Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(ABC News)   Newspaper helpfully publishes names and addresses of local houses not to rob while occupied. Hilarity is ensuing   ( abcnews.go.com) divider line
    More: Stupid, Putnam County  
•       •       •

23258 clicks; posted to Main » on 25 Dec 2012 at 11:11 AM (5 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



535 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2012-12-25 12:58:11 AM  
They really didn't think this thing through at all. Very, very bad idea. Someone should get fired for that.

I am a gun owner and I support new legislation and common-sense measures to restrict/ban hi-cap mags, certain types of weapons and more enforcement of current laws on the books. This is NOT helping!

Whomever thought that was a good idea should be unemployed.
 
2012-12-25 01:25:35 AM  
Newspapers do this sort of thing every five or six years.  Then somebody publishes the names, addresses, phone numbers, license plate numbers, and schools of the kids of all the reporters and editors and they all have to jump through hoops to get phone numbers changed, and if I recall last time I read about this foolishness one of the reporters moved because she was tired of getting rotten fish guts on her porch.
 
2012-12-25 03:45:48 AM  
"How about a map of the editorial staff and publishers of Gannett and Journal News with names and addresses of their families...,"

Please do.
 
2012-12-25 08:20:01 AM  

doglover: "How about a map of the editorial staff and publishers of Gannett and Journal News with names and addresses of their families...,"

Please do.


The publisher, the publisher's home alarm security code, the publisher's favorite nine-martini-lunch restaurant, the publisher's country club tee times and the dates he tells his family he's going to a men's fellowship meeting but really goes to Dita's Dungeon to be tied up with extension cords and repeatedly violated with a bottle of Pert by a shaved midget albino.
 
2012-12-25 08:32:24 AM  

NewportBarGuy: They really didn't think this thing through at all. Very, very bad idea. Someone should get fired for that.

I am a gun owner and I support new legislation and common-sense measures to restrict/ban hi-cap mags, certain types of weapons and more enforcement of current laws on the books. This is NOT helping!

Whomever thought that was a good idea should be unemployed.


Do something about the laws that allow the info to be pubic record. The hand-wringing is a bit boring. Noones going to lose their job over this.

Someone's going to publish it eventually. Whether it's a paper or a gun control blogger.
 
2012-12-25 08:37:33 AM  
I could see this backfiring.
 
2012-12-25 08:51:48 AM  

Generation_D: I could see this backfiring.


Case an address, doublecheck the list. Not on the gun owners' registry? Easy pickins for a home invasion. They won't shoot back.
 
2012-12-25 08:52:51 AM  
Pfaw, public records. I could've gotten the same information if I go to the local town halls.
 
2012-12-25 08:58:02 AM  
I live in a somewhat rural area, where you assume that every house has at least one gun.
 
2012-12-25 08:58:51 AM  

Mr. Coffee Nerves: goes to Dita's Dungeon to be tied up with extension cords and repeatedly violated with a bottle of Pert by a shaved midget albino.


Go on...
 
2012-12-25 09:30:09 AM  
mlkshk.comView Full Size
 
2012-12-25 09:40:09 AM  

catusr: I live in a somewhat rural area, where you assume that every house has at least one gun.


Yah, out in the country pretty much everyone has at least one gun. We don't have to register them either.
 
2012-12-25 10:20:27 AM  
God, but zealots do some thoroughly brain dead stuff. I mean, that's Westboro Baptist crazy.

I hope those assholes lose every gun owners subscription, as well as those who don't own guns but still have common sense. Advertisers should be dropping them right and left too.

Fire the editor and whatever writers were involved with this.
 
2012-12-25 10:36:34 AM  

RexTalionis: Pfaw, public records. I could've gotten the same information if I go to the local town halls.


sure.
just like you can go to a court house and find the names of everyone on trial and the charges against them - you can publish that too.
 
2012-12-25 10:43:56 AM  

Mr. Coffee Nerves: doglover: "How about a map of the editorial staff and publishers of Gannett and Journal News with names and addresses of their families...,"

Please do.

The publisher, the publisher's home alarm security code, the publisher's favorite nine-martini-lunch restaurant, the publisher's country club tee times and the dates he tells his family he's going to a men's fellowship meeting but really goes to Dita's Dungeon to be tied up with extension cords and repeatedly violated with a bottle of Pert by a shaved midget albino.


i.imgur.comView Full Size
 '
Dita's Dungeon has it all...
 
2012-12-25 10:48:45 AM  
Oh, my. Judging from the comments, we have a quite a number of revolutionaries on our hands here.
 
2012-12-25 10:55:41 AM  

tenpoundsofcheese: RexTalionis: Pfaw, public records. I could've gotten the same information if I go to the local town halls.

sure.
just like you can go to a court house and find the names of everyone on trial and the charges against them - you can publish that too.


I don't get your point. 1) That's false, not all names are released (for instance, minors), and 2) so what? Isn't that what newspapers do?

I am under no delusion that I have an expectation of privacy in my public records.
 
2012-12-25 11:17:33 AM  
I'm familiar with a smal part of the area in question and can emphatically state that this list is incomplete both in not listing all pistol permit holders and in totally omitting unregistered guns. Doesn't excuse the idiocy of the decision to publish this information for general consumption, but anyone who thinks they're guaranteed a selection of easy targets based on unlisted homes might well be on the receiving end of some small-caliber hilarity.
 
2012-12-25 11:17:55 AM  
isn't it generally known when you apply that it will be publically available? pretty sure i knew that when i got my permit in MA.
 
2012-12-25 11:18:34 AM  

doglover: Generation_D: I could see this backfiring.

Case an address, doublecheck the list. Not on the gun owners' registry? Easy pickins for a home invasion. They won't shoot back.


That makes no sense, no one's going to shoot anyone when there's no one there.

I would think that the reason people are pissed off is because thieves are going to be targeting gun owner's houses to steal their guns.
 
2012-12-25 11:18:51 AM  

doglover: Generation_D: I could see this backfiring.

Case an address, doublecheck the list. Not on the gun owners' registry? Easy pickins for a home invasion. They won't shoot back.


Or, I can pick an address that *is* listed, wait until no one is home, and then walk out with some firearms that will sell very nicely on the black market.

The vast majority of burglars operate when the home is vacant, something your vaunted guns will do nothing to protect against.
 
2012-12-25 11:20:42 AM  
Follow up article:

Mass shooting at The Journal News offices by disgruntled gun owner.
 
2012-12-25 11:21:59 AM  

RexTalionis: tenpoundsofcheese: RexTalionis: Pfaw, public records. I could've gotten the same information if I go to the local town halls.

sure.
just like you can go to a court house and find the names of everyone on trial and the charges against them - you can publish that too.

I don't get your point. 1) That's false, not all names are released (for instance, minors), and 2) so what? Isn't that what newspapers do?

I am under no delusion that I have an expectation of privacy in my public records.


The point is ease of access.
I doubt that newspapers publish the list of every adult who is charged with a crime and the details of that crime.
Much less do they create a nice interactive tool that, I don't know, people who are hiring people could look at in their free time
(although of course they would never make a decision based on what they read)

Are the resumes and job applications of people who apply for federal jobs considered public information?  If so, is there a searchable database for all that info?
 
2012-12-25 11:23:24 AM  

tlchwi02: isn't it generally known when you apply that it will be publically available? pretty sure i knew that when i got my permit in MA.


Available for someone to discover, perhaps; but published is another thing.
 
2012-12-25 11:23:51 AM  

doglover: Generation_D: I could see this backfiring.

Case an address, doublecheck the list. Not on the gun owners' registry? Easy pickins for a home invasion. They won't shoot back.


That's not how crime works.
 
2012-12-25 11:24:32 AM  
Put me on the map. But not my pussy ass hippy neighbors.
 
2012-12-25 11:24:36 AM  

Mr. Coffee Nerves: doglover: "How about a map of the editorial staff and publishers of Gannett and Journal News with names and addresses of their families...,"

Please do.

The publisher, the publisher's home alarm security code, the publisher's favorite nine-martini-lunch restaurant, the publisher's country club tee times and the dates he tells his family he's going to a men's fellowship meeting but really goes to Dita's Dungeon to be tied up with extension cords and repeatedly violated with a bottle of Pert by a shaved midget albino.


THAT IS A SCURRILOUS LIE!!!!!! The albino was not shaved.
 
2012-12-25 11:25:18 AM  

Spanky McStupid: Available for someone to discover, perhaps; but published is another thing.


seems like semantics at that point. I guess its annoying that a newspaper published it, but if anyone who was interested could obtain the information anyway i don't get the outrage. oh no, public information is available to the public!
 
2012-12-25 11:25:21 AM  
The people that should be pissed are the ones that DON'T own guns. Now everone knows that they have to legal way to defend themselves. This is just plain batshiat crazy.
 
2012-12-25 11:25:33 AM  
How about a list of illegal gun owners.
 
2012-12-25 11:25:36 AM  
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
 
2012-12-25 11:25:52 AM  

snuff3r: Noones going to lose their job over this.


But Noone didn't have anything to do with this. Noone has been doing a great job since he joined the paper.
 
2012-12-25 11:25:55 AM  
What, don't all you tough-guy six-shootin' cowboys want everyone to know how big and bad you are with your big bad guns? Pussies. Learn to fist-fight, like a real man.
 
2012-12-25 11:26:13 AM  

snuff3r: NewportBarGuy: They really didn't think this thing through at all. Very, very bad idea. Someone should get fired for that.

I am a gun owner and I support new legislation and common-sense measures to restrict/ban hi-cap mags, certain types of weapons and more enforcement of current laws on the books. This is NOT helping!

Whomever thought that was a good idea should be unemployed.

Do something about the laws that allow the info to be pubic record. The hand-wringing is a bit boring. Noones going to lose their job over this.

Someone's going to publish it eventually. Whether it's a paper or a gun control blogger.


No one is two words... Unless of course you are saying nooooneees, which is how I read that.
 
2012-12-25 11:26:56 AM  
FTA: "How about a map of the editorial staff and publishers of Gannett and Journal News with names and addresses of their families...," wrote commenter George Thompson.

Seems fair to me.
 
2012-12-25 11:27:29 AM  
There's an idea. Treat gun owners like registered pedophiles, and then wonder why they have such a persecution complex.
 
2012-12-25 11:27:46 AM  
So you publish folks who, like myself, have handgun permits. Keep in mind that some states require no such permit for shotguns and rifles.
 
2012-12-25 11:27:58 AM  
The ONLY thing that can stop a bad guy with a newspaper is a good guy with a newspaper.
 
2012-12-25 11:28:08 AM  
Step 1)Have a break in staged Step 2) hide gun Step 3) sue paper

Profit!
 
2012-12-25 11:29:00 AM  
I have been thinking during other recent gun threads that this would be a good idea, for all guns. As things stand, you only need a permit if you're a serious gun nerd, or a SoF rambo. This kind of map is perfect for parents who don't want to buy a house near someone who is likely to send a stray round through the wall.

Why would a pro-gun person be ashamed of their guns?
 
2012-12-25 11:30:16 AM  

Eatin' Queer Fetuses for Jesus: What, don't all you tough-guy six-shootin' cowboys want everyone to know how big and bad you are with your big bad guns? Pussies. Learn to fist-fight, like a real man.


Real world doesn't work that way, also just because you have a gun permit doesn't mean you have a conceal/carry permit which means they can be stolen once people know you are not home.
 
Pav
2012-12-25 11:30:17 AM  
Public records are public! Oh the horror!
 
2012-12-25 11:30:52 AM  

ParaHandy: This kind of map is perfect for parents who don't want to buy a house near someone who is likely to send a stray round through the wall.


Most parents don't share your paralyzing fear of firearms. Seek help.
 
2012-12-25 11:31:10 AM  

tlchwi02: seems like semantics at that point. I guess its annoying that a newspaper published it, but if anyone who was interested could obtain the information anyway i don't get the outrage. oh no, public information is available to the public!


Not at all. I've never known of a burglar who bothered to go downtown to check public records for information like this. But despite what many probably believe, many see the local section of the newspaper. If for no other reason than to see which of their buddies was recently arrested.
.
I can't speak for others, but I know I don't worry about my house getting broken into when I'm home. I'm worried about my house getting broken into when I'm not home.
 
2012-12-25 11:31:13 AM  

tylerdurden217: snuff3r: NewportBarGuy: They really didn't think this thing through at all. Very, very bad idea. Someone should get fired for that.

I am a gun owner and I support new legislation and common-sense measures to restrict/ban hi-cap mags, certain types of weapons and more enforcement of current laws on the books. This is NOT helping!

Whomever thought that was a good idea should be unemployed.

Do something about the laws that allow the info to be pubic record. The hand-wringing is a bit boring. Noones going to lose their job over this.

Someone's going to publish it eventually. Whether it's a paper or a gun control blogger.

No one is two words... Unless of course you are saying nooooneees, which is how I read that.


mjalters.comView Full Size
 
2012-12-25 11:32:48 AM  

ParaHandy: I have been thinking during other recent gun threads that this would be a good idea, for all guns. As things stand, you only need a permit if you're a serious gun nerd, or a SoF rambo. This kind of map is perfect for parents who don't want to buy a house near someone who is likely to send a stray round through the wall.

Why would a pro-gun person be ashamed of their guns?


Exactly! It's stories like this that made the wife and I decide against moving into a golf course neighborhood.

/Never know when one of those serious golfers will go nuts
 
2012-12-25 11:32:48 AM  

coco ebert: Oh, my. Judging from the comments, we have a quite a number of revolutionaries on our hands here.


What purpose does this serve? I've tried to find a positive aspect and found none. They want to create a visual to get across the point of how many guns are out there? Fine, just stick with the numbers. I honestly see no need to list the names and addresses of every pistol permit holder. I understand that this information is available under FOIA, but what possible purpose does it serve to collate it and put it out like that?

It's just going to piss people off more and that is not going to further the debate, nor will it help convince other gun owners to embrace new legislation or increased enforcement of current legislation.

If they want to collect the data, they should also pull all criminal records of those they are targeting and combine that with the data and find out how many people with pistol permits should a) not have been given them or b) who should have them taken away because of a crime after they got it. That? I'm fine with that.

Just putting it out there like they did? Not cool with that at all.
 
2012-12-25 11:32:53 AM  
Why would you do that? I can see publishing names of child rapers and other sexual deviants, but posting who is armed and who isn't? You know someone is going to try to burgle one of those homes that has guns in it while the people are away.
 
2012-12-25 11:33:24 AM  

Hamanu: doglover: Generation_D: I could see this backfiring.

