@lemmy.world 8 points 2 months ago

No, that is what I want. It should be a pain in the ass and expensive to hold. It should be a liability. Ok, fair, just for actual PII and not things like account settings specific to that business. But I do want it.

And GDPR-style deletions while we're on the topic, I want that also.

[-] Wiz@midwest.social -3 points 2 months ago

If you were to have this, then there would be no social media. Probably no email, as both sides of the communication would not be allowed to forward it. You would not be able to communicate or post on forums.

It would take computing back to about 1990. The medical industry uses faxes for a reason. They are very secure point to point communication. That's the sort of security you're asking for, and it would cripple most communication.

[-] desktop_user@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 2 months ago

faxes are only legally secure, not physically.

[-] DeceasedPassenger@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago

A fax is only as secure as the line it's transmitted on (I think)

[-] barsquid@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago

The medical industry uses computers, actually. Healthcare providers may send medical information over the internet. They need to have a business agreement with the entity they send it to and follow the other rules in HIPAA.

[-] yesman@lemmy.world 20 points 2 months ago

For years I've argued that the gun lobby is for manufacturers, not owners. This is a concrete example of them prioritizing the former over the latter.

[-] SeaJ@lemm.ee 11 points 2 months ago

Something tells me gun nuts will waive away the violation of privacy that gun companies sharing gun purchasing into with government officials represents.

[-] vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works 4 points 2 months ago

Most gun nuts I know fucking hate the manufacturers, its the gun fetishists that are the ones who wave it away.

[-] ThermonuclearCactus@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 2 months ago

Because the gun nuts usually know enough about how firearms work to just make their own guns.

[-] vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 months ago

Either they know enough to build their own or enough to restore inoperable ones. But yeah a lot of them unless they are professionally involved with the manufacturers arent quite about their hatred.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 5 points 2 months ago

Now is not the time to talk about gun privacy control.

[-] AhismaMiasma@lemm.ee 0 points 2 months ago

I agree, we need action to protect people's privacy from unethical warrantless searches and monitoring.

Snowden tried to warn us...

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago

[-] AhismaMiasma@lemm.ee -1 points 2 months ago

Oh I got the point Squid, I disagree :)

Tell me, do you feel Jan 6th was a genuine coup attempt? As in, DJT and his ilk were actually interested in and attempting to maintain and consolidate their power in the government outside of the election results?

[-] RaoulDook@lemmy.world 7 points 2 months ago

The facts reported by the Jan 6th committee made it clear that it was a premeditated coup attempt.

[-] AhismaMiasma@lemm.ee 2 points 2 months ago

Exactly. Now assuming they were successful (or a future attempt is) how do we fight them? I somehow doubt a peaceful march will sway them to restore democracy.

[-] RaoulDook@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago

What does this have to do with the post subject? I don't think anyone here is suggesting a peaceful march in that case.

[-] AhismaMiasma@lemm.ee 2 points 2 months ago

I mistakenly thought Squid was suggesting that privacy for gun owners wasn't a valid topic for discussion.

Following that, I was establishing the importance of privacy for gun owners because, well... We may need them if there is a successful coup.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

I have no idea what you mean by "DJT and his ilk." None of them were breaking into congress. The people that were wanted to install Trump as president and do it by executing Mike Pence. They made that very clear. So yes, that was a coup attempt. I'm not sure why you think Trump had to be directly involved to make it a coup attempt.

[-] AhismaMiasma@lemm.ee 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

If you don't know who "DJT and his ilk" are, then who is "them" in your response?

Point is, if your government is about to be overrun, why would you give the government/state a monopoly on violence?

Do you trust the police/military to be the sole owners of firearms given the current political climate? I know you don't like cops Squid, and Trump has already threatened to deploy the military against civilians and political opponents.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago

I thought your point is it wasn't a coup attempt.

Your point seems to keep changing.

You also seem to think I want to ban guns for some reason. I don't know why because I never said I did.

[-] AhismaMiasma@lemm.ee 1 points 2 months ago

My point hasn't changed at all, my point was to establish that you agree it was a coup attempt.

Given a possible coup, a list of all gun owners (regardless of political affiliation) is bad. Privacy rights are important, even for people we disagree with.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago

Remember when I said privacy rights aren't important? Because I sure don't.

[-] AhismaMiasma@lemm.ee 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Maybe I really did miss the point. What did you mean by, "Now is not the time to talk about gun privacy control."

I took it to mean you didn't think it was a valid issue for discussion.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago

You sure did.

“I agree with the comments of your guests there: This is not the time to be talking about legislation. We’re in the middle of that crisis right now.”

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/4279085-speaker-johnson-says-now-not-the-time-to-discuss-gun-control-problem-is-the-human-heart-not-guns/

"It just goes to show that the politics from this Administration .. has nothing to do with people. They're going to continue to push an agenda. It's not the right agenda. In my opinion, it's not the right time to talk about what we see out there ... We've got to get back to God in this country, we have really gotten away from that from a moral standpoint. There's a lot of issues out there, she is dead wrong to bring that up at this time. It's just not the right time."

https://meidasnews.com/news/rep-collins-its-not-the-time-to-talk-about-gun-control

President Donald Trump was at the University Medical Center in Las Vegas on Wednesday visiting victims of Sunday’s mass shooting when a reporter asked him, “Do you think we have a gun violence problem?”

“We’re not going to talk about that today,” Trump responded. “We won’t talk about that.”

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2017/10/trump-says-its-the-wrong-time-to-discuss-gun-control-in-las-vegas-even-gun-owners-disagree/

“There’s a time and place for a political debate, but now is the time to unite as a country,” Sanders said. “There’s currently an open and ongoing law enforcement investigation, a motive is yet to be determined and it would be premature for us to discuss policy when we don’t fully know all the facts or what took place last night.”

https://www.cnn.com/2017/10/02/politics/sarah-sanders-las-vegas/index.html

“It’s particularly inappropriate to politicize an event like this. It just happened within the last day and half. Entirely premature to be discussing about legislative solutions if any,” McConnell said.

https://www.politico.com/story/2017/10/03/mitch-mcconnell-gun-control-las-vegas-shooting-243418

I can keep going if you like, but something tells me you still won't get it if I do.

[-] AhismaMiasma@lemm.ee 1 points 2 months ago

Squid, you are always a joy to converse with. I'd like to know what your "something" is but something tells me you won't tell me if I ask 😉

You could have just mentioned that you were referencing other responses to previous events. Regardless, I'll take the L because I guess I did miss the point.

[-] Rentlar@lemmy.ca 4 points 2 months ago

We need good guys with boots to tread on me to stop bad guys with boots!

this post was submitted on 24 Oct 2024
240 points (99.6% liked)

News

23659 readers
3180 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil

Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.

2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.

Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.

3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.

Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.

4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.

Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.

5. Only recent news is allowed.

Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.

6. All posts must be news articles.

No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.

7. No duplicate posts.

If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.

8. Misinformation is prohibited.

Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.

9. No link shorteners.

The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.

10. Don't copy entire article in your post body

For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
rjc@lemmy.world
Thekingoflorda@lemmy.world
Tenthrow@lemmy.world
JonsJava@lemmy.world
gedaliyah@lemmy.world
little_cow@lemmy.world
jeffw@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world