As Ney Yorker for 50 years, I can attest to the difficulty in getting a gun permit in NY. The process is difficult to pass as it should be. The reqiurement in Arizona is you have to be 21 years old, and have some money. Concealed carry out here does not require a license. Make of that what you wish, but be careful before comparing NY gun death statistics with the "wild west" as so many people like to characterise us. All of that being said, I can not believe the stupidity of the Journal giving clear access to criminals by telling them which homes are threats to them and which are most likely not. I hope your paper circulation matches your I.Q., and of course your community spirit.
Michael Abrams
Phoenix AZ
Leeq - 12 years ago
So you have now enabled all the crooks in New York City to go out and target for theft the guns that these people keep for defense. So you have put a target on these gun owners backs.
If the criminals are successful in stealing any weapons, they can then be used to rape murder and steal from the homes you listed as unarmed.
THAT MUST FEEL SOOOO GOOOOOD!
Sarah Van Cleve - 12 years ago
Many thanks! We at theRobbers Official Brotherhood wish to thank you for the map of homes NOT to violate and plunder. We try our best to stay away from homes with security systems, dogs, and most of all guns. You have provided us with invaluable information and we in turn will put your premises on our "Do Not Rob" list even though we presume you do not have a gun. Again, the ROB is forever grateful for your service and respectfully requests an update in five years.
Paul O. - 12 years ago
In reference to that posting of Firearm Permitholders names and addresses: The people who compiled and posted this information - surely, only in the "interests of freedom of the press" - have proven to be even more misguided and irresponsible than Adam Lanza could ever have dreamt of being. They willingly demonstrate how they will trample YOUR 1st (and 2nd) Amendment rights by hiding behind the protection of...Gosh, the 1st Amendment! I can only hope that the perpetrators (and supporters) of this highly-questionable act are litigated into oblivion and end up living in cardboard boxes. The news media - much like most politicians of today - have an over-blown sense of self-worth and importance. They too easily confuse problems with resolutions (and feel THEIR way is the ONLY way), and have lost sight of what journalism truly should be. Sad.
Selina R - 12 years ago
I'm wondering why this 'news organization' doesn't publish the name of sex offenders. Instead, they publish the names of law abiding gun owners. I'm boycotting every company and business that advertises in this 'rag'.
Roger Meurer - 12 years ago
These polls are from the MORONS that printed a map showing the registered gun owners in the area, thereby showing the home owners that do NOT have guns to defend their homes and families.
By putting hundreds of thousands in danger of rape, assault, robbery, and murder, they "think" they somehow made a "point" on gun control?
Eura Maroon - 12 years ago
I think there should be a law limiting the 'press'. We have too much 'press' in the United States. Maybe we should not allow new news organizations to be created and over time we can limit the amount of bad journalist that can 'create news' and place law abiding citizens in danger.
Did this news service publish the known address of murders, rapist, burglars, those who committed drug offenses, or anyone that got a traffic ticket in their community in the name of public safety? No, they took their own bias and created a news story. What a bunch of amateurs. Amateurs with no journalistic integrity.
Louisa - 12 years ago
Why is the NRA's suggestion for armed security in schools frowned upon when President Clinton proposed (and made some strides toward) the same thing?
BTW I hope your irresponsible 'journalism' does not cause an unarmed citizen to be victimized by sn illegally armed criminal. Also, if I were a licensed permit holder who you've 'outed' in your efforts to create pariahs, I would not hesitate to pursue you legally for any damages you caused my family, business, or me.
Your editorial staff seemed quite perturbed at the idea that many people were exceptionally upset with you for releasing these peoples private information for legally held firearms. You indicated you were upset that this story had been picked up by several bloggers and internet news sites. You mentioned that everything you had done was legal and that some responses were quite vitriolic and you seemed confused as to why people would react the way they did.
The reactions you received were for what was obviously your intent to achieve by releasing these people's information. Although their information was 'legally' obtained, these people legally owned these weapons. You knowingly placed them at risk under the hypocritical guise of public safety. You did not seem to understand that the very same reactions you received were reactions I'm sure many of these people received. You seemed to believe that it was no business of people outside your readership to be upset by this and yet you know full well that legal precedent is established from situations that arise from what you caused. In short, the people that were 'upset' knew that if you got away with what was legal but immoral the likelihood would be that someone would post their information on the web claiming public safety as an excuse.
Shame on you! Shame on you for attempting to hide your vindictive intent behind a false flag. Shame on you for creating a crisis where none existed and most significantly shame on you for your lie of omission by refusing to acknowledge that what had happened to you was somehow unjust while what you had done to these peoples lives was much more unjust. These people owning guns legally had no quarrel with you but you picked one with them. Shame on you. You got what you deserved.
