putnam co denies newspaper list of gun owners

[BlueStarLizzard]

 Sorry, it's early and I don't have time to find a link or the old thread but...
I just heard this gem on the radio news.
The paper that released the list of CCW permit holders in NY has hired armed gaurds.

I guess commen sense kicked in and they finally figured out that ticking off people with guns is not the brightest move in the world.

 

[dogmush]

Link:

http://www.rocklandtimes.com/2013/01/01/the-journal-news-is-armed-and-dangerous/

I saw that this morning as well.  Made me chuckle.  I especially liked the part where the paper called the cops about being threatened, and the cops read the emails and said "yeah, that's not a threat".

 

[geronimotwo]

http://news.yahoo.com/york-county-denies-request-names-gun-permit-holders-231656034.html

the putnam county clerkhas called the paper irresponsible for printing the names of gun owners and has refused to comply with the freedom of information releases.  while i don't agree with the papers assinine decision to print this information, i feel public records should be public and am curious how this will play out if the courts get involved.  unfortunatly the paper knows that any publicity is good publicity, and will keep this stirred up for as long as possible. 

on another facet of this, i am not sure why the gun owners, and their groups, haven't jumped on this and turned the spin in  their favor.  how hard is it to take this info and say, "look at all these law abiding gun owners who haven't committed any crimes".?  it seems to me that it can be turned into a pr win pretty easily.

[TechMan]

Merged topics

[MrsSmith]

Personally, it aggravates me that gun ownership falls under Freedom of Information. It's nobody's damn business that I have a gun permit.
It is nice though to see at least one media outlet being spanked for their irresponsibility.
I've said it repeatedly over the years, somewhere along the way, our society (and the media specifically) has forgotten that with rights come responsibilities. Just because you have the right to say/write whatever you want doesn't mean it's responsible to exercise that right. Really wish the media were as eager to exercise responsible behavior as they are to scream about their rights. Or hell, for that matter, I wish they treated words like responsible gun owners treat their guns.

[Zardozimo Oprah Bannedalas]

What's wrong with these people? Don't they know that guns don't solve any problems?

[ArfinGreebly]

What's wrong with these people? Don't they know that guns don't solve any problems?

Of course they do.

Just not yours.

[zahc]

Personally, it aggravates me that gun ownership falls under Freedom of Information.

It doesn't, as far as I know. I have only heard about FOIA in regards to CHL/CCW permits, which ARE under the FOIA. Why shouldn't they be?

This is why it's bad that we should have to get a permit to exercise our rights. I can't get worked up over the permit itself being public record...what else could it be...a secret handshake? The government should be open. It's just that we shouldn't need the government to exercise our rights.

[RoadKingLarry]

It doesn't, as far as I know. I have only heard about FOIA in regards to CHL/CCW permits, which ARE under the FOIA. Why shouldn't they be?

This is why it's bad that we should have to get a permit to exercise our rights. I can't get worked up over the permit itself being public record...what else could it be...a secret handshake? The government should be open. It's just that we shouldn't need the government to exercise our rights.

While I wholeheartedly agree with you on your second point I strongly disagree with your first. As did our state legislature when they passed our CCW law. In Oklahoma, permit holders info is limited to law enforcement only, no public/FOIA disclosure allowed.

[Hutch]

I wonder if th 50% or so of the adults in this country who are persuadable on this issue can appreciate the delicious irony of this whole vomitus mass?  If so, are cause is served, at the cost of privacy.  I am confident that if the local rags in my part of the country published something like this, it would be met with yawns.

[Boomhauer]

which ARE under the FOIA. Why shouldn't they be?

Because it's NOBODY'S *expletive deleted*ing BUSINESS that I have a permit to carry a gun. And why is it under FOIA but the goddamn local schoolboard gets to holds secret, closed door meetings all the time about how to screw over us taxpayers?

[zahc]

Because it's NOBODY'S *expletive deleted* BUSINESS that I have a permit to carry a gun

Agreed, with minor changes per above.

I'm just saying that CCW permits are a deal with the devil. I'm not sure it's ever a good thing for government to be secret. Think about it; most states' CCW laws are 'shall issue', where the state is specifically required to issue a permit to applicants that meet the criteria. How is it possible to run such a system if every step is not public record? You can have a permit, or you can have it be nobody's business, but I don't see how you can have it both ways.

[MechAg94]

Well, you shoundn't need a permit anyway.  Why don't they print lists of people convicted of DUI or reckless driving?

A few years back before the FOIA law was modified, the Texas DPS denied requests by a couple of newspapers saying they could/would not provide complete lists of CHL holders, but if they would just send in separate requests for each individual, they would tell them if they had a CHL or not.  I think newspapers weren't ready to do that. 

[zahc]

Why don't they print lists of people convicted of DUI or reckless driving?

DUI and reckless driving are convictions, which is a completely different thing than a permit? Were you trying to relate them somehow?

What other government-issued permits are secret? Are building permits secret? Garage sale permits? Lemonade stand permits? I honestly don't know.