Case an address, doublecheck the list. Not on the gun owners' registry? Easy pickins for a home invasion. They won't shoot back.

That makes no sense, no one's going to shoot anyone when there's no one there.

I would think that the reason people are pissed off is because thieves are going to be targeting gun owner's houses to steal their guns.


Whether you're a gun owner or not, you probably shouldn't think this is a good idea.
 
2012-12-25 11:34:05 AM  

coco ebert: Oh, my. Judging from the comments, we have a quite a number of revolutionaries on our hands here.


I'd say they're more parlor pinks.  Anyone know why the GOP decided to take the color of the Revolution as its own?
 
2012-12-25 11:35:00 AM  

stealthd: That's not how crime works.


Wolf_Blitzer: Or, I can pick an address that *is* listed, wait until no one is home, and then walk out with some firearms that will sell very nicely on the black market.

The vast majority of burglars operate when the home is vacant, something your vaunted guns will do nothing to protect against.


stealthd - Yes. Yes it does work that way. I spent enough time in the public defender's office to be able to tell you that criminals are always looking out for an easy, quick, safe hit.

Wolf_Blitzer - Which is why responsible firearms owners keep their guns in a secure spot. Something which, unfortunately, does not describe enough firearms owners. We had a rash of gun thefts here a few years ago, to the point that our prosecutor went on the record and told the public to lock their stuff up. Fortunately none of the stolen weapons were used locally that I know of. Most of them were recovered when the thieves tried to swap them for a metric butt load of rave drugs.
 
2012-12-25 11:35:22 AM  

NewportBarGuy: coco ebert: Oh, my. Judging from the comments, we have a quite a number of revolutionaries on our hands here.

What purpose does this serve? I've tried to find a positive aspect and found none.


well, maybe people who want guns will realize that it is better to get one and not register it.
that will result in lower fees for the county
the county can make that up by taxing the rich more.
 
2012-12-25 11:36:00 AM  
What's next? Registering knives? Then they will make us register baseball bats. Then maybe our Laser Tag blasters. The next thing you know Hitler/Stalin/Pol Pot is marching down Main Street.

Wake up people. Second Amendment!

/derp
 
2012-12-25 11:36:42 AM  
It's ok. I mean, we know that robbers wouldn't possibly attack a red-blooded American who has a gun at his disposal, right?
 
2012-12-25 11:37:18 AM  
Excellent move!

Now criminals know which houses not to hit. Publishing records gives them a head-start on those who've chosen to be defenseless and victims.

Evolution in Action™
 
2012-12-25 11:37:40 AM  
i1121.photobucket.comView Full Size


So, if the hysterical Gun-Grabbers are right, a map showing gun-related crimes should correlate very closely to the above.

Red areas: High gun crime.
Non-red: Crime Free Zones.

Right?
 
2012-12-25 11:37:48 AM  

Mr. Coffee Nerves: doglover: "How about a map of the editorial staff and publishers of Gannett and Journal News with names and addresses of their families...,"

Please do.

The publisher, the publisher's home alarm security code, the publisher's favorite nine-martini-lunch restaurant, the publisher's country club tee times and the dates he tells his family he's going to a men's fellowship meeting but really goes to Dita's Dungeon to be tied up with extension cords and repeatedly violated with a bottle of Pert by a shaved midget albino.


** fap **
 
2012-12-25 11:39:08 AM  
I've been toying with putting up a sign along the following lines:

Posted - Any forced entry, including no-knock warrnats by law enforcement, will be repelled with deadly force.

I want to see how my mostly SUV driving upper middle class neigbours might react, and whether it will curb people leaving leaflets.
 
2012-12-25 11:39:22 AM  
Keep reloading because I sure as hell ain't finished honking and you need the target practice, grandmom.
 
2012-12-25 11:39:35 AM  
I live in the south. I go under the assumption that I am the only one in my neighborhood who doesn't own a gun.
 
2012-12-25 11:39:58 AM  
Wait, I thought all you Fark gun nuts were responsible gun owners, that kept their guns locked up and secured. You know, unlike Nancy Lanza. If you are telling the truth, noone will be able to break in and steal your guns.

If you have done nothing wrong, you have nothing to fear, gun-owning citizen.
 
2012-12-25 11:40:34 AM  

shanrick: Mr. Coffee Nerves: doglover: "How about a map of the editorial staff and publishers of Gannett and Journal News with names and addresses of their families...,"

Please do.

The publisher, the publisher's home alarm security code, the publisher's favorite nine-martini-lunch restaurant, the publisher's country club tee times and the dates he tells his family he's going to a men's fellowship meeting but really goes to Dita's Dungeon to be tied up with extension cords and repeatedly violated with a bottle of Pert by a shaved midget albino.

[i.imgur.com image 290x290] '
Dita's Dungeon has it all...


"Midget" is not an acceptable term any more. "Fun size" is now the appropriate term according to Stefon.
 
2012-12-25 11:40:36 AM  
I don't see the problem.
 
2012-12-25 11:40:46 AM  
The real outrage is that the GOVERNMENT even has this information in the first place.

You know they can take this map and overlay a map of who has perscriptions for controlled substances or any perscription where medicade covers part of the cost.

What else could they add to make it even more interesting?
 
2012-12-25 11:40:53 AM  

feckingmorons: Newspapers do this sort of thing every five or six years.  Then somebody publishes the names, addresses, phone numbers, license plate numbers, and schools of the kids of all the reporters and editors and they all have to jump through hoops to get phone numbers changed, and if I recall last time I read about this foolishness one of the reporters moved because she was tired of getting rotten fish guts on her porch.


So are you suggesting that they retaliate or merely expressing your complete lack of surprise for the retaliation that has yet to occur?
 
2012-12-25 11:41:45 AM  
I'd be lawyering up pretty damn quick. The government of Richmond, VA got its ass handed to them on a silver platter when they released the same information. The government has your SocSec No., that doesn't mean its open to requests from the public.

This is also one of the many reason's its completely unconstitutional for any government to compile such information. And before the typical farktards go off, "shall not infringe" fark you.
 
2012-12-25 11:41:46 AM  
"The Journal News" is obviously gay, and should be sued!
 
2012-12-25 11:42:02 AM  

Amos Quito: [i1121.photobucket.com image 850x596]

So, if the hysterical Gun-Grabbers are right, a map showing gun-related crimes should correlate very closely to the above.

Red areas: High gun crime.
Non-red: Crime Free Zones.

Right?


Indeed.  Lunatic's aside you'll find that Fairfield County Ct, right next to Westchester is incredibly safe.  Port Chester.... Not so much.   But enjoy your penis surrogate gun toting call of duty jack off fantasy.
 
2012-12-25 11:42:10 AM  

BizarreMan: I live in the south. I go under the assumption that I am the only one in my neighborhood who doesn't own a gun.


I live in a Northern city in a neighborhood that is UP AND COMING so this, too.
 
2012-12-25 11:43:43 AM  
While I'm all for openness in government, why the hell are those public records?
 
2012-12-25 11:43:50 AM  

ParaHandy: I've been toying with putting up a sign along the following lines:

Posted - Any forced entry, including no-knock warrnats by law enforcement, will be repelled with deadly force.

I want to see how my mostly SUV driving upper middle class neigbours might react, and whether it will curb people leaving leaflets.


I'm going to put a sign in my yard that says "Future Sex Offender, I will tie an intruder to my radiator and grape them in the mouth"

Might deter more crime that a "Beware
 
2012-12-25 11:43:56 AM  

utharda: But enjoy your penis surrogate gun toting call of duty jack off fantasy.


I admit, that's bringing it pretty strong.
 
2012-12-25 11:44:26 AM  

Eatin' Queer Fetuses for Jesus: What, don't all you tough-guy six-shootin' cowboys want everyone to know how big and bad you are with your big bad guns? Pussies. Learn to fist-fight, like a real man.


Tell that to a 68 year old disabled man.... or a 5'1" 98 pound woman.

Yeah, just fist-fight. Don't be a pussy.
 
2012-12-25 11:44:32 AM  

ParaHandy: I've been toying with putting up a sign along the following lines:

Posted - Any forced entry, including no-knock warrnats by law enforcement, will be repelled with deadly force.

I want to see how my mostly SUV driving upper middle class neigbours might react, and whether it will curb people leaving leaflets.


I'm going to put a sign in my yard that says "Future Sex Offender, I will tie an intruder to my radiator and grape them in the mouth"

Might deter more crime that a "Beware of owner" sign
 
2012-12-25 11:44:55 AM  

tlchwi02: seems like semantics at that point. I guess its annoying that a newspaper published it, but if anyone who was interested could obtain the information anyway i don't get the outrage. oh no, public information is available to the public!


Exactly.

When have government permits (of any kind) NOT been public information? They should be private Because Guns? Puhleeze. If you want to be anonymous, don't get a permit.

/They outed my sekrit gun!
//The gun nuts really posted info on the reporters kids the last time? Anyone OK with that is a douchbag.
 
2012-12-25 11:44:57 AM  
I own a flintlock, unlimited ability to get bent out of shape over everything, a twitter account and I vote!
 
2012-12-25 11:45:00 AM  

feckingmorons: Newspapers do this sort of thing every five or six years.  Then somebody publishes the names, addresses, phone numbers, license plate numbers, and schools of the kids of all the reporters and editors and they all have to jump through hoops to get phone numbers changed, and if I recall last time I read about this foolishness one of the reporters moved because she was tired of getting rotten fish guts on her porch.


I remember the last time this was trendy with the local 'journalists' and the shock and appall when their tactic was turned on them. Serves the hypocritical douches right, IMO.
 
2012-12-25 11:45:26 AM  

Pav: Public records are public! Oh the horror!


.
The government has your, address, DOB, SocSec number, and Checking account information. Public information, correct?
 
2012-12-25 11:45:32 AM  
I completely support the paper's right to publish publically available info.

I completely suppprt the gun owner's right to publish all the publically available info of any/all people who work at the paper.
 
2012-12-25 11:46:00 AM  
As a fan of everything in the bill of rights, I find this hilarious. As strident as some gun owners can be about their rights, they tend to lose sight of free speech and what bits of information should be public knowledge. After all, when you ban lists of gun owners, only outlaws will have lists of gun owners.

/we're getting carried away with privacy rights at the expense of the public good.
//It takes nerve for a newspaper to do this. They will lose more revenue than they will gain.
 
2012-12-25 11:46:35 AM  
Daniel Perleman would still be alive if he was armed. Think about it. Then sign up for the NRA using my referral ID so I can get GunBuxs good for free apparel at the NRA online store. There's a tom Clancy e-book I want to get.
 
2012-12-25 11:46:42 AM  
Oh thank god!

As a fellow Pro-Rights person, I was thinking that guns had been taking a pretty hard rap lately. But this idiotic act should be enough to stop this whole silly debate.
 
2012-12-25 11:46:59 AM  

Ontos: Eatin' Queer Fetuses for Jesus: What, don't all you tough-guy six-shootin' cowboys want everyone to know how big and bad you are with your big bad guns? Pussies. Learn to fist-fight, like a real man.

Tell that to a 68 year old disabled man.... or a 5'1" 98 pound woman.

Yeah, just fist-fight. Don't be a pussy.


Do you think either one of those defective citizens will be able to hit the broad side of a barn with their .22 anyways?
 
2012-12-25 11:47:41 AM  

Sleeping Monkey: [mlkshk.com image 330x186]


mlkshk.comView Full Size

i1121.photobucket.comView Full Size


What he said!
 
2012-12-25 11:48:46 AM  
Step 1: print a treasure map for burglars, showing where guns are waiting to be stolen??
 
2012-12-25 11:49:32 AM  
The AP tried to do this in Illinois, because we have a BS "FOID" card system. Lisa Madigan tried to force the ISP to release the information of everyone with a FOID. The ISP refused because they didn't want to get sued, and then the General Assembly passed a law protecting FOID information. This was entirely meant to intimidate gun owners.

You hysterical gun-grabbers sound like a lot what people were saying about Muslims after 9/11.
 
2012-12-25 11:49:57 AM  
To everyone involved in either side of the gun control debate, you aren't helping.
 
2012-12-25 11:50:02 AM  

iron_city_ap: I completely support the paper's right to publish publically available info.

I completely suppprt the gun owner's right to publish all the publically available info of any/all people who work at the paper.


Like those sites with lists of family planning clinic doctors that display their successes in strikeout?
 
2012-12-25 11:50:33 AM  

Amos Quito: [i1121.photobucket.com image 850x596]

So, if the hysterical Gun-Grabbers are right, a map showing gun-related crimes should correlate very closely to the above.

Red areas: High gun crime.
Non-red: Crime Free Zones.

Right?


A certain town in Connecticut between Danbury and Waterbury is missing a rather large, red, angry, recent dot.
 
2012-12-25 11:50:56 AM  
I'm not for banning guns, but I also don't recall anyone having a "right" to secrecy when owning an instrument that has only two uses: threatening and killing. If you have a problem with this, then you are not what anyone would consider a responsible gun owner, so all the more reason for you to be identified in a public forum. Let me make it clear: community safety far exceeds your desire to not give people a reason to pass judgment on you. Don't like it, find a different community. Threatening others over this is just going to prove the point.
 
2012-12-25 11:50:59 AM  
This is such a horrible idea. Now people are not going to want to register their guns. I'd like tighter gun control, not more unregistered guns. Also if anybody there is hiding from a psycho ex .... too bad for them I guess. This doesn't accomplish anything other than bad things for everybody.
 
2012-12-25 11:51:12 AM  
Hold the paper responsible if firearms are stolen from the home and used to murder someone. Count the reporter as being liable under federal law for gun crime....10 year prison term....at least.
 
2012-12-25 11:51:13 AM  

david_gaithersburg: I'd be lawyering up pretty damn quick. The government of Richmond, VA got its ass handed to them on a silver platter when they released the same information. The government has your SocSec No., that doesn't mean its open to requests from the public.

This is also one of the many reason's its completely unconstitutional for any government to compile such information. And before the typical farktards go off, "shall not infringe" fark you.



No Fark you!!... Yes what we all need is not less government in our lives but more lawyers... you sir are a typical big government loving liberal democrat idiot!
 
2012-12-25 11:51:20 AM  

Eatin' Queer Fetuses for Jesus: Ontos: Eatin' Queer Fetuses for Jesus: What, don't all you tough-guy six-shootin' cowboys want everyone to know how big and bad you are with your big bad guns? Pussies. Learn to fist-fight, like a real man.

Tell that to a 68 year old disabled man.... or a 5'1" 98 pound woman.

Yeah, just fist-fight. Don't be a pussy.

