Newspaper's handgun-permit map draws criticism

 @Fed up Fed  @MarkKpic  @CTWU  @Jack_Bauer  @scoreboard Agreed. I just wish that passion were applied towards RESPONSIBLE journalism. 

 

Cause/effect... What net effect (read:benefit) did publishing this offer? None. Zilch. Nada. It is, none the less, an incendiary topic. Ratings = $$$. There was no greater public good served, but there was an obvious profit incentive.

 

There are, however, about a dozen or so different ways in which I (not being a criminal) can come up with that it could be abused. I shudder to think of what a criminal bent on getting their hands on guns could come up with. 

 

Insofar as the legal avenues, that's specifically why I said 'tort' lawsuits. Admittedly, any judgements would likely get bogged down in legal challenges for a decade, but just having a multi-million dollar judgement handed down against this 'news' publisher would send a pretty clear message. 

 @CTWU  @Jack_Bauer  @Fed up Fed  @scoreboard Not disputing your observations, but (IMO) the difference is the forum. 

 

If you (or I) go down to the county clerks office and request the list, there is a record of that transaction. If a whole bunch of homes start getting broken into and guns stolen, detectives likely will end up in possession of the list of people who made that request as part of their investigation. 

 

What these fools have done is make the list, complete with names and addresses, availible to any person with internet access. Heck, you don't even have to do it at home, you can use your burner cell phone or library internet access to get it. 

 

If there were damages, I suspect that a good attorney could find cause for a tort claim that would be winnable. Justifyably so. 

 @Jack_Bauer  @Fed up Fed  @scoreboard Information gathered under the Freedom of Information Act isn't invasion of privacy.  The information is legally available using the FOIA for New York.  Yes, if it happened here, you'd have cause but the damage would already have been done.

 

From wisegeek.com:

 

Invasion of privacy involving public disclosure of private facts about the plaintiff generally requires that there is an unauthorized public dissemination of information about the plaintiff that was previously private. The public dissemination must also be objectionable to a reasonable person. The truth of the statement is irrelevant in the analysis as well — if it is a private fact that was unreasonably communicated to the public, it is a violation of public disclosure invasion of privacy laws.

 @HarryJuku Are you going to ignore the rest of my message? I guess you fear a logical rebuttal to the nonsense you spew. I guess you would be considered a "troll," according to internet lingo.

 @HarryJuku Sigh... what is this derp nonsense? Anyway, I will to to impart a little logic in this discussion, but I expect it'll go largely ignored. Sex offenders are guilty of committing a crime. Registered gun owners have committed no crime. In our justice system, people are innocent until proven guilty. With your flawed logic, we should register everyone as a sex offender because everyone is dangerous and could commit a crime.

 @CTWU  @HarryJuku  @Fed up Fed CTWU...first...my respect for your quick and logical thinking and my sympathies for your struggle. Second...I'm a law abiding citizen so I obey the rules that dictate where and when I can carry my firearm.

 

Like you...I don't subscribe to the idea that carrying a weapon and having the skill to deploy and use it will save my bacon in the event I need to use it. Rather...it's just a tool in my tool box which also includes some training, some life experience and some situational awareness. At all times...I will simply do my best. My sidearm is not the answer...just a resource.

 @honorbound  @HarryJuku  @Fed up Fed Weapons aren't the only tools you can use to protect yourself and your property.

 

"How fast would you reconsider gun ownership and proper training if someone destroyed your sense of safety and security? How fast might you make this transition if you or one of your family members was robbed or assaulted in your home...?"

 

While I can't speak for Harry, I can address this very scenario.  When I was 12 my house was broken into and vandalized in addition to burglarized.  Fortunately, when we returned home, the intruders were gone but that destroyed my feeling of "home".  It hasn't been restored.

 

My dad had worked for the bulk of my childhood with a gun accessory manufacturer so I had experience and was very skilled with using a variety of weapons.  We had many guns in our house.  Somehow the burglars missed them while they were destroying my microscope slides...

 

Four years later, when I was 16, I was home alone (living on a dead end street with adult working families and I knew no one was home) taking a shower when several people broke into my house.  The guns were in the room adjacent to the bathroom.  And the burglars were in THAT room.  Where the loaded guns were.  Several guns.  At least seven.  Loaded.

