Outrage after NY paper publishes names of gun permit holders

[KubotaOwner]

I disagree. Don't you think it would be useful to know if an unbalanced individual in your neighborhood had a permit for a semi automatic rifle? Why should that be a secret? In this case it appears just to be those who have pistol/revolver permits. I presume one can get lists of people with pilot's licenses or liquor licenses. Why should gun owners be treated differently?

I'd want to know if there was a gun in a house that one of my kids was likely to be playing in. I'd take the opportunity to ask the parents in that house how they secured the weapon. If it didn't meet my standards for safety I'd simply not let my kid go there. Why shouldn't I have that information?

I would be fascinated to know what you would do with this information if it was available to you....

 

[ultrarunner]

Probably the same reason they omit all those that are in Law Enforcement from officers to judges...

 

[DieselnHooters]

We be in deep scat with just the current numbers. With the Baby Boomers retiring, many early because of this economy, the demand for government money is going to start increasing which is going to lead to more government debt meaning the scat is much deeper than it appears.

Later,
Dan

You could start by slashing that gigantic defense budget... no need for such a big military with all that firepower in the hands of citizens

 

[OldMcDonald]

Can I suggest that what happens in the US should not be influenced in any way by statistics and gun regulations in other countries? I am British, have lived there in two spells (the first from birth) totalling 45 years in both England and Scotland, plus I have had 13 years in Australia and more recently 10 in Portugal. I have never lived in the US, but believe the cultures about guns are so dissimilar that comparisons amongst the countries are of no value whatsoever.

There is some erroneous information in a few threads too. British police do not carry guns at any time on duty except under express conditions of requirement in individual situations, and a limited number of officers may be permitted to be armed. If a gun is carried by police in a vehicle the vehicle must be fitted with a special compartment in which the gun(s) are placed. My brother in law fits them for one force. I owned a shotgun in Britain (as many, if not most farmers do, and generally for pest control only) and took it to Australia with me where I bought a 3000 acre sheep and cattle station. I then bought a .243 and a .22 because the pests were much more numerous - and different to the UK. On returning to Britain I took the shotgun and .243 and had no difficulty in obtaining permission to keep them, despite not owning any land when I first arrived back. I bought 22 acres only and was able to renew the licence to have both guns. Note I had nowhere else to use them. I obtained a European "passport" for the guns, meaning I could take them anywhere in the European Union, and I brought them with me to Portugal where I am semi-retired on 16 acres. I knew many people in Australia and Britain who had guns, and I never met anyone who had any difficulty in obtaining their licences. I did not know anyone who owned a rapid fire gun of any description, they are not really pest control weapons in the farmers' sense. I knew station owners in Australia who carried a pistol in order to be able to shoot their own livestock that needed to be culled.

Rules on handguns in Britain changed whilst I was there after being in Australia and rules on semi-automatics in Australia changed after I left. I would say that amongst non-farmers it is unusual for people to own guns in either place. In Britain there is little land available for shooting, and what there is is very expensive shooting, so rich people who are non-farmers are the ones most likely to have legally held guns, plus a very few who target shoot. There is more scope in Australia, and some people in rural towns will have guns and the availability of land on which to shoot.

Neither place has a history of widespread gun ownership, and as a consequence the number of guns per head of population is miniscule compared with the US. Perhaps, just perhaps, this gives rise to less criminals using guns too, because they have not been accustomed to having them around and their victims will almost certainly not have a gun. They do make mistakes when robbing farmhouses and the odd one has been shot. Of course criminals will obtain guns if they want them. Triple R gave me a link on another thread that showed one million violent gun crimes a year are committed in the US. Britain has about one fifth of the US population so, on the same per capita ratio would have 200,000 similar crimes. Statistics are published to September each year, the latest currently available, 2011, gave just over 6,000 such crimes, a drop on the previous year of (from memory) somewhere over 7,000. There are statistics available for Australia both pre and post the automatic ban.

I would not now walk alone at night (and some parts in daytime) in any major UK city except along a brightly lit major thoroughfare with lots of people around. I saw a statistic recently that 50% of all crime in the UK is committed in the Greater London area.

What you decide to do, if anything, about further gun control is up to you, the people of the US, and foreigners should keep their nose out of what is your business. It has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with politicians or so-called celebrities from other countries.

 

[bcp]

The newspaper is going to do it again.
Journal News To List More Gun Permit Holders After Uproar

A suburban New York newspaper that sparked an uproar among gun enthusiasts by publishing names and addresses of residents holding pistol permits is now planning to publish even more identities of permit-toting locals.
...

The next batch of names will be permit holders in suburban Putnam County, New York, where the county clerk told the newspaper it is still compiling information.