Do you think either one of those defective citizens will be able to hit the broad side of a barn with their .22 anyways?


Yes. I actually see it on a daily basis.
 
2012-12-25 11:51:46 AM  
The full blown batshiat crazy fear from the wannabe fascist progressives proves that the the second amendment works.
 
2012-12-25 11:51:46 AM  

Amos Quito: [i1121.photobucket.com image 850x596]

So, if the hysterical Gun-Grabbers are right, a map showing gun-related crimes should correlate very closely to the above.

Red areas: High gun crime.
Non-red: Crime Free Zones.

Right?


Or it could correlate with population density. You know, like if you did a crime map of Rock Springs, Wyoming and Manhattan.
 
2012-12-25 11:52:13 AM  

AutumnWind: This is such a horrible idea. Now people are not going to want to register their guns. I'd like tighter gun control, not more unregistered guns. Also if anybody there is hiding from a psycho ex .... too bad for them I guess. This doesn't accomplish anything other than bad things for everybody.


ditch the serial #'s and rasp the inside of the barrels, too.
 
2012-12-25 11:52:41 AM  
This is the kind of thing that makes licensing and registration a bad idea.
The criminals won't attack law abiding gun owners, they'll rob these houses while the owners are out. This paper has willfully aided in the distribution of illegal weapons.
They should be sued for every incident that happens as a result.
The state should also voluntarily comply with federal rules for the FOPA, and destroy those lists immediately.
 
2012-12-25 11:52:50 AM  

Satanic_Hamster: While I'm all for openness in government, why the hell are those public records?


Why the hell is the list of cars I own available?
 
2012-12-25 11:53:17 AM  

david_gaithersburg: Pav: Public records are public! Oh the horror!

.
The government has your, address, DOB, SocSec number, and Checking account information. Public information, correct?


I don't think you understand the concept of public records.
 
2012-12-25 11:53:46 AM  

clane: david_gaithersburg: I'd be lawyering up pretty damn quick. The government of Richmond, VA got its ass handed to them on a silver platter when they released the same information. The government has your SocSec No., that doesn't mean its open to requests from the public.

This is also one of the many reason's its completely unconstitutional for any government to compile such information. And before the typical farktards go off, "shall not infringe" fark you.


No Fark you!!... Yes what we all need is not less government in our lives but more lawyers... you sir are a typical big government loving liberal democrat idiot!


^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
The full blown batshiat crazy fear from the wannabe fascist progressives proves that the the second amendment works.
 
2012-12-25 11:54:21 AM  

RexTalionis: I am under no delusion that I have an expectation of privacy in my public records.


It's not just the expectation of privacy. It's also the ease of access to that information.

I believe one of the arguments in favor of ANPR devices is basically what you say, isn't it? That you have no expectation of privacy in your public records.  So I guess that makes it okay for the police or newspaper to put up ANPR devices all over town and then track and maybe broadcasting every trip you or anyone in town makes?

(Hell, maybe you and I should do that as a private company, and gather information on consumer shopping trips, duration, frequency, destinations per neighborhood -- I bet there's a zillion VC bucks in doing that.)

Or here:

When GPS Tracking Violates Privacy Rights

For the right to personal privacy to survive in America in this digital age, courts must be meticulous in applying longstanding privacy protections to new technology. This did not happen in an unfortunate

The case concerned a drug conviction based on information about the defendant's location that the government acquired from a cellphone he carried on a three-day road trip in a motor home. The data, apparently obtained with a phone company's help, led to a warrantless search of the motor home and the seizure of incriminating evidence.

The majority opinion held that there was no constitutional violation of the defendant's rights because he "did not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in the data given off by his voluntarily procured pay-as-you-go cellphone."
 
2012-12-25 11:55:03 AM  

BizarreMan: I live in the south. I go under the assumption that I am the only one in my neighborhood who doesn't own a gun.


This.

But I live in Utah.

Wait a second.....guns cause crime. I must be dead.
 
2012-12-25 11:55:24 AM  
3.bp.blogspot.comView Full Size



The question is not whether you can own a gun...because you can.

What you can't do is own ANY gun you want. A gun is a commercial product. It can be regulated, controlled, recalled, restricted...just like any other commercial product.

I for one am not going to sit here and listen to you badMOUTH sensible gun restrictions. Gentlemen!
 
2012-12-25 11:55:47 AM  

Cuchulane: david_gaithersburg: Pav: Public records are public! Oh the horror!

.
The government has your, address, DOB, SocSec number, and Checking account information. Public information, correct?

I don't think you understand the concept of public records.


.
I don't think I know you fail at reading comprehension.
 
2012-12-25 11:55:58 AM  
Editorial staff meeting beforehand:

"Dammit, Lois, there has to be a way to make another dime off of those dead kids, and I want you ON IT!"
 
2012-12-25 11:56:32 AM  
I think this topic is ripe of a little vigilante stuff too. I'd loveto be rich enough to travel around the country as a sniper and take out gun nuts who threaten people, gang bangers, cops who get off with murder on the job, and other dangerous elements. Live by the gun, die by the gone.

I also believe no-knock warrants should be outlawed, or at minimum, I should have the right to shoot first and ask questions later.
 
2012-12-25 11:57:42 AM  
Wow, the biases here are really on display. Nobody has the right to know who owns what - including cars and guns. This paper hates gun owners so much they thought this would be OK. Enjoy the payback, biatches.
 
2012-12-25 11:57:49 AM  

Hamanu: I would think that the reason people are pissed off is because thieves are going to be targeting gun owner's houses to steal their guns.


Are they going to pick the lock on the gun safe, or carry the whole thing away on their backs??
 
2012-12-25 11:58:19 AM  
Hey mods, can we get some trigger warnings on this article? Was just video skyping with BongBoy69 and he just bit the tip of his own tongue off after reading it. He totally went off half-cocked and started screaming racial epithets about Obama and how kickstarter will be sorry they never allowed his zombie mmporg to succeed.
 
2012-12-25 11:58:40 AM  
Class action lawsuit.
 
2012-12-25 11:59:24 AM  

halB: Oh thank god!

As a fellow Pro-Rights person, I was thinking that guns had been taking a pretty hard rap lately. But this idiotic act should be enough to stop this whole silly debate.


A newspaper doing something many other newspapers have done many times before is going to knock the mass murder of twenty 5 and 6 year olds out of the news? Uh, no.

As others have pointed out, when newspapers have done this previously, sometimes "fellow Pro-Rights persons" have published information on those reporters kids. This sort of thing generally doesn't work out well for the gun rights crowd.

Because your brain may not be wired like the rest of us, I'll explain this clearly. Publishing information already in the public record does not even begin to begin to begin to equate to the mass murder of twenty little kids.
 
2012-12-25 12:00:07 PM  

Amos Quito: [i1121.photobucket.com image 850x596]

So, if the hysterical Gun-Grabbers are right, a map showing gun-related crimes should correlate very closely to the above.


The dots on Manhattan are probably bodyguards for liberal celebrities. You know, the ones like Michael Moore that have armed guards but then go on TV and say poor people should not have guns.
 
2012-12-25 12:00:12 PM  

david_gaithersburg: Cuchulane: david_gaithersburg: Pav: Public records are public! Oh the horror!

.
The government has your, address, DOB, SocSec number, and Checking account information. Public information, correct?

I don't think you understand the concept of public records.

.
I don't think I know you fail at reading comprehension.


So what was your point then? Three out of the four things you listed are information held by the government, but are not public records. Your address is a public record if you have registered a deed. What did I miss?
 
2012-12-25 12:03:30 PM  

Cuchulane: david_gaithersburg: Cuchulane: david_gaithersburg: Pav: Public records are public! Oh the horror!

.
The government has your, address, DOB, SocSec number, and Checking account information. Public information, correct?

I don't think you understand the concept of public records.

.
I don't think I know you fail at reading comprehension.

So what was your point then? Three out of the four things you listed are information held by the government, but are not public records. Your address is a public record if you have registered a deed. What did I miss?


.
Oh good lord. My point is based on your logic three of those four things should also be available to the public.
 
2012-12-25 12:04:59 PM  

Dear Jerk: As a fan of everything in the bill of rights, I find this hilarious. As strident as some gun owners can be about their rights, they tend to lose sight of free speech and what bits of information should be public knowledge. After all, when you ban lists of gun owners, only outlaws will have lists of gun owners.

/we're getting carried away with privacy rights at the expense of the public good.
//It takes nerve for a newspaper to do this. They will lose more revenue than they will gain.


Several states require the destruction of all records on gun ownership after 7 days or so of the records being created. They also ban the creation of records in certain circumstances. For a good reason why, watch Red Dawn. Or this, this right here.
 
2012-12-25 12:06:41 PM  
"We are decent, caring people who have an overwhelming hatred of guns. By publishing this information, we put your family at risk of having your home burglarized, maybe your spouse gets killed, maybe your children are raped . . . well dumbass, you should not keep guns in your house! Will your guns protect you now? Tough shiat for you, Mr. Gun-lover. If only you had thought of the children!" -- The No Guns For A Better America Coalition of Non-Violence and Happiness
 
2012-12-25 12:06:58 PM  
I've lived my life by very few rules, but one of them has always been "Don't piss off crazy people who own guns". I'm betting at least two of the people on that list are certifiable. Possibly more.

//At least they wont have to go far for their next story.
 
2012-12-25 12:07:17 PM  

Anonymocoso: BizarreMan: I live in the south. I go under the assumption that I am the only one in my neighborhood who doesn't own a gun.

This.

But I live in Utah.

Wait a second.....guns cause crime. I must be dead.


You live in Utah. You only wish you were dead.
 
2012-12-25 12:07:32 PM  

david_gaithersburg: Pav: Public records are public! Oh the horror!

.
The government has your, address, DOB, SocSec number, and Checking account information. Public information, correct?


While we are at it, add income tax records to the list!
 
2012-12-25 12:08:41 PM  

RandomRandom: halB: Oh thank god!

As a fellow Pro-Rights person, I was thinking that guns had been taking a pretty hard rap lately. But this idiotic act should be enough to stop this whole silly debate.

A newspaper doing something many other newspapers have done many times before is going to knock the mass murder of twenty 5 and 6 year olds out of the news? Uh, no.

As others have pointed out, when newspapers have done this previously, sometimes "fellow Pro-Rights persons" have published information on those reporters kids. This sort of thing generally doesn't work out well for the gun rights crowd.

Because your brain may not be wired like the rest of us, I'll explain this clearly. Publishing information already in the public record does not even begin to begin to begin to equate to the mass murder of twenty little kids.


So when the thieves break into 20 houses, and murder 20 children sleeping inside, what about then?

Think very carefully of your answer, for I am setting a trap for your "logic."
 
2012-12-25 12:08:51 PM  

fredklein: Hamanu: I would think that the reason people are pissed off is because thieves are going to be targeting gun owner's houses to steal their guns.

Are they going to pick the lock on the gun safe, or carry the whole thing away on their backs??


No gun safe is impenetrable. At most, a safe deters a thief looking for a quick smash and grab. A thief who has access to my house and knows I am not due home could probably cut his way into my safe in under a half an hour, using the tools in my garage. The safe merely lets him know where all my guns are.
 
2012-12-25 12:08:52 PM  

Amos Quito: [i1121.photobucket.com image 850x596]

So, if the hysterical Gun-Grabbers are right, a map showing gun-related crimes should correlate very closely to the above.

Red areas: High gun crime.
Non-red: Crime Free Zones.

Right?


Or perhaps there is high gun ownership in those high crime areas because people want to be able to defend themselves. Which came first, the high crime rate or the high gun ownership rate?
 
2012-12-25 12:08:56 PM  
Ooh. Depending on how the politics flies, this could have some far reaching consequences.

Oh, and if I were a smart thief, I would be doing my homework on which one of those residences aren't paying attention.
 
2012-12-25 12:09:23 PM  
I dont have a problem with this. Its good to know where the paranoid loonies are so that you can avoid them and their houses. They may not want the info out there but its much like the sex offender registries. I am sure those folks dont like their names out there either, but lets face it, the info is not being put out there for their benefit. It is for all the sane folks that want to avoid them.
 
2012-12-25 12:11:41 PM  

robnelle: Follow up article:

Mass shooting at The Journal News offices by disgruntled gun owner.


Highly unlikely. More likely- "Several area homes robbed- targeted for weapons and ammunition".

I don't agree with publishing the names contained in public records. There is a lot of information that we are required to provide as a matter of record, but it is not necessary for this information to be made public other than by necessity- such as the transfer of property that may be contested or information that may affect the public's well being-- otherwise, the information need be deemed as need to know.

If i need to know whether my immediate neighbors or my child's friends have guns in the home- that info should be made available out of concern for my child's possible access to a weapon. If I'm just out to expose who possesses guns, I better have a compelling reason to publish specific names and addresses as opposesd to generalized info like gun types and numbers.
 
2012-12-25 12:12:19 PM  
Oh, gawd. I despise the gun worshiping mentality as much as the next gun grabbing libby lib derpty doo but this is bullsh*t.

That's it, America. You've jumped the shark. Perhaps it's time for the US to be annexed by Canada so your country can be run by adults again.

Sickening.
 
2012-12-25 12:12:55 PM  

italie: I've lived my life by very few rules, but one of them has always been "Don't piss off crazy people who own guns". I'm betting at least two of the people on that list are certifiable. Possibly more.

//At least they wont have to go far for their next story.



This is what I think is kind of amusing (in a dark way) about the NRA's "registry of mentally ill" - such a thing, well administered and cautious in defining 'too ill to own a gun', would likely disqualify many of their members.
 
2012-12-25 12:13:06 PM  
Hey, lets next publish the name and address of all the women out there who have had an Abortion.

While there are about 30,000 gun related deaths in America each year. A number that has been decreasing by the way. There are about 1,300,000 abortions in America each year.

And while everyone should be outraged and saddened by the killing of the Sandy Hook school children we should also be saddened and outraged by the killing of babies...

philipbrocoum.comView Full Size
 
2012-12-25 12:13:28 PM  

BizarreMan: Anonymocoso: BizarreMan: I live in the south. I go under the assumption that I am the only one in my neighborhood who doesn't own a gun.


You live in Utah. You only wish you were dead.


Usually, yes, but not today.

/Foot of fresh powder, FTW
 
2012-12-25 12:14:19 PM  
Oh yes, I forgot, the people at ABC News are fricken idiots! Just sayin.
 