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

round here they do print dui convictions etc

[roo_ster]

Okey-dokey, we ought to start publishing lists and handy-dandy electronic maps of women who get abortions by abortionists that take gov't money.  It is our money after all.  Information wants to be free!

And lists of those who get food stamps, housing subsidies, and other sorts of welfare, too.

Name & shame FOIA FTW.

[zxcvbob]

I guess commen sense kicked in and they finally figured out that ticking off people with guns is not the brightest move in the world.

More likely, the hiring of guards is just part of the stunt -- gives an air of credibility to alleged threats they've received; paint gun owners as dangerous lunatics.

They've gone long past the point of reporting the story and are trying to be the story.  (Gonzo Journalism, or as I like to call it, Geraldoism)

[BlueStarLizzard]

More likely, the hiring of guards is just part of the stunt -- gives an air of credibility to alleged threats they've received; paint gun owners as dangerous lunatics.

They've gone long past the point of reporting the story and are trying to be the story.  (Gonzo Journalism, or as I like to call it, Geraldoism)

Aww... And I was so enjoying the mental picture of:

setting:  offices of newspaper

Tom: Well, George, seems like we're getting a lot of responce from that article we ran locating people with guns.
George: Yes, Tom. It even made national news outlets.
Tom: And look at all these comments and letters!

Tom and George read some of the letters

Tom: Wow, a lot of these people are really angry.
George: Yes, Tom. The article seems to have pissed a lot of people off.
Tom: I'm wonder... A lot of these people have guns and they are really mad.
George: Yeah, so?
Tom: Well, they all have those evil guns that makes them violent.
George: I'm not following you, Tom.
Tom: Well, the guns might make them shoot us.

Tom and George make poopy face

George: Oh, God!! We need guns!! Call for a security company!
Tom: Good idea, George.



The moment of poopy face was just priceless in my mind.

[geronimotwo]

part of me wonders if a large part of the anti gun sentiment would be there if we were less secretive about gun ownership.  it seems to me that if the majority of people were to see a gun on the hip of a law abiding citizen on a regular basis, that they would be less likely to make the poopy face in regards to gun ownership.

[Boomhauer]

Aww... And I was so enjoying the mental picture of:

setting:  offices of newspaper

Tom: Well, George, seems like we're getting a lot of responce from that article we ran locating people with guns.
George: Yes, Tom. It even made national news outlets.
Tom: And look at all these comments and letters!

Tom and George read some of the letters

Tom: Wow, a lot of these people are really angry.
George: Yes, Tom. The article seems to have pissed a lot of people off.
Tom: I'm wonder... A lot of these people have guns and they are really mad.
George: Yeah, so?
Tom: Well, they all have those evil guns that makes them violent.
George: I'm not following you, Tom.
Tom: Well, the guns might make them shoot us.

Tom and George make poopy face

George: Oh, God!! We need guns!! Call for a security company!
Tom: Good idea, George.



The moment of poopy face was just priceless in my mind.

As if a few rentacops would even slow down a determined gunfighter...

[roo_ster]

As if a few rentacops would even slow down a determined gunfighter...

Same-same at schools.  I asked a cop buddy about cops working at the airfield and at schools.  He replied, "That is where the losers who don't want to work go to put in their time."

You're not going to get Mel Gibson Lethal Weapon-like performance out of a school resource officer.

[BlueStarLizzard]

As if a few rentacops would even slow down a determined gunfighter...

Do Tom and George really seem that bright to you?

I mean, come on! They are working with severly limited brain power as it is.

[Hawkmoon]

It doesn't, as far as I know. I have only heard about FOIA in regards to CHL/CCW permits, which ARE under the FOIA. Why shouldn't they be?

Because it's not anybody's business who has a permit to carry a gun?

It's against the law to release this information in my home state, and I know it's against the law to release it in Florida. I assume it's illegal in at least a few more states.

Heck, in my state I don't think even driver's licenses are open to FOIA inquiries.

[MrsSmith]

Agreed, with minor changes per above.

I'm just saying that CCW permits are a deal with the devil. I'm not sure it's ever a good thing for government to be secret. Think about it; most states' CCW laws are 'shall issue', where the state is specifically required to issue a permit to applicants that meet the criteria. How is it possible to run such a system if every step is not public record? You can have a permit, or you can have it be nobody's business, but I don't see how you can have it both ways.

I agree with the general concensus here that permits shouldn't be required. That would solve the entire argument. But I'll say this with regard to public record and gov transparency: any legal transaction I undertake with the gov is between me and the gov. If not, then your tax records should be public information, your driving record, if you served in the military then your service records, any other transaction. And that's just wrong.

It is NO ONE'S business if I want to finish my basement or carry a weapon or dig a well on my property. Let me repeat that: IT'S NO ONE'S BUSINESS. Gov transparency stops at personal information. Period.

[SteveS]

While I wholeheartedly agree with you on your second point I strongly disagree with your first. As did our state legislature when they passed our CCW law. In Oklahoma, permit holders info is limited to law enforcement only, no public/FOIA disclosure allowed.

Same here in MI.