Slashdot Mirror
New York Paper Uses Public Records To Publish Gun-Owner Map
New submitter Isaac-1 writes "First it was the sex offenders being mapped using public records, now it seems to be gun owners — I wonder who will be next? It seems a newspaper in New York has published an interactive map with the names and addresses of people with [handguns]."
It's happened before: In 2007, Virginia's Roanoke Times raised the ire of many gun owners by publishing a database of Virginia's gun permit holders that it assembled based on public records inquiries. (The paper later withdrew that database.) Similarly, WRAL-TV in North Carolina published a database earlier this year with searchable map of (partially redacted) information about permit holders in that state, and Philadelphia made the news for a similar disclosure — complete with interactive map and addresses — of hundreds of gun permit applicants and holders.
Yet such resistance to open up data on it. These are legal guns and these maps allow prospective homeowners to know which neighborhoods are "safer" (one way or the other). Leave it up.
AKA A map of which houses NOT to rob.
All these people that shoot up eachother, are their guns legal or are they illegal?
for now they know which homes not to invade.
So basically its a map of people without guns, and therefore excellent homes to invade and rob. Thanks Journal News! Douch bags.
Python
This is just a great example of responsible journalism. Now the criminals know exactly where to go to get firearms that will never be traced back to them.
Ha! very good initiative from this New York newspaper.
There's nothing illegal publishing public records, and it has one heavy effect. It puts shame on gun owners.
Make it a socially reprehensible act to possess fire arms (even though it's not illegal) and you'll see how fast people's attitude towards guns will change for the better. And the good news ? You don't have to get Congress involved, or the NRA etc...
Just public shame.
Because, as we all know, only bad people have guns, or even want them.
I'm not sure what they're hoping to do other than to harass law-abiding gun owners, but this is a bad idea regardless. It will give criminals a list of people who have guns at their houses. It may make them safer from break-ins by criminals looking for some easy cash and no trouble, but it could make them targets for criminals who are specifically trying to get a hold of guns.
Is this sector udner another administration county ? What is there ? It seems to be in the middle of the zone but quasi empty of guns.
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
Dear America,
I have tried and tried to defend you and get you to see just how idiotic you all are. I've attempted to defend your right to pirate and your right to defend your opinions. However, I believed in the Constitution wholeheartedly. I had believed the good in all, even the lousiest men. However, time and again, you have shown only the dark, ugly side of you, beginning with the war on Rebecca Black's Friday. You all make me ashamed to be an American right now, letting the government seduce you into thinking that guns are bad simply because one maniac decided to let loose on an elementary school.
Removing guns will not solve anything, in fact it will cause more problems. Our will is slowly being drained as they try to pass more and more laws restricting our freedoms, taking away our pride, and eventually turning us into slaves. I came from the 1990s, the final decade where we didn't let government tell us what to do, we all had individual thoughts and cared for the whole rather than ourselves
The internet, while a fantastic tool, has only reinforced the point I have been trying to make. It has made us less unique and forced us to think like a bee hive - all the same thoughts and act in the same way. What happened to being different? Right, being different means you are either gay, a Nazi, or pathetic. Well, call me all those names, but I'm through sticking up for this sorry-ass country I live in. It sickens me to admit I actually tried to defend you and the Constitution.
Now that gun owners are being tracked, it tells me that the final stages are being put forth along with our loss of ownership over photos. Good job, America, you've screwed yourself on all levels. Would you like to be chain and whipped or held in concentration camps while your so-called "government" protects you?
So, the best response you could come up with is an ad hominem attack and profanity? Nice.
"Tell me doctor, with all of your defenses, are there any provisions for an attack by killer bees?"
Does gun ownership make for a safer, better, society, or something else? Statistical correlation is not the same thing as causality, but what do these facts tell us?
Is that supposed to shame people? Because now they will need their guns for self defense from nutjobs.
Seen the new Dredd movie? Still think we don't have a problem with ultra violent media?
"If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
though in some respects it makes me want to get a permit as my neighborhood appears undefended. Hmm.. maybe thats the point of it? Left out of all of this is that NY does not require permits for shotguns or rifles.
The difference now is that they have a browsing wy to check for it. So it makes it easier for them, but neither it was difficult before publication.
... else's business?
Maybe I'm trying to work out where I'm going to live, and want to avoid neighbourhoods that are so dangerous that their residents think they need guns.
don't forget posting as anonymous chickenshit too
lets give everyone another reason to buy guns on the black/gray market and not register them - that is utter stupidity
Well when the paper uses it's free speech to endanger the lives and property of others by noting for criminals which houses are unprotected and may be burglarized without fear of adding a felony gun crime to possible charges when a crowbar will do. On the other hand if one has a gun and wants another it becomes easier to do your shopping if you know where to go, which really amounts to the paper condoning, hell, even facilitating future " gun crimes", how extremely profitable for the paper. Not so much for free speech or free people. This is an example of the fatal error of slackly publicly educated liberals ignorantly shouting FIRE! in a theatre to generate headlines of people being trampled. UYYEAAAHHH , free speech alright.....Doh, Homer!
*Repent!Quit Your Job!Slack Off!The World Ends Tomorrow and You May Die!
Because its an abuse of the freedoms you have to use to protest something that everyone deserves, its just not right to use constitutional amendments to attack other constitutional amendments, its amounts to mass insanity. It shows how bad our culture has been damaged by the stupid bullshit all the conspiracy nuts are always crying about.
No, the response he came up with was to refer to the First Amendment, which gun nuts are conveniently ignoring, and thus are probably not mentally stable enough to own a gun.
Ad Hominem means "You insulted people instead of presenting an argument", not "Even though you presented a logical and coherent argument, I'm going to pretend it's invalid because you also happened to insult people and use naughty words while presenting it. And because I have no counter-argument".
I think there's an app for that!
*Repent!Quit Your Job!Slack Off!The World Ends Tomorrow and You May Die!
I now know which homes aren't safe to break into, wonder if any of those people would be sympathetic towards their neighbors if I broke into those homes.
Being aware of the presence of a gun and whether it is in a safe mode is essential when children are involved.
So... I have just looked at the map, and discovered that my little nephews live next to gun owners on three sides. Their parents now know this, and can ensure that their neighbors properly "safe" their weapons if they are at their house.
IMHO, this was a very important community service.
Either a shopping list for burglars who want to steal guns, or a list of addresses not to burglarize for fear of being shot.
Here in Florida, concealed carry license holders' information was removed from public record ages ago.
If i was a burglar i'd want to know what weapon to take to a house. If i know the owner has a hand gun, i can take a bigger one. And then i'd also know which houses i didn't need to take a weapon with me.
"The hands that help are better far than lips that pray." - Robert Ingersoll (1833-1899)
its also useful to people who want guns to wait until the occupier leaves and then steal the gun to use else where.
"The hands that help are better far than lips that pray." - Robert Ingersoll (1833-1899)
You do know what public records are, right?
"This year will go down in history. For the first time, a civilized
nation has full gun registration. Our streets will be safer, our
police more efficient, and the world will follow our lead into the
future!"
Adolph Hitler
Chancellor, Germany, 1933
Not really see what they actually did was just literally publish the list, they didn't incite anyone to violence. I'm not entirely sure I agree with the release of the list to begin with, for other reasons.
I hate sigs.
You assume that because I don't show up on such a list that I'm unarmed. None of the shotguns that I inherited from my father are listed anywhere, but they all work perfectly well. These lists indicate permit holders, which are required for hand guns. Owners of rifles generally don't need permits.
I actually think we should have a national registry like this where you can classify your home as: 1) no protection, 2) armed, 3) heavily armed or 4) a well regulated militia in a box.
