Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Medford Oregon Newpaper Sues To Get Names Of Gun Owners

Discussion in 'Activism Discussion and Planning' started by simpleguy, Nov 14, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. simpleguy

    simpleguy Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2006
    Messages:
    145
    Location:
    Clackamas, OR(PDX Metro Area)
    All right guys, you do some amazing things....gun owners in Southern Oregon need your help from a paper that is seriously off the reservation.
    This is from Oregon Firearms Federation's Website.

    http://oregonfirearms.org/alertspage/11.13.07 alert.html

    MEDFORD NEWSPAPER SUES TO GET NAMES OF GUN OWNERS
    As you may have heard, the Medford Mail Tribune has sued to get the names of concealed handgun license holders.

    This action was taken as a result of the lawsuit brought by a Medford teacher against the Medford school district. As you know, teacher Shirley Katz was suing to be allowed to carry her defensive firearm to work at Medford High School.

    The Mail Tribune, which has repeatedly editorialized that licensed, trained adults should NOT be allowed to carry firearms on school property, believes that one of the ways to promote its anti-gun agenda is to intimidate gun owners by demanding that the Sheriff turn over the names of license holders.

    What possible purpose this would serve, beyond invading the privacy of the most law abiding residents of Oregon, remains a mystery. But the Tribune's Editor, Bob Hunter is determined to proceed.

    Jackson County Sheriff Mike WInters has so far refused, correctly pointing out the dangers this would present. “We were reluctant to hand over the names because we don’t want to make it easier for anybody who would use the information for harm in terms of credit card fraud or identity theft." Winters said.

    Editor Bob Hunter believes that he has the right to those names for whatever purpose he chooses to use them. "This is information bought and paid for by the public, and the public has a right to it.” But of course, that's not true. The public did not buy and pay for this information. The information was paid for by the fees license holders are forced to pay to exercise a "right." But Bob goes on “It’s important for news media to take a stand on something like this because if public information is withheld in this way it will diminish the amount of public information the public is allowed to see,”

    The truth is, whether it is legal for the press to obtain these names or not, (and attorneys have recently informed us it may NOT be legal) the only purpose being served is to chill the rights of gun owners. It would be no different if we published the home addresses and phone numbers of Tribune staff and hid behind the First Amendment. (Which we will do if they continue this senseless exercise.)

    While the Sheriff should be applauded for his efforts to protect license holders,Bob Hunter and the Mail Tribune and its advertisers should know that it's wrong to promote their anti self-defense crusade by threatening the privacy of gun owners.

    You can contact Hunter by e-mail here bhunter@mailtribune.com or by regular mail and phone here:

    Mail Tribune
    P.O. Box 1108
    111 N. Fir St.
    Medford, OR 97501
    541-776-4411
     
  2. NeveraVictimAgain

    NeveraVictimAgain Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2003
    Messages:
    344
    This is like the newspaper - was it in Virginia? - that published the names of law abiding CHL holders. I must also ask, what's the point? Are these people so ignorant they acutally believe the mere possesion of a gun is wrong? Are those exercising their RKBA supposed to be ostracized? Are the neighbors going to shun them? Will the landlords of CHLs who rent be pressured to evict them?
    There's some facet to the "thinking" - although I suspect it's based purely on emotion - of this radical left conspiracy that I'm just not getting. Can someone with more insight into their "thinking" explain it to me, please?
     
    Last edited: Nov 14, 2007
  3. gunsmith

    gunsmith member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2003
    Messages:
    5,906
    Location:
    Reno, Nevada
    I just talked to

    Melissa ( 541-776-4411)
    At the newspaper, she has only gotten two calls on the matter.
    I guess you guys are sleeping!
    Anyway, she is a nice young lady who thinks that
    it is public information and that our fight should be with the leglislator(SIC).
    (These kids today, they think they invented the wheel...EVERY paper
    says the same thing)
    For some reason, she was reluctant to give me her personal info
    for publication on the www.
    Well, lets gear up fellas and ladies, we need a list of the people who work at the paper (and their home addresses) as well as their advertisers.
     
  4. gunsmith

    gunsmith member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2003
    Messages:
    5,906
    Location:
    Reno, Nevada
    Public Records is a dual edged sword

    Through the internet I found out that lovely Melissa
    made the deans list recently, for some reason she wasn't very happy
    that the semi anonymous gun nut on the phone knew that much personal info
    about her.:evil:
     
  5. simpleguy

    simpleguy Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2006
    Messages:
    145
    Location:
    Clackamas, OR(PDX Metro Area)
  6. gunsmith

    gunsmith member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2003
    Messages:
    5,906
    Location:
    Reno, Nevada
    infuriating!

