Round 2...Some people are slow learners

bakerloobakerloo BannedPosts: 980 Senior Member
New York newspaper to list more gun permit holders after uproar

http://news.yahoo.com/york-newspaper-list-more-gun-permit-holders-uproar-120534293--finance.html

Maybe the gun guys will find and print pics of their pets...Maybe even a pic of a monkey.
"So what is big is not always the Trout nor the Deer but the chance, the being there. And what is full is not necessarily the creel nor the freezer, but the memory."
Aldo Leopold

Replies

  • 1060785.jpg

    You really think that's a good idea?
  • bring it

    if a person is gonna be a douchetard there's no stopping them (I see evidence of this laying in the OR everyday)

    if one has to take their retribution out on a person's kids then it's proof positive they have no balls
  • Further NorthFurther North Senior Member Posts: 1,699 Senior Member
    Or no brains.

    ...on the flip side, you've really got to be shortchanged in the brain department to go escalate something that got you punched in the virtual kidneys the first time...

    ...or your ego is more important to you than other people's safety...

    ...or...by far the most likely most likely: you see increased attention, sales and advertising revenue in continuing on the same path and are willing to sacrifice people's safety in pursuit of the almighty dollar.
    "Just because I criticize your argument doesn't mean that I disagree with your position."
  • bakerloobakerloo Banned Posts: 980 Senior Member
    On the flip side of "outing" the gun owners, they have virtually named those that are unarmed. Those people may be easy picken's for bad guys that want to harm people. At least the first responder on the scene will have a gun.
    "So what is big is not always the Trout nor the Deer but the chance, the being there. And what is full is not necessarily the creel nor the freezer, but the memory."
    Aldo Leopold
  • bakerloo wrote: »
    On the flip side of "outing" the gun owners, they have virtually named those that are unarmed. Those people may be easy picken's for bad guys that want to harm people. At least the first responder on the scene will have a gun.

    You are giving most criminals too much credit to be smart and resourceful enough to figure this out
  • Further NorthFurther North Senior Member Posts: 1,699 Senior Member
    That was one of the first thoughts I had. Not that the greedy, selfish publishers will ever admit to that.

    It'd be interesting to go back into the area in a couple of years to see if crime was up in the home that do not show permits (or the ones that do)...then go after the publishers if it could be shown they endangered pubic safety.

    This would assume criminals are bright enough to use the data, which is a pretty big jump....and that sorta reveals the hollering from both sides for what it is: Headline grabbing...if the paper could get the data, anyone could, so it was already out there.

    IMO, the game goes to the folks who published the addresses of the newspaper folks, even though I don't like the involvement of the kids - though publishing the initial data certainly endangered children also.

    Going back to the well a 2nd time is just stupid and setting themselves up for punishment.
    "Just because I criticize your argument doesn't mean that I disagree with your position."
  • bakerloo wrote: »
    On the flip side of "outing" the gun owners, they have virtually named those that are unarmed. Those people may be easy picken's for bad guys that want to harm people. At least the first responder on the scene will have a gun.

    First off, I've already said that just because a newspaper can doesn't mean it should

    Second, if the information is a matter of public record how are they "outing" anyone? You've yet to demonstrate or prove that any 'confidential' information has been shared by those demons in da liburrrl media ... in other words your justification for putting links up to the photos of a person's children apparently doesn't exist unless you have info to the contrary.
  • Further NorthFurther North Senior Member Posts: 1,699 Senior Member
    Both these groups fall under the "just because they can......." banner.

    What makes no sense at all, is the paper going back to put more families...and their kids...at risk here.
    "Just because I criticize your argument doesn't mean that I disagree with your position."
  • that's a weak stretch or did the paper post links to the photos of these gunowner's children? or even identify whether they even had children

    keep trying to make it all same same even if it isn't
  • Further NorthFurther North Senior Member Posts: 1,699 Senior Member
    It's not the same...but we're kidding ourselves if we're claiming that posting the addresses of the permit holders does not put their entire families at risk...or if we take the opposing argument that now the bad guys know which houses to stay away from, that we're putting all the other families kids at greater risk.

    Nobody wins with thing, it was incredibly stupid to start it, even stupider to counter, and borders moronic to continue it.

    Egos and dollars over safety of people is pathetic.
    "Just because I criticize your argument doesn't mean that I disagree with your position."
  • bakerloobakerloo Banned Posts: 980 Senior Member
    monkeydoes wrote: »
    that's a weak stretch or did the paper post links to the photos of these gunowner's children? or even identify whether they even had children

    keep trying to make it all same same even if it isn't

    I think it's called collateral damage. The newspaper guys shouldn't have had their kids standing nearby when the 'gun blog drone" was hunting...
    "So what is big is not always the Trout nor the Deer but the chance, the being there. And what is full is not necessarily the creel nor the freezer, but the memory."
    Aldo Leopold
  • fishingcomicfishingcomic Senior Member Posts: 23,539 Senior Member
    To be honest I am at a loss to figure out what either side hopes to accomplish here.
    'I've spoken of the Shining City all my political life. …In my mind it was a tall, proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, windswept, God-blessed, and teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace; a city with free ports that hummed with commerce and creativity. And if there had to be city walls, the walls had doors and the doors were open to anyone with the will and the heart to get here. That's how I saw it, and see it still.'" Ronald Reagan
  • breamfisherbreamfisher Senior Member Posts: 4,576 Senior Member
    To be honest I am at a loss to figure out what either side hopes to accomplish here.
    I think both groups have stock in Tuck's and Preparation H, because all they're accomplishing is more butt-hurt....
  • so, how did the newspaper get the list of names in the first place?
  • NRA mailing list?
  • Further NorthFurther North Senior Member Posts: 1,699 Senior Member
    To be honest I am at a loss to figure out what either side hopes to accomplish here.

    What they hope to accomplish, or what we think when we see these antics?

    They hope to "win", then do a bunch of high fives and chest bumps with a bunch of clowns who think like they do, while the rest of shake our heads and think "Morons!"
    "Just because I criticize your argument doesn't mean that I disagree with your position."

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file
Magazine Cover

GET THE MAGAZINE Subscribe & Save

Temporary Price Reduction.

SUBSCRIBE NOW

Give a Gift   |   Subscriber Services

PREVIEW THIS MONTH'S ISSUE

GET THE NEWSLETTER Join the List and Never Miss a Thing.

Get the top Fly Fisherman stories delivered right to your inbox.