Gannett Outs Gun Permit Holders in Upstate NY with Interactive Map

page: 3
15
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 08:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by AwakeinNM
SOURCE

Here you have a liberal media organization revealing the names and addresses of gun permit holders to the general public, just because the information is a "matter of public record". Is this really prudent by Gannett? Couldn't they be held liable if someone on that map became a target of some anti-gun lunatic who used the map to find their victim?

On the other hand, looking at the map gives me a warm fuzzy Christmasy feeling inside knowing that in uber-liberal areas of New York there are this many registered guns. This doesn't include the unregistered ones. When push comes to shove, you can plainly see that the US military and all police agencies combined are WAY outnumbered.

Viva la Second Amendment!


If you are so proud of your right to own a gun, why wouldn't you be proud enough to have people knowing you had a gun? Kind of hypocritical if you ask me.




posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 08:17 AM
link   
This is a gross invasion of privacy, an invitation for criminals to go "shopping", and questionable on so many grounds that one barely knows where to begin.

Owning a gun in the United States is not a crime. It is, in fact, a right. There are those who might say then, why be upset that people now know who does, and who does not in the area in question? Those folks are of course, either willfully ignorant, or just plain unable to see past the nose on thier face.

The people highlighted by this map, are now going to be at risk of being victims of breaking and entering related crime, are now at hightened risk of not only having thier homes invaded, but being injured or killed defending thier own homes. I am amazed that someone has not been arrested over this already to be quite honest, so great is the danger in which these people, who are only upholding thier rights under the constitution, have been placed.

This is perhaps the most irresponsible piece of reportage on this subject, that I have ever come across in relation to the gun ownership debate.



posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 08:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by MikeNice81

Originally posted by GArnold

Originally posted by micmerci
reply to post by GArnold
 


Just because it is perfectly legal doesn't make it the right thing to do.


Why not? It is posted when your born.. when you die.. when you buy a house.. your property taxes are likely printed as well.


Because the purpose was to try to shame or damage the reputation of people that have done nothing illegal by the standards of the law or their community. They also may have opened up certain persons for an increased chance of robbery or attack. Criminals may decide to target homes with guns because of the quick liquidity available. They could decide to target homes without guns because they know the residents will be easier victims.

There is the possibility of many unintended consequences.


If you find shame in owning a gun then you probably shouldn't own one. Just saying.



posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 08:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by DoubleDNH

Originally posted by AwakeinNM
SOURCE

Here you have a liberal media organization revealing the names and addresses of gun permit holders to the general public, just because the information is a "matter of public record". Is this really prudent by Gannett? Couldn't they be held liable if someone on that map became a target of some anti-gun lunatic who used the map to find their victim?

On the other hand, looking at the map gives me a warm fuzzy Christmasy feeling inside knowing that in uber-liberal areas of New York there are this many registered guns. This doesn't include the unregistered ones. When push comes to shove, you can plainly see that the US military and all police agencies combined are WAY outnumbered.

Viva la Second Amendment!


If you are so proud of your right to own a gun, why wouldn't you be proud enough to have people knowing you had a gun? Kind of hypocritical if you ask me.


How about the fact that the map shows the criminals where there is most likely NO protection. Aren't the people who don't have guns now glad that they all show up as a blank spot....now the criminals KNOW who is most likely not protected. I doubt most of the legal gun owners are too nervous. I'd be nervous to NOT have a dot on that map. Now the creeps know where the weak spots are. I'd have thought the police would know that and not allow something so detrimental to the UNARMED public to be published.
edit on 26-12-2012 by Opportunia because: hit enter too early



posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 08:29 AM
link   
reply to post by GArnold
 


Unfortunately, whenever a subject becomes emotionally charged 'facts' seem to be the first casualty. Even well-meaning people seem to 'facts' that tend to support their personal bias. For example, you cite the UK as evidence that curtailing the presence of guns in the society leads to less gun violence. Is that true? I should point out that the U.S. ranks 28th based upon gun homicides per 100,000 population. If your suggestion is true than we should find a clear correlation between low gun ownership rates and low homicides. That, however is NOT the case. The data is readily available online and you are free to do your own analyses. I have.

If the presence of guns leads to more homicides then it stand sto reason that the as the number of guns goes up the rate of homicides per gun should also go up. The U.S. ranks 65th. Ireland ranks 54th. The Netherlands 45th. How aboout other countries with high numbers of guns per 100,000 population? Switzerland ranks 3rd in gun ownership but 45th in homicides. Saudi Arabia ranks 7th in ownership but 170th in homicides.

The FACT is, there is no direct correlation of the kinds casually tossed around by gun control advocates. They tend to selectivelt 'skim' data to make a point. Guns have been prevasive in our culture forever. Gun laws have progressively tightened overe time yet the senseless violence has increased. The cry 'we need to do something" is frequently heard. The problem is 'something' doesn't identify or work to correct the actual problem. So the problem just gets worse. We have a cultural/societal problem that is spinning out-of-control but no one seems to want to address it, peferring instead to focus on simplistic, feel-good solutions. We should take a lesson from the success we have evaded in the 'drug wars'.



posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 08:38 AM
link   
reply to post by DoubleDNH
 


I'm sure the owners don't feel shame. However, they may now face ridicule from others in their neighborhood or their place of work. So, in essence they could be shamed/ostracized for exercising a fundamental right.



posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 08:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by MikeNice81
reply to post by DoubleDNH
 


I'm sure the owners don't feel shame. However, they may now face ridicule from others in their neighborhood or their place of work. So, in essence they could be shamed/ostracized for exercising a fundamental right.