Full discloser: I am armed at home. Always. Please publish this information for all to see. Much as my dogs make my home a less ideal target than my cat-loving neighbor, this revelation is further deterrent to the "takers".
Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.
Ernest Hemingway
...on behalf of gun rights advocates, for graphically illustrating one reason requiring gun registration is a bad idea.
Another thank you from Westchester & Rockland Organized Crime, Inc, both for providing homes to avoid for their junior members, and high-value targets for their more skilled housebreakers.
First it was the sex offenders being mapped using public records, not it seems to be gun owners — I wonder who will be next?
Slashdot editors?
systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
Now someone can do a statistical analysis of whether houses that own guns get burglarized at a different rate than houses without. My guess would be less cuz if I was a burglar I wouldn't want to be extra ventilated; I'd go for the soft target.
now criminals know where to go
Deterrence does not work if the other party does not know you have a weapon. See nuclear weapons as an example. If the opposing country does not know you are armed they may attack you by mistake and then all hell breaks loose. The only time you do *not* want someone to know you have nukes is if you are developing first strike capability. The paper in fact has done a great service to gun owners and inhabitants of neighborhoods with high gun ownership.
putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
If i was a burglar i'd want to know what weapon to take to a house. If i know the owner has a hand gun, i can take a bigger one. And then i'd also know which houses i didn't need to take a weapon with me.
Oh please, this is New York City. There are even more illegal and unregistered guns here than there are illegal sublets.
So posting anonymously is bad, but owning guns anonymously is bad. I dare say I'd rather know if my neighbor owns a gun than who someone who posts on the Internet is. In truth I don't care if I know either.
This is only a list of handguns, which you need a permit to own. It does not list rifles or shotguns, which make up a significant percentage of guns owned by Americans. Although it is more probable that the households that own handguns also own more of the rifles and shotguns than households without handguns, there are still many gun owning households that are not listed here. In fact, I know someone who lives in this area who is not listed, but has a rifle in her house.
Honestly this just makes sense to me. I would prefer to know at least at an aggregate level (dots on a map) of things like convicted pedophiles, guns, lethal chemical storage, and so on.
Since they're so proud of their guns. And since guns are mainly intended to secure by deterrence, publicly advertising their presence makes a home that much safer from intruders.
Let's see... The NRA compiles and publishes a list of people who contributed to a group or lobby that was anti-gun... how do you think those people would feel? PETA compiles and publishes a list of people who own fur coats. Westboro Baptish Church compiles and publishes a list of all same-sex marriage licenses. These types of things are nothing more than harassment.
registration is bad, it makes registration lists. thanks from all us gun owners for proving our point
So I can be sure never to live near the nutters who believe they need to own one.
The statistics show that concealed permit carriers commit less crime than police officers themselves. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concealed_carry_in_the_United_States
Relatively unknown news website posts controversial map coinciding with this week's hot headlines in order to push subscriber access. With only 18 articles left to view during my 30-day free trial, I better sign up before the next big killing spree takes place.
As popular as that quote is, it's highly unlikely to be real.
I used to think gun owners were just regular people who just happened to like guns. After reading the comments to this story I now think they're a bunch of sniveling whiners. Just man up, my goodness. The paroxysm of shrieking fear that gun owners may have been outed makes you all look like wimps.
Freely available or would they have to pay a processing fee for the records? And waste time poring through the records (the whole point of crime is avoiding "work" like that)?
I see it as a list of non-gun owners. Now criminals can case properties on the computer to determine if the owner has a gun or not. Why risk the hassle of robbing a place where there is the potential of a gun owner when criminals can determine if the property and properties around it have gun owner without ever leaving their house.
So posting as iggymanz, which is about as anonymous as AC is as far as most of us are concerned, is somehow better than simply posting as AC?
And therefore warrants a genuine ad hominem from you?
Your complaint would be a lot more credible if you had signed your real name to your post. Just Sayin'.
(And no, I'm not the AC in the OP. I just can't be bothered to create an account.)
This is cool, as when zombi outbreak happens, i want to know who to be friends with
Here's what I blame America for-
America would clearly rather not do anything meaningful about the constant violence in places like Chicago, where 20 kids were killed every two weeks for all of 2012. America would far rather endure a 24/7 media blitz when 20 rich white kids get killed, and they would far rather focus on what young black kids use to try to kill each other rather than the fact that black kids are trying to kill each other in the first place, I can only assume because that would be an uncomfortable conversation.
Go ahead America, focus on something that won't make a damn bit of difference to a kid using a stolen handgun with a 6-round ammo capacity to flush his life right down the toilet.
THAT"s what I blame you for.
The first amendment now means all government records should be public? I don't think anyone is denying the right of the people to publish any information they can legally obtain. Instead the argument is that the information should not be public. That in no way violates the first amendment. Unless you think the CIA should just be a web forum where we can all pitch in.
How about a map of males between 15 and 30, who are intelligent, take an SSRI or similar drug, and have a gun. That would really help keep the mediocre majority safer.
Here's your map.
We'd appreciate it if you indeed would stay the fuck far away from here.
If you think there's nothing wrong with this map then consider how you'd react if it was a map of gay couples who had just been married.
Or a map of ACLU members.
Or a map of abortion doctors.
Or a map of Jews.
The simple fact is that this map serves only to demonize gun owners and present them as a target for other people in society. "Look! Here's the nasty gun owners!" This kind of so-called journalism is nothing more than an attempt to further divide Americans against each other, and it should not be rewarded or tolerated.
I hope someone publishes a list of all the author's info and family's info so the felons can properly thank them.
And you assume that the criminal geniuses which pervade our society think at such levels. Realistically, crackheads and such will simply see a map of protected vs. unprotected homes. Or, if they're looking for a weapon, will see a map which shows them exactly where to go - thus encouraging & facilitating weapons being stolen from their rightful owners and ending up in criminal hands.
Rho
A good argument for both concealed and open carry. I should have the lightness in my heart, that life in public is a level playing field.
*Repent!Quit Your Job!Slack Off!The World Ends Tomorrow and You May Die!
So we just wait for your wife to be alone, you gotta work.. Or we wait for you to leave the kids with a sitter... And get your gun then. Point is, crime is organized... They will have this list for years to come. You won't always be so hot-headed...
I don't know how you got rated "Insightful" for that ridiculous comment. Name calling will not solve anything and neither will creating a list of people who LEGALLY own a gun. Maybe we should compile a list of everyone who owns an iPhone? What is this list supposed to accomplish? If anything it would help criminals know who doesn't have a gun.
Only seems fair.
Janet Hasson
President/Publisher
The Journal News
w: 914.694.5204
h: 248-594-2197
3 Gate House Ln
Mamaroneck Ny 10543
The CEO of the parent corporation, Gannett
Gracia C Martore
728 Springvale Rd
Great Falls, VA 22066
This is reckless. Since this information will be available to all, burglars will know which houses have guns, and will wait until the owners aren't there. I think you all know where I am going with this.
If someone used voter registration rolls to publish a map of all registered black voters, would that be a conflict between the 1st Amendment and the 14th Amendment, or would that just be a conflict between the 1st Amendment and an expectation of privacy?
The answer in that case is obvious, so why do we have idiotic posts like yours?
your thin skin doesn't make me a troll
Hyuck! And here is an interactive map that shows all the people that usually leave their house unlocked when not home. And here is another one that shows all the registered iPod joggers and the routes they take each day. And here is a list that.....