Unfortunately for you all now, everyone knows your linkedin profiles, people have been able to view your homes both inside and out from Zillow.com and from Google maps street view. Your advertisers have been contacted with great vigor by people you had no quarrel with. I suspect the violation of your privacy that you have provoked is now much greater for you than for those people you attacked with malice.
- RM
Kenneth Martin - 12 years ago
"A petition or even ten thousand petitions will never stop the evil that lurks in some hearts. Take a look at things that have taken place in other parts of the world. China for example. recently a crazed man killed over thirty children with a knife. so lets ban all knives. In Sweden someone set fire to an orphanage killing over sixty people so lets get a petition and ban matches. If in the case of the recent horrible event if that school principal and the counselor would have been trained and armed we would have no dead children today as a result. Outlawing any object is foolish at best. The problem is the lack of morality and parenting skills. Before 1962 none of this sort of thing was ever heard of. Take a look at history and you will see that in 1962 the supreme court made it against the law to pray in schools. Hence the problems began. When you remove God from any situation evil will prevail. By promoting and signing a petition like this you are removing power from the hands of the honest people. If you or anyone thinks for one minute that banning guns will keep criminals from having one is foolishness. That is why they are called criminals because they don't follow the rules.
Bob - 12 years ago
Schools in our city already have police assigned to the school and they are armed. It has been the practice for at least five years that I can remember. I don't see what the big surprise is on this issue.
The other thing to consider is if there is another incident, God forbid, parents will be asking why there were not armed personnel at the school. It is sad to say, but eventually this issue will be decided in favor or armed security as schools.
Robert Clampit - 12 years ago
The school where the Obama children attend has eleven(11) armed guards, why should the schools of other children not have the same protection.
In Chicago, which has very tight gun laws has more shooting deaths per capita than places that have concealed carry. Doesn't that raise questions as to what good does further gun control laws will accomplish, as criminals will find a way to obtain weapons to create mayham.
Virginia Tech, Auroura Colorada and Newtown Ct were all designated "Gun Free Zones" therefore the shooter knew they had nothing to fear.
I have owned at least one(1) gun since I was 15, I'm now 76, and none of my guns have ever shoot anyone.
The media wants anything that is sensational to sell their product. A heroic act or an act of kindness gets buried in the middle of the paper, if it is reported at all.
Jeff Hoser - 12 years ago
This particular "dragon" - killing the defenseless - has been with us before our inception as a nation. Any serious perusal of unexpurgated history reveals countless examples spanning 4 centuries. Yet today's statists continue to insist that supine acceptance by the victims makes them more "moral" than those that resist, and eradication of the means to resist is a "moral" response.
Predators we will always have. But - as in Newtown, CT - "when seconds count lives", effective response is often many minutes away. >MW
As Ney Yorker for 50 years, I can attest to the difficulty in getting a gun permit in NY. The process is difficult to pass as it should be. The reqiurement in Arizona is you have to be 21 years old, and have some money. Concealed carry out here does not require a license. Make of that what you wish, but be careful before comparing NY gun death statistics with the "wild west" as so many people like to characterise us. All of that being said, I can not believe the stupidity of the Journal giving clear access to criminals by telling them which homes are threats to them and which are most likely not. I hope your paper circulation matches your I.Q., and of course your community spirit.
Michael Abrams
Phoenix AZ
So you have now enabled all the crooks in New York City to go out and target for theft the guns that these people keep for defense. So you have put a target on these gun owners backs.
If the criminals are successful in stealing any weapons, they can then be used to rape murder and steal from the homes you listed as unarmed.
THAT MUST FEEL SOOOO GOOOOOD!
Many thanks! We at theRobbers Official Brotherhood wish to thank you for the map of homes NOT to violate and plunder. We try our best to stay away from homes with security systems, dogs, and most of all guns. You have provided us with invaluable information and we in turn will put your premises on our "Do Not Rob" list even though we presume you do not have a gun. Again, the ROB is forever grateful for your service and respectfully requests an update in five years.
In reference to that posting of Firearm Permitholders names and addresses: The people who compiled and posted this information - surely, only in the "interests of freedom of the press" - have proven to be even more misguided and irresponsible than Adam Lanza could ever have dreamt of being. They willingly demonstrate how they will trample YOUR 1st (and 2nd) Amendment rights by hiding behind the protection of...Gosh, the 1st Amendment! I can only hope that the perpetrators (and supporters) of this highly-questionable act are litigated into oblivion and end up living in cardboard boxes. The news media - much like most politicians of today - have an over-blown sense of self-worth and importance. They too easily confuse problems with resolutions (and feel THEIR way is the ONLY way), and have lost sight of what journalism truly should be. Sad.
I'm wondering why this 'news organization' doesn't publish the name of sex offenders. Instead, they publish the names of law abiding gun owners. I'm boycotting every company and business that advertises in this 'rag'.
These polls are from the MORONS that printed a map showing the registered gun owners in the area, thereby showing the home owners that do NOT have guns to defend their homes and families.
