Blogger publishes names, addresses of newspaper staff after gun-permit database

So whos gonna post the bloggers address?

Originally posted by IkNOwSTuff
So whos gonna post the bloggers address?

My bad please delete.

Originally posted by Rezlooper

Originally posted by Krazysh0t

Originally posted by Rezlooper
reply to post by SubTruth

 

So they just stick to higher ground and then it seems these idiot publishers get away with that. Next thing you know, they are doing it again. Now they see there are sometimes consequences to irresponsible behavior.

But you could still seek retribution without stooping to their level. Why not enact a class action lawsuit against the paper? Or how about organizing a boycott of the paper they print? There are many ways to go about getting back at these yahoos without endangering their lives and their family's lives.

There not in anymore danger than the gun owners who they published. What? All these gun owners are a bunch of nut bags that are going to go hunt them down now? Not likely.

It only takes one person to make headline news.

Both sets of information are a matter of public record. All either side did was to put that information in one place. If you disagree with this, blame the laws that make this information available to the public.

reply to post by JIMC5499


Just because it is public doesn't mean it is legal to disclose it like they did. There are many things that are public information but to go about accessing them requires paperwork to leave a trail in case that information is misused. This is just throwing it out there for the world to see. Tired of reading this whole "its public information so whatever" argument, its a bad one.

Originally posted by SubTruth

Originally posted by AwakeinNM
reply to post by SubTruth

 

Disagree. At some point you have to realize that you are playing an a tilted field. Fire with fire, baby.

Did you ever stop to think this is exactly what they wanted to happen. Things in this world are not as they seem up is down left is right.



This eye for a eye attitude is destructive. Like I said before I kinda expected this from the world we live in today. It is about destroying the other side and at the end of the day no one wins.

So you'd rather keep playing your violin while the titanic sinks? Not me. At some point we have to fight for our freedom again and not sit idly by while these a**holes take it from us because we LET them. You cannot fight amoral people with morality.

reply to post by AwakeinNM


I thought it was quite funny how the "abused women" are now terribly afraid because of the publication for the fact that these abused women probably helped more abused women (who are now legal gun owners) get found by their attackers. Maybe these poor abused women who work for the paper should become gun owners so they can better protect themselves now. Tit for tat I say.

BTW think of all the new victims they helped create by doing this.

This is win, IMO. It's not like they can cry about the ethics of it, after all they did the same thing.

while this seems at first glance to be poetic justice is it? i can understand the feeling that this "response in the same form as the original attack is justified, unfortunately it is not really. the thing is that most people who's information was released had no part or responsibility for the original issue. the writer, editor and above sure have responsibility for what was published., but not everyone else who had no part of it. for most of the staff the first they would even have known about it would have been AFTER it was published and even if they did would not have had the power to stop it. it would be exactly like holding the guy who cleans the floor of the white-house held responsible for actions the president might take. again that floor cleaner even if he knew about it (rather doubtful), could not have done anything to stop it.

what would be justice in the case of the newspaper story would be to hold the paper financially responsible for pretty much any break in in the area that was covered by the story. be it damages, missing objects and even responsibility for any injury or death resulting from both the break ins as well as anything any guns stolen in them caused later. also the paper should be forced to pay for a major police presence in that area to try to combat the possible harm the story has caused. alternately the paper should be forced to pay for everyone in that area to relocate elsewhere.

even more disturbing from the release of information is that they have pretty much made EVERYONE in that area a target be they gun owners or not. gun owners may now be targets for people looking to steal weapons and they will also have an idea of what may be waiting for them and can bring enough firepower to overcome it. but on the other side of the coin those that don't have guns registered have now become targets for those who wish a nice easy break in where they don't have to worry about a possible gun being turned on them. talk about one hell of a WIN WIN for CRIMINALS.

reply to post by generik


I kind of agree with you here, but then again, the paper was pretty indiscriminate about posting information as well. Look at the abused women who had hoped to keep their whereabouts anonymous from an abusive ex.