2012-12-25 12:14:30 PM  

Ima4nic8or: I dont have a problem with this. Its good to know where the paranoid loonies are so that you can avoid them and their houses. They may not want the info out there but its much like the sex offender registries. I am sure those folks dont like their names out there either, but lets face it, the info is not being put out there for their benefit. It is for all the sane folks that want to avoid them.


Well this is about what is legal to do. It is legal to own a gun, if you go through the proper channels. It is legal to print their names. It is also legal to get an abortion, if you go through the proper channels. Perhaps the names of anyone that has had an abortion should be made public, so men will know which women are less likely to attempt the pregnancy trap?
 
2012-12-25 12:14:37 PM  
I'd be more concerned if I didn't own a gun! When the criminal is checking to see who's naughty or nice, I'm sure they would prefer to hit a house without a gun in it.
 
2012-12-25 12:15:18 PM  

Ima4nic8or: I dont have a problem with this. Its good to know where the paranoid loonies are so that you can avoid them and their houses. They may not want the info out there but its much like the sex offender registries. I am sure those folks dont like their names out there either, but lets face it, the info is not being put out there for their benefit. It is for all the sane folks that want to avoid them.


Not every gun owner is an irresponsible lunatic and claiming that is the case is not helping the cause.

If you lump in the responsible gun owners who are willing to work on fixing things in with the sh*theads you will only ostracize them.

Why the f*ck can't you people THINK and work TOGETHER to solve your issues?! You're tearing the damned country apart!
 
2012-12-25 12:15:43 PM  

david_gaithersburg: Cuchulane: david_gaithersburg: Cuchulane: david_gaithersburg: Pav: Public records are public! Oh the horror!

.
The government has your, address, DOB, SocSec number, and Checking account information. Public information, correct?

I don't think you understand the concept of public records.

.
I don't think I know you fail at reading comprehension.

So what was your point then? Three out of the four things you listed are information held by the government, but are not public records. Your address is a public record if you have registered a deed. What did I miss?

.
Oh good lord. My point is based on your logic three of those four things should also be available to the public.


Then your point is horribly made and senseless.
Pav made the point that the newspaper published records that are available to the public, so there wasn't much to do or say about it. In applying for a license in that jurisdiction you acknowledge that your license and address information will be made available to the public.
You seem to be stating the fallacy that anyone who agrees that public information can be published must also agree that any information held by the government should be made public. So either you are not able to understand the distinction, or are making an invalid and senseless argument for some silly reason.
 
2012-12-25 12:16:03 PM  

Brick-House: There are about 1,300,000 abortions in America each year.


How much is that saving in welfare costs?
 
2012-12-25 12:16:37 PM  
Offtopic, but relevant to my interests:

Bit'O'Gristle: ...burgle...


Thank you. Not every word needs to be -ized
 
2012-12-25 12:17:04 PM  
Why would anyone register a gun after this?
 
2012-12-25 12:17:24 PM  

Brick-House: And while everyone should be outraged and saddened by the killing of the Sandy Hook school children we should also be saddened and outraged by the killing of babies...


Uh-huh.

Funny, when Herod got jealous that a new King of the Jews had been born, he planned to kill all male children under two years old in Bethlehem to ensure the death of that baby. God sent a vision to Joseph, telling him to flee to Egypt with the newborn Jesus in order to keep Jesus safe, then sat idly by while Herod ordered his soldiers to kill every farkin' baby in the entire city.

Merry Christmas! See you next Passover!
 
2012-12-25 12:17:55 PM  

ParaHandy: Satanic_Hamster: While I'm all for openness in government, why the hell are those public records?

Why the hell is the list of cars I own available?


I want a list of where all the young nubile children live as well as their school schedules. It's public records, after all.
 
2012-12-25 12:18:18 PM  
Gun nuts, ready to violently overthrow the government at a moments notice, piss their pants when a local newspaper points at them.. And here I thought they've been claiming to be so brave and prepared for opposition.
 
2012-12-25 12:18:55 PM  

s2s2s2: Brick-House: There are about 1,300,000 abortions in America each year.

How much is that saving in welfare costs?


That's racest
 
2012-12-25 12:19:24 PM  
Second Amendment, meet First Amendment.
 
2012-12-25 12:19:55 PM  

Mentalpatient87: Gun nuts, ready to violently overthrow the government at a moments notice, piss their pants when a local newspaper points at them.. And here I thought they've been claiming to be so brave and prepared for opposition.


So says the mental patient.
 
2012-12-25 12:19:56 PM  

Lenny_da_Hog: then sat idly by


That's some good, inadvertent accuracy. I guess you believe one man CAN stop an army.
 
2012-12-25 12:20:18 PM  

halB: So when the thieves break into 20 houses, and murder 20 children sleeping inside, what about then?

Think very carefully of your answer, for I am setting a trap for your "logic."


You believe thieves are A. smart enough or - B. stupid enough to break into homes with known gun ownership?

The answer is C. Home burglars are generally junkies. Junkies don't read the newspaper. The answer is C because this will have no impact.
 
2012-12-25 12:20:36 PM  

amquelbettamin: That's racest


At least it's not racest to the bottom.
 
2012-12-25 12:20:45 PM  
Oh oh oh. I want a list published of where every politician and cop lives.
 
2012-12-25 12:21:21 PM  

tylerdurden217: What's next? Registering knives? Then they will make us register baseball bats. Then maybe our Laser Tag blasters. The next thing you know Hitler/Stalin/Pol Pot is marching down Main Street.

Wake up people. Second Amendment!

/derp


England has done exactly that. It's illegal for a person under 18 to own a knife longer than 3 1/4" and all knives longer have to be registered. They have also recently banned cricket bats in public.
England, as well as Canada also doesn't have this one document that we treasure so greatly called a constitution. The only civil rights they have are the ones the government deems they are worthy of. But they're groomed from birth to accept that the government is there to spoonfeed you everything you need, so they just accept it.
England has 1/5 the the population of the US and their Violent crime is 4x ours. Yeah, the anti gunners spout the gun stats, but completely leave out that little tidbit.
 
2012-12-25 12:22:36 PM  

s2s2s2: Lenny_da_Hog: then sat idly by

That's some good, inadvertent accuracy. I guess you believe one man CAN stop an army.


Do you remember sentence diagrams?
 
2012-12-25 12:22:48 PM  

Cuchulane: Amos Quito: [i1121.photobucket.com image 850x596]

So, if the hysterical Gun-Grabbers are right, a map showing gun-related crimes should correlate very closely to the above.

Red areas: High gun crime.
Non-red: Crime Free Zones.

Right?

Or it could correlate with population density. You know, like if you did a crime map of Rock Springs, Wyoming and Manhattan.


I think it is safe to say that the folks of Rock Springs own far more guns per capita, AND that the crime rate in Rock Springs is far lower - per 100,000 population.

But let's ban guns anyhow, mmmmkay?
 
2012-12-25 12:23:50 PM  
I would have no problem having my name published in the paper as owning guns because:

1. My guns are locked in safes. If someone breaks in my house, they can get the television, the inexpensive jewelry, the silver, etc., but my guns will never end up in the hands of criminals. My guns are also safe from my son and daughter's friends who might get curious when visiting. All gun owners should be responsible and accountable for keeping their guns away from thieves and children. While I am sorry that the whacko in CT's mother was killed, she should have been more responsible with her guns.

2. The handgun I keep loaded and ready to use is in a separate lockbox that i can access in about 3 seconds from my bed. The lockbox also holds the buckshot for the shotgun under the bed - my weapon of choice for home protection if I have time to load it. Will I ever need to use it? Highly probable that I will not. But the number of home invasions where I live continue to increase, and no one will every rape or kill anyone in my household. We have an excellent police force where I live, but they are very good at solving crimes, not preventing them.

3. Any burglar with any sense (a bit of an oxymoron) would look up their potential victims on the map published by the paper. I cannot imagine they would burglarize a house of a homeowner.

4. I would hope the parents who don't want their kids playing in houses with guns would also see the list. If they don't trust their kids to mind my rules, I don't either.

If I was one not on the list, I would be a bit upset that the paper identified my house as an unprotected house.
 
2012-12-25 12:23:59 PM  

RandomRandom: halB: So when the thieves break into 20 houses, and murder 20 children sleeping inside, what about then?

Think very carefully of your answer, for I am setting a trap for your "logic."

You believe thieves are A. smart enough or - B. stupid enough to break into homes with known gun ownership?

The answer is C. Home burglars are generally junkies. Junkies don't read the newspaper. The answer is C because this will have no impact.



Way to completely sidestep the question I put forth to you. I'm surprised you didn't just scream "NO! MINE" like a toddler. Enjoy your permanent infancy. I look forward to my paycheck supporting your welfare check.
 
2012-12-25 12:24:03 PM  

s2s2s2: Brick-House: There are about 1,300,000 abortions in America each year.

How much is that saving in welfare costs?


Not the point... Publish a interactive map with the name and address of all the women who have had an Abortion and watch the left explode with outrage for invading these poor innocent women's privacy. But it is just fine and dandy to invade the privacy of law abiding citizens for exercising their second amendment right.
 
2012-12-25 12:24:08 PM  

s2s2s2: Brick-House: There are about 1,300,000 abortions in America each year.

How much is that saving in welfare costs?



I know you jest, but Texas, which has recently attempted to prevent Planned Parenthood from getting any money (even the clinics that don't perform abortions), realized that the loss of family planning clinics would result is an extra $273 million a year in taxpayer costs due to unplanned birth care.
 
2012-12-25 12:24:33 PM  
They should make the gun owners in that area wear yellow stars, so the decent folk can easily identify them.
 
2012-12-25 12:25:25 PM  

s2s2s2: amquelbettamin: That's racest

At least it's not racest to the bottom.


Racest to the bottom

artrocker.tvView Full Size
 
2012-12-25 12:27:02 PM  
This is an outrage! The 2nd Amendment clearly states that all American citizens have the right to stockpile a secret arsenal. In fact, it used to be against the law to admit to owning a gun. How are we going to surprise the Russians when they invade if they know who has the guns?

It's common sense, Sheeple!
 
2012-12-25 12:27:14 PM  

computerguyUT: England has done exactly that. It's illegal for a person under 18 to own a knife longer than 3 1/4" and all knives longer have to be registered. They


does that go for culinary knives, too?
 
2012-12-25 12:28:12 PM  

Ima4nic8or: I dont have a problem with this. Its good to know where the paranoid loonies are so that you can avoid them and their houses. They may not want the info out there but its much like the sex offender registries. I am sure those folks dont like their names out there either, but lets face it, the info is not being put out there for their benefit. It is for all the sane folks that want to avoid them.


We're not talking about a sexual offender's list (although they probably need to redefine what is a sexual crime before ostracising your neighbor for being convicted after peeing off the porch during the Super Bowl).

You'll find entire communities of gunowners that have hunted since childhood and have yet to commit a crime with a rifle. Maybe we need to have a special plate for cars with drivers convicted of speeding and wreckless driving as there are far more auto related deaths than from guns.

Do I need a list of car owners so i know who i should and should not associate with?
 
2012-12-25 12:28:25 PM  
stupid, but after all it is public information
 
2012-12-25 12:28:56 PM  

s2s2s2: Brick-House: There are about 1,300,000 abortions in America each year.

How much is that saving in welfare costs?


i45.tinypic.comView Full Size
 
2012-12-25 12:31:18 PM  

RandomRandom: tlchwi02: seems like semantics at that point. I guess its annoying that a newspaper published it, but if anyone who was interested could obtain the information anyway i don't get the outrage. oh no, public information is available to the public!

Exactly.

When have government permits (of any kind) NOT been public information? They should be private Because Guns? Puhleeze. If you want to be anonymous, don't get a permit.

/They outed my sekrit gun!
//The gun nuts really posted info on the reporters kids the last time? Anyone OK with that is a douchbag.


Why are they douches? It's public information.
 
2012-12-25 12:31:28 PM  
Public records are public. The freedom to access public information and the right to government transparency are even more important to democracy than the freedom to own a firearm.
 
2012-12-25 12:32:51 PM  

s2s2s2: Brick-House: There are about 1,300,000 abortions in America each year.

How much is that saving in welfare costs?


Seriously...as a conservative I say Fark it...scoop out your womb for 500$ instead of letting us taxpayers support it for the rest of it and its offsprings life....generational welfare and all that.

500 up front or hundreds of thousands over its lifespan.
 
2012-12-25 12:33:17 PM  

Satanic_Hamster: Oh oh oh. I want a list published of where every politician and cop lives.


and where all the homosexual party cruises are, too, they always have the nicest things!
 
2012-12-25 12:33:40 PM  
I love all the people with GEDs in law from NRA U who think that they have a right to sue over this, as if the newspaper is strictly liable for anything that happens to anyone they report on. Don't like it? Stick to hunting rifles that don't need to be registered; you can still clutch it in your cold dead hands when you're murdered by a government drone during the great defense of the second amendment.
 
2012-12-25 12:34:07 PM  
Good for the paper. Now people no what local nut jobs to stay away from.
 
2012-12-25 12:34:25 PM  

Amos Quito: Cuchulane: Amos Quito: [i1121.photobucket.com image 850x596]

So, if the hysterical Gun-Grabbers are right, a map showing gun-related crimes should correlate very closely to the above.

Red areas: High gun crime.
Non-red: Crime Free Zones.

Right?

Or it could correlate with population density. You know, like if you did a crime map of Rock Springs, Wyoming and Manhattan.

I think it is safe to say that the folks of Rock Springs own far more guns per capita, AND that the crime rate in Rock Springs is far lower - per 100,000 population.

But let's ban guns anyhow, mmmmkay?


See, this is the absurdist approach the NRA has pushed as a defense and is being echoed thoughtlessly, that any mention of regulating firearms = complete gun ban. But the NRA is completely on the wrong side of the argument with the general public, and by a big margin. Every product available to the public is regulated for public safety. This all or nothing gambit has not, and will not, continue to fool the public and only cements in the "gun nut" stereotype.
 
2012-12-25 12:35:42 PM  

Satanic_Hamster: ParaHandy: Satanic_Hamster: While I'm all for openness in government, why the hell are those public records?

Why the hell is the list of cars I own available?

I want a list of where all the young nubile children live as well as their school schedules. It's public records, after all.


In NJ they wanted to put ahighly visible sticker on cars with first time drivers in it.....the left complained because that would let pedophiles target cars with teens in it.....instead of following that highly visible long bright yellow thing that drops off and picks up kids to and from school.
 
2012-12-25 12:37:08 PM  

MerelyFoolish: I would have no problem having my name published in the paper as owning guns because:

1. My guns are locked in safes. If someone breaks in my house, they can get the television, the inexpensive jewelry, the silver, etc., but my guns will never end up in the hands of criminals. My guns are also safe from my son and daughter's friends who might get curious when visiting. All gun owners should be responsible and accountable for keeping their guns away from thieves and children. While I am sorry that the whacko in CT's mother was killed, she should have been more responsible with her guns.

