Right to privacy must be upheld for legal gun owners

[beagle9]

A quick story - I own gun's of course, and I have had them for years and years, and when a young man began coming around who had a shady past, and a gang exposed upbringing, I had to become as cautious and as responsible as I could be. I had to use good ole common sense while dealing with him. He needed help and guidance, and I tried to give him some, but his upbringing was engrained within him, and it came out in many ways that made me correct him many times.

I never allowed him into my home, because he asked way to many questions that were uncomfortable to me, so I just allowed him only into the yard and garden when he wanted to help me. His brother was a real bad thug and criminal, and he was torn between being like his brother or being like a normal kid. He asked me one time did I have any guns that I owned, in which I said to him immediately "Nope". He then said well how do you protect yourself (?) and I said well I just take a butcher knife and cut peoples heads off if need be.

I always keep my guns locked up, hidden and secret, and he never knew that I owned any at all.

This is why I thought "wow" when I heard about the idea in which some idiot had upon listing the names and addresses of gun owners somewhere in which this incident happened, and it made me see this immediately as an atrocity that should be met with criminal punishment for violating the right to citizens privacy, and violating the safety of the public at large for such an idiotic dangerous act.

 

[Mr. H.]

Yup.

 

[Pogo]

A quick story - I own gun's of course, and I have had them for years and years, and when a young man began coming around who had a shady past, and a gang exposed upbringing, I had to become as cautious and as responsible as I could be. I had to use good ole common sense while dealing with him. He needed help and guidance, and I tried to give him some, but his upbringing was engrained within him, and it came out in many ways that made me correct him many times.

I never allowed him into my home, because he asked way to many questions that were uncomfortable to me, so I just allowed him only into the yard and garden when he wanted to help me. His brother was a real bad thug and criminal, and he was torn between being like his brother or being like a normal kid. He asked me one time did I have any guns that I owned, in which I said to him immediately "Nope". He then said well how do you protect yourself (?) and I said well I just take a butcher knife and cut peoples heads off if need be.

I always keep my guns locked up, hidden and secret, and he never knew that I owned any at all.

This is why I thought "wow" when I heard about the idea in which some idiot had upon listing the names and addresses of gun owners somewhere in which this incident happened, and it made me see this immediately as an atrocity that should be met with criminal punishment for violating the right to citizens privacy, and violating the safety of the public at large for such an idiotic dangerous act.

Those names were already public information, so there's no privacy to violate. And how does this publishing of public info "violate the safety of the public"? Please explain.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

A quick story - I own gun's of course, and I have had them for years and years, and when a young man began coming around who had a shady past, and a gang exposed upbringing, I had to become as cautious and as responsible as I could be. I had to use good ole common sense while dealing with him. He needed help and guidance, and I tried to give him some, but his upbringing was engrained within him, and it came out in many ways that made me correct him many times.

I never allowed him into my home, because he asked way to many questions that were uncomfortable to me, so I just allowed him only into the yard and garden when he wanted to help me. His brother was a real bad thug and criminal, and he was torn between being like his brother or being like a normal kid. He asked me one time did I have any guns that I owned, in which I said to him immediately "Nope". He then said well how do you protect yourself (?) and I said well I just take a butcher knife and cut peoples heads off if need be.

I always keep my guns locked up, hidden and secret, and he never knew that I owned any at all.

This is why I thought "wow" when I heard about the idea in which some idiot had upon listing the names and addresses of gun owners somewhere in which this incident happened, and it made me see this immediately as an atrocity that should be met with criminal punishment for violating the right to citizens privacy, and violating the safety of the public at large for such an idiotic dangerous act.

Privacy rights, as with other rights in general, place restrictions on government law or policy making entities only, not private entities such as newspapers:

By its very definition, the public record is not private. Under New York state law, the information the Journal News obtained from Westchester and Rockland county authorities can be obtained by anybody who asks for it.

Let’s not go crazy over publishing gun lists | Jack Shafer

And it’s hard to imagine the grounds for a civil suit on the part of a handgun permit holder, since the applicant should be aware that his permit information would indeed be part of the public record.