    When this info gets published it does more then give info out for
    people to steal ID's, which is bad enough.
    When an Ohio paper did it, a man was killed and his gun stolen.
    A women in VA had to move because her abusive creep of an ex
    found her again.
    We have to publish the names , addresses and phone numbers
    of the people that work for this paper and the ADVERTISERS as well.
    When asked directly for personal info theses creepy "journalist"
    do not want it published....Well too bad!
    What is good for us is good for them.
    The PEOPLE have a right to know who is practicing their first amendment rights
     
  7. novaDAK

    novaDAK Member

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2006
    Messages:
    1,030
    here we go again...them and their BS. :rolleyes:
     
  8. Diggers

    Diggers Member

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2007
    Messages:
    890
    Maybe I'm wrong but I thought the people of Oregon for the most part wouldn't care about who owns a gun or has a CCW. :confused:

    Last time I drove through Bend OR. I saw signs saying "Win a gun!" In front of guns shops along the way. :)
     
  9. gunsmith

    gunsmith member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2003
    Messages:
    5,906
    Location:
    Reno, Nevada
    you're not wrong

    They do not care and probably support gun ownership.

    What ccw'ers care about is being targeted by miscreants looking to kill
    some one and taking their gun.

    ccw works because the bad guys DO NOT KNOW who has a gun.

    Police officers have been killed so that criminals can get a gun.

    If this thread was in general we would have "zumboed" these fascist already.
     
  10. Scorpiusdeus

    Scorpiusdeus member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2006
    Messages:
    740
    Location:
    Ventura County, California
    I just sent Bobby an email. I made sure it was not filled with anger and hate, but realistic concern and the promise that if he pursues his personal Vendetta against gun owners, we'd be contacting his advertisers and do what we legally could to ruin his day as much as he seeks to ruin ours.
     
  11. mpmarty

    mpmarty Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2006
    Messages:
    1,163
    Location:
    So. Western Oregon
    My Response

    Mr. Hunter:

    I am a concealed weapons permit holder in Oregon and also hold or have held CCW permits as a non resident of Washington State.
    Your feeling that the information should be public as it is gathered at public expense is misguided. Every time I renew my permit I pay fifty dollars. The CCW program in Oregon is self supporting and always has been.

    Publishing names and addresses of CCW holders is an invasion of privacy, pure and simple. Furthermore, it is dangerous and could result in unintended consequences such as:

    A divorced or separated spouse has been abused by her husband or significant other. She moves away from the area she formerly lived in and attends a firearms safety course to obtain her CCW. She feels safe as she is now better able to defend herself and the person who was a threat to her does not know where she lives or works. You would destroy this by making public her name and address.

    Trite as it may sound to you sir, denying CCW permits is telling five foot tall one hundred pound ladies that they should go “hand to hand” with a six foot two hundred pound attacker.

    Finally, if you succeed in your efforts, and expose my name and address, I will personally file a suit for invasion of privacy.

    Marty Patrovsky
    Legal / Regulatory Liaison Officer
    Comspan Communications
    541-229-2101 Direct Line
    541-430-0217 Cell Phone
     
  12. novaDAK

    novaDAK Member

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2006
    Messages:
    1,030
    I think that is exactly why they're doing this. They want to scare people into NOT getting a CCW. If they make people afraid that they're personal info will be published and made public to the world they'd be less likely to go through and get their CCW.
     
  13. kbellis3

    kbellis3 Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2003
    Messages:
    45
    In Ohio in response to a similar move by a newpaper in Sandusky Ohio the Buckeye Firearms Ass. published almost every piece of legally obtainable information on the newspaper editor they could get their hands on.

    Maybe it is time for firearms owners in Oregon to do the same.

    K-3

    http://www.buckeyefirearms.org/article3823.html
     
  14. Jim K

    Jim K Member

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2002
    Messages:
    17,626
    Easy response. An association or just a few guys who have permits get together, hire an attorney and countersue on the grounds of invasion of privacy and the clear intent of the paper to make the names of gun owners available to criminals, burglars and other persons who can do harm to the named citizens.

    Request compensation from the paper for mental anguish and promoting fear. If you look, you can probably find libel in there too. Freedom of the press is not absolute, and permit holders are not "public figures", so if the press calls them names, it can be held liable. (Example: "The insane fascist nutcases who insist on arming themselves for no purpose than murdering innocent people....")