Fucking martians. Stop leaking personal information like it's your fucking job...
with so many dots, you'd think there would be a much higher incidence of gun violence in that neighborhood, right? That's what the newspaper is apparently trying to make you think, anyway. After all, guns lead to innocents' death, right?
That, or the goal of the newspaper is to instill shock and fear into the public about the "proliferation" of weapons in their community without taking the time to analyze the data in context, hoping that the readers will just take the newspaper's word that this is the "whole story". If the idea that guns lead to innocents' death is true, then the number of dots in this map should indicate a disproportionate level of innocents' death per square mile. Without that data, this is pure sensationalism for the sake of forcing their neighbors to disarm.
The real truth to the data shows the VAST MAJORITY of gun owners are responsible and law abiding (they registered their guns), and therefore presumably non-violent (they'd be in prison and would no longer have a permit to own a gun if they used their gun illegally.) Exactly the opposite of the point that the newspaper was trying to make. This data plot should be relabeled "number of registered gun owners who are not responsible for the death of an innocent person."
This pretty much illustrates the mental illness from which this nation suffers. Everyone's saying "OMG you just published a list of houses to rob!" or "OMG you just published a list of houses not to rob." Then they start going through a list of hypothetical scenarios that will NEVER HAPPEN. Just because the voices in your head say something will now happen, that does not mean it's true. This is especially true if the voices in your head have been replaced by Fox News. This entire fucking nation needs an intervention, and as soon as I can figure out how to get 350 million people into a room and tell them their friends are worried about them, we're going to have one! You need to turn off that 24 hour news channel, chuck your cellphone in the toilet, and go out to reconnect with the real world!
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
They created an attractive nuisance putting public safety in jeopardy with either their own profit in mind or with gross negligence on a monumental unrivaled scale. I stand by that.
*Repent!Quit Your Job!Slack Off!The World Ends Tomorrow and You May Die!
Before I post what I wanted a little thought about motivation.
Why print this map? Why not print for example a map of all people buying ARM programming books from Amazon. The simplest answer "to sell more newspapers" doesn't hold water. I would want be more likely to buy the newspaper if it had the ARM map. While I admit that I am atypical in that way, I suspect that the number of extra newspapers sold would not outweight the number of subscriptions lost. ( Sales vs subscriptions being a asymmetrical measure. A lost subscription costs way more then a single sale makes. ) I think that a good lawyer will make a good case that their motives were malicious.
If I were the lawyer of the newspaper, I would tell the head honchos to pray that no one gets killed during a burglary and the burglar gets caught with thtat map on him. The wrongful death suit could be disastrous for them.
Now on with my post.
First they came for the smokers
and I didn't say anything because I did not smoke
Then they came for the heavy drinkers
and I didn't say anything because I did not drink much
Then they came for the cheese and fast food eaters
and I didn't say anything because I did not eat fast food
Then they came for the gun owners
and I didn't say anything because I did not own a gun.
Then they came for me
and there was no one left to speak for me.
Cause this is safer than using that "No Guns In This House" sticker
So your real name is iggymanz? Or are you an anonymous chickenshit too?
...you do NOT register a gun!
Ferret
Sic gorgiamus allos subjectatos nunc
A pool. A list of gun owners. Same thing!
I hate sigs.
Anonymous firearm ownage performs a great deal of "herd immunity" for modern society. Criminals are deterred when they don't know who's packing, and they increase their risk by invading multiple homes without free guns. Posting the identities of real people also places them at risk from their own peers, through public prejudice or through marking victims of theft. Either way is a violation of privacy and gun ownership.
Good job ruining Christmas, New York.
A gun is more like a car. If you want to own it and operate it there some regulations to limit the risk that your neighbors have to endure.
There are also rule about privacy of car ownership. Under federal law, you can't simply call up the DMV and find out the registered owner of a car based on the license plate. You have to have specified, limited reasons for doing so, and there are records kept of such requests: Driver Privacy Protection Act
"Anyone who [rips a CD] is probably engaging in copyright infringement." - David O. Carson
I would like everyone in America to stop and
think what "War on drugs" means in the context of
violence. This is a "War" taking place on the streets and homes
on America. Is it really a wonder that violence is becomming
more and more prevelant? I'm thinking that a war that we know
from the experience of the 20's and 30's cannot be won should
be written off to experience.
That would be a valid concern in more rural areas than I live in. Hell, I dunno if that stranger on the step has a blackjack or a howitzer, but here, a handgun would be most common. It would be a visible case of " is that a 12 ga. in your pocket or are you just glad to see a lot of people as you try to conceal your prize trap shooting iron."
It's true gun sales/gifts/trades from individuals to individuals are not logged, so handguns needn't be " registered" or anything else for that matter. It's just that buying commercially sold arms puts you on public display for whatever ends.
*Repent!Quit Your Job!Slack Off!The World Ends Tomorrow and You May Die!
I'm 100% gun control.
Last week I found a gun in the street just outside of my house on my way to work.
The police called me later that day to let me know that the gun had been stolen from someone in Kentucky.
I don't think it was very smart for that paper to publish a list of gun owners. They just told criminals where they might potentially break in and find guns. Maybe some little old lady's home who keeps a glock in the house for protection.
Maybe some gun nut who has an automatic weapon in his garage, which will now be stolen and used in some gang fight........or school massacre.
FAIL
What would *really* be valuable would be a database of what used to be called "crazy people". For example, anyone diagnosed as bipolar, maybe even including the probability of them going off their meds? Another example worthy of consideration is anyone who has committed domestic violence. & road rage.
Now, there's a database worth the effort!
The paper missed the mark by miles, in their breathless attempt to score page views off the tragedy of another. But isn't this what news media does nowadays?
Sex offenders, unlike registered firearm owners, are typically 1. convicted felons (who are barred from firearm ownership anyway) and 2. Statistically likely to commit repeat offenses.
REGISTERED firearms owners are, in the overwhelming majority, legally permitted in their jurisdiction to possess such things, legally acquiring the firearms, and law abiding citizens. They have not broken any laws in the acquisition, ownership, or use of such items. In addition, at least in my area, this list would contain a very large percentage of the local law enforcement officers, who typically become quite irate at having their home addresses listed.
I won't show up on this kind of list, as the interesting things in my house are exempt from permit requirements in my locale. Besides, I'd so much rather pin an armed home invader to the wall with a broadhead arrow...much more in keeping with my barbarian ancestry. The stain will go away with the carpet.
I agree! I'm against it. Let them guess. It's none of their business if I have a baseball bat or an " Illudium Q-36 Explosive Space Modulator ". I have it for my purposes. If my purposes put anyone in actual danger, then it's my ass. So don't worry about what I have, just be glad burglars don't know where their career can come to an abrupt halt. Unless, of course, your local airbrain newsclowns need copy to sell more of their garbage for ads. That's what it boils down to, the public safety was traded to bring you a word from these sponsors!
*Repent!Quit Your Job!Slack Off!The World Ends Tomorrow and You May Die!
These databases are a godsend! Now I know where to find our good guys when a mass killer starts shooting up my neighborhood.
Nice of the newspaper to publish a shopping list for bad guys. Now criminals will know exactly which houses to rob so as to get guns that won't be traceable to them. This is very bad.
So... The people who support the civil right to be armed argue that just because people misuse the technology doesn't meant that it should be illegal. The anti-arms people argue that your rights should be strictly limited because some people abuse it.
Then some idiot abuses her free speech civil rights, and those who support the right to arms point this out. Suddenly, the anti-arms people complain that if you do something about this abuse, then you are overreacting and threatening all free speech rights.
Have I got all that right?
Seems this is more a list of who not to rob.
Be seeing you...
