• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

NY Newspaper Publishes all Gun Owners' Names and Addresses

Page 8 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
DCal430 said:
I think this is a perfectly fine idea, much like how we have child sex offender list, we should have gun registry list.
Click to expand...

People like you/this are the reason that reasonable gun control legislation (assuming you can even define such a term) will never get passed. Gun rights advocates point out that people such as yourself exist, and as a result everyone who has any inclination to ever get reelected says "yeah, maybe we shouldn't pass this..." (outside of certain senators from california).

In fact, I would argue that posts such as this are to gun control as the really loony side of the NRA is to gun rights.
 
DCal430 said:
🙄

People taking medication are not a danger to others because of their medication. People with guns are danger to everyone around them. The only purpose a gun serves is to maim and murder.
Click to expand...

You are retarded. People that take pills can easily be a danger if they get loaded and get behind the wheel. Sane, law abiding people with guns are no more dangerous than people without, and only an ignorant twat would think otherwise.
 
Not to stir the topic - but even the Sex Offender list needs to go. I'm not even on it and I can say that taking a piss on the side of the road or behind a building and being caught doesn't equate to being on a list with child rapists. There is a WEE bit of difference between the 2.
 
Also - in the latest of news - I believe it was a lawyer who brought up the names, addresses, and locations of all of the people from that article and publication. Gotta love how it feels for those retards when they get bitch slapped back.
 
s0me0nesmind1 said:
Also - in the latest of news - I believe it was a lawyer who brought up the names, addresses, and locations of all of the people from that article and publication. Gotta love how it feels for those retards when they get bitch slapped back.
Click to expand...
Lawyers, scum of the earth, suck on the Goverment tit, and fuck everyone they can.

-John
 
Pens1566 said:
Stop using words you obviously don't know the meaning of.
Click to expand...


harm somebody's reputation: to attack somebody or somebody's reputation, character, or good name by making slanderous or libelous statements

Synonyms: insult, slander, libel, denigrate, deprecate, disparage, offend, vilify

Do you really think that this doesn't offend these people or vilify them considering the recent tragedy and ensuing debate about gun control? Well, I guess I should just take your word for it Johnny Cochran. Just because you refuse to think outside of your little box does not mean I am not right or don't know what this word means. I guarantee you there will be a lawsuit over this, and these innocent victims will win.
 
Pr0d1gy said:
harm somebody's reputation: to attack somebody or somebody's reputation, character, or good name by making slanderous or libelous statements

Synonyms: insult, slander, libel, denigrate, deprecate, disparage, offend, vilify

Do you really think that this doesn't offend these people or vilify them considering the recent tragedy and ensuing debate about gun control? Well, I guess I should just take your word for it Johnny Cochran. Just because you refuse to think outside of your little box does not mean I am not right or don't know what this word means. I guarantee you there will be a lawsuit over this, and these innocent victims will win.
Click to expand...


So how does newspaper showing the gun owners location meet any of what you posted above? The people who had their information released have no grounds for a defamation suit as no slanderous or libelous statements were made about these people.
 
Pr0d1gy said:
harm somebody's reputation: to attack somebody or somebody's reputation, character, or good name by making slanderous or libelous statements

Synonyms: insult, slander, libel, denigrate, deprecate, disparage, offend, vilify

Do you really think that this doesn't offend these people or vilify them considering the recent tragedy and ensuing debate about gun control? Well, I guess I should just take your word for it Johnny Cochran. Just because you refuse to think outside of your little box does not mean I am not right or don't know what this word means. I guarantee you there will be a lawsuit over this, and these innocent victims will win.
Click to expand...

No the fact you are wrong means you are not right. You certainly are stubborn in your desire to embrace your ignorance though, I'll give you that.

Honest question here. Have you bothered to look into what must actually be proven to establish a case for libel?

Rant on though. Perhaps another time you'll be willing to actually learn as opposed to just sticking to an incorrect idea in your head just because it makes you feel better.
 
Pr0d1gy said:
harm somebody's reputation: to attack somebody or somebody's reputation, character, or good name by making slanderous or libelous statements

Synonyms: insult, slander, libel, denigrate, deprecate, disparage, offend, vilify

Do you really think that this doesn't offend these people or vilify them considering the recent tragedy and ensuing debate about gun control? Well, I guess I should just take your word for it Johnny Cochran. Just because you refuse to think outside of your little box does not mean I am not right or don't know what this word means. I guarantee you there will be a lawsuit over this, and these innocent victims will win.
Click to expand...

No.

You are trying to use a twisted up logic to backup your claim and you are wrong. Here is why you are wrong.

Your claim is that because their addresses were posted in a easier to access newspaper, that they are going to be vilified for being gun owners.

1) You have to prove that was the intent of the newspaper with that posting. That they sought to have the public vilify those people,

and

2) That there is indeed vilification with damages stemming from that vilification.


In other words, it's not going to stand up in court. Nor does it matter. If people can sue over this it will be over something like reckless/negligent endangerment or something similar. It will not be over libel/slander as you claim.
 
I remember the star in Toronto did a map with basic dots indicating where Registered guns were in Toronto trying to show the saturations of guns in the suburbs then somebody posted the same map overlaying actual gun crimes and voila
Urban core almsot no gun registrations 10X the amount of gun crime OWNED
It isn\t the law abiding, in fact in Canada one of the things that did come out of the short experiment was that registered gun owners commited gun crimes at about 1/3 the same rate per capita of the non-registered general population
 
Personally, I would view the list of gun owning homes as a good thing. It is a list of places criminals can actively avoid. If I was someone who wanted to commit a home invasion, I would look at that list and make darn well sure the house I was about to break into was not on the list.

