re: #154 erik_t

That’s not strictly true. It was privileged by default, and was evaluated against the FOIA guidelines by a worker and judged to be releasable according to those guidelines.

Well what the newspaper that did this has to say on the matter is different than what you claim.

Access to information provided on pistol-license applications — such as the permit type, models of guns purchased and number of weapons owned — changed in 1994 when the state Legislature rewrote sections of the penal law covering licensure.

Before the amendment, the law said “the application for any license, if granted, shall be a public record.” The law now reads “the name and address of any person to whom an application for any license has been granted shall be a public record.” Many counties have interpreted that to mean any information beyond names and addresses is barred from public release.

But Robert Freeman, executive director of the state Committee on Open Government, said all government records and data are presumed public unless a specific statute bars their release. While names and addresses are specifically deemed public records, Freeman said, disclosure of additional data is left to the discretion of the custodians of pistol-permit records.

“There’s nothing in the law that prohibits the disclosure of additional information,” he said. “There’s simply no right of access to it.”

Look on page 3 of the article for this section.
lohud.com