Thanks for advertising that your state is friendly to criminals by helping them stay safe this holiday season. I know that some criminals will move to your state from mine hence making mine safer. In my state a criminal thinks twice not mater what house he robes because he does not know if it is one with a gun or not.
What I hate these urban myth sites is that so many of their entries seem to be of the form this is/kinda/sorta/not really an urban myth.
The quote maybe off. ( OK they checked Nazi speachs, did they check out speachs made by officials of Weimar Republic ? ) But the fact is that gun control did help the Nazi's obtain and consolidate power.
The two fact ( as claimed by the article ).
1) Most Gernans could not obtain a gun.
2) Nasis found ways around the law.
that's actually my last name with the first character moved to the end -- Warren
Someone should post the personal names, addresses, phone numbers, email addresses and other personal details of the reporters of the newspaper who put the information up on online about the gun owners.
That's funny, I keep a list of people who have donated to pro-gun control nonprofits. So in the event of zombie apocalypse, I know which undefended houses to rob.
You give criminals too much credit. If they want to burglarize a house, they simply wait for nobody to be home and break in.
Self awareness - try it!
Your nephews are more likely to die from the junk food being served there than from the firearms.
I would consider the publishing of the map to be a crime against the counties, endangering the safety of both gun owners and non-gun owners, and particularly targeting law enforcement officers. The district attorneys for those counties should prosecute the publisher, editors and reporters involved for large-scale reckless endangerment.
Gun owners are the same thing as sex offenders in my book, and I have a right to know where all of the dangerous psychopaths in my neighborhood live.
There should be a public online database of all gun owners in the country, and they should have to go door to door just like sex offenders so their neighbors are aware.
This is painting a target on individuals for coordinated attacks by crime. Congradulations, New York, in one move you've sealed the fate of innocent people and have given *MORE* guns to criminals. Re-fucking-tards.
"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." Why doesn't it list his address? Why don't you want people to know that your address is 23006 139 Ave
Springfield Gardens, NY 11413 and your phone number is (718) 527-0832?
http://www.gannett.com/article/99999999/WHOWEARE04/110714008
Gracia C Martore
728 Springvale Rd
Great Falls, VA 22066 (703) 759-5954
William A. Behan
2511 Halterbreak Ct
Herndon, VA 20171 (703) 709-9829 & (703) 709-6012
Paul Davidson
5602 Tilia Ct
Burke, VA 22015 (703) 503-8287
Robert J. Dickey
12070 Chancery Station Cir
Reston, VA 20190 (703) 467-8060
Victoria D. Harker
1127 Rector Ln
Mc Lean, VA 22102 (703) 356-4437
Kevin Lord
17 Lake Ave
Salem, VA 24153 (540) 389-4950
David T. Lougee
354 Runner Rd
Great Falls, VA 22066
Todd A. Mayman
8118 Birnam Wood Dr
Mc Lean, VA 22102 (703) 790-9573
David A. Payne
20820 Cross Timber Dr
Ashburn, VA 20147 (703) 858-0968
Jack A. Williams
4528 Commons Dr
Annandale, VA 22003 (703) 354-1798
Public records are awesome!
If this isn't a 1984ish set up when the system is asking you to spy on politically "undesirable" citizens, I don't know what is.
Lets start a public list of other harmful products
Liquor - let us know where the drunks are, lets name them by face
Tobacco - so you know when your kids might be harmed by tobbaco smoke.
Red Meat
Sugary Soft Drinks.
Cars larger than 3000 pounds - don't wanna get run over by roadhogs.
Are you stupid or just pretending?
You don't need a permit to purchase liquor. Or tobacco. Or red meat. Or sugary soft drinks.
And the records of registered vehicles are already public.
Straightdope is not facts, but the opinions of a bunch of drug users with their brains filled with THC.
My mother was born in 1927 in Munich Germany and grew up under Hitler's rise to power. Hitler indeed did institute gun confiscation upon the citizens. Their home was visited by machinegun-armed police who searched the house and confiscated my grandfather's beloved Italian double barrel shotgun and Nagant revolver and threatened to kill him.
First home that gets burglarized and is published on that map will pretty much own the company. Once their legal department figures out how much liability they have opened themselves up to, that map will have a rather short lifespan I think. Except, it's the internet. Once published, forever a part of it.
Agreed. I wonder how slippery the slope will turn out to be.
The Heller decision made it clear that gun ownership is an individual right. But when the laws change and all gun owners are forced to get a license, will it be fair game to demand that all journalists go through a background check and get a government stamp of approval before they are allowed to make a living by arranging words on a screen?
If exercising your rights is reason enough to be "outed" like this, how about an interactive map showing the homes of everyone who writes for the paper, holds a management position, or sits on the board? Fair's fair, right?
Last week I found a gun in the street just outside of my house on my way to work.
The police called me later that day to let me know that the gun had been stolen from someone in Kentucky.
Once gun control is firmly in place, you would be arrested yourself for merely being near that gun after you report it to police.
Gun thieves find such lists of great use. simply look for expensive guns registered to an address and rob the home after making certain that no one is home. That puts illegal guns on the streets and those illegal guns will not be on a map published in a newspaper. Such thieves also fins addresses of motorcyclists interesting as well as addresses of Corvette owners.
They should publish a list of all the people who don't have guns, so the robbers will know where to go.
Wasn't aware that this was public information. It would be better to know who has assault weapons so that they can be turned in and/or recovered by the police when we finally pass sensible gun control laws in America. Just look at those maps!! Imagine, every person who is in a home on that map has a higher likelihood of perishing via firearm violence. Yes, KEEP THAT MAP UP, and let health insurance companies charge the occupants accordingly for the health risk in their homes! Also, let neighbors know who amongst them might have weapons around so that they can find out how safely those weapons are kept, to insure that their kids, when visiting those homes, are not in danger.
Isn't hiding that information somewhere difficult to find (but still possible for someone determined to) the very definition of security by obscurity?
Any criminal determined enough could look this database somewhere and rob these houses.
none
This kind of thing is only possible in places that have firearm permits. Those federal yellow forms that we fill out to buy a gun legally can't have the gun buyers information transcribed. We have no state permit system here, the yellow form must stay on file in physical form in storage at the gun shop (ideally in a poorly wired connex)
They come in the dark, only in the darkest.
Apparently it is, as he has said in another post.
Thieves want to know!
1. Who's house is safer to break into
2. Where are the guns you want to steal
3. make it easier for anti gun whack jobs to know who to annoy
Now you know why (we) oppose registration!
I killed da wabbit -Elmer Fudd
Great, thieves now know where to get handguns if they want them.
From the summary:
"First it was the sex offenders being mapped using public records, now it seems to be gun owners — I wonder who will be next? It seems a newspaper in New York has published an interactive map with the names and addresses of people with [handguns]."
Why the "[handguns]"? Why change what was submitted? Why change the real subject of the article, a map of " individuals with handgun or pistol permits" to "handguns"? It is much less accurate and sensationalistic. Just because someone has a permit does not mean they always have a gun. For example, people who carry handguns due to their job may not have one at home. They may be target shooters that need the permit to transport their pistols from range to range, Permit holders are much more likely to have a handgun at home but it is not a sure thing like the summary states.
If it's government information, it should be public information. That needs to be the default position with everything the government collects. Exceptions to this need to be exceedingly rare. Democracies die behind closed doors.
