Check out what Jim Anderson at decorablia has to say on the issue, he includes a local example.

I'm not going to even pull out a quote for my own post here, go to his blog and read, browse around, comments are enabled there.

Is privacy important to you?

I posted this earlier, and then while editing the blog entry, accidently deleted it...  asked a docent if there was a cached copy and haven't heard anything so just reposting...

I found this discussion on a gun rights site I frequent, so if visiting such places make you feel tainted, don't click.  The primary discussion is based off a CNN topic of the same title as this blog entry.  Several other links also show up in the conversation.  I chose to link to the conversation on OpenCarry.org because the last time I merely posted links out of the context I found them in, I got nowhere except a scolding over the quality of information in one link.  Now you can see everything in the context I first saw things...

Personally I find the whole thing way creepy. 

Yes folks, this is on a gun rights forum, so if even visiting such places make you feel tainted, don't bother. However there are a lot of interesting links to pages and I think they are best viewed in context rather than simply reposting the links. I tried that before recently and got nowhere productive for my troubles....

Here it is...

CNN story that started the discussion...

EDIT:  Added CNN link 

In the discussion regarding TESC releasing student info to military recruiters, I posted the comparison of that available student information to the protected status of the list of concealed carry permits issued by the City of Olympia.  Not really up in arms over it, but I think it's interesting to note where privacy is permitted to exist and where it is not.

The Fire Inside posted the following regarding the privacy of the concealed carry permit information:

I'm really going to hijack the thread here, but if the list of Concealed Carry Permit holders were to be made public based on the argument of "public safety" and the comfort level of being near an individual with a firearm I would bet that just as equal an argument can be made to make a public list available of those who carry HIV and AIDS.

Ok, you have bet that an equal argument can be made for making public a list of folks with a serious and infectious disease.  Please make that argument and be sure to cover the issue of choice - the fact that folks who are carrying HIV and other serious infectious diseases among us have not chosen to have that disease in the same way that a person chooses to carry a concealed and deadly weapon on their person.  Please show me that equal argument. 

Security 6 then added the following:

Might as well publish lists of blacks, homosexuals, high school dropouts, mentally disabled people, owners of large dogs, or any other group that makes folks uncomfortable.  It's all about having an open and accepting mind.

I am not sure what S6 is thinking, maybe it's a simple off-hand comment, but some of these groups he mentions are classes specifically protected because of bias and prejudice. I am having trouble figuring out what S6 means with this post. 

Whilst being Mr. Asshat, I got to explore the functionality of the TOR plugin for FireFox.  This is software that routes your browsing through other servers, masking your IP address.  It is kinda slow, but is an interesting plugin and worth looking at for those interested in privacy issues.

I also used MyWebsiteCloak as well, which was faster. I hadn't even delved into the deeper darker world of more complex IP masking and changing, but am inspired to do so now!  I would encourage anyone interested in privacy issues to look at some of this stuff.