Here you go: Map: Where Are The Journal News Employees In Your Neighborhood?
you gotta believe there was a meeting at work with a whole lot of this going on; 
:mad::dubious::smack: and very little of this: :p:);)
Something I’d like to know. Does this gun owner database screen out victims of domestic violence? I know many government services in my state, if a woman has fled an abusive husband and has a protective order against him it protects the woman’s current address from being easily shared by the government. I’d seriously hate to find out that this gun owner database posting in New York State might reveal victims of abuse to their abusers who previously had not known where they were living.
Heh. I know a few gun owners that do not have penises. I know that for a fact, having examined closely.
either post something like this in the Pit or go away.
Or the jokes from 1937 forum?
I rather doubt it does. That’s not usually something people remember to take into consideration when they draft these sorts of registration laws. (I’d love to be proven wrong in this case, though!)
What amuses me is all the people that compare this to posting the names of all Muslems in town instead of all the KKK members.
Because lawful gun owners and the KKK have SO much in common. :rolleyes:
Did anybody notice this part of the article?
Don’t you find it curious that they couldn’t find an example of someone committing a crime with a registered firearm? The Wilson example seems to blow the whole story out of the water.
I find it hard to believe that criminals are so hard up trying to find guns that they’d go out of their way to target homes just to steal a firearm…
Any thief breaking into a house is looking for something that can be turned into quick cash. And since all gun owners tell us over and over again how responsible they all are, clearly they always keep their guns under lock & key or in biometric safes etc. So they can’t be stolen anyway. And if someone is at home when they break in, they might get shot.
So, the newspaper did you all a favor. You’re safer with your gun! Congratulations!
I am a police officer. My department does not issue me an off duty weapon. So I am a registered firearm owner. Now explain to me how I will be safer with having the criminals I’ve arrested knowing where me and my family live.
And that’s really the only way a criminal could figure out where you live?
Safes can be broken into, given time and the right tools. Which a burglar might decide to carry if he knows there are likely to be guns (which are good for some quick cash) in the house he’s breaking into.
Well, admitting that the overwhelming majority of legal gun owners never commit a crime with their firearms would wreck their story, so I’m not in the least surprised that that little detail was promptly ignored.
I actually am friends with a few local LEOs and a member of the VSP, all of them have told me before that it’s standard practice to try and protect that information as best as is possible. If a criminal really wanted to know where they live, and had the drive and the time to go to a county courthouse or etc he could probably eventually get an address. But none of them can be easily found on a website with a search box, and ostensibly any registered firearm owner domestic violence victims or police officers are now easily searchable in those New York counties.
It goes back to why I said this wasn’t a good thing to do, there is a difference between “public” and “publicized” and sometimes it’s just asshattery to publicize something when it serves no compelling journalistic or public interest.
That’d make sense. I’m just asking here.
I agree that no journalistic or public interest was served by doing this story this way.
This is something our society really needs to deal with. A lot of people (not just police officers) have legitimate reasons to want to be hard to find, and as more and more public records are becoming accessible online, it’s getting harder for them to guard their privacy. Maybe some information ,while technically still public, should require a person to go to a courthouse or hall of records to obtain it, and folks who face real dangers (like victims of a persistent stalker) should have a way of keeping that information from becoming public knowledge at all.
The only way? I suppose if this were a movie he could wait in the parking lot without anyone noticing and then follow me the 30 plus miles to home without me noticing. Any other way would be extremely difficult. My name is not extremely common but common enough. And there are several people who are prominent in their fields that clog up any Internet search of me. I can’t find myself on google so I doubt anyone else can. There are tools that are available to law enforcement but the chances of criminals having access to them is slim. So no, it’s not impossible to find out but extremely difficult. Unless a newspaper prints it.
bold is mine.
Actually that would be illegal under federal law, the Driver’s Privacy Protection Act. A newspaper could not get the personal information* of Lexus owners through a public records request without a permissible use. If they had a permissible use it is still illegal to transmit that information to persons without a permissible use.
So if names, addresses, phone numbers, and such personal information is exempt from public release via DMV records then why should it be released for other publicly held records?