If we've decided that owning a firearm has enough inherent risk that it needs to be licensed, then of course we have have a right to know who has received those licenses. Otherwise how can we tell if the county sheriff is actually issuing permits in the manner we want him or her to? (In "may issue" jurisdictions CCW permits are rife with abuse. My favorite was the guy with a 20 year old manslaughter conviction who got one. He'd also donated thousands to the sheriff's campaign committee. Coincidence, of course. Administrative glitch. Sure.) And if we've decided gun ownership is dangerous enough to require a permit, then of course I should be able to know who on my street is strapped. For the same reason I have a right to know about hazardous waste being hauled through my town, and which trucking companies are hauling it, and what their safety record is.
Now I personally believe that the government has no business telling me what I can pack, where, and how. I believe that requiring a CCW permit, much less a permit to own a gun in the first place, is a violation of my 2nd amendment rights (there's no constitutional right to haul hazardous waste). I also believe in assault rifles being sold at drive through windows with no background check. However, if the government does issue these permits, then of course they should be public record.
Now was the this the best decision by the paper? Nah. But in general the default position of a news organization should be to publish, and if you're going to error, better to do it on the side of getting the information out there. And anyone pissed off about this should be pissed over a law that requires a permit just to own a gun.
Yea, just what I need. a bunch of nuts showing up with signs on my doorstep calling me a "Baby Killer".
Why not have the newspaper release your medical records too. I mean it's a first amendment right. I'd like to know who has HIV in my neighborhood. Won't somebody please think of the children?
Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
I think it's Pope who wrote in his 'Essay on Man' "but man, proud man, is all in arms through fear", and I really wouldn't want to live in a society like that.
From scarped cliff or quarried stone she cries "A thousand types are gone, I care for nothing, no not one."
that they posted a map of gun ownership is good and is useful public information (even if it can be abused)
that they posted names and specific addresses shows absolutely no tact or consideration whatsoever
strip out names and specific address numbers from the map data and you have a more acceptable map
eg. Fairmont Road, zipcode 40261 has 6 registered gun owners
it doesn't provide who exactly owns a gun (unless there's only 1 residence on the entire road/street/etc)
but it does provide public info in knowing there's a certain level of gun owneship in a particular street / area
Citation needed.
I'm pretty sure the constitution mentions well regulated militia, but not cowardly little men who are afraid of publicly admitting their fear. Let me guess, you had someone read you the teabaggers version of the constitution once and thought that counted.
Assault guns?
Do you even KNOW what an "assault gun" is defined as?
It's a weapon of medium caliber with a select-fire switch, namely that it is able to be put from semi-auto to full-auto mode. Automatic weapons are Class III items and you have to have a license from the Federal gov't to even OWN one of them.
What you're talking about is a semi-auto that looks "scary" like the assault weapons. Quit being an idiot...but then, this is /. and you posted as an anon coward.
your paranoia and fear override the constitutional rights of everyone around you. How did you ever manage to obtain such an overly inflated sense of self worth?
no, the gun nuts created the nuisance with their impotent little attempts at countering their own personal cowardice.
Why Don't they post a list of communists ?
that's at threat because of people like yourself. Of course, you feel that your extreme fear is more important than everyone else's safety so that's OK. too bad for you, the grownups don't feel that way, and are starting to understand that the previous political correctness isn't the way to go.
you are a good argument for limiting all handguns. Such ignorance coupled with your inherent fear and paranoia is a bad mix.
So is is mainly the fear of blacks that causes you to seek your mechanical compensation then? Blacks aren't a danger to others around them. that isn't the case with gun nuts.
Libertarians and other spoiled children all think that might makes right. they just have a little temper tantrum at the thought that they aren't as mighty as they thought.
I take it that's gun nut speak for "The truth leaves me in an indefensible position". Your post does show the delusions of adequacy gun nits seem to have, when it comes to justifying their little strapons however.
If swords were the same aa guns, little men like you would be strapping them on.
ah yes, the internet at its finest. I'd hate to be that guy this week.
I've decided to Diversify my Holdings. I've divided my cash between my left and right pockets, instead of all in one.
someone did.
I've decided to Diversify my Holdings. I've divided my cash between my left and right pockets, instead of all in one.
Anyone who owns a handgun permit should be charged with attempted murder. Let THEM prove they're not going to kill anybody.
They may be liable for those guns now.
They just informed criminals where to aquire them.
This is the sort of thing that makes people carry 24/7.
Would the paper publish the real names and addresses of everyone with jewelry and gold?
Would the paper like Anonymous to publish their own real names and home addresses?
If guns are so bad, when can we expect the government to give up their guns?
These lists indicate permit holders, which are required for hand guns.
Legal ownership of handguns in those jurisdictions. Something tells me, if somebody is going to shoot an intruder to kill and ditch the body down a sewer drain, it's not going to be a license holder.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
Unless you think the CIA should just be a web forum where we can all pitch in.
Well, that would be far less dangerous than an unaccountable drug-running quasi-military that runs around the world torturing innocent people and knocking over democratically elected governments.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
As the map indicates, I do have guns at my house. Just a heads up if you're considering coming over to steal them (or anything else): I won't tell you exactly where they are, but I assure you I can get to at least two of them from any spot in the house before you can get through a door or window. There will be an additional surprise waiting to slow you down if you do try to enter, which may give me time to reach a third gun. Or call the police, but I'll probably wait until we're done to do that.
I'm also a bit of a geek/hacker/maker. I've been working on developing an automated gun turret (buiding on the work seen at http://hackaday.com/2012/03/20/birdwatching-meets-a-computer-controlled-water-cannon-awesomeness-ensues/) to shoot non-lethal bean bag rounds. I may or may not have those complete by the time you arrive.
FYI, my neighbor is against gun ownership so their house may be more to your liking than mine.
Have a nice day.
You can only get a license for the space modulator if Earth obstructs your view of Venus.
I'm just sayin'
"Truth is what works" -- William James "It works!!" -- o-dark-AM comment
I live in Australia, and seeing all those dots, seeing the density of them, is astonishing to me.
I noticed the comments from people being upset that these represent a possible "shopping list" for people who wish to acquire a gun, however as is commonly pointed out in other contexts, security via obscurity is very minimal security indeed. If a newspaper can acquire this information, you can safely assume any other interested party can do so.
If my interpretation of the second amendment is along the right lines, it was to intended to make sure that a government could be overthrown by the people, I think you guys need to reevaluate how effective any gun you can own is in a modern age. You would be up against the largest military in history.
If you wish to have no tracking or boundary for gun types, you are effectively creating the environment where there is a constant battle between those who would do harm with guns and those who need to protect themselves. An environment of escalation. If on the other hand you take steps to reduce the overall availability of guns over time, you would at least be slowly calming the situation. Looking at these numbers I can't help feeling it would take decades however. It would have to be carefully done not to create the equivalent of your prohibition of alcohol, where guns become a black marketed item for the general populous.
I feel for you guys - it seems an unenviable situation, particularly when I look to the future of weapons and see them becoming even deadlier with each passing year.
For crazy people to find places to steal guns from.
Seriously, if that's not also invasion of privacy then I don't know what is.
Location data can be exploited to steal weapons when the owner is elsewhere, and if they are worth stealing even a gun safe is no guarantee they won't get swiped.
BTW, we used leftover steel scrap from an ATM/gun safe manufacturer for torch-cutting practice at the last place I works. A set of small, portable OA cylinders is more than enough to run a cutting torch long enough to cut common gun safes, and it's a quiet process though smoky.
"This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
This blogger has dug up and posted the home address, email, phone number, personal interests, family demographics, satellite imagery,and even Zillow interior photos of the publisher's home. http://christopherfountain.wordpress.com/2012/12/24/sauce-for-the-goose/
I don't really understand two things of the US:
1) The obsession with the Founding Fathers.
Can't you just decide what is best for you NOW without trying to interpret their words as if it was the Bible?
