Handgun owners irate over having names published online

[Desertdog]

Handgun owners irate over having names published online
By JORGE FITZ-GIBBON
THE JOURNAL NEWS
http://www.thejournalnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061217/NEWS01/612170348/1018/NEWS02


Dozens of readers have taken issue with The Journal News over its decision to run a list of pistol permit holders in Westchester and Rockland counties as part of a wider investigative article.

The names of more than 30,000 licensed handgun owners were posted online as part of "Falling Through the Cracks," the paper's Dec. 10 report that found that thousands of registered handguns were unaccounted for because there is no system to secure the weapons of permit holders who die. The articles can be found by clicking the "Gun Control" icon at www.lohud.com.

Some readers, particularly those on the list of licensed pistol owners, suggested that the newspaper erred in publishing the names. They said it may target their homes for theft, although the paper did not publish their home addresses.

The New York State Rifle and Pistol Association reacted by posting what it thought were home addresses and telephone numbers of newspaper staff members. The list inadvertently included addresses of people not associated with the newspaper or the articles.

The association pulled that list from its Web site on Friday.

Some pistol owners remain irate at the newspaper.

"I just question the judgment," said Rockland pistol permit holder Rich Himes. "As far as I'm concerned, I've done everything legally. I've been fingerprinted and everything's on record. And I understand Freedom of Information. But maybe because we can publish information, maybe it's not always a good idea."

The lists were obtained by the newspaper through Freedom of Information Law requests. State pistol permits are public records, as are the names and home addresses of all permit holders. The Journal News chose to withhold the street addresses. Instead, only the names and municipalities where the permit holders live were published.

"The Constitution gives people the right to own guns in this country, and it also gives people the right to know whether they own a gun or not," said Henry Freeman, editor and vice president/news at The Journal News. "This is a public record. People have a right to know that.

"We did take it into consideration and did not publish your street address, which is also public information."

Reach Jorge Fitz-Gibbon at [email protected] or 914-694-5016.

 

[buzz_knox]

"We did take it into consideration and did not publish your street address, which is also public information."

Of course, the street address was easily obtained via said public information, so it wasn't necessary to provide it in order to cause harm. Revealing the name was sufficient to cause the potential for harm.

 

[wingman]

In truth this is more of a danger to non-permit holders, which would you
target if you wanted to rob a home.?

 

[ArmedBear]

In truth this is more of a danger to non-permit holders, which would you
target if you wanted to rob a home.?

Depends what you want to steal.

 

[MechAg94]

If someone was robbed, could they hold the paper liable?

 

[Robert Hairless]

"The Constitution gives people the right to own guns in this country, and it also gives people the right to know whether they own a gun or not," said Henry Freeman, editor and vice president/news at The Journal News. "This is a public record. People have a right to know that."

The newspaper editor, Mr. Freeman, needs to take remedial courses in reading, writing, and thinking at the local community college.

It's good that Mr. Freeman recognizes that the Constitution "gives people the right to own guns in this country," but if Mr. Freeman were to actually read the Constitution he would see that it does not give other people the right to know who owns a gun.

The issue isn't whether people who own a gun have the right to know whether they own it. The issue is whether other people have a right to know whether someone owns a gun.

 

[Car Knocker]

If someone was robbed, could they hold the paper liable?

Not unless there is some link between the publishing of the name and the burglary. Of any group of 30,000 people, a percentage of them will have their homes burglarized in a given year just through happenstance. Now, if the burglar were to be caught and stated that he broke into the home because the published name led him to believe he would find guns in the home, there would probably be cause for action.

 

[carterbeauford]

The Constitution gives people the right to own guns in this country, and it also gives people the right to know whether they own a gun or not

Wow. Just wow. Not sure what constitution he is reading, the one I am familiar with has no such language.

I honestly cannot think anything witty to say in response to that. Just amazing how people create their own realities.

 

[SoCalShooter]

I would be irate also. I am surprised that California has not done something like this. Gun information like that should be confidential, in my opinion there should be no reason to register your firearm at all its just beaurocracy.

 

[longeyes]

I suggest a website with the names and addresses of various left-leaning scribes and academoids. Just for the sake of openness and togetherness, of course.

 

[Manedwolf]

In truth this is more of a danger to non-permit holders, which would you
target if you wanted to rob a home.?

They can target a home with guns to steal when the owner isn't home, then use those guns for home invasions of people not on the list.

All in one convenience for criminals.