 

[two_bit_score]

The gun control LIBS will twist things around to say what they want.They don't have guns & don't want You or anyone elst to be able to have guns. These people need to move to a country that believes in no guns for anyone instead, of trying to take away rights of others . If I didn't have guns. I wouldn't try to trke away the rights of others that want or own guns. But with these gun LIBS. they don't want you to have what they don't like GUNS !

I have to differ with you a bit. The LIBS want to control the guns and who may have them so they, the LIBS, can control society.

They don't want you and me to have guns or for our children or grandchildren to attend schools where the students are protected by armed guards like the children of the elite LIBS.

The LIBS know that they must control the guns against the common people.

.

 

[two_bit_score]

Good point. Sure, states can make laws regulating the carrying of weapons. That is all I am talking about. I don't want a ban on all guns, just on certain types.

The Second Amendment. Defender of the rest.

 

[TripleR]

Can I suggest that what happens in the US should not be influenced in any way by statistics and gun regulations in other countries? I am British, have lived there in two spells (the first from birth) totalling 45 years in both England and Scotland, plus I have had 13 years in Australia and more recently 10 in Portugal. I have never lived in the US, but believe the cultures about guns are so dissimilar that comparisons amongst the countries are of no value whatsoever.

There is some erroneous information in a few threads too. British police do not carry guns at any time on duty except under express conditions of requirement in individual situations, and a limited number of officers may be permitted to be armed. If a gun is carried by police in a vehicle the vehicle must be fitted with a special compartment in which the gun(s) are placed. My brother in law fits them for one force. I owned a shotgun in Britain (as many, if not most farmers do, and generally for pest control only) and took it to Australia with me where I bought a 3000 acre sheep and cattle station. I then bought a .243 and a .22 because the pests were much more numerous - and different to the UK. On returning to Britain I took the shotgun and .243 and had no difficulty in obtaining permission to keep them, despite not owning any land when I first arrived back. I bought 22 acres only and was able to renew the licence to have both guns. Note I had nowhere else to use them. I obtained a European "passport" for the guns, meaning I could take them anywhere in the European Union, and I brought them with me to Portugal where I am semi-retired on 16 acres. I knew many people in Australia and Britain who had guns, and I never met anyone who had any difficulty in obtaining their licences. I did not know anyone who owned a rapid fire gun of any description, they are not really pest control weapons in the farmers' sense. I knew station owners in Australia who carried a pistol in order to be able to shoot their own livestock that needed to be culled.

Rules on handguns in Britain changed whilst I was there after being in Australia and rules on semi-automatics in Australia changed after I left. I would say that amongst non-farmers it is unusual for people to own guns in either place. In Britain there is little land available for shooting, and what there is is very expensive shooting, so rich people who are non-farmers are the ones most likely to have legally held guns, plus a very few who target shoot. There is more scope in Australia, and some people in rural towns will have guns and the availability of land on which to shoot.

Neither place has a history of widespread gun ownership, and as a consequence the number of guns per head of population is miniscule compared with the US. Perhaps, just perhaps, this gives rise to less criminals using guns too, because they have not been accustomed to having them around and their victims will almost certainly not have a gun. They do make mistakes when robbing farmhouses and the odd one has been shot. Of course criminals will obtain guns if they want them. Triple R gave me a link on another thread that showed one million violent gun crimes a year are committed in the US. Britain has about one fifth of the US population so, on the same per capita ratio would have 200,000 similar crimes. Statistics are published to September each year, the latest currently available, 2011, gave just over 6,000 such crimes, a drop on the previous year of (from memory) somewhere over 7,000. There are statistics available for Australia both pre and post the automatic ban.

I would not now walk alone at night (and some parts in daytime) in any major UK city except along a brightly lit major thoroughfare with lots of people around. I saw a statistic recently that 50% of all crime in the UK is committed in the Greater London area.

What you decide to do, if anything, about further gun control is up to you, the people of the US, and foreigners should keep their nose out of what is your business. It has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with politicians or so-called celebrities from other countries.

Very well written.:thumbsup:

 

[IslandTractor]

I have to differ with you a bit. The LIBS want to control the guns and who may have them so they, the LIBS, can control society.

They don't want you and me to have guns or for our children or grandchildren to attend schools where the students are protected by armed guards like the children of the elite LIBS.

The LIBS know that they must control the guns against the common people.

.

Sorry but that is a load of crap. Only gun nuts think they can control the government with their pop gun weapons. All BS and bluster.

If you bother to think about it, you'd realize that efforts to control certain types of guns occur almost exclusively after mass killings of innocents by those same weapons. Nothing much to do with political control except for what is driven by the NRA threats to legislators who might otherwise vote for limits on certain types of weapons.

 

[kenmac]

You LIBS just hate the NRA... Don't you ????? I'm glad,/happy to send the NRA my $$$$$ to Defend my rights. It's a small price for me to pay to insure my children, their childern,etc, their rights . I couldn't imagine myself trying to take on the Anti gun LIBS God bless the NRA !!