2) The obsession for violent ousting of a tyrant.
You like guns, you want guns, you know... it's ok.
But don't go around telling bullshit about rising in arms against a tyrannical government.
Your President can order arrest, torture and assassination of any US citizens.
What about the Patriot Act?
What about all the propaganda, all the lies?
They just scream "Terror! Think of the children! Jump!" and you ask "How high?"
Your gun in hand, you are just waiting for your dear government to tell you where to shoot.
Do you really, seriously think that the government is afraid of your guns?
So stop deceiving yourself, the time to rise in arms is passed, you don't give a shit about freedom, you just want the guns and possibly someone to shoot.
Exactly my thoughts. In my state, no permits are required. None of our shotguns, rifles or handguns are registered, and so far I've only had to use them twice (Coyotes trying to eat my dog).
Parent, you miss a whole lot. For example, you make the incorrect leap that someone being proud of somethign means everyone involved in similar activity wants to be specifically identified. You also make the incorrect leap/straw man argument that publicly advertising where guns are stored is supposed to make those areas safer. Other posts, here, explain it better, but it's not about the criminal knowing who is armed, but exactly the opposite: if the criminal doesn't know who is armed, then everyone is safer because the criminal doesn't know who it is safe to attack. Correlation of crime to gun ownership shows this - violent crime goes down where gun ownership is higher (doesn't mean it's gun ownership that lowers crime, but it does show that the opposite correlation doesn't exist - the opposite correlation being the "blood in the streets" crap that we often see).
By your logic...
* Parents should be all for creating a list of houses where children under 10 live, because they're proud of their children.
* Police officers' homes should all be explicitly identified, because police are proud of their jobs.
* Pharmacists are proud of their job, so their homes should be published. After all, pharmacists have the keys to where drugs are stored, and drugs are scary.
Thats alright, we just posted all the addresses and phone numbers and picture of the home and inside of the home of the publisher and her kids. And then posted the address and all info on the reporters for the newspaper.....whats good for goose is good for gander as they say.......heh.
Now, let's not be modest with our level of disclosure.
Gracia and Janet sure weren't!
http://www.gannett.com/article/99999999/WHOWEARE04/110714008
Gracia C Martore
728 Springvale Rd
Great Falls, VA 22066 (703) 759-5954
William A. Behan
2511 Halterbreak Ct
Herndon, VA 20171 (703) 709-9829 & (703) 709-6012
Paul Davidson
5602 Tilia Ct
Burke, VA 22015 (703) 503-8287
Robert J. Dickey
12070 Chancery Station Cir
Reston, VA 20190 (703) 467-8060
Victoria D. Harker
1127 Rector Ln
Mc Lean, VA 22102 (703) 356-4437
Kevin Lord
17 Lake Ave
Salem, VA 24153 (540) 389-4950
David T. Lougee
354 Runner Rd
Great Falls, VA 22066
Todd A. Mayman
8118 Birnam Wood Dr
Mc Lean, VA 22102 (703) 790-9573
David A. Payne
20820 Cross Timber Dr
Ashburn, VA 20147 (703) 858-0968
Jack A. Williams
4528 Commons Dr
Annandale, VA 22003 (703) 354-1798
Merry Christmas to the entire corporate leadership of Gannett Company Inc!
and a simple look at the listing in the paper will tell them which are safe...
*Repent!Quit Your Job!Slack Off!The World Ends Tomorrow and You May Die!
Lets get the addresses of the Newspaper folks, and post their porn internet surfing for their wives and husbands and children to see?
It's about as much their business as a list of sex offenders. You can even use the same excuse: 'Think of the children'. It lets the parents know which neighbors have guns in their house, so they can prohibit their children from visiting those houses, in case the guns are poorly secured.
That's not the radix causa of publishing gun owners' address. That's a bullshit argument and you know it. For that matter they should also have registries for drunk drivers, or people changed with a misdemeanor and up. But guess what? Those lists of people who statistically pose a greater risk to the ZOMG children does not exist, so the argument does not hold water.
I own guns, and I for one don't care to be listed, should that event ever occurs. Barring my social and banking info, I really don't care about hiding anything, certainly not weapons. Not because I'm totting my guns in pride. I simply do not concern myself with trivia. People want to know if I have guns and make a value judgement on me. Fine. Want to know what car I drive. Fine. Want to know if I had or have a bad credit score. Fine.
But not caring does not mean giving up calling on the attention whoring bullshit of it all. The motivation behind this is so pathetic and subjective (considering that more important lists have never and probably will never be published), any attempt to dress it as a logical step falls on its face harder than Willie E. Coyote.
Painting gun owners on a similar basis as sex offenders is just pathetic. Not that the NRA crowd isn't guilty of such stupid mentality when hurling sad value judgement on the anti-gun crowd. Both are equally stupid.
If you are a gun-control advocate, and if you are intelligent, I'm sure you can come up with a better argument than "think of the children and empower parents to protect kids from poorly secured weapons." It's a bullshit argument and you know it.
http://www.shtfplan.com/headline-news/the-right-to-bear-arms-over-10800000-guns-sold-in-the-usa-in-2011_01212012 Sorry, but these levels of sales are ludicrous.
The newspaper in its breathless zeal to ostracize gun law-abiding owners may have (IANAL) created grounds for two class action lawsuits composed of different plaintiffs in the three affected counties. The first group that might have standing to file such a lawsuit would, of course, be the affected gun owners who could reasonably claim that they were held forth for public approbation (perhaps suffering employment and social consequences of the papers ill-advised publication of their personally identifying data), violation of privacy, and being placed at enhanced risk of criminal attack upon their persons or property (possibly affecting their insurance rates in potentiality as an additional claim).
This, however, neglects to consider the second group that might have legitimate cause for suit - those inversely designated by the posting of licensees - as *not* having firearms in their households and thus as being safer targets for home invasions and other undesirable events.
Those who claim that the First Amendment bars pursuit of such a suit are deeply, in my lay opinion, mistaken. The First Amendment reads, as follows:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
Further insight may be gained at Cornell Universities Legal Information Institute. http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/first_amendment
This is an area of law still, as far as I can tell, actively evolving. Knowingly engaging in speech or publication that in the view of a reasonable person would put a specific second party at significantly greater risk of criminal action, civil injury, or violation of civil rights would seem to me to be a fairly risky action. The publication of twinned shopping lists for criminals (the list and its inverse implication) would seem to me to be a grand venture out onto that risky ground.
To address the hyperbole of "but gun owners should feel safer with this data published, it's all about publicity isn't it?" I would point out that having the *numbers* of gun owners or licensees in a given area published would serve the same purpose as the newspapers action, but without placing either licensees or non-licensees at enhanced risk. No gain is achieved by specific identification, and a loss is incurred in terms of public safety strategy - "keeping the criminals guessing" regarding who is and is not armed and under what conditions has a strategic value of its very own. The theory is roughly the same as that behind Q Ships ( http://www.rmg.co.uk/explore/sea-and-ships/facts/faqs/ships-and-vessels/what-were-q-shipshttp://www.rmg.co.uk/explore/sea-and-ships/facts/faqs/ships-and-vessels/what-were-q-ships) during WWI & WWII - that a small percentage of lawfully armed citizens is disproportionately influential as a deterrent to criminal activity *specifically* because it is not known who they are, raising the question for the aspiring criminal of "Am I lucky, today?"....
I look forward to seeing how this turns out in the real world and hope that appropriate firearms owners organizations find merit in legal action.
antigun nut makes no points, but gets masturbatory relief from posting.
*Repent!Quit Your Job!Slack Off!The World Ends Tomorrow and You May Die!
