The Journal News is taking heat for revealing names and addresses of gun permit holders in its coverage area -- information the paper in Westchester County, N.Y., got through public records obtained under freedom of information law requests.
The information, published in map form Saturdayyesterday, spurred more than 500 comments from readers within a day of its appearance on the daily's website, many of them voicing outrage at the paper’s decision to make the information public, according to ABC News.
In a statement, the paper said readers “are understandably interested to know about guns in their neighborhoods,” after the school shooting in Newtown, Conn., last week.
The information, published in map form Saturday
In a statement, the paper said readers “are understandably interested to know about guns in their neighborhoods,” after the school shooting in Newtown, Conn., last week.
At Gannett's newspaper in Boise, Idaho, in the mid-1990s, I obtained names and addresses of every concealed carry gun permit owner in the state, also using open-records laws.
ReplyDeleteWe published a story based on those records that revealed names of prominent Idahoans (one was a Congresswoman, I think). But we didn't publish the full list; the paper didn't have a website at the time.
After the story ran, unfortunately, the Idaho legislature amended the state's freedom of information law to exempt concealed carry permit records from public disclosure.
Gannett sold the paper, The Idaho Statesman, in 2005.
You are proud to be an idiot that endangered the lives of law abiding citizens ? Get a life
DeleteThat is why I disagree with these types of stories, where we use the open records laws just to reveal the names without any greater purpose in mind. If the story was combined with conducting research into domestic abuse incidents, criminal violations and numerous other activities involving those names there would be some justification for the story. However, as we have seen numerous times when the records laws are used to simply piss people off, legislators pass more restrictive laws and nothing is gained.
ReplyDeleteBut this is just the first step to opening up a lot of information of great public interest.
DeleteWeapons require transparency imho. And the illegal guns will be much easier to identify.
But many of us will be glad to know which neighbors have weapons on premises. And it will be useful in correlating data. I am glad Gannett had the courage to publish this public information.
DeleteSome grease ball lawyers are going to be very rich after this, one of the biggest blunders in journalism ethics.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2012/12/24/Lohud-New-York-gun-permits
Perhaps law-abiding gun owners will be "understandably interested" in making public the names & addresses of The Journal News staff? Hmmm??
ReplyDeleteOh, and let's not forget the addresses of police officers. The decision publish the names and addresses of people breaking no law -- indeed, adhering to it -- was motivated by cheap sensationalism wrapped in a "public service."
DeleteThe names, addresses and home phone numbers of editors of a Tennessee newspaper were released online after the paper published concealed carry permit holders names. I don't recall which paper it was--it's been a couple of decades since I worked in the news business and I've tried to forget as much about those years as possible. The paper's editors were outraged that such publicly available information was made publicly available.
DeleteThat was the Memphis Commercial Appeal, or as we call it in TN, the Commercial Squeal.
DeleteI will not be one of your readers or tv viewers and i will make sure everyone i know can do the same!
ReplyDeleteI think this was a terrrrrrrible idea to publish the map of owners. Now, street gangs know which houses to hit, even which clusters might be most lucrative to stake out or scam. Whatever benefit the NJ sees is far overshadowed by the harm, imho.
ReplyDeleteIt's also incredibly LAZY reporting. It's not reporting. A real journalist analyzes the data -- washes the dishes, not throw you the dirty kitchen sink. It's not journalism to just publish data. It's just, well, mindlessly publishing data.
Street gangs know which houses to hit? I thought guns were the great deterrent?
ReplyDeleteFrankly, I applaud the move. As I said elsewhere (did not realize a separate discussion was here), I can look up voter registrations in most states, house assessments, all kinds of personal documents. Guns are a big deal and they should be part of the public record.
And as long as they are public record (apparently), this shows the extent of the ownership, block by block.
A gutsy move by TJN and one that should be applauded. The light of day is always the preferred option.
