I can hear the shocked indignation of gun-toters already: It's nobody's business but mine if I want to pack heat.
Au contraire. Because the government handles the permitting, it is everyone's business.
"Au contraire." Figures he'd use French.
Readers are beating this odious punk up pretty good over in the article's comments section. Hopefully it'll result in some canceled subscriptions.
[Via KABA Newslinks]
10 comments:
I understand they have pulled the online listing, citing an "editorial mistake" or something, and that they should not have published SOME of the listed information.
"Because the government handles the permitting, it is everyone's business."
One could say the same thing about Social Security numbers, but you don't see anyone publishing those lists in a newspaper.
"A state that eagerly puts sex offender data online complete with an interactive map could easily do the same with gun permits, but it does not."
Sure, Christian. Because we all know law-abiding gun owners are really just criminal thugs worse than rapists and child molesters. Possessing a CCW is certainly worse than a felony criminal conviction for breaking the law. You *&^$@#^.
"As a Sunshine Week gift, The Roanoke Times has placed the entire database, mistakes and all, online at www.roanoke.com/gunpermits. You can search to find out if neighbors, carpool partners, elected officials or anyone else has permission to carry a gun."
Then
"The Roanoke Times has decided to remove the online database of registered concealed handgun permit holders from its website...'When we posted the information, we had every reason to believe that the data the State Police had supplied would comply with the statutes. But people have notified us that the list includes names that should not have been released,' said Debbie Meade, president and publisher of The Roanoke Times. 'Out of a sense of caution and concern for the public we have decided to take the database off of our website.'"
So, what is it - our right to know the database, mistakes and all, even if it causes mayhem, or something that shouldn't be published? After all, if it is our First Amendment right to know this stuff, why pull out now?
You journalistic frauds.
Too bad I don't live there and can cancel my subscription.
Not a single voice of support in the comments.
That's very telling.
"Because the government handles the permitting, it is everyone's business."
The state also handles the licensing of law enforcement officers. Shouldn't he have made a list of all their names and addresses? I can remember a time when I was desperately looking for a deputy sheriff to kill him. Yeah, I was, I so informed the sheriff and the District Attorney. They sent him away and wouldn't release his address, where the Hell was this jackass then with his sunshine?
I am hard to anger to the point where I want to kill, but that deputy got me there and he deserved to die. The sheriff told me if I did at his house what his deputy did at mine he would kill me. I then told him what we were really talking about and that my intentions were exactly the same as his. Till that point I had only described the action not told him his deputy did it.
They would not tell me where he lived. They did move him. They kept him out of sight for at least six months. They threatened me several times and I gave them an open invitation and assured them when I went down, I was taking company. Funny how I never had any trouble from them after that.
But, as one commenter said, there are more crimes committed by cops than by CCW holders, where is the sunshine on their personal information? Back then, I would have paid dearly for it.
He is getting a justly deserved hammering in the comments section. (Thanks for pointing that fact out to us David!)
Notice the response has been overwhelming lately. On nailing down any anti-gun garbage that sticks it's head up. Perhaps there is room for some hope yet! With the greatest majority being PRO, rather than anti.
We need to keep the heat up. As well as seek ways to expand the message into a wider audience....
Serious question - why can't legal action be taken against this 'man'? He needlessly has put others in danger to justify his anti-gun views.
You get whacked for pulling your gun even though you don't use it based on endangerment, right?
Am awaiting response from an email sent to the Roanoke Times, inquiring as to precisely what they meant by saying that the list was taken off line because "some names should not have been released."
I'm getting the feeling that we've totally surprised some people with so swift and telling a response to their incredibly stupid offerings.
I submitted feedback to the Roanoke Times about Trejbal's article, but they didn't print it.
Now that Trejbal's address has been posted in the feedback column, you can bet the farm that Trejbal will plead for police protection from all the "crazies" out there.
The police should leave him be. Let him defend himself - just like all those folks he exposed must defend themselves.
BTW - my wife was stalked for years. We had to move 3 times, and yes, we got CCW permits.
If some idiot reporter in our state undid all the security measures that law enforcement personnel advised us to do, I would hold him responsible for any harm that occurred to us as a result of his actions.
And, BTW - bad guys are always looking for an excuse for their actions. Trejbal just gave them one. Hopefully he'll have his pants sued off for any harm that his "reporting" caused. I can imagine the excuses from the bad guys:
"I would never have stolen a gun, but this article gave me information about an easy target across the street from my house. I only had to wait ’till they went to work, and I then broke in and stole some guns. I never considered that my neighbors had guns at home until I read it in the paper. It's not my fault - I got the idea from the newspaper.”
Oh yeah - rape victim's names are typically kept out of news stories. I suppose that Trejbal's going to publish those next.
As for "removing" the list - how does one "unpost" something from a newspaper?
What a gaggle of vile idiots. I suppose that they have a "right" to post the list. However, if someone suffers injury due to their name and address being posted, they also have a "right" sue the Trejbal and the Roanoke Times into oblivion.
Ned
Post a Comment