QUICK_DRAW_McGRAW
Member
if it truly was sarcasm them i retract my statement and appogise, if not then it stands.
Posted by searcher451:
Does anyone else find it interesting that many forum members here who are such vigorous supporters of the Second Amendment are ready to trounce the First Amendment on this issue? In point of fact, you can't cherry-pick the amendments, folks: "I'm OK with this amendment, but that one is not for me so I'll ignore it ... or threaten a lawsuit (or revenge) against those who use it."
The First Amendment allows the press barons to operate freely in this country. When you consider the alternative, that's not a bad thing. Sometimes the press boys do it well, and sometimes they do it poorly (as is the case here). But you can't throw it out entirely because a newspaper editor made a horrendous call, anymore than you can toss out the Second Amendment -- as the many anti-gun folks advocate -- when a Virginia Tech blows up.
Does anyone else find it interesting that many forum members here who are such vigorous supporters of the Second Amendment are ready to trounce the First Amendment on this issue?
if it truly was sarcasm them i retract my statement and appogise, if not then it stands.
The First Amendment allows the press barons to operate freely in this country. When you consider the alternative, that's not a bad thing. Sometimes the press boys do it well, and sometimes they do it poorly (as is the case here). But you can't throw it out entirely because a newspaper editor made a horrendous call, anymore than you can toss out the Second Amendment -- as the many anti-gun folks advocate -- when a Virginia Tech blows up.
Help Protect the Privacy Rights of Oregon's Right-to-Carry Permit Holders!
Friday, November 21, 2008
Newspapers across the state have been requesting that local sheriffs release information about the identity of individuals who have been issued Concealed Handgun Licenses within their respecive counties.
Earlier this year, after the Jackson County Sheriff refused a request for similar information from the Medford Mail Tribune, a circuit court in Jackson County ruled that individuals who apply for or have been issued CHLs must document that the license is for personal security reasons in order to be exempt from state public records disclosure laws. The Portland Oregonian reported last week that in response to this ruling and subsequent requests for information, the Washington County Sherifff's Office has decided to mail letters to the tens of thousands of individuals who have been issued CHLs by the county, asking them if they obtained their license for personal security reasons and whether they want their information released as part of a public records request. CHLs in Washington County also have the option of answering these questions by visiting the sheriff's office website at http://washtech.co.washington.or.us/handgunholder/.
The Washington County Sheriff's Office should be commended for recognizing the importance of keeping a personal security decision to obtain a CHL private -- and for developing a mechanism that complies with the court's ruling, but still gives CHLs a choice in the matter. We've also received information that the Coos County Sheriff has done the same for his CHL holders, so bravo to him as well.
Members are urged to contact their county sheriff and ask him or her to devise a way to accommodate CHL holders and their privacy concerns as the Washington and Coos County Sheriffs' Offices has done. You can find contact information for your county sheriff's office by visiting http://www.oregonsheriffs.org/.
searcher451 said:Does anyone else find it interesting that many forum members here who are such vigorous supporters of the Second Amendment are ready to trounce the First Amendment on this issue?
You can't maliciously yell "fire!" in a crowded auditorium when there's no fire.
You (or the news media) can't incite a riot.
You (or the news media) can't libel or slander someone.
You (or the news media) do NOT have a blank check to invade privacy, and place some people in danger by publishing their names, addresses and other private information.
Several states have already passed laws that make concealed carry permit lists unavailable to the public and news media. Thus far, not one of these laws has been overturned on first amendment grounds.
I would love to see gun owners in CA (or any other state where it is public record) unite and fight to change that. This article is dangerous..... Nothing like issuing a memo to all criminals out there on where to steal a gun from. I wonder how many people on that list's homes were broken into/gun's stolen. The person who wrote that article should be ashamed.
Quote:
You (or the news media) do NOT have a blank check to invade privacy, and place some people in danger by publishing their names, addresses and other private information.
Not sure what the case law is, but I am 100% confident that my hometown newspaper could report my name, address, and any "private" information - as long as it is true. I know the can do it with real estate records (how much I paid for my house, etc), because they do.