Tag Archive: Freedom


NRA Stand and Fight: We Are America

About these ads

FAA Moves Closer To Widespread US Drone Flights With Plan For Test Sites

 

 

” A future in which unmanned drones are as common in U.S. skies as helicopters and airliners has moved a step closer to reality with a government request for proposals to create six drone test sites around the country.

The Federal Aviation Administration made the request Thursday, kicking off what is anticipated to be an intense competition between states hoping to win one of the sites.

The FAA also posted online a draft plan for protecting people’s privacy from the eyes in the sky. The plan would require each test site to follow federal and state laws and make a privacy policy publicly available.

Privacy advocates worry that a proliferation of drones will lead to a “surveillance society” in which the movements of Americans are routinely monitored, tracked, recorded and scrutinized by the authorities.”

 

 

Judge Napolitano: How Teddy Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson Destroyed Constitutional Freedom

 

Ben Garrison

 

Sleeping Giant Awakes

California Passes Sweeping New ‘Animal Abuse’ Laws That Give Government Massive New Powers Over Animal Ownership

 

 

 

   Animal rights run amok …

 

” (NaturalNews) If you live in California and own pets or livestock, you could soon be criminalized as an animal abuser for things like letting your livestock roam on pasture or transferring ownership of rare-breed animals in a parking lot. Two new laws recently passed under the auspices of animal protection actually threaten to eliminate animal ownership throughout the state, as they re-categorize normal animal rearing methods as acts of abuse worthy of criminal fines and unwarranted seizure of said animals.

The bills are AB 1117 and SB 917, and they were passed under a shroud of secrecy. Those who knew about the bills were told they would protect animals from abuse. But upon closer investigation, AB 1117 and SB 917 were clearly designed to incriminate animal ownership and discourage livestock farming. SB 917, as it turns out, makes it a crime to both sell and give away animals on any street, highway, public right-of-way, parking lot, carnival or boardwalk, while AB 1117 gives full authority to humane and peace officers to seize and destroy animals without a warrant. “

 

 

   For once it seems that California is behind the curve in this headlong dash towards human extinction …

 

 

” Such lunacy is not reserved to California, sadly, as numerous other U.S. states are pushing their own laws that would essentially criminalize animal ownership. As we reported back in 2012, the state of Michigan passed a not-so-cleverly disguised “Invasive Species Order” (ISO) that reclassified most rare-breed pig breeds as “feral,” and thus illegal. Beginning last April, the state actually went around with SWAT teams raiding local farms and shooting these rare-breed species (http://www.naturalnews.com/035372_Michigan_pigs_farm_freedom.html).And back in 2011, Illinois lawmakers tried to push House Bill 1166, which would have required pet owners to actually get a state-issued permit if they wished to possess more than six animals as pets. Included in this pet category, as explained in a Pet Industry Joint Advisory Council (PIJAC) report, were the usual cats and dogs, as well as fish. Thousands of Illinois residents with even one fish tank of fish, in other words, would have become criminals overnight (http://www.pijac.org)”.

The Corbett Report On Lysander Spooner

 

 

 

” While statists across America (and around the world) were celebrating the inauguration of Obama last weekend, anti-statists celebrated a festive occasion of their own: the 205th birthday of Lysander Spooner. Join us this week on The Corbett Report as we explore the life, works, and thought of Lysander Spooner, lawyer, entrepreneur, Deist, abolitionist, freethinker, and one of the giants of the American anarchist tradition. “

Obama Inaugural Disguises Collectivism As Liberty

 

 

 

” According to this president, “being true to our founding documents … does not mean we all define liberty in exactly the same way.” Liberty, we are to believe, is an eye-of-the-beholder proposition.

This is what we are to have in mind as we swallow the “ask not what your country” line of Obama’s address: “preserving our individual freedoms ultimately requires collective action.”

In other words, there is no real liberty without big government. Or perhaps we should turn to Orwell’s 1984 to break the code: “Freedom Is Slavery.”

Obama says he’s all for entrepreneurs, Grandma and her apple pie, but “a free market only thrives when there are rules to ensure competition and fair play.”

 

 

 

 

Illustration By Michael Ramirez

 

 

What Is the Future of Conservatism?

 

 

 

 

” Lost in all the post-election analysis was a much larger and more cynically brilliant Obama us-and-them campaign that created the image of a shrinking, geriatric white male plutocratic establishment forced to give way to the new age of the diverse “other.” Affluent Asians, blacks, Latinos, gays, women, etc., supposedly had beef with Republicans and were brilliantly united by Obama in vague resentment against “them.”