 

Fortunately the robbers didn't find them or elected to ignore them.  I got out of the shower and, as I exited the bathroom, I heard the robbers scamper out of the house (there were at least two or three of them).  I got to my bedroom, blocked the door with the bed, and thanked my parents silently for getting me a phone for my 16th birthday (yeah, land lines in the '80's).  Then I called 9-1-1 (yes, I lived in an urban setting -- my choices might have been different if I lived in the country).

 

So, see, in my particular situation, having a loaded gun with a trained user served absolutely no purpose.  Had they found the guns, I would have complied with anything they told me to do -- because I knew they were loaded.  I credit my brains and my reasoning skills to get me out of the impossible situation I found myself in.

 

I'm assuming that, since you're so gun-positive, you go ABSOLUTELY nowhere without your weapon(s)?  That must be really daring and a very talented skill.  I guess it was my parents fault for not putting a gun hold in the bathroom.  Good thing they're dead and no longer feel bad that they were unable to protect their darling daughter.

 

So how fast would I reconsider gun ownership?  That MOMENT gave me the clarity to see that I would be a fool to rely merely on a tool (and training) to get me through a difficult situation.

 @honorbound  @Fed up Fed I wouldn't and I wouldn't care, either.  While I respect the Constitution, I don't think anyone should be forced to own or not own a weapon (outside of the limits imposed by government and society).  

 

I'm certainly not pro-gun.  I'm anti-gun but I respect the Constitution, Bill of Rights, etc.

 

 

 @Fed up Fed  @leapfrogger 

Straw purchases are also illegal. That is another gun law that doesn't stop the criminal. In fact, calling a straw purchaser a 'legal buyer' is also a stretch since by their very act they are a criminal. After  they declare on the 4473 form that they are the owner of the weapon, then at that moment they are a criminal even if they have no previous record.

 @Jack_Bauer  @Fed up Fed Agreed....a single legally armed adult could have dramatically reduced or eliminated the carnage. This is a no nonsense piece of logic which forces me to question the problem solving ability of anyone who rebuts it as a concept. I would also point out that legally authorized concealed carry individuals whether law enforcement, military or private citizen will without exception tell the unarmed individual that they are safe from the risk of harm from them....they are willing to jump through the hoops to carry a weapon and are subject to strict and necessary laws that dictate when and how they can use their firearm.

I disagree and don't think that you can be so sure about that outcome. The argument can be made that the first person to get it in some instances if armed guards are used - is the armed guard. That is a good argument. Look how well it worked in banks? Did it lessen the number of bank robberies? I don't think so. How many - anyones guess. People still rob them with armed guards present (although I agree that there are few banks anymore with them present). One of the reasons they are long gone is 1. money and 2. they were largely innefective. I am actually for having an trained and armed person(s) in eacjh school. I just am not convinced it would work as well as many envision as someone cannot be evrywhere at once. The element of surpirise along with the sheer number of people who come and go i a school during a day make trying to make a school safe darn near impossible without total control of all entry points and people. I would rather live with the threat than lose some personal freedoms.

You have yet to define or identify one thing about how the release of names is either against the law or in anyway puts these people in any more danger than you or I with our names being on a governmental website that lists the value of our houses - along with all the amnities. As Fed up has said - it might be irresponsible, it is also in my opinion no more dangerous to the average citizen than the NRA's call for armed guards in every school or that private gun sales should be allowed without background checks.  Arguements can be made pro and con all day for this subject.   

 @Fed up Fed  Once again, bad point.

A single concealed handgun in that school could of either limited the tragedy or completely prevented it.

The additional gun in the school would have indeed met the definition of 'more guns'. And it could of bee effective.

So your point that 'more guns' is not a solution is pure stupidity.

Let go of your false ideology and instead support the constitution that has served us well since day one.

 @Fed up Fed  @ChrisJ82  So now you're really going into la-la land. Your entire concept that what you said was the NRA crowd's argument is a fallacy. You changed a real and solid argument, into something which can easily be defeated.