And how about publishing a list of people who illegally own firearms? What, a list doesn't exist? You DON'T SAY?!

 

[Waitone]

Arrogant condescension. Fairer and more balanced than usual, but arrogant condescension nonetheless.

 

[Desertdog]

I suggest a website with the names and addresses of various left-leaning scribes and academoids. Just for the sake of openness and togetherness, of course.

How about a website with anti-gunners name and addresses stating "I do not own a firearm."

 

[doubleg]

Now gun owners are being treated the same as rapists.

 

[mbt2001]

How about a website with anti-gunners name and addresses stating "I do not own a firearm."

and my wife is hot and my daughter is young....

yeah, people have a right to know this. I mean, we are paying taxes to protect this person, I want to know what he has to protect...

 

[Marshall]

I see it as a ploy to reduce the amount of people getting permits. If people know this can happen, they may fear getting a permit. Therefore the number of new CCL's drops. Anti's will try anything.

 

[JohnL2]

That is INCREDIBLY poor judgement from the editors. I am awestruck at the level of arrogance and nerve.
Law-abiding citizens. I repeat, they are law-abiding citizens from what I can understand. Not criminals. Maybe I could understand it if they were felons.
Unbelievable. Astounding. Dumbfounding.
They should stick with their police blotter section and leave the good folks alone.

I am normally tolerant of all the anti-gun hoopla. But this sticks in my craw. I can't type the words I am saying now.

 

[quatin]

Wow. Just wow. Not sure what constitution he is reading, the one I am familiar with has no such language.

Freedom of the press. Unless we argue over what "freedom" means exactly.

 

[the pistolero]

Freedom of the press. Unless we argue over what "freedom" means exactly.

What in the name of all that is holy is that supposed to mean? I suppose, strictly speaking, they do have the freedom to stick it to groups of people who do things they don't agree with (such as getting a permit to carry), but that damn sure doesn't make it right. It's absolutely no one's business -- not mine, not yours, not anyone's -- who's issued a permit to carry a gun, and for this ****** editor to sit there and self-righteously proclaim that it is his business is the absolute height of arrogance. I'd almost call it tabloid journalism, but that's an insult to the tabloids. I can't say what I am thinking right now either, but I will say it most assuredly is not High Road material.

 

[longeyes]

I suppose, strictly speaking, they do have the freedom to stick it to groups of people who do things they don't agree with (such as getting a permit to carry), but that damn sure doesn't make it right.

What they're doing is purely malicious; they do not have the right to endanger the safety of the people named.

Turn the malice against the malicious. See how they like it.

 

[Soybomb]

"The Constitution gives people the right to own guns in this country, and it also gives people the right to know whether they own a gun or not," said Henry Freeman, editor and vice president/news at The Journal News.

Freedom of the press. Unless we argue over what "freedom" means exactly.

The issue isn't if the paper has the right to publish anything but if the public has the right to know what sort of personal property I keep at home. To me its no different than publishing a list of marital aids Mr. Freeman keeps at home. Or perhaps more accurately, the list of books on his bookshelf.

[email protected]

 

[the pistolero]

What they're doing is purely malicious; they do not have the right to endanger the safety of the people named.

That's basically what I was trying to say but just couldn't phrase it the way I wanted to. It just really irks me when people trot out that "freedom of the press" bit as if it were some get-out-of-jail-free card. No one ever talks about responsibility of the press. I wonder why that is...

 

[Desertdog]

What would happen if anyone that has been named in the newspaper decided to sue for invasion of privacy or endangerment by naming them?

Yes, it may be public record, BUT that does not give them right to publish it all in the newspaper. It does give you, or me, the right to go to the Public Records Office and look it up ourselves.

I would love to see them hit with a lawsuit for each and every name they publish.

Anybody know a good lawyer in that territory?

Fight fire with fire.

 

[gyp_c2]

yup

...More of the same crap...

It's a right...it wasn't given...

It was bound to happen...registration is registration...

Whether you tie it to the gun, a social security#, or a carry permit...

...that blows...

...and besides, who the hell deserves to know what happened to those firearms?
Is that some local ordinance that's being pushed for?

That's just too frrackkin' much...

 

[Art Eatman]

I had some polite emailing back and forth with Jorge when this first broke.

Among other things, after I pointed out the targeting for burglary, he said they would monitor police reports to see if there was any effect on the licensees.

I think he was quite startled at the amount and intensity of the negative reactions...

Art