I wish I were a fly on the wall of that staff meeting after the custodian gets some nasty phone calls. Talk about peer pressure to stop doing this sort of thing.

Originally posted by Krazysh0t
Just because it is public doesn't mean it is legal to disclose it like they did. There are many things that are public information but to go about accessing them requires paperwork to leave a trail in case that information is misused. This is just throwing it out there for the world to see. Tired of reading this whole "its public information so whatever" argument, its a bad one.

The newspaper filed a FOI request and was given the information. A direct quote from the Fox News story says

The Journal News, meanwhile, has defended publication of the database, which was legally obtained from the County Clerks’ Offices through a Freedom of Information Act request made after the shootings in Newtown, Conn., that left 20 children and eight adults dead.

“New York residents have the right to own guns with a permit and they also have a right to access public information,” Hasson, president and publisher of The Journal News Media Group, was quoted as saying in a subsequent story in the newspaper.

Two can play.

reply to post by AwakeinNM


oh, if you want to become a subscriber they have a toll free customer service number.

When they published the names and addresses of gun owners with a map it was with the intent of terrorizing them in my opinion. If the law allows the media to do that without consequence then i see nothing wrong with throwing it right back at them. It is just my opinion but Liberals seem to have a problem seeing the unintended consequences of their actions. All it takes is a bit of common sense.

reply to post by JIMC5499


The paper filled out an FOI request means that they put forth paperwork to leave a papertrail for this information. Then they turned around and released this information to the public giving their subscribers or anyone who picks up their publications at a newstand access to this information without first documenting that they want access to it. And you don't see anything wrong with this?

Perhaps someone should publish all of the addresses and phone numbers of all members of Congress (Senate and House) and all outspoken members of the media or film industry who support legislation for gun control as well (ie, Diane Feinstein, Chuck Schumer, Michael Moore and others of like mind and action).

reply to post by CosmicCitizen

Perhaps someone should publish all of the addresses and phone numbers of all members of Congress (Senate and House) and all outspoken members of the media or film industry who support legislation for gun control as well (ie, Diane Feinstein, Chuck Schumer, Michael Moore and others of like mind and action).

I love it!!!! Watch the vermin scuttle about like a bunch of blind mice, once they are pointed out!!!

Originally posted by CosmicCitizen
Perhaps someone should publish all of the addresses and phone numbers of all members of Congress (Senate and House) and all outspoken members of the media or film industry who support legislation for gun control as well (ie, Diane Feinstein, Chuck Schumer, Michael Moore and others of like mind and action).

Agreed. Since our government is so fond of keeping tabs on us, I think we the people should watch everything they do 24/7. We should be surveilling them by all means possible, not that I think this isn't being done already.

A reoccurring theme from epic literature is that, in doing justice, you become unjust yourself.

I accept the burden.

I completely disagree that this is unjust in any way shape and or form,
this happened because an overzealous news caster published names
of people who did nothing wrong, thereby committing the injustice,
any retribution in the form of equal punishment is fair, i don't
understand the entire, turn the other cheek attitude, all that ends
up getting you is two slaps in the face when really one is plenty....

it all comes down to respect, the news caster disrespected the
privacy of those people and now people don't care about his,
i find that perfectly fitting the crime....... the talking heads on
the news must faces consequences when they choose to
push an agenda over using common sense and thinking
things through, it really comes down to the irresponsible nature
of news casts now days, it doesn't matter to them if the story
is even true, so long as they break it first, again and again
they make fools out of themselves because they don't
bother fact checking and rush things......

Originally posted by Bob Sholtz
what an utter FOOL that would write an article and let all the criminals in america know what houses that have guns so they can avoid them and rob the unarmed people.

kudos to this blogger.

Was it public information to begin with..? could i have found the database from public records..?

Was the publishers information public information..? could i have found the database from public records..?