 

[Politico]

If it's public it's out there sorry.

 

[Sallow]

Wait a minute..

Now you guys want privacy?

 

[skookerasbil]

What should also be out there are the list of residences that DONT own guns!!! All you ever hear from the left is "fairness" this and "fairness" that. Whats fair is fair. The public has a right to know who's guarding their residences with wiffle ball bats.

 

[zeke]

Nah skook, you are thinking about this all wrong.
You know how you are fantasizing about blowing someones head off with your fine shotgun?
Here's what you do. YOU publish your own name and address as a home that does not have guns. Then when the criminals arrive (and they will, right) you've got your target.

Course you might go to jail, but what the fuk, at least you got to shoot someone.

Hey and I finally found an article (no thanks to your kind) of a home owner defending his home with his weapon. Down in FL. A naked guy was choking the home owners dog when the homeowner woke up. Then the guy tried to bite the homeowner. So the homeowner shot him. In the leg. To bad he didn't have your shotgun eh? It is not millions of times like you all claim, but it's a start.

 

[beagle9]

A quick story - I own gun's of course, and I have had them for years and years, and when a young man began coming around who had a shady past, and a gang exposed upbringing, I had to become as cautious and as responsible as I could be. I had to use good ole common sense while dealing with him. He needed help and guidance, and I tried to give him some, but his upbringing was engrained within him, and it came out in many ways that made me correct him many times.

I never allowed him into my home, because he asked way to many questions that were uncomfortable to me, so I just allowed him only into the yard and garden when he wanted to help me. His brother was a real bad thug and criminal, and he was torn between being like his brother or being like a normal kid. He asked me one time did I have any guns that I owned, in which I said to him immediately "Nope". He then said well how do you protect yourself (?) and I said well I just take a butcher knife and cut peoples heads off if need be.

I always keep my guns locked up, hidden and secret, and he never knew that I owned any at all.

This is why I thought "wow" when I heard about the idea in which some idiot had upon listing the names and addresses of gun owners somewhere in which this incident happened, and it made me see this immediately as an atrocity that should be met with criminal punishment for violating the right to citizens privacy, and violating the safety of the public at large for such an idiotic dangerous act.

Those names were already public information, so there's no privacy to violate. And how does this publishing of public info "violate the safety of the public"? Please explain.

School me here a bit then, how is it that private gun owners and their ownership is somehow public information ? I didn't know this, but do tell please... The danger is that people could use the information to target their residences for theft later on, thus placing guns into the hands of criminals who are successful at thievery of this kind.

Has this nation absolutely no common sense anymore what so ever ? Kidding me right ?

 

[jillian]

A quick story - I own gun's of course, and I have had them for years and years, and when a young man began coming around who had a shady past, and a gang exposed upbringing, I had to become as cautious and as responsible as I could be. I had to use good ole common sense while dealing with him. He needed help and guidance, and I tried to give him some, but his upbringing was engrained within him, and it came out in many ways that made me correct him many times.

I never allowed him into my home, because he asked way to many questions that were uncomfortable to me, so I just allowed him only into the yard and garden when he wanted to help me. His brother was a real bad thug and criminal, and he was torn between being like his brother or being like a normal kid. He asked me one time did I have any guns that I owned, in which I said to him immediately "Nope". He then said well how do you protect yourself (?) and I said well I just take a butcher knife and cut peoples heads off if need be.

I always keep my guns locked up, hidden and secret, and he never knew that I owned any at all.

This is why I thought "wow" when I heard about the idea in which some idiot had upon listing the names and addresses of gun owners somewhere in which this incident happened, and it made me see this immediately as an atrocity that should be met with criminal punishment for violating the right to citizens privacy, and violating the safety of the public at large for such an idiotic dangerous act.

Those names were already public information, so there's no privacy to violate. And how does this publishing of public info "violate the safety of the public"? Please explain.