Should one on that list be fired for being on that list will the ACLU come rushing in to get his job back? I wonder.



posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 09:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by GArnold
I have thought for awhile that people on both sides of the abortion debate are impossible to talk to. They are hard headed and set in their beliefs. They do not hold a candle to people in the 2nd amendment debate. Most of the gun proponents I have met have never actually read the second amendment.,, have no idea of any of the cases that have shaped our current law. They just know to say second amendment when it looks like anyone may infringe on their gun ownership.


As a person who does support gun rights, I completely agree with your above statement. You will find no shortage of gun owners who have no idea what the second amendment says. I happen to know many myself. They simply grew up with guns, hunted since they were children. They have no clue why they have the right do so.



Or "Guns do not kill people, people kill people." (which is ironic if they ever bothered to look into it. 2009 there was 9,100 people killed by gun homicide in the US. In the UK where guns are regulated there was 39.) You simply cannot compare a society with gun restrictions with one that doesn't in terms of violence. There is always way way more violence in societies with guns...


Now here is where you and I disagree. What I love about people who spout out these "statistics" is that they always fail in one common sense area and choose to ignore it when it is pointed out. If a society has outlawed guns, you would naturally expect gun homicide numbers would go down. That does not necessarily mean violence has gone down. If there are no guns available, killers will simply choose a different weapon. So you are dead wrong when you say "You simply cannot compare a society with gun restrictions with one that doesn't in terms of violence". You are not looking at "violent acts" your simply looking at "death by gun". In other words no guns + less death by guns = less violence is incorrect.

Here is an 2009 article which names Britain as the most violent country in Europe, exceeding even the US.


But it is the naming of Britain as the most violent country in the EU that is most shocking. The analysis is based on the number of crimes per 100,000 residents. In the UK, there are 2,034 offences per 100,000 people, way ahead of second-placed Austria with a rate of 1,677. The U.S. has a violence rate of 466 crimes per 100,000 residents, Canada 935, Australia 92 and South Africa 1,609.


Source

No guns in the UK, yet go look at violent crimes, real violent crimes and see which is higher. Robbery, higher. Rape, higher. Assault, higher. Violent acts, higher. But of course they have less people dying from guns.. way to go



edit on 26-12-2012 by MrWendal because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 09:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by AwakeinNM
[ I would hope that criminals aren't so stupid that they would think they would be safe. I'm sure many are, though.


Then it would be Darwinism at it's finest.



posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 01:08 PM
link   
reply to post by DoubleDNH
 


How does ANY of this have to do with pride of gun ownership?




posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 02:10 PM
link   
If I've learned anything about these people, it's that they're always working on multiple levels. Just because they're evil doesn't mean they aren't smart.

Maybe they're attacking the Second Amendment and the First Amendment at the same time? Publishing this kind of info is obviously discretionary. A responsible advocate for the First Amendment would probably try to refrain from publishing anything like this during a "debate" on such a heated subject.

Anyone with a brain knows if you publish this kind of info, it could lead to trouble. I don't buy that they're this stupid.



posted on Dec, 26 2012 @ 03:09 PM
link   
The brainchild liberal media strikes again! Well, if anyone breaks into my house looking for a gun they will first have to contend with four very large Siberian Huskies. Who knows what the MSM will try next to negatively affect public opinion? Maybe appear on TV in Washington holding outlawed high-capacity magazines....oh, wait....



posted on Dec, 27 2012 @ 09:16 AM
link   
Criminal check list:

1. Verify property owner is unprotected: Check


BTW They need to make reverse map to make it even easier to identify owners without guns. I know I wouldn't want to be on that list.



posted on Dec, 27 2012 @ 12:17 PM
link   
I just ran across this: Blog turns tables on gun map paper

Fountain’s blog on Wednesday linked to a map that identified — with pictures — employees of the suburban New York newspaper, the Journal News, as well as their places of residence. That move came several days after the Journal News published interactive maps of Westchester and Rockland counties, which named people with gun licenses and included their addresses — igniting outrage from the right and from some readers.

To create the map, Talk of the Sound submitted Google searches for the names and addresses of all Journal News employees in the New York Tri-State area. By state law, the information is public record.
Link to enlarged map What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

“We knew publication of the database [as well as the accompanying article providing context] would be controversial, but we felt sharing information about gun permits in our area was important in the aftermath of the Newtown shootings,” Janet Hasson, president and publisher of the Journal News Media Group, told POLITICO Wednesday in a statement.
They knew that their map would be contraversial. I wonder how they feel about this one?



posted on Jan, 1 2013 @ 10:21 PM
link   
A ray of hope from Mr. Sant. There is still a tiny glint of common sense left in the world.

"BREAKING: Putnam County Clerk Refuses to Release Pistol Permit Holders’ Info to Journal News"



www.thetruthaboutguns.com... ment-562329


edit on 1-1-2013 by zayonara because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 1 2013 @ 10:29 PM
link   

'Journal News' hires armed security guards.



How hypocritical is this? Hanging legal gun owners out to dry, and then hiring guns to protect themselves. Disgusting.

www.politico.com...
edit on 1-1-2013 by zayonara because: (no reason given)





new topics

top topics



 
15
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join