2. The handgun I keep loaded and ready to use is in a separate lockbox that i can access in about 3 seconds from my bed. The lockbox also holds the buckshot for the shotgun under the bed - my weapon of choice for home protection if I have time to load it. Will I ever need to use it? Highly probable that I will not. But the number of home invasions where I live continue to increase, and no one will every rape or kill anyone in my household. We have an excellent police force where I live, but they are very good at solving crimes, not preventing them.

3. Any burglar with any sense (a bit of an oxymoron) would look up their potential victims on the map published by the paper. I cannot imagine they would burglarize a house of a homeowner.

4. I would hope the parents who don't want their kids playing in houses with guns would also see the list. If they don't trust their kids to mind my rules, I don't either.

If I was one not on the list, I would be a bit upset that the paper identified my house as an unprotected house.


I'm right there with you as far as securing my firearms with one notable exception. If someone wants to get at my gun safe while I am not here they are going to have to get by one *very* energetic German Shepherd who takes his roll as "security" very, very seriously.

/the Basset Hound and the Husky are just for show.
 
2012-12-25 12:37:19 PM  
This isn't about guns. This is about taking a volatile situation, wherein people are very upset and angry about something, and these newspeople then "make a list" of the people who are at best obliquely associated with the cause of the anger and upset.

This is instigation to cause trouble. It is as simple as that.


/where's those maps with the bullseyes on it?
 
2012-12-25 12:37:47 PM  

clowncar on fire: robnelle: Follow up article:

Mass shooting at The Journal News offices by disgruntled gun owner.

Highly unlikely. More likely- "Several area homes robbed- targeted for weapons and ammunition".



A gun owner (or family member of gun owner) mowing down 20 kids for the hell of it is pretty unlikely too.....but it happened.

A gun owner lighting up a theater is unlikely...but it happened.
A gun owner picking off innocent people at a mall is unlikely ...but it happened.
It's not so much that they are gun owners. The vast majority of gun owners would never do something like this- I agree with you on this. But, like in any group, you will have a small percentage of them that are mentally unstable. When dealing with the mentally unsound, it really doesn't matter how likely a given scenario is. It is unlikely to you and I because we are sane. It is impossible to predict the actions of a mentally compromised person- and those actions can be deadly when that person has access to a weapon-gun, knife or whatever at their disposal. I agree that a shooting is generally unlikely but given the sorry state of mental health care in this country and the general high level of emotions on both sides of this argument, it's not as unlikely as it should be.
 
2012-12-25 12:37:52 PM  

muck4doo: They should make the gun owners in that area wear yellow stars, so the decent folk can easily identify them.


Link
 
2012-12-25 12:37:54 PM  
i1121.photobucket.comView Full Size


NY Murder Map - 2010

i1121.photobucket.comView Full Size


New York legal gun map, 2012

Anyone notice any correlation here?

Any?
 
2012-12-25 12:38:09 PM  
gun ownership should be mandatory.
 
2012-12-25 12:38:39 PM  

MNMarkPW: I love all the people with GEDs in law from NRA U who think that they have a right to sue over this, as if the newspaper is strictly liable for anything that happens to anyone they report on. Don't like it? Stick to hunting rifles that don't need to be registered; you can still clutch it in your cold dead hands when you're murdered by a government drone during the great defense of the second amendment.


I guess those neighbors kids in the 1 month to 7 year old range are just collateral damage.

If there is anyone who fantasizes about the death of other humans it is progressices/liberals/democrats.
 
2012-12-25 12:38:47 PM  

MNMarkPW: I love all the people with GEDs in law from NRA U who think that they have a right to sue over this, as if the newspaper is strictly liable for anything that happens to anyone they report on. Don't like it? Stick to hunting rifles that don't need to be registered; you can still clutch it in your cold dead hands when you're murdered by a government drone during the great defense of the second amendment.


Some of us have real law degrees, and therefore we know that the malicious publication of public information is a TORT that CAN be sued for. In many places it is also a crime to maliciously publish information for no reason other than harassment. You know all those kids on 4chan who publish people's addresses, names, and numbers? That is DEFINITELY a tort, and most likely a crime in their state.

The newspaper will get away with it though, because they will pull some justification out of their ass.
 
2012-12-25 12:39:22 PM  

Amos Quito: [i1121.photobucket.com image 606x452]

NY Murder Map - 2010

[i1121.photobucket.com image 850x596]

New York legal gun map, 2012

Anyone notice any correlation here?

Any?


People north of the Bronx have better aim?
 
2012-12-25 12:40:14 PM  
This version of the article contains the the following:

"Editor's note: Journal News reporter Dwight R. Worley owns a Smith & Wesson 686 .357 Magnum and has had a residence permit in New York City for that weapon since February 2011."

Dwight R. Worley is the reporter who wrote the story. These gun owners were outed by one of their own.
 
2012-12-25 12:41:52 PM  

Rich Cream: This isn't about guns. This is about taking a volatile situation, wherein people are very upset and angry about something, and these newspeople then "make a list" of the people who are at best obliquely associated with the cause of the anger and upset.

This is instigation to cause trouble. It is as simple as that.


Irresponsible use of First Amendment in response to irresponsible use of Second Amendment.
 
2012-12-25 12:42:20 PM  

muck4doo: They should make the gun owners in that area wear yellow stars, so the decent folk can easily identify them.


static.bbc.co.ukView Full Size


The maps will come in handy when it comes time to round-up the undesirables.
 
2012-12-25 12:42:40 PM  
This is a good thing.

They should all be treated like registered sex offenders.
 
2012-12-25 12:43:00 PM  
Wow, this is amazing. Some people wonder why gun owners are against registration. This is why. These are not criminals. OK, it's public record there. But should it be? I get that people are deeply upset about the horrible tragedy in Connecticut. And rightly so. Publishing a list of legal gun owners that have done nothing illegal at all is sensationalist journalism, pure and simple. It does nothing to lead us to any kind of irrational debate on the issues.
 
2012-12-25 12:43:03 PM  

PopularFront: This version of the article contains the the following:

"Editor's note: Journal News reporter Dwight R. Worley owns a Smith & Wesson 686 .357 Magnum and has had a residence permit in New York City for that weapon since February 2011."

Dwight R. Worley is the reporter who wrote the story. These gun owners were outed by one of their own.


Did he put his home address in the article?
 
2012-12-25 12:43:16 PM  
People need to stop thinking it's 1960. Any information that is publicly available is going to end up categorized in some database somewhere that is easily accessible.

You shouldn't get mad at Zillow for compiling public information.
You shouldn't get mad at Google maps for compiling public information.
You shouldn't get mad at the endless 'Find Anyone' websites for compiling public information.
etc...etc...

If it's public, it's public.
If we have the technology (and we do) public information is, and will continue to be, easily accessible.

If you have a problem with the newspaper publishing this information you should take it up with the laws that make this information a matter of public record.
 
2012-12-25 12:43:38 PM  
utah dude
gun ownership should be mandatory.

Since we don't have a standing army. Oh, wait.
 
2012-12-25 12:43:58 PM  

Amos Quito: [i1121.photobucket.com image 606x452]

NY Murder Map - 2010

[i1121.photobucket.com image 850x596]

New York legal gun map, 2012

Anyone notice any correlation here?

Any?


correlation does not imply causation


//No real point, just like saying that
 
2012-12-25 12:45:32 PM  

robnelle: clowncar on fire: robnelle: Follow up article:

Mass shooting at The Journal News offices by disgruntled gun owner.

Highly unlikely. More likely- "Several area homes robbed- targeted for weapons and ammunition".

A gun owner (or family member of gun owner) mowing down 20 kids for the hell of it is pretty unlikely too.....but it happened.

A gun owner lighting up a theater is unlikely...but it happened.
A gun owner picking off innocent people at a mall is unlikely ...but it happened.
It's not so much that they are gun owners. The vast majority of gun owners would never do something like this- I agree with you on this. But, like in any group, you will have a small percentage of them that are mentally unstable. When dealing with the mentally unsound, it really doesn't matter how likely a given scenario is. It is unlikely to you and I because we are sane. It is impossible to predict the actions of a mentally compromised person- and those actions can be deadly when that person has access to a weapon-gun, knife or whatever at their disposal. I agree that a shooting is generally unlikely but given the sorry state of mental health care in this country and the general high level of emotions on both sides of this argument, it's not as unlikely as it should be.



And therein lies the problem. Even a much better mental health care system would not have a perfect record as mental illness can be a hard thing to spot. Such individuals and their families are often in denial about it and keep it under the rug - or simply don't realize how ill their family member might be and thus seek inadequate treatment. The sickest of them all are usually very quiet.

Regulating weapons and ammo is more practical. The 2nd amendment may give you the right to bear arms, but it doesn't say a thing about ammo. Tax $20 a bullet and implement a national buyback program for weapons, ammo and accessories. I bet a lot of families that are unhappy with a certain member's gun collection would gladly start bringing them in. In a generation, the number of usable weapons floating around out there would decline dramatically.
 
2012-12-25 12:46:23 PM  

HMS_Blinkin: Public records are public. The freedom to access public information and the right to government transparency are even more important to democracy than the freedom to own a firearm.


The government and press shouldn't be allowed to rat on people in an attempt to have them tried in the public eye, outside of court, for the crime of following laws.

Information confidentially given to the government should not be up for public scrutiny. Especially if it threatens the security of an individuals home.
 
2012-12-25 12:46:29 PM  

Brick-House: s2s2s2: Brick-House: There are about 1,300,000 abortions in America each year.

How much is that saving in welfare costs?

Not the point... Publish a interactive map with the name and address of all the women who have had an Abortion and watch the left explode with outrage for invading these poor innocent women's privacy. But it is just fine and dandy to invade the privacy of law abiding citizens for exercising their second amendment right.


No can do, Chumlee. HIPA law experessly prohibits publishing medical information about people. No such law exists to prohibit publishing information about gun fetishists,though.

Not that you gun fetishists give a shiat about law, though. Your guns put you above the law, right? Right?
 
2012-12-25 12:48:21 PM  
0x1a4
... It does nothing to lead us to any kind of irrational debate on the issues.

I assume you meant rational - but - sure it does. Evidenced by this thread right here. The first amendment is designed to air out bad ideas.
 
2012-12-25 12:48:36 PM  

MerelyFoolish: I would have no problem having my name published in the paper as owning guns because:

1. My guns are locked in safes. If someone breaks in my house, they can get the television, the inexpensive jewelry, the silver, etc., but my guns will never end up in the hands of criminals. My guns are also safe from my son and daughter's friends who might get curious when visiting. All gun owners should be responsible and accountable for keeping their guns away from thieves and children. While I am sorry that the whacko in CT's mother was killed, she should have been more responsible with her guns.


Safes are great when preventing a smash and grab. A determined thief who knows he has time will either:
a) get into the safe (not hard - I did this to a DoD safe in under 15 minutes - and only went that slowly so I didn't catch the documents inside on fire):
s3.amazonaws.comView Full Size


b) carry off the safe and open it at his leisure - growing up, this happened to a friend's dad, while they were away on vacation. They lived in the sticks, and the robbers clearly came with a truck and the knowledge that they had time to ransack the place.

2. The handgun I keep loaded and ready to use is in a separate lockbox that i can access in about 3 seconds from my bed. The lockbox also holds the buckshot for the shotgun under the bed - my weapon of choice for home protection if I have time to load it. Will I ever need to use it? Highly probable that I will not. But the number of home invasions where I live continue to increase, and no one will every rape or kill anyone in my household. We have an excellent police force where I live, but they are very good at solving crimes, not preventing them.

Shotgun under the bed? What happened to always having your guns in safes to keep thieves away from them?

3. Any burglar with any sense (a bit of an oxymoron) would look up their potential victims on the map published by the paper. I cannot imagine they would burglarize a house of a homeowner.

I assume you mean gunowner? And what better way to get a gun, than to rob the unoccupied house of a known gunowner?

4. I would hope the parents who don't want their kids playing in houses with guns would also see the list. If they don't trust their kids to mind my rules, I don't either.

Fair enough - I feel the same way. The parents of my kids' friends know I own (and lock up) my weapons.
 
2012-12-25 12:48:36 PM  
I'm not liking all this gun discussion talk on Fark. I own two guns and shoot them maybe once a year just for farksake. It's for home-defense. I don't jizz in the barrel or plan on taking arms up against the government. They're just there and I'm a responsible owner. I understand the importance and dangers of guns but I don't understand the people who wants to ban all guns? Yeah, they're dangerous. That's the point. No one is denying that a gun isn't dangerous, that's why most gun owners take safety courses. Hell, for some states, safety courses are mandatory for licenses.

I just don't even know. Most gun owners don't even see their guns for months at a time because there's never a use for them. Some hope there won't be. Use your brain America. Can't rely on the police for immediate assistance. Sometimes you have to defend yourself once in a while.
 
2012-12-25 12:48:42 PM  

Ima4nic8or: I dont have a problem with this. Its good to know where the paranoid loonies are so that you can avoid them and their houses. They may not want the info out there but its much like the sex offender registries. I am sure those folks dont like their names out there either, but lets face it, the info is not being put out there for their benefit. It is for all the sane folks that want to avoid them.


LOL. Nice troll. 8/10 minimum.
 
2012-12-25 12:49:21 PM  
Hey, I wanna shoot people, but the government won't let me have guns. But the Smiths on Jefferson have guns and like their Sunday family movie night.

Doesn't the public have the right to know everything?
 
2012-12-25 12:50:37 PM  
Non-story.

Burglars don't read the newspaper, nor does anyone.
 
2012-12-25 12:50:47 PM  

RobDownSouth: Not that you gun fetishists give a shiat about law, though. Your guns put you above the law, right? Right?


The ones on this list registered their firearms. If they didn't give a shiat, they woudn't have done that, huh.
 
2012-12-25 12:52:26 PM  

Amos Quito: [i1121.photobucket.com image 606x452]

NY Murder Map - 2010

[i1121.photobucket.com image 850x596]

New York legal gun map, 2012

Anyone notice any correlation here?

Any?


overlaid for you:

img405.imageshack.usView Full Size
 
2012-12-25 12:52:39 PM  

Wolf_Blitzer: doglover: Generation_D: I could see this backfiring.

Case an address, doublecheck the list. Not on the gun owners' registry? Easy pickins for a home invasion. They won't shoot back.

