"Inmates using newspaper's gun owner map to threaten guards, sheriff says"

Fox put this out on the 4th, I found one other thread about this. However it only talked about the News paper hiring guards.

Law enforcement officials from a New York region where a local paper published a map identifying gun owners say prisoners are using the information to intimidate guards. Rockland County Sheriff Louis Falco, who spoke at a news conference flanked by other county officials, said the Journal News' decision to post an online map of names and addresses of handgun owners Dec. 23 has put law enforcement officers in danger. "They have inmates coming up to them and telling them exactly where they live. That's not acceptable to me," Falco said, according to Newsday. Robert Riley, an officer with the White Plains Police Department and president of its Patrolman’s Benevolent Association, agreed. "You have guys who work in New York City who live up here. Now their names and addresses are out there, too," he said adding that there are 8,000 active and retired NYPD officers currently living in Rockland County. Local lawmakers also say that they intend to introduce legislation that prevents information about legal gun owners from being released to the public. The newspaper published the online map last month alongside an article titled, "The gun owner next door: What you don't know about the weapons in your neighborhood." The map included the names and addresses of pistol permit holders in Westchester and Rockland counties obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request. While the paper ostensibly sought to make a point about gun proliferation in the wake of the school shooting in Newtown, Conn., the effort may have backfired. A blogger reacted with a map showing where key editorial staffers live, and some outraged groups have called for a boycott of parent company Gannett’s national advertisers. Ironically, the newspaper has now stationed armed guards outside at least one of its offices.

Source

This is tragic on a deeper level than most realize.

The last nail in the coffin of any society is the loss of the capacity for civil public discourse. The US passed that point long ago.

Unfortunately, I don't think even death or injury as a result of the published information will cause the newspaper to realize their mistake. There is a mindset here that just isn't easy to reach. I've noticed many people with the same type of mindset and they just won't listen, or even engage other ideas. They are like a race horse with blinders on. Full speed ahead with no thought of anything else but finishing the race and 'winning' (their agenda). It's really sad because I think innocent people will be hurt by the publisher's selfish and irresponsible actions.

Originally posted by Gridrebel
Unfortunately, I don't think even death or injury as a result of the published information will cause the newspaper to realize their mistake. There is a mindset here that just isn't easy to reach. I've noticed many people with the same type of mindset and they just won't listen, or even engage other ideas. They are like a race horse with blinders on. Full speed ahead with no thought of anything else but finishing the race and 'winning' (their agenda). It's really sad because I think innocent people will be hurt by the publisher's selfish and irresponsible actions.

I don't think the newspaper would realize their mistake even if someone got seriously injured or worse. The funny part is, I believe (I could be wrong) the newspaper never received any threats just upset patrons and residents of the area, along with bad publicity. I read an article the other day stating that some of the people who were listed on the map had received threats though. It's kind of funny how that works, I thought gun owners were suppose to be horrible murders (being sarcastic). I also read an article the other day where the newspaper is planning on publishing a similar article with 3 or 4 county's this time. Let me see if I can find those articles again.

I hope they are forced to pay to move every single person they outed to a different county. Or they should all just rot in prison.

That's one of the reasons why Texas doesn't release information about police OR concealed carry licenses.
If one has a specific question about a specific person's status as a licensee, the state will respond - but the licensee is notified as well.

ganjoa

reply to post by incoserv


Explanation: St*rred!

Here ... Let me express that deep tragedy ...



Time to run up that flag ok!

Personal Disclosure: The USA is in deep doodoo ... when people attack a constitutional right in such large numbers its hard to ignore the coming civil war in the USA.

Even if there is NO constitution the right to bare arms still exists because its a RIGHT and nobody can take rights away from anybody.

To attempt to do so ... is to loose ones humanity completely because one becomes a despot and tyrant.

******************************************************************

@ Mr Obama ... are you really a tyrannical despot???

These are the same newspapers that refuse to divulge the names of criminals that they used for sources in their stories. Then they complain that their First Amendment rights are being trampled when they are found in contempt of court.
Hypocrite bastards.

Originally posted by Preacher76
Fox put this out

FOX was one of the Biggest Prompters of the Lie of

"Weapons of Mass Destruction"

Half a Million Iraqi's died from that Lie.

Bet your OK with that though, cuz FOX said...

The problem is, they have an agenda. Determining where the orders for this action came from should be of utmost importance.

At a glance, most people just bite the bait that this was an internal newspaper decision. But, was it? I know, people will probably rail on me, calling me a CT for that, but think it through.

They had to know it was high risk, propoganda, self inflicted suicide if you will.

Now, think. Who do we really consider to be "in charge" of the majority of US media to begin with? Run with that.

Media right now is in a state of flux. Newsprint is failing, papers and print media are folding left and right. WaPo just last year got a grant from the Ford Foundation that some could deemto be something of a "bail out". Now, who do we know directly tied to the Ford Foundation? Now, they are back, asking straight out, for a bail out.

Stay with me here...

Who just bought Al Gore's channel? I don't care who you are, the general consensus is Al Jazeera is the equivalent of Pravda, which is likened to The Enquirer.

There is no denying MSNBC/NBC are clearly state run media. This is according to their own words, when they admitted to daily phone calls with the WH to discuss talking points.

Now, if one were to consider a moment that this was directed with a, "We have your back", it becomes clear that no amount of reasononing or argument will change the path this paper is on.

It has an agenda, it is driven by an obvious higher purpose, they seemingly have zero fear of repercussions, and almost seem to be instigating them.

Now, ask yourself why, and whose agenda this would fit, and whose purpose would be served.