In this regard, Republicans have to focus on a more populist approach that ensures their message of smaller government, lower taxes, a strong defense, and more freedom appeals to those on the receiving end of government largesse. Free-market conservatives do best when they appear naturally as part of the working or small-business class and can’t be caricatured as elevator-owning grandees–and when they mix it up and take their licks in trying to appeal to those who probably won’t vote for them. “

 

 

 

 

Obama’s Big Defense of Big Government

 

 

Cato Podcast

 

 

Why Libertarians Support Equal Rights for America’s Gun Owners

 

 

 

 

” Libertarians, like other Americans, want to be able to walk city streets safely and be secure in their homes. We also want our Constitutional rights protected, to guard against the erosion of our civil liberties. In particular, Libertarians want to see all people treated equally under the law, as our Constitution requires.America’s millions of gun owners are people too.

Law-abiding, responsible citizens do not and should not need to ask anyone’s permission or approval to engage in a peaceful activity. Gun ownership, by itself, harms no other person and cannot morally justify criminal penalties.

Constitutional Rights

America’s founders fought the Revolutionary War to throw off British tyranny. Most of the revolutionaries owned and used their own guns in that war. After the war, in 1789, the 13 American States adopted the Constitution, creating the federal government. Before ratifying the Constitution, the people demanded a Bill of Rights to prevent our government from depriving them of their liberties as the British had done.

One of the most important protections we have against government tyranny is that we are presumed innocent of any crime until proven guilty, before a jury, in a proper trial. “

 

 

America’s Dangerous Devotion to Executive Power

image

” Americans have increasingly expanded presidential power over recent decades by expecting the president to provide solutions for all national problems, prosperity for all, and protection from harm. Healy demonstrates how the president’s role needs to return to its properly defined constitutional limits, with its powers held in check by Congress and the courts.

“The year’s most pertinent and sobering public affairs book.”
— GEORGE WILL, Newsweek

Read the free e-book version of Cult of the Presidency below. Available for a limited time only “

Y’all Come To Texas, State Official Tells New York Gun Owners

 

 

” Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott has a message for New York gun owners: Come to Texas, and bring your guns with you.

“Texas is better than New York, and New York just gave us another excuse to say that,” Abbott, a Republican, said on Thursday, after ads extolling Texas appeared on several media websites.

One ad says in classic Western script: “WANTED: Law abiding New York gun owners seeking lower taxes and greater opportunities.”

Clicking on the ad leads to a Facebook page touting the virtues of Texas, including the fact that the state has no income tax so “you’ll be able to keep more of what you earn and use that extra money to buy more ammo.” “

 

 

NY Poised to Pass First Gun Bill Since Sandy Hook Shooting

” A key New York Senate leader and the Assembly speaker said they expect the state Legislature to vote Monday to enact what would be the nation’s first gun control measure following last month’s Connecticut school shooting.

“I think when all is said and done, we are going to pass a comprehensive gun bill today,” Sen. Jeffrey Klein told reporters Monday morning. “I’m very excited about it. I am very confident we are going to vote on a comprehensive bill that will be agreed on by the governor, the Senate and Assembly.”

People familiar with closed-door negotiations told The Associated Press a tentative deal was struck over the weekend.