What are you willing to sacrifice your privacy for? I don't think this is good or bad, but I would like to see it done on a national level. It would probably cause just as many problems as it mitigates. I just really like seeing projects that make public information REALLY public.
It's true gun sales/gifts/trades from individuals to individuals are not logged, so handguns needn't be " registered" or anything else for that matter. It's just that buying commercially sold arms puts you on public display for whatever ends.
That's not true in the locations, and regarding the guns, in question. There are States, like NY, where handguns are illegal to possess at all without being registered and permitted by a county. Doesn't matter if it's a gift from your mother or not. That's how people are able to put together harassment lists like this.
A lack of substantive argument to back up his position is why we have idiotic posts like his. Unfortunately, there are fantastically stupid people on both sides of the argument, which is why we have the idiotic posts which aren't even couched in pretend-logic. They're easier to filter though. Lots of people can be conned with pretend-logic.
RobThisHouse: Thieves can enter a target address and find out if the occupants possess the means with which to defend themselves.
In Texas we call this list the phone book. Not published much any more.
Does the NY permit allow the holder to carry their pistol? If so, it won't be of much use to potential gun thieves. If they are home the burglars stand a chance of getting shot. If the resident is away, then the gun might very well be on their person as well.
Have gnu, will travel.
I have the raw data with almost 17000 records (name + address).
It covers mostly NY however there is also data from Florida and Connecticut.
This is great. Now they just need to overlay violent crime statistics and we can get another data point as to whether or not certain communities are more or less safe based on the density of personal firearm ownership.
Switching from gun deaths to murder by gun puts the US from 10th to 14th, partially because some countries do not have the data. How is that way down the list?
1) The US is 14th in gun homicide per 100k
2) Of the 13 countries that have more gun deaths, only 3 have data on suicides.
3) Honduras is 46/100k gun homicides and has no data on suicides. Your ~91 number for Honduras comes from the overall murder rate, including, but not limited to, guns. The US number (4.2) includes primarily gun murders (3.7). Honduras has the highest murder rate in the word, so you're cherry picking as well. 70% of its 7 million citizens live in poverty. Honduras is in the middle of the drug wars and went through a coup d'état in 2009. This is a shockingly fucked up country and should be no standard that we compare ourselves to.
4) 67% of murders in the US are committed with guns. (2010)
Sources:
Gun deaths w/ info on suicide vs homicide
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate
Murder rate
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate
FBI Expanded Homicide Data
http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2010/crime-in-the-u.s.-2010/tables/10shrtbl08.xls
AS legally aquired firearms
Doesn't seem like a move toward survival of the fittest, living in New York.
*Repent!Quit Your Job!Slack Off!The World Ends Tomorrow and You May Die!
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3339513&cid=42393487
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2261720&cid=36545928 especially after you libel people.
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3339513&cid=42393487
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2261720&cid=36545928 especially when you libeled others before it too.
Now you've got a list of places for criminals to stake out and attempt to rob while owners are not home (in the hopes of getting guns, since it's so hard to legally transport guns over there).
Moreso than the issue of guns specifically, I think this is more of a personal privacy issue. Especially in an age where technology is sufficient to provide this sort of interface for just about anything, it seems like we should really assess the value of privacy. There should be a difference between "Information about private citizens available to anyone who asks for it" and "Information about private citizens that is held by public/government institutions and is available only to those same public institutions for discharging certain duties". It seems to me that registration of handgun permits should fall into this second category.
While the requisite public regulatory agencies and law enforcement would have need of this information, I don't see why other private citizens should. I can't (or at least, I don't think I can) request the complete bill and total usage information of my neighbor's access to the public municipal water/well utility and then use that information to put up a "Here's a list of water-wasters in our town. Beware!" letter (or conversely "Look at these stinky eco-nuts who use much less water than everyone else. They probably don't shower more than once a week!"). What is the purpose for the public to be able to look up this gun data? I can't believe it relates to the "Guns are dangerous, everyone should know who has these dangerous objects" viewpoint (the same idea behind the public sex offender registry, which for the record I also object to on principle), as the NRA would have lobbied the information private simply to rebut that insinuation. It is also worth noting that as individual personal information is becoming more available with fewer restrictions on its handling that corporate entities are increasingly securing additional privacy rights (often, to obfuscate the harm they're doing to the public).
We need to start making new laws to protect the privacy of natural persons in light of 21st century technological and legal landscapes, while ensuring that information that benefits the collective good of society is openly available and that select information sharing can take place where necessary with proper protections.
so.. obviously the only thing this will cause is for criminals to know who they can steal guns from. For every gun that gets stolen from a home, insurance will replace it, and then insurance rates will end up raising across the board. So thank you anti-gun people for buying me new guns after they get stolen. Oh and good luck with all the criminals with exponentially more guns than they had prior to this plan hahaha. And don't worry, us gun owners know you mean well, albeit in a misinformed manner.. so when all these newly armed criminals come into our neighborhoods and run rampant we will try our best to shoot them dead so that they can't make it into your "gun free zones" to come and rape your children and wives. I'm sure we won't get thanked for our service, but we know you'll secretly be appreciative.
This thieving criminal element for which you seemingly credit much patience, literacy, and technical skill are actually opportunistic and predominately drug-addicted in this day and age. My home's modest appearance and dog moat are probably all the deterrent necessary to avoid the "easy mark" distinction most of these mouth breathers are hunting for. And BTW, armed means many things, other than firearms, my good man.
Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.
Ernest Hemingway
Unless you live in a state that does... MA...
THC by itself is not neccissarily permanently damaging or harmful. Might not be good to post while using it, but Ayahuasca is not as insidious as you think. Your more likely to be brainwashed by your T.V. then some proccessed plants.
That's great! Makes it real easy for the criminal to determine where to strike with least resistance. WTG NY! *
Don't porn movies have to list actors on file? Where's the interactive map for this?
It's as if the newspaper is treating registered gun owners like sex offenders, putting their names and addresses online so you can see if they live anywhere near you.
I think more to the point, is that handgun owners are also more likely to own rifles and shotguns... more shit to steal once you've ID'd your target.
~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
1. You've got nothing to hide.
2. Nobody has any bad intentions with the data (at the time when they came up with the idea for the register).
3. Getting a gun is your own free choice, so getting registered is your own free choice.
I'm sure I'm forgetting some. Please feel free to add some more.
Privacy is terrorism.
Having the right to speak doesn't make your speech moral or ethical and your right to speech here in no way conflicts with my right to privacy. Government agencies have no right to disclose the details of private citizens. The potential for an unethical and immoral publishing of those details under justification of the first amendment only occurs if the government first violates my right.
In other words, there is nothing coherent or logical in his argument which somehow implied a conflict between the first and second amendment, neither of which are the issue here. Leaving only his insult.
You had a good argument there but just couldn't resist losing all credibility by throwing in a bit of partisan nonsense about liberals at the end?
And you'd feel the same way if they'd gotten a list of everyone who put a domestic partner on their insurance policy and published their name/address/phone number and put it on a google maps style database?
Yes they just published the list and the lion share of blame for any subsequent crime goes to the person who commits it but they aren't exactly completely blameless here. The list may well facilitate crime. This isn't whistleblowing on government or business. This is disclosing a bunch of confidential information about private citizens that no government agency should have released in the first place. And they are doing so for no other purpose than to incite controversy. Once they got the data I support their right to publish it but just because they have a legal right does not mean they have a moral or ethical right. Publishing this list is unethical, immoral, and just bad form.
That's Wonderful! I thing we need to include an interactive database on White Collar Criminals, Speeding Ticket Offenders, People who donated to Political Causes and Estimated Annual Income!