Or, I can pick an address that *is* listed, wait until no one is home, and then walk out with some firearms that will sell very nicely on the black market.

The vast majority of burglars operate when the home is vacant, something your vaunted guns will do nothing to protect against.


Vaunted
 
2012-12-25 12:52:59 PM  
TheDirtyNacho: Tax $20 a bullet and implement a national buyback program for weapons, ammo and accessories. I bet a lot of families that are unhappy with a certain member's gun collection would gladly start bringing them in. In a generation, the number of usable weapons floating around out there would decline dramatically.

So, a program of punitive taxation and government sanctioned theft.

Every man a good idea that simply will not work.
 
2012-12-25 12:53:08 PM  

steamingpile: Eatin' Queer Fetuses for Jesus: What, don't all you tough-guy six-shootin' cowboys want everyone to know how big and bad you are with your big bad guns? Pussies. Learn to fist-fight, like a real man.

Real world doesn't work that way, also just because you have a gun permit doesn't mean you have a conceal/carry permit which means they can be stolen once people know you are not home.


This is the main issue here, I think. This looks like a shopping list for someone who wants to steal some guns.
 
2012-12-25 12:53:34 PM  

PopularFront: This version of the article contains the the following:

"Editor's note: Journal News reporter Dwight R. Worley owns a Smith & Wesson 686 .357 Magnum and has had a residence permit in New York City for that weapon since February 2011."

Dwight R. Worley is the reporter who wrote the story. These gun owners were outed by one of their own.



Well, I just clicked every dot in NYC, and his name / address isn't there.

Say, you don't suppose he edited his OWN name and address out for some reason, do you?
 
2012-12-25 12:54:33 PM  

computerguyUT: England, as well as Canada also doesn't have this one document that we treasure so greatly called a constitution. The only civil rights they have are the ones the government deems they are worthy of.


Canada has a constitution. We also have a Bill of Rights. Your statement that "the only civil rights they have are the ones the government deems them worthy of" is absolutely ridiculous. Do Americans have civil rights outside of those the government has granted?
 
2012-12-25 12:56:17 PM  

robnelle: clowncar on fire: robnelle: Follow up article:

Mass shooting at The Journal News offices by disgruntled gun owner.

Highly unlikely. More likely- "Several area homes robbed- targeted for weapons and ammunition".

A gun owner (or family member of gun owner) mowing down 20 kids for the hell of it is pretty unlikely too.....but it happened.

A gun owner lighting up a theater is unlikely...but it happened.
A gun owner picking off innocent people at a mall is unlikely ...but it happened.
It's not so much that they are gun owners. The vast majority of gun owners would never do something like this- I agree with you on this. But, like in any group, you will have a small percentage of them that are mentally unstable. When dealing with the mentally unsound, it really doesn't matter how likely a given scenario is. It is unlikely to you and I because we are sane. It is impossible to predict the actions of a mentally compromised person- and those actions can be deadly when that person has access to a weapon-gun, knife or whatever at their disposal. I agree that a shooting is generally unlikely but given the sorry state of mental health care in this country and the general high level of emotions on both sides of this argument, it's not as unlikely as it should be.


But now we are far more likely to see homes robbed by people who, by their own actions, would be granted access to guns- or would provide access to others-- and be more likely to use them on another human in the future commission of a crime than a pissed off gun owner who respected and complied with the law by registering his guns in the first place.

The real issue has to do with who is accessing guns, not just ownership. The Newspaper was trying to correlate ownership with future propensity to commit a crime with a firearm. They could have easily published a list of car owners as more people are killed by cars than guns. Again- there is this reasonable expectation for the most part that car owners will take care in Complying with the laws (snert) in the usage of their cars. The reality- like with firearms-- is that some a-hole will be granted an id and an automoble license and will either drive drunk, wreckless or intentionally "rage" someone off the road.

Far more likely than homocide via a firearm. Have any solutions to that problem yet?
 
2012-12-25 12:57:52 PM  

utah dude: Amos Quito: [i1121.photobucket.com image 606x452]

NY Murder Map - 2010

[i1121.photobucket.com image 850x596]

New York legal gun map, 2012

Anyone notice any correlation here?

Any?

overlaid for you:

[img405.imageshack.us image 640x480]


Thanks, utah dude

Here's a link to the murder map source.

/In case you want to enbiggen
 
2012-12-25 12:58:08 PM  

whatshisname: Do Americans have civil rights outside of those the government has granted?


Our country was founded with these words: We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

The government does not grant us our basic rights - they are ours as human birthright.
 
2012-12-25 12:58:11 PM  

MerelyFoolish: I would have no problem having my name published in the paper as owning guns because:

1. My guns are locked in safes. If someone breaks in my house, they can get the television, the inexpensive jewelry, the silver, etc., but my guns will never end up in the hands of criminals. My guns are also safe from my son and daughter's friends who might get curious when visiting. All gun owners should be responsible and accountable for keeping their guns away from thieves and children. While I am sorry that the whacko in CT's mother was killed, she should have been more responsible with her guns.

2. The handgun I keep loaded and ready to use is in a separate lockbox that i can access in about 3 seconds from my bed. The lockbox also holds the buckshot for the shotgun under the bed - my weapon of choice for home protection if I have time to load it. Will I ever need to use it? Highly probable that I will not. But the number of home invasions where I live continue to increase, and no one will every rape or kill anyone in my household. We have an excellent police force where I live, but they are very good at solving crimes, not preventing them.


Wow.
 
2012-12-25 12:58:50 PM  

Even With A Chainsaw: steamingpile: Eatin' Queer Fetuses for Jesus: What, don't all you tough-guy six-shootin' cowboys want everyone to know how big and bad you are with your big bad guns? Pussies. Learn to fist-fight, like a real man.

Real world doesn't work that way, also just because you have a gun permit doesn't mean you have a conceal/carry permit which means they can be stolen once people know you are not home.

This is the main issue here, I think. This looks like a shopping list for someone who wants to steal some guns.


Stupid is as stupid does... on both sides of the fence...

i.imgur.comView Full Size
 
2012-12-25 12:59:55 PM  
so many feral pigs in New York? Gevalt, who knew?
 
2012-12-25 01:00:39 PM  
More proof that

w.tlck9academy.comView Full Size

solving-math-problems.comView Full Size


upload.wikimedia.orgView Full Size


jus' sayin'

My gun does nothing when I am not at home.

My dogs chewed through a metal screen on the back of the door trying to eat the mailman.
 
2012-12-25 01:00:46 PM  

Amos Quito:

Anyone notice any correlation here?

Any?


More guns and murders in poor areas.

That's a social issue, not a firearms related issue.
 
2012-12-25 01:01:11 PM  

amquelbettamin: s2s2s2: Brick-House: There are about 1,300,000 abortions in America each year.

How much is that saving in welfare costs?

That's racest


Only if you believe there is diversity in 'welfare' recipients. Asshat.
 
2012-12-25 01:01:28 PM  

muck4doo: PopularFront: This version of the article contains the the following:

"Editor's note: Journal News reporter Dwight R. Worley owns a Smith & Wesson 686 .357 Magnum and has had a residence permit in New York City for that weapon since February 2011."

Dwight R. Worley is the reporter who wrote the story. These gun owners were outed by one of their own.

Did he put his home address in the article?


I didn't see an obvious way to determine that without his address. While looking for that I noticed that some of the people who are trying to publish his address in retaliation for the article are posting info for the wrong guy.
 
2012-12-25 01:02:03 PM  

stiletto_the_wise: Second Amendment, meet First Amendment.


This.

Anti-gun people: There should be heavy restrictions on gun ownership.
Pro-gun people: SECOND AMENDMENT! SECOND AMENDMENT!
Anti-gun people: We're going to publish a list of public records as allowed by the First Amendment.
Pro-gun people: THIS IS AN OUTRAGE!
 
2012-12-25 01:02:49 PM  

Dear Jerk: Since we don't have a standing army. Oh, wait.


because we have a standing army, all or which is off, away, in some foreign country ending with -stan or -ea.
 
2012-12-25 01:02:49 PM  

willfullyobscure: so many feral pigs in New York? Gevalt, who knew?


This map is only for registered handgun owners, because in NY state, you need permission from the government to possess a handgun. Rifles are not registered.
 
2012-12-25 01:03:00 PM  

Lenny_da_Hog: Rich Cream: This isn't about guns. This is about taking a volatile situation, wherein people are very upset and angry about something, and these newspeople then "make a list" of the people who are at best obliquely associated with the cause of the anger and upset.

This is instigation to cause trouble. It is as simple as that.

Irresponsible use of First Amendment in response to irresponsible use of Second Amendment.


Simply owning a registered firearm is an irresponsible use of the Second Amendment?
 
2012-12-25 01:04:13 PM  
This is an atrocity clearly equal to the mass murder of Kindergarteners and firefighters, to say nothing of the too-frequent senseless (but less newsworthy) murders, therefore both sides are bad.
 
2012-12-25 01:04:15 PM  

Amos Quito: [i1121.photobucket.com image 606x452]

NY Murder Map - 2010

[i1121.photobucket.com image 850x596]

New York legal gun map, 2012

Anyone notice any correlation here?

Any?


you're telling me only one person owns a legal gun in Brooklyn?
 
2012-12-25 01:04:32 PM  

Dear Jerk: 0x1a4
... It does nothing to lead us to any kind of irrational debate on the issues.

I assume you meant rational - but - sure it does. Evidenced by this thread right here. The first amendment is designed to air out bad ideas.


I did mean rational. Damn new tablet loves to change what I type. Yes, I agree the first lets us talk about this issue. But this type of crap is why I am against registration. Many types of government records are not public. This should not be either.
 
2012-12-25 01:05:09 PM  

Uisce Beatha: The government does not grant us our basic rights - they are ours as human birthright.


That's a nice idea but those statements are so vague as to be useless in actual practice. Your constitution lays out the specifics of some civil rights and federal and state laws further define them. The point is there is no specific civil right that the government doesn't have some say in.
 
2012-12-25 01:06:52 PM  

The All-Powerful Atheismo: you're telling me only one person owns a legal gun in Brooklyn?


the map was according to readership of the 'newspaper', here, an online publication.
 
2012-12-25 01:07:37 PM  

Ontos: Lenny_da_Hog: Rich Cream: This isn't about guns. This is about taking a volatile situation, wherein people are very upset and angry about something, and these newspeople then "make a list" of the people who are at best obliquely associated with the cause of the anger and upset.

This is instigation to cause trouble. It is as simple as that.

Irresponsible use of First Amendment in response to irresponsible use of Second Amendment.

Simply owning a registered firearm is an irresponsible use of the Second Amendment?


The only reason they thought they could make money from this is the recent shooting sprees.
 
2012-12-25 01:09:24 PM  

Lenny_da_Hog: Ontos: Lenny_da_Hog: Rich Cream: This isn't about guns. This is about taking a volatile situation, wherein people are very upset and angry about something, and these newspeople then "make a list" of the people who are at best obliquely associated with the cause of the anger and upset.

This is instigation to cause trouble. It is as simple as that.

Irresponsible use of First Amendment in response to irresponsible use of Second Amendment.

Simply owning a registered firearm is an irresponsible use of the Second Amendment?

The only reason they thought they could make money from this is the recent shooting sprees.


OK... I see what you were saying now.
 
2012-12-25 01:10:39 PM  

utah dude: The All-Powerful Atheismo: you're telling me only one person owns a legal gun in Brooklyn?

the map was according to readership of the 'newspaper', here, an online publication.


So the correlation between the two maps is complete bullshiat. Got it.
 
2012-12-25 01:10:41 PM  

Giltric: Satanic_Hamster: ParaHandy: Satanic_Hamster: While I'm all for openness in government, why the hell are those public records?

Why the hell is the list of cars I own available?

I want a list of where all the young nubile children live as well as their school schedules. It's public records, after all.

In NJ they wanted to put ahighly visible sticker on cars with first time drivers in it.....the left complained because that would let pedophiles target cars with teens in it.....instead of following that highly visible long bright yellow thing that drops off and picks up kids to and from school.


What a ridiculous fear. Cars have windows.

In Northern Ireland new drivers under 21 have to display an "R" plate (restricted) whem driving alone, and use lower speed limits on major roads. I have never heard of this as an issue.

I am a big believer in advanced driver education schemes like the UK's Pass Plus ... in the long term, this would save thousands of lives a year too. US driving tests are far too easy.
 
2012-12-25 01:11:37 PM  
If a newspaper in Alabama complied the names and addresses of everyone who ever donated to the NAACP in their readership area and put them in an interactive map for anyone to peruse, it might be "legal" too, but would anyone try to deny that it would be a transparent attempt at intimidation?
 
2012-12-25 01:12:14 PM  
No matter your views on gun control this was a stupid, vindictive idea.
 
2012-12-25 01:12:35 PM  

The All-Powerful Atheismo: So the correlation between the two maps is complete bullshiat. Got it.


because sampling error / bias.
you win two Jesuses.
 
2012-12-25 01:12:54 PM  

whatshisname: The point is there is no specific civil right that the government doesn't have some say in.


Some say in, perhaps, but you asked, " Do Americans have civil rights outside of those the government has granted?" The idea of government here is that the basic rights are ours, and when a government decides it can taken them away, it has to go.

The government can regulate, that is its job, but some things it cannot totally restrict. To keep it on topic, the government can require firearms registration, or background checks, etc, all of which I think are fine, but a total restriction is off the table, as the 2nd Amendment is currently interpreted. As other folks can relate better than I, the amendment was written with an eye towards protecting the rights of the people from an overzealous government.
 
2012-12-25 01:13:01 PM  
Oh no, they published public information.

What are you gonna do, shoot them?
 
2012-12-25 01:13:09 PM  

ParaHandy: Giltric: Satanic_Hamster: ParaHandy: Satanic_Hamster: While I'm all for openness in government, why the hell are those public records?

Why the hell is the list of cars I own available?

I want a list of where all the young nubile children live as well as their school schedules. It's public records, after all.

In NJ they wanted to put ahighly visible sticker on cars with first time drivers in it.....the left complained because that would let pedophiles target cars with teens in it.....instead of following that highly visible long bright yellow thing that drops off and picks up kids to and from school.

What a ridiculous fear. Cars have windows.

In Northern Ireland new drivers under 21 have to display an "R" plate (restricted) whem driving alone, and use lower speed limits on major roads. I have never heard of this as an issue.

I am a big believer in advanced driver education schemes like the UK's Pass Plus ... in the long term, this would save thousands of lives a year too. US driving tests are far too easy.