The tentative agreement would further restrict New York’s ban on assault weapons, limit the size of magazines to seven bullets, down from the current 10, and enact more stringent background checks for sales. Other elements, pushed by Republicans, would refine a mental health law to make it easier to confine people determined to be a threat to themselves or others.
Senate Republicans also have included a further crackdown on illegal gun trafficking into New York, the people said. Most New York City gun crimes involve weapons illegally brought into the state, state and city officials say. “
  With the murder rates in NY state at the lowest point in FIFTY years , it is all of a sudden imperative that draconian new laws be passed on the basis of knee-jerk emotionalism ? This should tell any thinking individual exactly how much this new ” policy ” is really about ” public safety ” . 
  If you look at the table below you will see that from a peak of 2605 murders in the state in 1990 , with a slight one year rise here or there the rate of killings has been steadily downward to a point where in 2011 , the last full year of complete records available , the total number of murders was 774 , a decrease of two thirds in the past thirty years . 
New York Crime Rates 1960 – 2011
Year Population Index Violent Property Murder Rape Robbery assault Burglary Theft Theft
1965  18,073,000  554,050  58,802  495,248  836  2,320  28,182  27,464  183,443  253,353  58,452 
1966 18,258,000 609,465 62,561 546,904 882 2,439 30,098 29,142 196,127 286,409 64,368
1967 18,336,000 692,528 75,124 617,404 996 2,665 40,202 31,261 219,157 314,472 83,775
1968 18,113,000 829,453 98,515 730,938 1,185 2,527 59,857 34,946 250,918 375,143 104,877
1969 18,321,000 837,210 105,870 731,340 1,324 2,902 64,754 36,890 248,477 367,463 115,400
1970 18,190,740 904,314 124,613 779,701 1,444 2,875 81,149 39,145 267,474 386,553 125,674
1971 18,391,000 935,022 145,048 789,974 1,823 3,225 97,682 42,318 273,704 388,612 127,658
1972 18,366,000 804,605 138,542 666,063 2,026 4,199 86,391 45,926 239,886 321,096 105,081
1973 18,265,000 814,349 135,468 678,881 2,040 4,852 80,795 47,781 246,246 320,307 112,328
1974 18,111,000 911,703 145,427 766,276 1,919 5,240 86,814 51,454 271,824 390,357 104,095
1975 18,120,000 1,021,197 155,187 866,010 1,996 5,099 93,499 54,593 301,996 447,740 116,274
1976 18,084,000 1,125,739 156,988 968,751 1,969 4,663 95,718 54,638 318,919 516,328 133,504
1977 17,924,000 1,091,144 149,087 942,057 1,919 5,272 84,703 57,193 309,735 498,653 133,669
1978 17,748,000 1,027,993 149,257 878,736 1,820 5,168 83,785 58,484 292,956 466,516 119,264
1979 17,649,000 1,095,140 161,906 933,234 2,092 5,394 93,471 60,949 308,302 500,589 124,343
1980 17,506,690 1,209,984 180,235 1,029,749 2,228 5,405 112,273 60,329 360,925 535,783 133,041
1981 17,594,000 1,214,935 188,178 1,026,757 2,166 5,479 120,344 60,189 350,422 539,486 136,849
1982 17,659,000 1,142,202 174,833 967,369 2,013 5,159 107,843 59,818 295,245 534,244 137,880
1983 17,667,000 1,042,811 161,489 881,322 1,958 5,296 94,783 59,452 249,115 504,346 127,861
1984 17,735,000 989,126 162,157 826,969 1,786 5,599 89,900 64,872 222,956 488,621 115,392
1985 17,783,000 993,811 165,365 828,446 1,683 5,706 89,706 68,270 219,633 502,276 106,537
1986 17,772,000 1,025,037 175,210 849,827 1,907 5,415 91,360 76,528 217,010 519,570 113,247
1987 17,825,000 1,061,021 179,691 881,330 2,016 5,537 89,721 82,417 216,826 539,175 125,329
1988 17,898,000 1,129,241 196,396 932,845 2,244 5,479 97,434 91,239 218,060 560,887 153,898
1989 17,950,000 1,129,638 203,042 926,596 2,246 5,242 103,983 91,571 211,130 544,459 171,007
1990  17,990,455  1,144,874  212,458  932,416 2,605  5,368  112,380  92,105 208,813  536,012 187,591
1991 18,058,000 1,127,651 210,184 917,467 2,571 5,085 112,342 90,186 204,499 531,681 181,287
1992 18,119,000 1,061,489 203,311 858,178 2,397 5,152 108,154 87,608 193,548 495,708 168,922
1993 18,197,000 1,010,176 195,352 814,824 2,420 5,008 102,122 85,802 181,709 481,166 151,949
1994 18,169,000 921,278 175,433 745,845 2,016 4,700 86,617 82,100 164,650 452,322 128,873
1995 18,136,000 827,025 152,683 674,342 1,550 4,290 72,492 74,351 146,562 425,184 102,596
1996 18,185,000 751,456 132,206 619,250 1,353 4,174 61,822 64,857 129,828 399,522 89,900
1997 18,137,000 709,328 124,890 584,438 1,093 4,075 56,094 63,628 118,306 386,435 79,697
1998 18,175,000 652,202 115,915 536,287 924 3,843 49,125 62,023 104,821 363,295 68,171
1999 18,196,601 596,743 107,147 489,596 903 3,563 43,821 58,860 93,217 338,118 58,261
2000 18,976,457 588,189 124,890 483,078 952 3,530 40,539 60,090 87,946 340,901 54,231
2001 19,084,350 556,025 98,022 458,003 960 3,546 36,555 56,961 80,400 329,316 48,287
2002 19,134,293 537,121 95,030 442,091 909 3,885 36,653 53,583 76,700 318,025 47,366
2003 19,212,425 521,565 89,486 432,079 934 3,775 35,790 48,987 75,453 311,422 45,204
2004 19,280,727 507,648 84,914 422,734 889 3,608 33,506 46,911 70,696 311,036 41,002
2005 19,315,721 491,829 85,839 405,990 874 3,636 35,179 46,150 68,034 302,220 35,736
2006 19,306,183 482,270 83,966 396,304 921 3,169 34,489 45,387 68,565 295,605 32,134
2007 19,297,729 461,731 79,915 381,816 801 2,926 31,094 45,094 64,857 288,929 28,030
2008 19,467,789 466,131 77,546 388,585 836 2,799 31,789 42,122 65,537 297,952 25,096
2009 19,541,453 452,647 75,110 377,537 781 2,582 28,141 43,606 62,769 292,897 21,871
2010 19,395,206 456,202 76,492 379,710 868 2,797 28,630 44,197 65,839 293,232 20,639
2011 19,465,197 449,745 77,490 372,255 774 2,752 28,396 45,568 65,397 287,547 19,311