Pure pandering to a bad situation to foment strife and drum up sales. The database contributes nothing but conflict to the situation. It is petty, vindictive and unhelpful.
Journalism is no longer practiced. We have regressed to the "sob-sister" and "yellow journalism" movements of the preceding century.
http://www.ajr.org/article.asp?id=4117
"Moogs! Would YOU buy that for a quarter?" CMK
No one is saying that what the news paper did should be illegal, the argument is that what they did is putting real people's lives in danger and could potentially be directly responsible for more criminals having firearms, and therefore more crimes involving firearms. Why are you surprised that this is outrageous? It was a stupid, dick move to create fear, uncertainty and doubt in relation to firearm owners and their status as civilized individuals.
So we just wait for your wife to be alone, you gotta work..
Why would you assume that his wife is defenseless because he's at work? Dunno if you noticed, but here in 2012 (almost 2013), they let women learn how to fight and use guns and everything.
For that matter, we don't know that rmdingler is male, and/or that s/he is heterosexual...
In Massachusetts you need a permit to own pepper spray, let alone a rifle. Handgun permit? Entirely at the discretion of your town's police chief. Sometimes it really is who you know.
This is just a map of people on DO NOT STEAL FROM registry. Now, criminals have a nice list they can check their potential victims against, to avoid any of the messy problems that may happen when they accidentally choose to rob one of these people, instead of those who are not on the list.
What's this I've been seein all over slashdot on you cravin pizza fatass?
Hmmm...Lists of people....sound familiar?
the community should out the folks who put this site together. and what abiut google? they afe also culpable for providing the maps API. this is how the nazis did it. this is how mccarthyism took hold. publishing names. how long til we see the next step? is there anything we can do about it? you know, something legal.
You do know you are a moron right? Anybody on this list has purchased their weapons LEGALLY. Criminals, by definition, are not listed so when the confiscation stormtroopers arrive they will not be taking any weapons away from criminals. Criminals DESPERATELY WANT legally owned guns to be confiscated.
The paper just made it easier to access this information. What is the problem?
Sounds like a complete invasion of privacy. More than that, do you really want criminals knowing which people DON'T have guns?
If my credibility rests on my politics in this day and age it's no wonder the Repubmocrat dictatorship has lasted so long.
Good lord 99 out of 100 births are autistic now!
Hmmm....I'm against the proliferation of guns, but this is a very BAD idea.
It's a ticket for small time thieves who want to find which house to rob so they can get a gun, too.
I can see your house is unarmed. Good luck with that!
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
What idiot would deliberately burglarise a home because he thought the owner had a gun
Hi, I'm a burglar. You may remember me from other stupid actions such as "smoking crack" and "grand theft auto".
Well I'm out and need a gun. How nice, a shopping list of where I can get one! Just wait for the family to head out to church or whatever, then I have a few hours to find it.
Next stop - your house! As I can happily see by the map you are not armed, so I can just come in any time you're home and do whatever strikes my fancy.
Thanks for the map, good twice over!
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
To summarize your argument re: crime: We should just all lie back and take it.
Ok then. What a great philosophy - for a man.
What likely happens when an armed robber enters the house of an unarmed woman?
How nice it is to have your worldview totally discount rape as a possible outcome.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
I wonder if they published private security employee and local and federal law enforcement data along with everybody else's data ?
So, if we are concerned about the people that are rapists and child molestors and want to lump gun owners in there, then lets go all the way. Why not list the people with speeding tickets and accidents as it is MUCH MUCH more likely that some idiot in their car that has been in 4 accidents is going to hurt you then the guy that jumped through all the hoops to legally register and own a gun. How about we start listing all the people that are unemployed in the neighboorhood. Would they not have a larger reason to try and steal or damage something for gain.
Listing the gun owners is just stupid. I agree that there are certain things that we should be aware of, but make it private. If you want to inquire how many guns are owned on your street, then you should have to go to the court pay a small fee and you can learn the number not the actual owners. People demonize guns so often, yet they are ok with everything else. I grew up around guns, and learned to shoot at an early age. Never has my family ever had an accident, or incident with our guns, or anyone else we know. 99.99% of gun owners are responsible, and jump through tons of hoops to comply with every liberal nut jobs desire to suppress their right to bear arms.
So, lets just list it all. I want to see a map of high school gpas, who has and has not graduated college, if they have a job, moving violations, arrest records, average credit card balance, shopping card values (giant, cvs, etc), lets just list it all. If that makes you feel better, safer and more informed then great. Oh, and I think that there should be a sign outside your home that lists all your values. If we do not want personal liberties, and freedom then f-it lets not.
You assume that because I don't show up on such a list that I'm unarmed. None of the shotguns that I inherited from my father are listed anywhere, but they all work perfectly well. These lists indicate permit holders, which are required for hand guns. Owners of rifles generally don't need permits.
Neither do handguns, you only need the permit to carry them concealed. Owning one in your home cannot generally be contravened at the state level. In many jurisdictions open carry is sitll legal.
Concealed Weapons Public Records Request
On July 1, 2006, a new law went into effect that makes personal identifying information pertaining to a Concealed Weapon or Firearm license confidential and exempt from Section 119.07(1), Florida Statutes and Section 24(a), Article 1 of the State Constitution.
Exceptions to this exemption are:
With the express written consent of the applicant or licensee or his/her legally authorized representative.
By court order upon a showing of good cause.
Upon request by a law enforcement agency in connection with the performance of lawful duties.
If one or more of these exceptions applies to you, please send your request and supporting documentation to Whitney Shiver, Public Records Liaison, via facsimile (850) 245-5493 or by US Mail [P O Box 3927; Tallahassee, FL 32315-3927] and your request will be reviewed and responded to accordingly.
I take it these idiots don't even comprehend that now criminals have a nice map to all kinds of legally licensed and owned weapons to steal.
The dipshit who came up with this....ugh.
@Mindless Drivel: 100% of Twitter posts ever Tweeted.
Erroneus/john b wilcox: When you eat, is your dish a wheelbarrow, your fork a pitchfork, and spoon a shovel or what http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3345911&cid=42414637 ? Does your bed use chevy truck coil springs and struts to hold your fat ass off the floor too? Hahahaha. No wonder you said this "Oh... to eat pizza again..." by erroneus (253617) on Saturday December 22, @05:20PM (#42371769) from http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3335159&cid=42371769 you disgustingly fat hog.
Erroneus/john b Wilcox, no clothes can hide that much fat pig: When you eat, is your dish a wheelbarrow, your fork a pitchfork, + spoon a shovel or what http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3345911&cid=42414637 ? Does your bed use chevy truck coil springs and struts to hold your fat ass off the floor too? Hahahaha. No wonder you said this "Oh... to eat pizza again..." by erroneus (253617) on Saturday December 22, @05:20PM (#42371769) from http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3335159&cid=42371769 you disgustingly fat hog.
To be as obese as yourself. When you eat, is your dish a wheelbarrow, your fork a pitchfork, and spoon a shovel or what http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3345911&cid=42414637 ? Does your bed use chevy truck coil springs and struts to hold your fat ass off the floor too? Hahahaha. No wonder you said this "Oh... to eat pizza again..." by erroneus (253617) on Saturday December 22, @05:20PM (#42371769) from http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3335159&cid=42371769 you disgustingly fat hog.
There's really two issues at hand here:
1. Whether or not public information should be published on the internet.
2. Whether or not gun ownership should be considered public information.
If you're mad that the newspaper published this information online, then simplify your argument by deciding if you are for both, against both, or agree with at least one.