So, what you're saying is, you basically want the US to be more like the UK? Why not go live in the UK and let us alone?
 
2012-12-25 01:14:21 PM  

special20: amquelbettamin: s2s2s2: Brick-House: There are about 1,300,000 abortions in America each year.

How much is that saving in welfare costs?

That's racest

Only if you believe there is diversity in 'welfare' recipients. Asshat.


Just the facts, ma'm

abort73.comView Full Size
 
Pav
2012-12-25 01:14:36 PM  

david_gaithersburg: Pav: Public records are public! Oh the horror!

.
The government has your, address, DOB, SocSec number, and Checking account information. Public information, correct?


Incorrect! Can you go and request my SS never using the freedom of information act? How about my checking account info? No! So that means your stupid.
 
2012-12-25 01:14:58 PM  
StopLurkListen: This is an atrocity clearly equal to the mass murder of Kindergarteners and firefighters, to say nothing of the too-frequent senseless (but less newsworthy) murders, therefore both sides are bad.

The mass murders were committed by someone, who, if they had not killed themselves, would have been found innocent by reason of insanity.

But this publication of addresses has no such justification. All those involved are capable and competent and malicious.

So you are on the right track in seeing the equality of the actions, but this is wrong.

The newspaper is worse.
 
2012-12-25 01:15:29 PM  

utah dude: The All-Powerful Atheismo: So the correlation between the two maps is complete bullshiat. Got it.

because sampling error / bias.
you win two Jesuses.


Can I get a pre-crucifiction model?
 
2012-12-25 01:16:18 PM  

NewportBarGuy: I am a gun owner



This is scary.
 
2012-12-25 01:17:43 PM  

wambu: "We are decent, caring people who have an overwhelming hatred of guns. By publishing this information, we put your family at risk of having your home burglarized, maybe your spouse gets killed, maybe your children are raped . . . well dumbass, you should not keep guns in your house! Will your guns protect you now? Tough shiat for you, Mr. Gun-lover. If only you had thought of the children!" -- The No Guns For A Better America Coalition of Non-Violence and Happiness


^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
The full blown batshiat crazy fear from the wannabe fascist progressives proves that the the second amendment works.
 
2012-12-25 01:19:06 PM  

letrole: TheDirtyNacho: Tax $20 a bullet and implement a national buyback program for weapons, ammo and accessories. I bet a lot of families that are unhappy with a certain member's gun collection would gladly start bringing them in. In a generation, the number of usable weapons floating around out there would decline dramatically.

So, a program of punitive taxation and government sanctioned theft.

Every man a good idea that simply will not work.


From what i've read- a majority of the guns aquired in a buy backprogram are defective, poor quality, non-operational junk that would have eventually injurred the idiot attempting to use them or end up in a scap heap. Would you really want to pay $25- $50 for scrap that would have generated less a dollar at the recycling plant?

I don't have a problem with the government having a light tax on ammo and firearm sales provided that the money funded firearm training and education, law enforcement, or assistance to families of gun related crimes.
 
2012-12-25 01:19:13 PM  

here to help: Ima4nic8or: I dont have a problem with this. Its good to know where the paranoid loonies are so that you can avoid them and their houses. They may not want the info out there but its much like the sex offender registries. I am sure those folks dont like their names out there either, but lets face it, the info is not being put out there for their benefit. It is for all the sane folks that want to avoid them.

Not every gun owner is an irresponsible lunatic and claiming that is the case is not helping the cause.

If you lump in the responsible gun owners who are willing to work on fixing things in with the sh*theads you will only ostracize them.

Why the f*ck can't you people THINK and work TOGETHER to solve your issues?! You're tearing the damned country apart!


But but VICTORY OR DEATH!!!

/something something darkside
 
2012-12-25 01:19:31 PM  

david_gaithersburg: wambu: "We are decent, caring people who have an overwhelming hatred of guns. By publishing this information, we put your family at risk of having your home burglarized, maybe your spouse gets killed, maybe your children are raped . . . well dumbass, you should not keep guns in your house! Will your guns protect you now? Tough shiat for you, Mr. Gun-lover. If only you had thought of the children!" -- The No Guns For A Better America Coalition of Non-Violence and Happiness

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
The full blown batshiat crazy fear from the wannabe fascist progressives proves that the the second amendment works.


Cling to that gun, boyo.
 
2012-12-25 01:21:20 PM  

maniacbastard: More proof that

[w.tlck9academy.com image 500x300]
[www.solving-math-problems.com image 273x208]

[upload.wikimedia.org image 300x228]

jus' sayin'

My gun does nothing when I am not at home.

My dogs chewed through a metal screen on the back of the door trying to eat the mailman.


One of my friends dogs was poisoned when his area was experiencing a streak of burglaries.
If people know the gun must be secured in the house and they think getting your property is worth the trouble, you'd be surprised how far a they'll go to defeat your defenses.
Part of your security is the fact that thieves don't know what you have.
 
2012-12-25 01:21:48 PM  
totally not the thing a liberally biased newspaper would do
 
2012-12-25 01:21:53 PM  

Brick-House: Hey, lets next publish the name and address of all the women out there who have had an Abortion.

While there are about 30,000 gun related deaths in America each year. A number that has been decreasing by the way. There are about 1,300,000 abortions in America each year.

And while everyone should be outraged and saddened by the killing of the Sandy Hook school children we should also be saddened and outraged by the killing of babies...


HANDS OFF MY REPRODUCTIVE ORGANS!

thank you.
 
2012-12-25 01:23:39 PM  
In fact, due to this B.S. I am going to find the names and addresses of everyone that was involved in posting this data to the public.

Then I am going to post THEIR ADDRESSES, and if each and every one owns a gun or not. Gotta let the crooks know who is easy right? If they want to post our info, I guess we should post theirs, RIGHT?
 
2012-12-25 01:25:13 PM  

Uisce Beatha: whatshisname: The point is there is no specific civil right that the government doesn't have some say in.

Some say in, perhaps, but you asked, " Do Americans have civil rights outside of those the government has granted?" The idea of government here is that the basic rights are ours, and when a government decides it can taken them away, it has to go.

The government can regulate, that is its job, but some things it cannot totally restrict. To keep it on topic, the government can require firearms registration, or background checks, etc, all of which I think are fine, but a total restriction is off the table, as the 2nd Amendment is currently interpreted. As other folks can relate better than I, the amendment was written with an eye towards protecting the rights of the people from an overzealous government.


The entire Bill of Rights is based around the idea that those rights are the most important to spell out in no uncertain terms. They are not a list of "only these", but a list of "primarily these".

The entire premise of the Constitution, and our government, was that the government served at the pleasure of the people, and the people have the right to remove that government at any time when they do not represent the best interests of the people.

As much as people like to throw around "ZOMG THAT'S NOT WHAT THEY WANTED!", I submit that our framers never intended for militarized police to roam the streets, and the culture of fear we live in now.
 
2012-12-25 01:25:48 PM  

clowncar on fire: feckingmorons: Newspapers do this sort of thing every five or six years.  Then somebody publishes the names, addresses, phone numbers, license plate numbers, and schools of the kids of all the reporters and editors and they all have to jump through hoops to get phone numbers changed, and if I recall last time I read about this foolishness one of the reporters moved because she was tired of getting rotten fish guts on her porch.

So are you suggesting that they retaliate or merely expressing your complete lack of surprise for the retaliation that has yet to occur?


You make it sound like a bad thing. Do unto others as they do unto you.
 
2012-12-25 01:25:56 PM  

computerguyUT: tylerdurden217: What's next? Registering knives? Then they will make us register baseball bats. Then maybe our Laser Tag blasters. The next thing you know Hitler/Stalin/Pol Pot is marching down Main Street.

Wake up people. Second Amendment!

/derp

England has done exactly that. It's illegal for a person under 18 to own a knife longer than 3 1/4" and all knives longer have to be registered. They have also recently banned cricket bats in public.
England, as well as Canada also doesn't have this one document that we treasure so greatly called a constitution. The only civil rights they have are the ones the government deems they are worthy of. But they're groomed from birth to accept that the government is there to spoonfeed you everything you need, so they just accept it.
England has 1/5 the the population of the US and their Violent crime is 4x ours. Yeah, the anti gunners spout the gun stats, but completely leave out that little tidbit.


England has 1/6 the population of the USA ... did you perhaps mean the UK?

There are bills of rights written into many UK laws and feudal agreements that go back hundreds of years before the USA was founded.

England has LESS violence ... the apparent rise is due to the fact the UK's reporting is now far more comprehensive and the bar for what is considered a countable violent crime is far lower than most countries, notably no-one needs to be charged or convicted for an incident in the UK to be recorded as a violent crime. It says right on the Wikipedia page that the data is neither standardized nor comparable across countries.

Why don't you do a little background research on these kinds of anomalies before presenting the NRAs counter-factual view, and you'll find out the real reason.

And please learn the difference between the UK, Great Britain and England before you go spouting off. It's not complicated.
 
2012-12-25 01:26:20 PM  

Uisce Beatha: fredklein: Hamanu: I would think that the reason people are pissed off is because thieves are going to be targeting gun owner's houses to steal their guns.

Are they going to pick the lock on the gun safe, or carry the whole thing away on their backs??

No gun safe is impenetrable. At most, a safe deters a thief looking for a quick smash and grab. A thief who has access to my house and knows I am not due home could probably cut his way into my safe in under a half an hour, using the tools in my garage. The safe merely lets him know where all my guns are.


No- the article let him know where the guns are.
 
2012-12-25 01:26:49 PM  

Pav: david_gaithersburg: Pav: Public records are public! Oh the horror!

.
The government has your, address, DOB, SocSec number, and Checking account information. Public information, correct?

Incorrect! Can you go and request my SS never using the freedom of information act? How about my checking account info? No! So that means your stupid.


^^^^^
The stupid in this one is strong.
 
2012-12-25 01:26:53 PM  

The All-Powerful Atheismo: Amos Quito: [i1121.photobucket.com image 606x452]

NY Murder Map - 2010

[i1121.photobucket.com image 850x596]

New York legal gun map, 2012

Anyone notice any correlation here?

Any?

you're telling me only one person owns a legal gun in Brooklyn?



No, that is what the MAP compiled by the author of the article is telling you.

Frankly, I find it hard to believe.

I mean, do all of those rich Wall Street tycoons, etc. run around with unarmed body guards?

/Bloomberg gets police protection, so he's ok
 
2012-12-25 01:27:26 PM  

IamKaiserSoze!!!: God, but zealots do some thoroughly brain dead stuff. I mean, that's Westboro Baptist crazy.

I hope those assholes lose every gun owners subscription, as well as those who don't own guns but still have common sense. Advertisers should be dropping them right and left too.

Fire the editor and whatever writers were involved with this.


I'll go further than that... I say that the paper should be seized, it's license to do business pulled, and the entire enterprise disbanded. This is civic irresponsibility. The Editor and whoever runs the paper should be jailed under the same laws that ban yelling "fire" in a crowded theater.

This is just plain westboro baptist church crazy and irresponsible.

The proceeds of the sale of the newspaper and its entire holding should go to the people whose names were published.

This is flat outright invasion of privacy. I understand that need to publish stories of interest, but these people are not public figures, and as such they have a reasonable expectation of privacy and that others will not publish their names for perfectly law abiding behavior.

Oh and gun control advocates... you just lost me right there. You've just shown that your cause is run by crazies that'll do any irresponsible thing that they can to get what they want. That sort of fanaticism need to be curb stomped.
 
2012-12-25 01:29:21 PM  
Yay! Now I know which houses to burglarize while their owners are away! Free guns to hit the black market!
 
2012-12-25 01:30:08 PM  

HotWingConspiracy: david_gaithersburg: wambu: "We are decent, caring people who have an overwhelming hatred of guns. By publishing this information, we put your family at risk of having your home burglarized, maybe your spouse gets killed, maybe your children are raped . . . well dumbass, you should not keep guns in your house! Will your guns protect you now? Tough shiat for you, Mr. Gun-lover. If only you had thought of the children!" -- The No Guns For A Better America Coalition of Non-Violence and Happiness

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
The full blown batshiat crazy fear from the wannabe fascist progressives proves that the the second amendment works.

Cling to that gun, boyo.


I'll cling to my guns, my right to privacy, my right to a lawyer, my right to being presumed innocent until proven guilty, my right to avoid illegal search and seizure, freedom of the press, freedom to peaceably assemble, freedom to vote, etc. etc.
 
2012-12-25 01:30:26 PM  

Eatin' Queer Fetuses for Jesus: What, don't all you tough-guy six-shootin' cowboys want everyone to know how big and bad you are with your big bad guns? Pussies. Learn to fist-fight, like a real man.


You are a moron and you need to shut your farkin mouth when grown folks are talking.
 
2012-12-25 01:31:04 PM  

Wolf_Blitzer: doglover: Generation_D: I could see this backfiring.

Case an address, doublecheck the list. Not on the gun owners' registry? Easy pickins for a home invasion. They won't shoot back.

Or, I can pick an address that *is* listed, wait until no one is home, and then walk out with some firearms that will sell very nicely on the black market.

The vast majority of burglars operate when the home is vacant, something your vaunted guns will do nothing to protect against.


Homeowners insurance protects me when burglars strike and I'm not home. My gun protects me when they strike and I am home. Dumbass.
 
2012-12-25 01:31:18 PM  

Lenny_da_Hog: Do you remember sentence diagrams?


Yeah, stick with "just bein' a dick". You wear it well.
 
2012-12-25 01:31:53 PM  

Kit Fister: HotWingConspiracy: david_gaithersburg: wambu: "We are decent, caring people who have an overwhelming hatred of guns. By publishing this information, we put your family at risk of having your home burglarized, maybe your spouse gets killed, maybe your children are raped . . . well dumbass, you should not keep guns in your house! Will your guns protect you now? Tough shiat for you, Mr. Gun-lover. If only you had thought of the children!" -- The No Guns For A Better America Coalition of Non-Violence and Happiness

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
The full blown batshiat crazy fear from the wannabe fascist progressives proves that the the second amendment works.

Cling to that gun, boyo.

I'll cling to my guns, my right to privacy, my right to a lawyer, my right to being presumed innocent until proven guilty, my right to avoid illegal search and seizure, freedom of the press, freedom to peaceably assemble, freedom to vote, etc. etc.


OMG LIBERTIES

You people are farking unhinged, and make your own case for being defanged.
 
2012-12-25 01:32:01 PM  

ParaHandy: computerguyUT: tylerdurden217: What's next? Registering knives? Then they will make us register baseball bats. Then maybe our Laser Tag blasters. The next thing you know Hitler/Stalin/Pol Pot is marching down Main Street.