    Jim
     
  15. jeepmor

    jeepmor Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2005
    Messages:
    2,824
    Location:
    Stumptown
    Better yet, write your legislator and support making this list private. I've started a thread here in Activism to do just that. I need some help and support in finding legislators that will support this effort.

    Better yet, lets push them to move to Alaska and Vermont legislation that actually defaults to our nation's Second Amendment. What a concept.

    Write Sheriff Winters in the Rogue Valley and offer him your support. His email link is in my thread. Get off your duffs, quit complaining and be proactive and we can squash these bugs. It won't take a huge effort, but I can't do it by myself.

    BTW, nice work gunsmith

    Oregonians, help me find the proper legislators to contact such that we can make these lists out of reach of the public forever.

    Marty - you could be a HUGE asset here man, PM me if you can help. I'm seriously sending letters and trying to get this process moving. It's time we do something about it before these local rag bozos get someone hurt or killed by exposing their locations to others.

    Here's my thread - http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=310158
     
  16. rjohnson4405

    rjohnson4405 Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2007
    Messages:
    262
    Location:
    Dayton, OH
    Email sent to Bobby as well, quite polite I thought.
     
  17. rjohnson4405

    rjohnson4405 Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2007
    Messages:
    262
    Location:
    Dayton, OH
    Sent a support note to Sheriff Winter, gosh I wish I could help him stay elected, but alas, I can only affect where I live...
     
  18. gunsmith

    gunsmith member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2003
    Messages:
    5,906
    Location:
    Reno, Nevada
    Fox news just covered this issue (terribly)

    they made it seem as if there is no danger to gun owners
    if their names and personal info is outed.

    Experience shows us different, from the few teachers who are carrying without getting caught or bringing lawsuits, to the women hiding from stalkers and the normal guy, who doesn't want to be targeted by some gangbanger looking for a gun or to make a name for himself.
    Truly an outrage!
     
  19. sdj

    sdj Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2007
    Messages:
    200
    Agreed. As Ben Kenobi said, "These aren't the 'droids you're looking for.". :)


    On another note: this newsman might have a motive that has little to do with firearms. He might well be seeking to create an issue on which people are divided in order to increase the readership of paper for which he works. Additionally, if the Sheriff is elected, he might be creating an issue which possibly leads to current Sheriff's being voted out.

    Lord, why can't we all just get along? :)
     
  20. jeepmor

    jeepmor Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2005
    Messages:
    2,824
    Location:
    Stumptown
    All,

    I was contacted by Bruce Starr, an Oregon state Senator, regarding my correspondence advocating making this CCW list private in Oregon and out of reach of newspapers such as this that are trying to create a story instead of report one. He said he is planning on bringing this up in 2009. Not sure why it would wait that long, but I don't navigate the .gov procedural quagmire very well.

    Mr Winters, the local sheriff, appreciates the support. Give him some more fellas.

    WinterMS@jacksoncounty.org
     
  21. Autolycus

    Autolycus Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2006
    Messages:
    5,456
    Location:
    In the land of make believe.
    Well perhaps we could start putting their emails, home numbers, home addresses, and other personal information on the web so that all can see it?
     
  22. mikec

    mikec Member

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2004
    Messages:
    223
    Location:
    MD
  23. Anonymous Coward

    Anonymous Coward Member

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2006
    Messages:
    199
    Location:
    Illinois, not Chicago
    Legal or not, it's just rude.

    Why don't they print the name of everyone in the county who has a criminal record? That would be more appropriate, don'tcha think?
     
  24. JT1JTI

    JT1JTI Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2007
    Messages:
    17
    Without commenting on whether I think the paper's story is "newsworthy," I have to ask why gun owners who will fight to exercise their 2nd Amendment rights seemed outraged by reporters and editors fighting to exercise their 1st Amendment rights. Have I missed something?

    Anyhow, newspapers are like buggy whips in this internet age. I'm expecting to have to find something else to train my puppy with soon.

    Oh, and I don't see parent Dow Jones (a.k.a. publisher of the Wall Street Journal) being the media cheerleader for any radical left conspiracy.
     
    Last edited: Dec 13, 2007
  25. LSCurrier

    LSCurrier Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2005
    Messages:
    271
    Location:
    Long Island, NY
    I spoke to someone at the paper (a female / didn't get her name) and was told that they are just seeking the number of CCW holders and not name and addresses.

    I don't believe this at all!!

    I know that the anti's will do anything and say anything to deceive people and that in their own twisted minds the are justified in using any means necessary.

    We must show them that they are SADLY mistaken and that they shall pay a dear cost when their deception is exposed for all to see!! Journalists were once defenders of truth and freedom - this is NO LONGER the case.

    Luke
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page