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.
Yup, first amendment vs second amendment.
It is funny to see those gun owners who run to the amendment, get outed by the one right above it.
Really gun owners.... really?
And if your gun is properly locked up, how is that going to happen?
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.
$CONTROVERSIALMUSICSTYLE - Those cretins probably don't vote for $CANDIDATEOFCHOICE or $PARTY, along with being "scary" or terrorists.
Or we could stop this politically oriented targeting of citizens. This list should not be public.
Those things aren't inherently lethal to others. If gun nuts just killed themselves, there wouldn't be a problem. But some of them like to make a splash and kill schoolchildren, firemen, etc., before they off themselves.
Or murder, or abduct kids.
Yep, I've been out shooting with a group of like-minded individuals too; but when it suited me.
So let me be a bit clearer. I wonder how appealing gun ownership would be if the owners had to turn out a compulsory drill every month. It'll be a supervised drill. You'll do it in the rain, snow, and sleet, -20; you'll do it in the hot sun, 100+; you'll do it one Saturday, every month, even though you just did it last month, and the month before, and the month before that. And no, you can't pull a W and just not show. You want to own a gun, these are the terms. How appealing would that be?
As a follow-up to my prior post, dictionary.com's etymology has this to say about how militia was defined: ... In U.S. history, "the whole body of men declared by law amenable to military service, without enlistment, whether armed and drilled or not" (1777). [no source cited]
(An unarmed militia? There's a concept.) But society has changed. Thanks to MADD the government is discriminating against the 18-20 demographic and apparently nobody sees this as a problem. Or at least nobody wants to take on MADD. If we can "legally" discriminate against 18-20 year olds WRT alcohol consumption, I'd wager if we get enough angry mothers together they'll change the terms under which people are allowed to own handguns and assault weapons too.
So stick to your guns (pun intended) and keep making it possible for children, firemen, and innocent bystanders to be slaughtered, and let's see what happens.