Wake up people. Second Amendment!

/derp

England has done exactly that. It's illegal for a person under 18 to own a knife longer than 3 1/4" and all knives longer have to be registered. They have also recently banned cricket bats in public.
England, as well as Canada also doesn't have this one document that we treasure so greatly called a constitution. The only civil rights they have are the ones the government deems they are worthy of. But they're groomed from birth to accept that the government is there to spoonfeed you everything you need, so they just accept it.
England has 1/5 the the population of the US and their Violent crime is 4x ours. Yeah, the anti gunners spout the gun stats, but completely leave out that little tidbit.

England has 1/6 the population of the USA ... did you perhaps mean the UK?

There are bills of rights written into many UK laws and feudal agreements that go back hundreds of years before the USA was founded.

England has LESS violence ... the apparent rise is due to the fact the UK's reporting is now far more comprehensive and the bar for what is considered a countable violent crime is far lower than most countries, notably no-one needs to be charged or convicted for an incident in the UK to be recorded as a violent crime. It says right on the Wikipedia page that the data is neither standardized nor comparable across countries.

Why don't you do a little background research on these kinds of anomalies before presenting the NRAs counter-factual view, and you'll find out the real reason.

And please learn the difference between the UK, Great Britain and England before you go spouting off. It's not complicated.


Why don't you go back to the UK?
 
2012-12-25 01:32:28 PM  
thomasajohnston.files.wordpress.comView Full Size

OMG! This thing's got my name, address and home phone number!! I feel violated.
 
2012-12-25 01:33:16 PM  
Kit Fister

I agree with everything you posted - and, had I not been up all night assembling presents, might have been able to put together something similarly coherent. Instead, though, I'll just stick with a:

THIS
 
2012-12-25 01:33:36 PM  

HotWingConspiracy: Kit Fister: HotWingConspiracy: david_gaithersburg: wambu: "We are decent, caring people who have an overwhelming hatred of guns. By publishing this information, we put your family at risk of having your home burglarized, maybe your spouse gets killed, maybe your children are raped . . . well dumbass, you should not keep guns in your house! Will your guns protect you now? Tough shiat for you, Mr. Gun-lover. If only you had thought of the children!" -- The No Guns For A Better America Coalition of Non-Violence and Happiness

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
The full blown batshiat crazy fear from the wannabe fascist progressives proves that the the second amendment works.

Cling to that gun, boyo.

I'll cling to my guns, my right to privacy, my right to a lawyer, my right to being presumed innocent until proven guilty, my right to avoid illegal search and seizure, freedom of the press, freedom to peaceably assemble, freedom to vote, etc. etc.

OMG LIBERTIES

You people are farking unhinged, and make your own case for being defanged.


Or, you know, we're completely sane and just disagree with your position, and like winding you up because it's funny to watch you piss your pannies...
 
2012-12-25 01:33:40 PM  

GoldSpider: utharda: But enjoy your penis surrogate gun toting call of duty jack off fantasy.

I admit, that's bringing it pretty strong.


He gets that way sometimes. We're also both from that neck of the woods and we can tell you right now the guns have more to do with protecting yourself from funny colored people.

Oh and they are screamingly insecure. Lady qcross the street leaves hers sitting on the windowsill so she can see 'em coming!
 
2012-12-25 01:34:15 PM  

ParaHandy: Giltric: Satanic_Hamster: ParaHandy: Satanic_Hamster: While I'm all for openness in government, why the hell are those public records?

Why the hell is the list of cars I own available?

I want a list of where all the young nubile children live as well as their school schedules. It's public records, after all.

In NJ they wanted to put ahighly visible sticker on cars with first time drivers in it.....the left complained because that would let pedophiles target cars with teens in it.....instead of following that highly visible long bright yellow thing that drops off and picks up kids to and from school.

What a ridiculous fear. Cars have windows.

In Northern Ireland new drivers under 21 have to display an "R" plate (restricted) whem driving alone, and use lower speed limits on major roads. I have never heard of this as an issue.

I am a big believer in advanced driver education schemes like the UK's Pass Plus ... in the long term, this would save thousands of lives a year too. US driving tests are far too easy.


Japan has a sticker for old folks and new drivers. This allows other drivers to be aware that the driver in your vicinity may be inexpirienced (or have a slower reaction time) so extra care may be needed around the drivers who's car bare these stickers.

We currently use a similar sticker identifier system to identify a-hole drivers here in the US:

vinyl-decals.comView Full Size
 
2012-12-25 01:34:25 PM  

TOWG: Homeowners insurance protects me when burglars strike and I'm not home. My gun protects me when they strike and I am home. Dumbass.


Maybe you should just never go home then. You would always be save and never have to worry about anything.
 
2012-12-25 01:34:34 PM  

RobDownSouth: you gun fetishists


RobDownSouth: Your guns


Neither of these phrases apply to me. I know the second was directed at someone else, but...crossfire.
 
2012-12-25 01:35:46 PM  

s2s2s2: Lenny_da_Hog: Do you remember sentence diagrams?

Yeah, stick with "just bein' a dick". You wear it well.


It's not my fault you're too stupid to understand a sentence more complex than you'd find in "Dick & Jane" books. The god was the subject of the sentence. Go ask your sixth-grade neighbor to explain it to you.
 
2012-12-25 01:36:09 PM  

TheDirtyNacho: I know you jest, but Texas, which has recently attempted to prevent Planned Parenthood from getting any money (even the clinics that don't perform abortions), realized that the loss of family planning clinics would result is an extra $273 million a year in taxpayer costs due to unplanned birth care.


I got a kick out of that.
 
2012-12-25 01:38:32 PM  

HotWingConspiracy: Kit Fister: HotWingConspiracy: david_gaithersburg: wambu: "We are decent, caring people who have an overwhelming hatred of guns. By publishing this information, we put your family at risk of having your home burglarized, maybe your spouse gets killed, maybe your children are raped . . . well dumbass, you should not keep guns in your house! Will your guns protect you now? Tough shiat for you, Mr. Gun-lover. If only you had thought of the children!" -- The No Guns For A Better America Coalition of Non-Violence and Happiness

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
The full blown batshiat crazy fear from the wannabe fascist progressives proves that the the second amendment works.

Cling to that gun, boyo.

I'll cling to my guns, my right to privacy, my right to a lawyer, my right to being presumed innocent until proven guilty, my right to avoid illegal search and seizure, freedom of the press, freedom to peaceably assemble, freedom to vote, etc. etc.

OMG LIBERTIES

You people are farking unhinged, and make your own case for being defanged.


Yeah, our Bill of Rights is just crazy talk. (Sigh)
 
2012-12-25 01:39:19 PM  

way south: This is the kind of thing that makes licensing and registration a bad idea.
The criminals won't attack law abiding gun owners, they'll rob these houses while the owners are out. This paper has willfully aided in the distribution of illegal weapons.
They should be sued for every incident that happens as a result.
The state should also voluntarily comply with federal rules for the FOPA, and destroy those lists immediately.


No, the absolute opposite should be true. If the gun owners are not home the guns should be in a secure safe, not in a bedroom dresser drawer. Any gun stolen in a theft that was not provably in a safe should result in criminal charges against the owners regardless of a red dot on a newspaper map (ie for those who are identified and those who are not)
 
2012-12-25 01:39:31 PM  

Kit Fister: ParaHandy: Giltric: Satanic_Hamster: ParaHandy: Satanic_Hamster: While I'm all for openness in government, why the hell are those public records?

Why the hell is the list of cars I own available?

I want a list of where all the young nubile children live as well as their school schedules. It's public records, after all.

In NJ they wanted to put ahighly visible sticker on cars with first time drivers in it.....the left complained because that would let pedophiles target cars with teens in it.....instead of following that highly visible long bright yellow thing that drops off and picks up kids to and from school.

What a ridiculous fear. Cars have windows.

In Northern Ireland new drivers under 21 have to display an "R" plate (restricted) whem driving alone, and use lower speed limits on major roads. I have never heard of this as an issue.

I am a big believer in advanced driver education schemes like the UK's Pass Plus ... in the long term, this would save thousands of lives a year too. US driving tests are far too easy.

So, what you're saying is, you basically want the US to be more like the UK? Why not go live in the UK and let us alone?


Because I choose to live in the USA. If you consider immigration from more civilized places a threat, then lobby to close the border.

My goal it to take the best of Europe (healthcare, gun control, fairer elections, mutli-party compromise politics, UK road signage, ...) and the best of the USA (entrpreneurial spirit, block based street numbering, right turn on red) and cross-pollinate.
 
2012-12-25 01:39:39 PM  

Kit Fister: Uisce Beatha: whatshisname: The point is there is no specific civil right that the government doesn't have some say in.

Some say in, perhaps, but you asked, " Do Americans have civil rights outside of those the government has granted?" The idea of government here is that the basic rights are ours, and when a government decides it can taken them away, it has to go.

The government can regulate, that is its job, but some things it cannot totally restrict. To keep it on topic, the government can require firearms registration, or background checks, etc, all of which I think are fine, but a total restriction is off the table, as the 2nd Amendment is currently interpreted. As other folks can relate better than I, the amendment was written with an eye towards protecting the rights of the people from an overzealous government.

The entire Bill of Rights is based around the idea that those rights are the most important to spell out in no uncertain terms. They are not a list of "only these", but a list of "primarily these".

The entire premise of the Constitution, and our government, was that the government served at the pleasure of the people, and the people have the right to remove that government at any time when they do not represent the best interests of the people.

As much as people like to throw around "ZOMG THAT'S NOT WHAT THEY WANTED!", I submit that our framers never intended for militarized police to roam the streets, and the culture of fear we live in now.



That's because, unlike the Gun Grabbers, the Framers weren't big on Authoritarianism.

Quite the opposite, in fact.

ParaHandy: computerguyUT: tylerdurden217: What's next? Registering knives? Then they will make us register baseball bats. Then maybe our Laser Tag blasters. The next thing you know Hitler/Stalin/Pol Pot is marching down Main Street.

Wake up people. Second Amendment!

/derp

England has done exactly that. It's illegal for a person under 18 to own a knife longer than 3 1/4" and all knives longer have to be registered. They have also recently banned cricket bats in public.
England, as well as Canada also doesn't have this one document that we treasure so greatly called a constitution. The only civil rights they have are the ones the government deems they are worthy of. But they're groomed from birth to accept that the government is there to spoonfeed you everything you need, so they just accept it.
England has 1/5 the the population of the US and their Violent crime is 4x ours. Yeah, the anti gunners spout the gun stats, but completely leave out that little tidbit.

England has 1/6 the population of the USA ... did you perhaps mean the UK?

There are bills of rights written into many UK laws and feudal agreements that go back hundreds of years before the USA was founded.

England has LESS violence ... the apparent rise is due to the fact the UK's reporting is now far more comprehensive and the bar for what is considered a countable violent crime is far lower than most countries, notably no-one needs to be charged or convicted for an incident in the UK to be recorded as a violent crime. It says right on the Wikipedia page that the data is neither standardized nor comparable across countries.

Why don't you do a little background research on these kinds of anomalies before presenting the NRAs counter-factual view, and you'll find out the real reason.



Seems to me that the UK has a pathetically low crime rate, when compared to the US.

It could be the lack of guns. But over 90% WHITE PEOPLE???

If they ever hope to catch up crime-wise, they'll need more DIVERSITY.
 
2012-12-25 01:39:40 PM  
This is more of a list of houses to rob for guns. The newspaper made it easier for cunning criminals who think plan their crimes out intelligently. It's not that hard to stake one of these houses out and wait for it to be completely unoccupied and voila, free guns if they are present and unsecured. Idiot newspaper. The editor moron in chief will accomplish the opposite of what he/she set out to do, and actually might put more stolen guns on the street as a result of this. Isn't it ironic?
 
2012-12-25 01:41:19 PM  

HotWingConspiracy: Kit Fister: HotWingConspiracy: david_gaithersburg: wambu: "We are decent, caring people who have an overwhelming hatred of guns. By publishing this information, we put your family at risk of having your home burglarized, maybe your spouse gets killed, maybe your children are raped . . . well dumbass, you should not keep guns in your house! Will your guns protect you now? Tough shiat for you, Mr. Gun-lover. If only you had thought of the children!" -- The No Guns For A Better America Coalition of Non-Violence and Happiness

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
The full blown batshiat crazy fear from the wannabe fascist progressives proves that the the second amendment works.

Cling to that gun, boyo.

I'll cling to my guns, my right to privacy, my right to a lawyer, my right to being presumed innocent until proven guilty, my right to avoid illegal search and seizure, freedom of the press, freedom to peaceably assemble, freedom to vote, etc. etc.

OMG LIBERTIES

You people are farking unhinged, and make your own case for being defanged.


LOL! They like their rights. How funny!

/Go be an authoritarian douche somewhere else
 
2012-12-25 01:43:16 PM  

moonscatter: way south: This is the kind of thing that makes licensing and registration a bad idea.
The criminals won't attack law abiding gun owners, they'll rob these houses while the owners are out. This paper has willfully aided in the distribution of illegal weapons.
They should be sued for every incident that happens as a result.
The state should also voluntarily comply with federal rules for the FOPA, and destroy those lists immediately.

No, the absolute opposite should be true. If the gun owners are not home the guns should be in a secure safe, not in a bedroom dresser drawer. Any gun stolen in a theft that was not provably in a safe should result in criminal charges against the owners regardless of a red dot on a newspaper map (ie for those who are identified and those who are not)


No safe is completely secure - a deterrent, sure, but not much more.

I agree, a gun owner who does not secure his guns is negligent, and, depending on circumstances, might be criminally so as well.

However, telling anyone who cares to look where guns are kept - that is just stupid.
 
2012-12-25 01:44:41 PM  

moonscatter: GoldSpider: utharda: But enjoy your penis surrogate gun toting call of duty jack off fantasy.

I admit, that's bringing it pretty strong.

He gets that way sometimes. We're also both from that neck of the woods and we can tell you right now the guns have more to do with protecting yourself from funny colored people.

Oh and they are screamingly insecure. Lady qcross the street leaves hers sitting on the windowsill so she can see 'em coming!


[I have always loved you]

:-)
 
2012-12-25 01:47:01 PM  
Way to facilitate theft.

Glad I don't have to live with farked up citizens like that.
 
2012-12-25 01:48:19 PM  
England has 1/6 the population of the USA ... did you perhaps mean the UK?

There are bills of rights written into many UK laws and feudal agreements that go back hundreds of years before the USA was founded.

England has LESS violence ... the apparent