By putting hundreds of thousands in danger of rape, assault, robbery, and murder, they "think" they somehow made a "point" on gun control?
I think there should be a law limiting the 'press'. We have too much 'press' in the United States. Maybe we should not allow new news organizations to be created and over time we can limit the amount of bad journalist that can 'create news' and place law abiding citizens in danger.
Did this news service publish the known address of murders, rapist, burglars, those who committed drug offenses, or anyone that got a traffic ticket in their community in the name of public safety? No, they took their own bias and created a news story. What a bunch of amateurs. Amateurs with no journalistic integrity.
Why is the NRA's suggestion for armed security in schools frowned upon when President Clinton proposed (and made some strides toward) the same thing?
BTW I hope your irresponsible 'journalism' does not cause an unarmed citizen to be victimized by sn illegally armed criminal. Also, if I were a licensed permit holder who you've 'outed' in your efforts to create pariahs, I would not hesitate to pursue you legally for any damages you caused my family, business, or me.
Your editorial staff seemed quite perturbed at the idea that many people were exceptionally upset with you for releasing these peoples private information for legally held firearms. You indicated you were upset that this story had been picked up by several bloggers and internet news sites. You mentioned that everything you had done was legal and that some responses were quite vitriolic and you seemed confused as to why people would react the way they did.
The reactions you received were for what was obviously your intent to achieve by releasing these people's information. Although their information was 'legally' obtained, these people legally owned these weapons. You knowingly placed them at risk under the hypocritical guise of public safety. You did not seem to understand that the very same reactions you received were reactions I'm sure many of these people received. You seemed to believe that it was no business of people outside your readership to be upset by this and yet you know full well that legal precedent is established from situations that arise from what you caused. In short, the people that were 'upset' knew that if you got away with what was legal but immoral the likelihood would be that someone would post their information on the web claiming public safety as an excuse.
Shame on you! Shame on you for attempting to hide your vindictive intent behind a false flag. Shame on you for creating a crisis where none existed and most significantly shame on you for your lie of omission by refusing to acknowledge that what had happened to you was somehow unjust while what you had done to these peoples lives was much more unjust. These people owning guns legally had no quarrel with you but you picked one with them. Shame on you. You got what you deserved.
Unfortunately for you all now, everyone knows your linkedin profiles, people have been able to view your homes both inside and out from Zillow.com and from Google maps street view. Your advertisers have been contacted with great vigor by people you had no quarrel with. I suspect the violation of your privacy that you have provoked is now much greater for you than for those people you attacked with malice.
- RM
"A petition or even ten thousand petitions will never stop the evil that lurks in some hearts. Take a look at things that have taken place in other parts of the world. China for example. recently a crazed man killed over thirty children with a knife. so lets ban all knives. In Sweden someone set fire to an orphanage killing over sixty people so lets get a petition and ban matches. If in the case of the recent horrible event if that school principal and the counselor would have been trained and armed we would have no dead children today as a result. Outlawing any object is foolish at best. The problem is the lack of morality and parenting skills. Before 1962 none of this sort of thing was ever heard of. Take a look at history and you will see that in 1962 the supreme court made it against the law to pray in schools. Hence the problems began. When you remove God from any situation evil will prevail. By promoting and signing a petition like this you are removing power from the hands of the honest people. If you or anyone thinks for one minute that banning guns will keep criminals from having one is foolishness. That is why they are called criminals because they don't follow the rules.
Schools in our city already have police assigned to the school and they are armed. It has been the practice for at least five years that I can remember. I don't see what the big surprise is on this issue.
The other thing to consider is if there is another incident, God forbid, parents will be asking why there were not armed personnel at the school. It is sad to say, but eventually this issue will be decided in favor or armed security as schools.
The school where the Obama children attend has eleven(11) armed guards, why should the schools of other children not have the same protection.
In Chicago, which has very tight gun laws has more shooting deaths per capita than places that have concealed carry. Doesn't that raise questions as to what good does further gun control laws will accomplish, as criminals will find a way to obtain weapons to create mayham.
Virginia Tech, Auroura Colorada and Newtown Ct were all designated "Gun Free Zones" therefore the shooter knew they had nothing to fear.
I have owned at least one(1) gun since I was 15, I'm now 76, and none of my guns have ever shoot anyone.
The media wants anything that is sensational to sell their product. A heroic act or an act of kindness gets buried in the middle of the paper, if it is reported at all.
This particular "dragon" - killing the defenseless - has been with us before our inception as a nation. Any serious perusal of unexpurgated history reveals countless examples spanning 4 centuries. Yet today's statists continue to insist that supine acceptance by the victims makes them more "moral" than those that resist, and eradication of the means to resist is a "moral" response.
Predators we will always have. But - as in Newtown, CT - "when seconds count lives", effective response is often many minutes away. >MW