I understand your point, 1:55 PM, but I don't think you understood 11:24 AM's. A map of gun owners would by omission generally show who does NOT have a gun as well; thereby, which house to hit.
Delete"Gutsy"? What the hell is gutsy about it? They took public information of questionable value and published it without context or interpretation. There's nothing there but an attempt to grab some short-term audience by playing off a recent tragedy in the region.
DeleteSometimes referred to in the legal profession as "reckless disregard".
DeleteNotice that Anon 1:55 is anonymous. Gutsy.
DeleteActually, 11:24 meant that criminals could more easily rob the houses WITH guns while the homeowners are gone. My fear is illegal handguns on the streets. I don't fear the legal ones, which is why I don't think where they are on a map serves any journalistic public interest. As for the Newtown anomaly, I think we'd better serve the public by analyzing the lack of compassion and resources for mental health problems, especially in predictable age and gender ranges.
DeleteMerry Christmas from The (Westchester County, N.Y.) Journal News instantly turning the unarmed in its coverage area into potential victims of criminals. I'm sure a lot of thought went into this brilliant piece of brainlessness.
ReplyDeleteIf you don't have the stomach to be in journalism, then pick a different profession.
DeleteI just read the article on Yahoo.
ReplyDeleteI've never seen posters/commenters so upset about this.
Some are even turning the tables on the Publisher, the Editor, the Reporter, etc. by posting their full names, addresses and telephone numbers. They even have Gracia's full name, address and telephone number posted. It's all on Yahoo.
What a big mess this appears to be!
A database of ILLEGAL weapons in the hands of violent criminals and dangerous lunatics -- now THAT would be a public service!
ReplyDeleteBut harassing innocent law-abiding private citizens?
""There's nothing there but an attempt to grab some short-term audience by playing off a recent tragedy in the region.""
ReplyDeleteDisagree. What The Journal-News has done is quite profound, actually.
It is simply an exercise in freedom of the press by publishing a public list of people who are exercising their right to have a firearm. What is wrong with that?
And what is profound is that it shows that our hard-fought rights can become over the top and uncomfortable when taken to extremes -- whether assault weapons in the hands of teenagers or a list of gun owners online.
Well done, TJN. A strong statement and a public service.
LIKE
DeleteIf TJN had any REAL guts, they'd publish the names and addresses of doctors and nurses working at abortion clinics. Assuming that medical licenses are subject to the same open-records laws as gun permits.
ReplyDeleteOr would that be goring a sacred cow instead of an ox?
Cleary an act meant to intimidate gun owners. It is no different than if one were to publish the addresses of doctors who perform abortions. Sure, it's public info, but the intent would be intimidation. If they don't like guns, fine, pass laws against them, but don't bother law abiding citizens.
ReplyDelete2 + 2 = ? would intimidate you.
DeleteGeorge Orwell, "1984": 2+2=5.....
DeleteSo... the armed citizens have been named. To me, that means the unarmed citizens have been named. Jeez-all-pete, that was simply stupid. There is nothing smaller-minded than this.
ReplyDeleteExcept for an anti-company site where everyone posts anonymously, with only a timestamp to "distinguish" the posters.
DeleteActually, no it does not mean that unarmed citizens have been named. What it is, lumping unarmed citizens and those who have a gun but no permit into one category. Those that have a permit are in the other. This is so very sad.
DeleteIt seems a crazy person has more privacy rights than a licensed gun owner. Where is the focus on mental health? Oh...yeah...that's not nearly as sexy as a gun ban angle. And it would take actual journalism. I'd love to be the paper's Circulation Director this week.
ReplyDeleteJanet Hasson is a former Circulation Marketing Director from Cincy. She is only interested in a quick bump in the numbers.
ReplyDeleteIf the paper wants to publish that kind of information, they should be able to as long as they publish the name and ALL contact information for the owner, publisher, editor, and reporter.
ReplyDeleteThink we need to publish all the names,addresss and phone numbers of all there employees. So the everyone can get on there butt.
ReplyDelete