 

   Having already established the FACT that crime in general , and murder in particular have been steadily declining throughout the state for the past three decades one might say , that’s all well and good but , since crime rates nationally have been in a similar decline , maybe NY state hasn’t done as well as it could and thus we need new laws . The next table should disabuse one of that notion fairly quickly . 

US States Crime 2004 -2006 Crimes per 100,000 and Ranking

” The table below provides the rank of each State’s reported rate of crime as compared to the 50 States and the District of Columbia.  1 = the highest reported crime rate and 51 = the lowest. Going from one year to the next a higher number means, that compared to other States, the relative crime rate is increasing and a lower number means that the relative level of crime is decreasing.  The Index category represents the total number of crimes, and since most crimes involve property crime it is weighted towards these types of crime.  ”

State Year Population  Index  Violent  Property  Murder  Forcible Rape  Robbery  Aggravated assault  Burglary  Larceny- Theft  Vehicle Theft
New York 2008 3 47 25 49 27 50 11 26 48 49 46
New York  2007 3 48 25 48 29 50 11 25 49 48 46
New York  2006 3 47 23 48 27 50 9 25 48 48 44
New York  2005 3 46 22 48 29 49 5 25 48 47 45

  While New York possesses the third largest population in the country it consistently ranks between 46-48 on the crime index . That means that 45-47 states have a higher crime rate than this state . Half the states have higher murder rates , yet ” We Must Do Something Now ” .  

  This is all just one more nail in the coffin of our freedoms . Get mad people . Get mad and channel that anger . Get involved , write letters , volunteer , donate time or money , educate your children , just do something . 

  One last table , Lest anyone think that the raw total numbers might be misleading here are the index numbers per 100,000 people . Again they show a current crime rate in the state of New York at levels unseen for nearly fifty years and that with a population increase of nearly one and a half million . Show us the crisis Mr Governor . 

