Today's Paper Latest stories Obits Rex Nelson Wally Hall Brummett online Traffic Newsletters Weather Puzzles
story.lead_photo.caption While acting as governor Friday, Lt. Gov. Mark Darr signed a bill exempting all information about holders of concealed-weapon permits from disclosure under the state Freedom of Information Act. - Photo by Rick McFarland

While acting as governor Friday, Lt. Gov. Mark Darr signed a bill exempting all information about holders of concealed-weapon permits from disclosure under the state Freedom of Information Act.

This story is only available from the Arkansas Online archives. Stories can be purchased individually for $2.95. Click here to search for this story in the archives.

Front Section, Pages 1 on 02/23/2013

Print Headline: Lieutenant governor signs gun-privacy law

Sponsor Content


You must be signed in to post comments
  • Jackabbott
    February 23, 2013 at 8:33 a.m.

    Hiding information from the public is not democracy. it smacks of tyranny, regardless of the issue. This is a road where stupid and uneducated legislators should not be going.

  • rainbowharold55
    February 23, 2013 at 9:22 a.m.

    And Darr proves again what a sleazoid he is.

  • RaylanGivens
    February 23, 2013 at 9:47 a.m.

    90% for, 10% against. He should not have signed it; that's not much of a majority

  • Packman
    February 23, 2013 at 9:55 a.m.

    Hey rainbow - What's sleazy about an acting governor signing a bill that passed with overwhelming bi-partisan vote?

  • rainbowharold55
    February 23, 2013 at 10:39 a.m.

    The governor was allowing the bill to become law without signature. This is the action of a power-hungry fool.

  • Spankthemonkey
    February 23, 2013 at 12:03 p.m.

    Beebe didn’t want his signature on it. Beebe couldn't have been too worried about the precedent of the lieutenant governor signing bills in his absence or he would have signed it. The governor doesn't condone the signing and recognizes the unique set of circumstances with this bill so he isn't going to raise any objections? Sounds very chicken s*hit to me. You can't have it both ways.

  • Spankthemonkey
    February 23, 2013 at 12:18 p.m.

    Jack you aren't considering privacy laws. FOI can't supersede an individual’s right to privacy. FOI was designed to keep your government from covering up things we as citizens have a right to know. Just because you want to know doesn’t mean you get to know. Go to court if you need to find out some specific information and prove that need to a judge. The reason the New York paper pulled the list down was because they were going to get sued. A judge had already said that the paper could be held liable if someone’s home was invaded in the area they reported. FOI rules state you can’t provide the information if it compromises an individual’s safety.
    If my kids are in public schools, you shouldn’t have the right to know where they live or anything else specific about them from government records.
    84 to 3 house members disagree with you along with 24 to 9 from the senate and 31 other states that have put a similar law in place. They can't all be stupid. OK. Maybe they can all be stupid but that isn't the point.

  • Ran2133
    February 23, 2013 at 12:38 p.m.

    Jackabbott, this country was set up by very intelligent people as a "Constitutional Republic," not a 'democracy.' Apparently you don't know the difference! Unfortunately, the leftists have taken over and, with the ignorant folks voting, have allowed this to happen. The Constitution is being slowly destroyed. It is no one else's business if I, or anyone else, has a CCP. Governor Beebe took the coward's way out because he knew if he vetoed this the legislature would override it and pass it anyway.

  • Garycmillerlawgmailcom
    February 23, 2013 at 2:13 p.m.

    Cowardly? Oh come on, lighten up
    Just a political decision on a relatively unimportant bill.

  • Dontsufferfools
    February 23, 2013 at 3:17 p.m.

    What a country, a gun permit is private, but not a woman's uterus.