BY: B. Keith Plunkett @Keithplunkett

As the drama unfolds over whether the Senate will move quickly on protecting Concealed Carry permit holders private information from the public with House Bill 485, it has been revealed that one of the FOIA requests for the information was from local blogger James Hendrix, aka Kingfish. Kingfish runs the blog Jackson Jambalaya.

Update: This is rich irony! I was sent word that Kingfish wanted his address and phone number redacted. Here is the document showing the request:

This request, along with an earlier one by the Northeast Mississippi Daily Journal are currently pending. What will be done with the information is still unclear. Kingfish defended the request with a comment on a PEP Talk Podcast Interview with HB 485 sponsors Senator Will Longwitz and Rep. Mark Baker last week.

Kingfish wrote:

Tell the truth. I flat out said I was not going to publish them. Period.

It’s an interesting comment in light of the fact that I am aware of no such statement, and until he made this comment I did not even know he was the one who made the request for the information. He outed himself.

Lloyd Gray of the Daily Journal had a similar explanation, although not quite as terse and succinct.

The question is do we believe that the media should be the gatekeeper and should have unlimited access, and when does a media organization cease to be a responsible organization and begin to be a special interest hack for hire. Should the public simply trust that those who would make such requests will always act responsibly simply because they say they will?

Many exemptions already apply to Public Records request in order to protect sensitive information. Should Concealed Carry be any different?

As Rep. Baker pointed out in the interview, this information would still be available through a court order. The only difference would be that requests would have to be defended and the purpose for the private information disclosed.

What do you think? Tell us by participating in this Poll.

About Keith: Keith Plunkett has worked on communications issues with a range of public officials from aldermen to Congressmen, and a variety of businesses, governmental agencies and non-profits. He serves or has served as a board member of several non-profit, civic and political organizations. Contact him by going to or follow him on Twitter @Keithplunkett

Related articles

19 thoughts on “Document: Jackson Jambalaya requests Concealed Carry permits issued in 2011-2012.

  1. If Kingfish wrote, “I flat out said I was not going to publish them. Period.” – why did he need to request the list ??

  2. Anyone who reads that idiots crap should know he couldn’t be trusted with private and personal information. He’s self-serving and arrogant and really has no reason to be.

    1. I was thinking the same thing. Why would anyone trust Kingfish as a legitimate source? This site obviously has more of a handle on state issues from a intelligent policy discussion, and has the ear and respect of state officials. Jackson Jambalaya is a hack website. It’s like watching a train wreck.

  3. Wait a minute! He actually requested his address and info be taken off the document requesting the private information of others? Good for you for doing it. Shows the difference between responsible blogging and irresponsible action of people like KF. But you certainly didn’t have to. Wow! What world is that guy living in.

    1. Thanks for the compliment. Kingfish has broken some big stories before, not a bad guy overall. I just think he’s on the wrong side of this one. We all disagree from time to time. We’ll keep plugging away at doing what we do here at Mississippi PEP. Thanks for reading and commenting.

      1. He was testing the system and never intended to publish. He said so from the outset so it is hard to see how he is on the wrong side of anything here. It isn’t his responsibility to keep those who don’t read his work up to speed.

        Furthermore Kingfish has done to demand transparency and open records compliance in his career than you’ve even considered.

        And his audience dwarfs PEP’s.

  4. I have no problem with his request. As a matter of fact, I’d like for hundreds of people to ask for this “public” information. Let’s find out if our legislators have CC permits. Maybe more of them will take an interest then. Does anyone know if Sen. Hopson or the Tater can carry?

    1. Private means private! The government shouldn’t force me to comply with a law to carry a concealed weapon, and then hand that information out willy nilly to any half-wit with a website.

  5. HB 485 has passed out of Jud A Committee in the Senate. Although it still has a redundant amendment introduced by Senator Briggs Hopson that will slow it down. We are told that, if there is quick passage on the Senate floor, Rep. Baker is expected to attempt to push through the amended bill quickly in the House.

  6. @MWA Not sure how you think you would know anything about the size of our audience. JJ has certainly been around longer so it stands to reason. But at any rate, no need in attempting to turn this into a head to head. Room for everyone on the web, and our niche is a bit different from JJ as we cover statewide politics and policy only. He covers more metro politics and gossip.

    1. Leave it to a KF groupie to go after another website over his idiotic move. They’re shooting at the messenger. KF made the request, KF will have to live with the request. It’s no one’s “responsibility” to read that website in order to know what his motives may or may not have been. I don’t want my personal info shared with anyone, including him. He has to explain himself as often as it takes or suffer the consequences. JJ’s relevance was already shrinking. After this, it’s practically gone. When I read this site I feel like I’m learning something. With JJ, I want to go take a shower.

      1. It’s no one’s “responsibility” to read that website in order to know what his motives may or may not have been.

        Do you shoot yourself in the foot often? If you have no interest in intent or motive then you have no interest in truth or knowledge. You simply want to believe what you want to believe because you have an ego-burr in your saddle and in that morass of ignorance you should remain. Cheers.

      2. I have no interest in KF’s STATED intent, because the information shouldn’t be given to anyone without a court order that fully states the reasons for it’s use. He doesn’t need it. He’s a hack. And, as I have made perfectly clear, I find his methods to be gossipy, his diction and grammar to be childlike, and his lack of even-handedness in approach to be dirty. Hence, the shower comment.

    2. Jimmy’s motives may have been honorable. That’s for him to defend. But actions count, and not many folks care what side of the argument the person obtaining the concealed carry information is on when it is their concealed carry information that is being traded. That’s why I say I think JJ is on the wrong side of this. I’m not going to get into any ridiculous back and forth over who has done more than someone else. That’s all subjective. I’d rather deal in interpretation based on objectivity, and I think the work I have done speaks for itself. Speaking of work . . . .

      1. Jimmy’s motives may have been honorable. That’s for him to defend.

        Did you write or call him to find out?

        You’ve presented nothing to indicate that his motives were dishonorable but allude that they may have been. That’s subjective not objective.

  7. I made no conclusions about his motives. Nor did I allude to anything. I merely stated the facts as known, provided the evidence of said stated facts, and followed up with open questions to readers, none of which concluded anything about him or his motives.

    I like Jimmy. I’m sorry if he is caught in the crossfires of all of this. But, the point was made that a “blogger had requested all concealed carry permit holders” in an interview I conducted. I chased it down and found the evidence. I did so based on KF’s own comment on the interview article (see above post for reference). Because prior to that no one had mentioned his involvement to me. As you can see from the post, it’s not a formal expose’ on Kingfish or Jackson Jambalaya. It’s just a simple small post that concludes with a poll.

    Methinks thou doth protest too much.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s