Most criminals are not stupid enough to purposefully attack someone who they know is armed.
 
cybrsage said:
Personally, I would view the list of gun owning homes as a good thing. It is a list of places criminals can actively avoid. If I was someone who wanted to commit a home invasion, I would look at that list and make darn well sure the house I was about to break into was not on the list.

Most criminals are not stupid enough to purposefully attack someone who they know is armed.
Click to expand...

You say that like a criminal considers such logic lol.

Outside of an alarm system warning on the front lawn, criminals that are stupid enough to steal from homes aren't quite too intellectual with their crimes.
 
wow having only read the first two pages of this this is idiotic! i don't mind public information being public, but who owns and who doesn't own firearms shoudln't be public! Unless we start posting publicly who uses controlled medications online too....
 
Zorkorist said:
Give the Government less money, and things like this will go away.

-John
Click to expand...

Starving the beast would have worked with a gold standard as there would be a limited supply or better said an end to spending. As it stands now they can print whatever the frak they want, laws and morality be damned.
 
PC Surgeon said:
Starving the beast would have worked with a gold standard as there would be a limited supply or better said an end to spending. As it stands now they can print whatever the frak they want, laws and morality be damned.
Click to expand...

That's where the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution comes in.

The right to bear arms.

You may be right, that we passed the "fiscal cliff" when we gave out the Gold Standard. That actually makes a lot of sense. It was Government saying this is a better/smarter way.

So far, they have kept folks alive/happy.

Our kids of course, are on borrowed time.

-John
 
Putnam was one the three Counties The Journal asked for the info. Two of the Counties bent over backwards for the paper and exposed law abiding citizens.

Putnam Officials are to be commended.


1-1-2013

http://news.yahoo.com/york-county-denies-request-names-gun-permit-holders-231656034.html

New York County denies request for names of gun permit holders



Authorities in a suburban county north of New York City said on Tuesday they will refuse to release names of local gun permit holders to a newspaper that has been publishing the identities of thousands of license-holding residents.


Putnam County Clerk Dennis Sant said he would defy a request for information about pistol permit holders from the White Plains, New York-based Journal News, which has come under criticism for publishing thousands of such identities already.


"There is the rule of law, and there is right and wrong and the Journal News is clearly wrong," Sant said in a statement. "I could not live with myself if one Putnam pistol permit holder was put in harm's way, for the sole purpose of selling newspapers."

The newspaper, owned by the Gannett Co., sought the information under the state's Freedom of Information law. It says the identities are a matter of public record.

Angered, state gun-owner groups have called for an advertising boycott of the newspaper until it takes the map and identities off its website.

The county clerk, Putnam County Executive MaryEllen Odell and other elected officials were slated to appear on Thursday at a news conference declaring their intentions. Also set to appear is state Sen. Greg Ball, a Patterson, New York, Republican who has said he will introduce legislation to keep permit information private except to prosecutors and police.
 
dmcowen674 said:
Putnam was one the three Counties The Journal asked for the info. Two of the Counties bent over backwards for the paper and exposed law abiding citizens.

Putnam Officials are to be commended.


1-1-2013

http://news.yahoo.com/york-county-denies-request-names-gun-permit-holders-231656034.html

New York County denies request for names of gun permit holders



Authorities in a suburban county north of New York City said on Tuesday they will refuse to release names of local gun permit holders to a newspaper that has been publishing the identities of thousands of license-holding residents.


Putnam County Clerk Dennis Sant said he would defy a request for information about pistol permit holders from the White Plains, New York-based Journal News, which has come under criticism for publishing thousands of such identities already.


"There is the rule of law, and there is right and wrong and the Journal News is clearly wrong," Sant said in a statement. "I could not live with myself if one Putnam pistol permit holder was put in harm's way, for the sole purpose of selling newspapers."

The newspaper, owned by the Gannett Co., sought the information under the state's Freedom of Information law. It says the identities are a matter of public record.

Angered, state gun-owner groups have called for an advertising boycott of the newspaper until it takes the map and identities off its website.

The county clerk, Putnam County Executive MaryEllen Odell and other elected officials were slated to appear on Thursday at a news conference declaring their intentions. Also set to appear is state Sen. Greg Ball, a Patterson, New York, Republican who has said he will introduce legislation to keep permit information private except to prosecutors and police.
Click to expand...

They've also released the name and personal information (address and phone # ) of 2 homes and sons information of Marjorie Magner a Chairman of Gannet newspapers and hacked and released the names and addresses of subscribers to their newspaper. Sounds like some fun times.

http://networkedblogs.com/GB2PU
 
That Putnam County clerk needs to be removed from office, time for special election for a new clerk. You shouldn't run for an office if you are unable to do your legal duties. It should be a crime.
 
cybrsage said:
Personally, I would view the list of gun owning homes as a good thing. It is a list of places criminals can actively avoid. If I was someone who wanted to commit a home invasion, I would look at that list and make darn well sure the house I was about to break into was not on the list.

Most criminals are not stupid enough to purposefully attack someone who they know is armed.
Click to expand...

It's a list of where criminals can go to steal guns...that's it. I sure as hell don't let people know my address AND that I own guns.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top