N.Y. County Refuses To Release Pistol Permit Data

jc @ 1/3/2013 5:07 PM

There really is no legitimate reason for this newspaper to do this, they're just being jerks and doing it because they can. Wise men know that just because you can do something doesn't mean you should. The president of the U.S. can launch a nuclear strike on Russia or China and start WWIII but just because he can do that does that mean he should? The jerks at the newspaper don't have the common sense or wisdom to figure this out; obviously these qualities aren't a prerequiste for the position of newspaper editor and publisher.
The printing of these names and addresses violates these people's privacy; maybe if someone found out the names and addresses of the publisher and all employees of this newspaper and published that for everyone for see, then maybe the newpaper might understand what it feels like to have their employee's privacy violated for everyone to see.

Morning Eagle @ 1/4/2013 12:08 PM

Way to go Putnam County, stand firm against these anti-gun ownership whackos. Searching for a "legal way" to refuse this so-called newspaper's request? Ignore it, after all the administration’s Department of INjustice does that all the time when they get FOIA requests they don’t want to comply with. Just tell the paper where they can stick it. What legal grounds do they have for making the request in the first place or for publishing such egregious and dangerous invasions of privacy? When the NYT first started this debacle they attempted to justify it by saying the public had just as much right to know where gun owners live as where registered sex offenders live. So where is there any legitimate connection or equation between law abiding gun owners and sex offenders? There is none and it was insulting for gun owners to say the least. Using the phrase "registered sex offender" in conjunction with gun owner elicits an almost automatic knee jerk emotional reaction from people who will not think for themselves. If there isn’t already, there should be a class action lawsuit against these publishers to make them stop putting out such potentially dangerous and invasive information.

Tom Ret @ 1/4/2013 1:29 PM

I heard or read that the paper had to hire armed guards as they apparently fear a backlash coming their way. It sure seems to fit that if the left needs guns then guns are ok as long as everyone else doesn't have them. This paper, in its attempt to embarrass or ridicule those who don't agree with their anti gun agenda, have put citizens in danger. This paper should be boycotted.

Jim A @ 1/6/2013 1:23 PM

I would go farther than just publishing the names of the newspaper employees. I would find out if they have guns. Then I would publish their names and addresses and further state "These people do not have guns to defend themselves, so burglars, these are good potential targets!"

Idiots. How do they get off thinking that their first amendment rights are more important than the second amendment rights of the gun owners? How do the publishers get away with endangering the lives of these law-abiding people?

Ima Leprechaun @ 1/12/2013 9:17 AM

Putnam County will get sued and the citizens will lose big money in this law suit. All public records are in fact public records and cannot be held secret. They should never be secret to protect the rights of every citizen. If any public records are forbidden from public view then who is to say what other records are being hidden, Are the public records of arrest being hidden to protect terrorists? Are there secret wire tap files being retained? Are there secret records being kept on anyone purcahsing any legal prescriptions? The reason public records are public are to miantain the freedom from unlawful search and seizure. At what point do all public records become secret records? If you are leaglly carrying a gun why care who knows, I would think the more people that know you are armmed the better your protection would be. If I knew someone was carrying a gun I would certainly not bother them needlessly. Even the newspaper has rights under the 1st ammendment but either way everyone that obtains a public record is subject to public disclosure its just how freedom works.