School me here a bit then, how is it that private gun owners and their ownership is somehow public information ? I didn't know this, but do tell please... The danger is that people could use the information to target their residences for theft later on, thus placing guns into the hands of criminals who are successful at thievery of this kind.

Has this nation absolutely no common sense anymore what so ever ? Kidding me right ?

i would guess the same way any other license is public information.

that said, i think the newspaper was wrong for publishing the addresses... it makes those locales targets for robbers who want those guns.

just like the rightwingut loons were wrong publishing the names and addresses of abortion doctors.... which targeted the doctors to be killed.

 

[jillian]

Wait a minute..

Now you guys want privacy?

that is pretty funny, come to think of it.

it always depends on whose ox is being gored.

 

[beagle9]

Wait a minute..

Now you guys want privacy?

For yours, your families and your friends sake yes, because if my guns end up in the hands of criminals, then it could be that you would be on the receiving end of that problem, so wouldn't you want to protect my right to privacy as a legal law abiding gun owner instead ? What is it with this country these days, has it lost all of it's marbles completely now?

The problem with the left is that it is fed this unrealistic view of life by it's members, and that is why they try and live with the bears until the bears eat them. LOL

 

[Katzndogz]

Ex-Burglars Say Newspaper

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.
The information published online by the Journal-News, a daily paper serving the New York suburbs of Westchester, Rockland and Putnam counties, could be highly useful to thieves in two ways, former burglars told FoxNews.com. Crooks looking to avoid getting shot now know which targets are soft and those who need weapons know where they can steal them.

Anyone who has applied for a protective order should absolutely not have their private information published, even if holding a weapons permit is public record. Gun owners might not mind having their names or addresses published because many of them advertise it themselves. Anyone who has a window sticker saying "Property protected by Smith and Wesson" doesn't mind having this information published.

The most effective method of public protection is to have MORE publication of public information. Everyone who has a protective order against them should have their names and addresses published. Every home that has a mentally disturbed resident should have the information made public. Everyone with an arrest record should have their name and address in the paper. The answer to a dilemma of public information is MORE public information.

 

[beagle9]

Those names were already public information, so there's no privacy to violate. And how does this publishing of public info "violate the safety of the public"? Please explain.

School me here a bit then, how is it that private gun owners and their ownership is somehow public information ? I didn't know this, but do tell please... The danger is that people could use the information to target their residences for theft later on, thus placing guns into the hands of criminals who are successful at thievery of this kind.

Has this nation absolutely no common sense anymore what so ever ? Kidding me right ?

i would guess the same way any other license is public information.

that said, i think the newspaper was wrong for publishing the addresses... it makes those locales targets for robbers who want those guns.

just like the rightwingut loons were wrong publishing the names and addresses of abortion doctors.... which targeted the doctors to be killed.

Yes that was wrong also if happened...I am not aware of all news that happens, but yes I agree there are better ways of handling these sorts of things, and these that we are speaking on are not done in the proper way's. It makes one wonder if when these things happen, if there isn't a sinister thought process involved by those who do these things in the ways that they do them..

 

[jillian]

School me here a bit then, how is it that private gun owners and their ownership is somehow public information ? I didn't know this, but do tell please... The danger is that people could use the information to target their residences for theft later on, thus placing guns into the hands of criminals who are successful at thievery of this kind.

Has this nation absolutely no common sense anymore what so ever ? Kidding me right ?

i would guess the same way any other license is public information.

that said, i think the newspaper was wrong for publishing the addresses... it makes those locales targets for robbers who want those guns.

just like the rightwingut loons were wrong publishing the names and addresses of abortion doctors.... which targeted the doctors to be killed.

Yes that was wrong also if happened...I am not aware of all news that happens, but yes I agree there are better ways of handling these sorts of things, and these that we are speaking on are not done in the proper way's. I makes one wonder if when these things happen, if there isn't a sinister thought process involved by those who do these things in the ways that they do them..

i take a pretty dark view of those things. i think any motivation that makes people disclose where families live, to target them because they don't like something they do, is sinister.

well, to be fair... except for pedophiles... i'm ok with warning people about pedophiles.