Think, people.

Originally posted by Tw0Sides

Originally posted by Preacher76
Fox put this out

FOX was one of the Biggest Prompters of the Lie of

"Weapons of Mass Destruction"

Half a Million Iraqi's died from that Lie.

Bet your OK with that though, cuz FOX said...

Would you prefer me to find an alternative source? I don't like mainstream media however that doesn't mean all information they put out is false.

How about you don't assume I'm okay with fox because I posted one article. I used this simply because it was the first one I read. If you have a grip with fox over that then please by all means contact them, protest them, however don't attack me because I sourced it on here. Just because I sourced one article doesn't mean I support the killing of innocent people.

Here is another Source

You want another source, fine, you find it yourself and post it.

reply to post by Preacher76


Thank you! I see yours,vand raise you one!


www.foxnews.com...

Ex-Burglars Say
Newspaper’s Gun Map
Would’ve Made the Job
Easier, Safer

"Reformed crooks say the New York newspaper that
published a map of names and addresses of gun
owners did a great service – to their old cronies in the
burglary trade."

A lot of those repercussions I spoke of, and some remain to be seen. Just some more of those unintended consequences that ironically, the current administration is starting to become infamous for.

Thank you for the thread.

Originally posted by Tw0Sides

Originally posted by Preacher76
Fox put this out

FOX was one of the Biggest Prompters of the Lie of

"Weapons of Mass Destruction"

Half a Million Iraqi's died from that Lie.

Bet your OK with that though, cuz FOX said...

Nice deflection.

You are so against guns that anything anyone does to hurt gun owners is ok with you.

And if anyone complains about it you scream "crazy nutjob rightwinger gun nut!" and walk away.

I'm not a fox fan but as previously pointed out there are other sources with this story.
The fact that you don't seem to care that law abiding citizens and LEOs have been put in danger because of this anti-gun crusade you and your antigunner buddies are on is very telling of both the agenda and your character.

Originally posted by projectvxn
The fact that you don't seem to care that law abiding citizens and LEOs have been put in danger because of this anti-gun crusade you and your antigunner buddies are on is very telling of both the agenda and your character.

Actually this is the 2nd post on this topic (first this thread) where I posted....

This was the First, tryed to be Civil but was overwhelmed by the,

"You can't tell me I can't have a Firearm,
I can tell you , you can't have a Abortion " crowd.

This was the first.

posted on 5-1-2013 @ 03:38 PM this post Printing the Names of Gun Owners was Wrong. But anyone using this to Further another Agenda of Printing names would also be wrong. Yet idiots will Defend Coulter , not because she is right, but because she is a GOP Nitwit. That is the Truly Pathetic thing Evolving in this Thread.

reply to post by Tw0Sides


You will find that I avoided that thread altogether.

You and I have had this conversation before.

You're trying to paint every gun owner in a box of left and right wing political BS. You are deflecting from the issues any time someone makes a persuasive argument as to why this anti gun agenda is wrong. It's your go-to. It's ridiculous and intellectually dishonest.

Cant win the argument on facts so you drive that political wedge. How sad.

www.politico.com...



that newspaper also hired armed guards.

reply to post by Tw0Sides


The Democrats were the ones pushing the WMD's in Iraq. Long before Bush ever took office actually. They just got a bad case of amnesia after the invasion.


"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
--President Bill Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
--President Bill Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998

"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."
--Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."
--Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."
Letter to President Clinton, signed by:
-- Democratic Senators Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others, Oct. 9, 1998

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
-Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998

"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."
-- Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999

"There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."
Letter to President Bush, Signed by:
-- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), and others, Dec 5, 2001

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and th! e means of delivering them."
-- Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
-- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
-- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction."
-- Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
-- Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002

www.davidstuff.com...

ah the message this sends is a scary one. "oh its ok to publish the names and addresses of gun permit owners,oh wait some of them are cops? we must stop this its a risk to officers!" so it only matters that prison guards were put at risk? what about the law full gun owners does them being put at risk not matter? so its only the civil servants that get privacy protection nice message

Originally posted by RalagaNarHallas
ah the message this sends is a scary one. "oh its ok to publish the names and addresses of gun permit owners,oh wait some of them are cops? we must stop this its a risk to officers!" so it only matters that prison guards were put at risk? what about the law full gun owners does them being put at risk not matter? so its only the civil servants that get privacy protection nice message

Any information like this shouldn't be released, regardless if it's the president or John Doe down the road.

reply to post by RalagaNarHallas


The story, and the article I linked as well, stand as testimony of unintended consequences.

The action of the publication of the addresses was negligent at best, and possibly intentionally harmful at worst.

The entire point of my earlier post was to invoke thought on the matter over who has exactly what to gain from this action. To fully consider that, you must first consider what some of the possible ramifications are, or could be. Let's examine that, shall we?

1. Women with an order of protection, with or without children, hiding from a stalker or ex boyfriend/spouse, now targetable

2. Public officials subject to revenge attacks, ranging from police officers, judges, to politicians

3. Other public figures open to stalking or revenge attacks, such as well known community volunteers, teachers, coaches, television personalities, and press

4. Victims of child abuse/rape that have relocated to avoid stalking from attackers having their locations revealed

5. A roadmap for criminals to easily find homes with guns, so they can case them, and gain an arsenal not traceable to themselves to sell or use in crime

6. A roadmap to homes that may be unarmed, for easier prey to target for burglary

Now, those are just a few unintended consequences. I am sure that if you weigh the alleged good intent versus the probable bad outcomes of this, it would be irrational for any thinking person to defend this was ever a good idea.