 

[beagle9]

Ex-Burglars Say Newspaper

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.
The information published online by the Journal-News, a daily paper serving the New York suburbs of Westchester, Rockland and Putnam counties, could be highly useful to thieves in two ways, former burglars told FoxNews.com. Crooks looking to avoid getting shot now know which targets are soft and those who need weapons know where they can steal them.

Anyone who has applied for a protective order should absolutely not have their private information published, even if holding a weapons permit is public record. Gun owners might not mind having their names or addresses published because many of them advertise it themselves. Anyone who has a window sticker saying "Property protected by Smith and Wesson" doesn't mind having this information published.

The most effective method of public protection is to have MORE publication of public information. Everyone who has a protective order against them should have their names and addresses published. Every home that has a mentally disturbed resident should have the information made public. Everyone with an arrest record should have their name and address in the paper. The answer to a dilemma of public information is MORE public information.

Fight fire with fire is what this is suggesting right, but in the meantime some of the more important information to those who would use it in that way, is taken advantage of by the crooks in that way ?

Doesn't seem like very good trade offs, because some information is way more useful than other information, and this all depends on who is using that information.

 

[jillian]

School me here a bit then, how is it that private gun owners and their ownership is somehow public information ? I didn't know this, but do tell please... The danger is that people could use the information to target their residences for theft later on, thus placing guns into the hands of criminals who are successful at thievery of this kind.

Has this nation absolutely no common sense anymore what so ever ? Kidding me right ?

i would guess the same way any other license is public information.

that said, i think the newspaper was wrong for publishing the addresses... it makes those locales targets for robbers who want those guns.

just like the rightwingut loons were wrong publishing the names and addresses of abortion doctors.... which targeted the doctors to be killed.

Yes that was wrong also if happened...I am not aware of all news that happens, but yes I agree there are better ways of handling these sorts of things, and these that we are speaking on are not done in the proper way's. I makes one wonder if when these things happen, if there isn't a sinister thought process involved by those who do these things in the ways that they do them..

i take a pretty dark view of those things. i think any motivation that makes people disclose where families live, to target them because they don't like something they do, is sinister.

and on the abortion doctor issue:

that was supported by the courts. i assume the same support would be given for publishing the names of holders of gun licenses.

US judges rule in favour of abortion

and if you're wondering about the site i linked, it's the national institutes of health's national library of medicine.

 

[beagle9]

i would guess the same way any other license is public information.

that said, i think the newspaper was wrong for publishing the addresses... it makes those locales targets for robbers who want those guns.

just like the rightwingut loons were wrong publishing the names and addresses of abortion doctors.... which targeted the doctors to be killed.

Yes that was wrong also if happened...I am not aware of all news that happens, but yes I agree there are better ways of handling these sorts of things, and these that we are speaking on are not done in the proper way's. I makes one wonder if when these things happen, if there isn't a sinister thought process involved by those who do these things in the ways that they do them..

i take a pretty dark view of those things. i think any motivation that makes people disclose where families live, to target them because they don't like something they do, is sinister.

well, to be fair... except for pedophiles... i'm ok with warning people about pedophiles.

I agree !!

 

[jillian]

If it's public it's out there sorry.

that seems to be what the courts have held.

but just because one CAN do something doesn't mean one SHOULD do something.

 

[jillian]

Yes that was wrong also if happened...I am not aware of all news that happens, but yes I agree there are better ways of handling these sorts of things, and these that we are speaking on are not done in the proper way's. I makes one wonder if when these things happen, if there isn't a sinister thought process involved by those who do these things in the ways that they do them..

i take a pretty dark view of those things. i think any motivation that makes people disclose where families live, to target them because they don't like something they do, is sinister.

well, to be fair... except for pedophiles... i'm ok with warning people about pedophiles.

I agree !!

heh.. has to happen occasionally!

you might also want to check my edit of that post.