Forcible Aggravated Larceny- Vehicle
Year Population Index Violent Property Murder Rape Robbery assault Burglary Theft Theft
1965  18,073,000  3,065.6  325.4  2,740.3  4.6  12.8  155.9  152.0  1,015.0  1,401.8  323.4 
1966 18,258,000 3,338.1 342.6 2,995.4 4.8 13.4 164.8 159.6 1,074.2 1,568.7 352.5
1967 18,336,000 3,776.9 409.7 3,367.2 5.4 14.5 219.3 170.5 1,195.2 1,715.1 456.9
1968 18,113,000 4,579.3 543.9 4,035.4 6.5 14.0 330.5 192.9 1,385.3 2,071.1 579.0
1969 18,321,000 4,569.7 577.9 3,991.8 7.2 15.8 353.4 201.4 1,356.2 2,005.7 629.9
1970 18,190,740 4,971.3 685.0 4,286.3 7.9 15.8 446.1 215.2 1,470.4 2,125.0 690.9
1971 18,391,000 5,084.1 788.7 4,295.4 9.9 17.5 531.1 230.1 1,488.2 2,113.1 694.1
1972 18,366,000 4,380.9 754.3 3,626.6 11.0 22.9 470.4 250.1 1,306.1 1,748.3 572.1
1973 18,265,000 4,458.5 741.7 3,716.8 11.2 26.6 442.3 261.6 1,348.2 1,753.7 615.0
1974 18,111,000 5,034.0 803.0 4,231.0 10.6 28.9 479.3 284.1 1,500.9 2,155.4 574.8
1975 18,120,000 5,635.7 856.4 4,779.3 11.0 28.1 516.0 301.3 1,666.6 2,471.0 641.7
1976 18,084,000 6,225.1 868.1 5,357.0 10.9 25.8 529.3 302.1 1,763.5 2,855.2 738.2
1977 17,924,000 6,087.6 831.8 5,255.8 10.7 29.4 472.6 319.1 1,728.0 2,782.0 745.8
1978 17,748,000 5,792.2 841.0 4,951.2 10.3 29.1 472.1 329.5 1,650.6 2,628.6 672.0
1979 17,649,000 6,205.1 917.4 5,287.7 11.9 30.6 529.6 345.3 1,746.9 2,836.4 704.5
1980 17,506,690 6,911.6 1,029.5 5,882.0 12.7 30.9 641.3 344.6 2,061.6 3,060.4 759.9
1981 17,594,000 6,905.4 1,069.6 5,835.8 12.3 31.1 684.0 342.1 1,991.7 3,066.3 777.8
1982 17,659,000 6,468.1 990.1 5,478.1 11.4 29.2 610.7 338.7 1,671.9 3,025.3 780.8
1983 17,667,000 5,902.6 914.1 4,988.5 11.1 30.0 536.5 336.5 1,410.1 2,854.7 723.7
1984 17,735,000 5,577.3 914.3 4,662.9 10.1 31.6 506.9 365.8 1,257.2 2,755.1 650.6
1985 17,783,000 5,588.5 929.9 4,658.6 9.5 32.1 504.4 383.9 1,235.1 2,824.5 599.1
1986 17,772,000 5,767.7 985.9 4,781.8 10.7 30.5 514.1 430.6 1,221.1 2,923.5 637.2
1987 17,825,000 5,952.4 1,008.1 4,944.3 11.3 31.1 503.3 462.4 1,216.4 3,024.8 703.1
1988 17,898,000 6,309.3 1,097.3 5,212.0 12.5 30.6 544.4 509.8 1,218.3 3,133.8 859.9
1989 17,950,000 6,293.2 1,131.2 5,162.1 12.5 29.2 579.3 510.1 1,176.2 3,033.2 952.7
1990  17,990,455  6,363.8  1,180.9  5,182.8  14.5  29.8  624.7  512.0  1,160.7  2,979.4  1,042.7
1991 18,058,000 6,244.6 1,163.9 5,080.7 14.2 28.2 622.1 499.4 1,132.5 2,944.3 1,003.9
1992 18,119,000 5,858.4 1,122.1 4,736.3 13.2 28.4 596.9 483.5 1,068.2 2,735.8 932.3
1993 18,197,000 5,551.3 1,073.5 4,477.8 13.3 27.5 561.2 471.5 998.6 2,644.2 835.0
1994 18,169,000 5,070.6 965.6 4,105.0 11.1 25.9 476.7 451.9 906.2 2,489.5 709.3
1995 18,136,000 4,560.1 841.9 3,718.3 8.5 23.7 399.7 410.0 808.1 2,344.4 565.7
1996 18,185,000 4,132.3 727.0 3,405.3 7.4 23.0 340.0 356.7 713.9 2,197.0 494.4
1997 18,137,000 3,910.9 688.6 3,222.4 6.0 22.5 309.3 350.8 652.3 2,130.6 439.4
1998 18,175,000 3,588.5 637.8 2,950.7 5.1 21.1 270.3 341.3 576.7 1,998.9 375.1
1999 18,196,601 3,279.4 588.8 2,690.6 5.0 19.6 240.8 323.5 512.3 1,858.1 320.2
2000 18,976,457 3,099.6 553.9 2,545.7 5.0 18.6 213.6 316.7 463.4 1,796.4 285.8
2001 19,084,350 2,913.5 513.6 2,399.9 5.0 18.6 191.5 298.5 421.3 1,725.6 253.0
2002 19,134,293 2,807.1 496.6 2,310.5 4.8 20.3 191.6 280.0 400.9 1,662.1 247.5
2003 19,212,425 2,714.8 465.8 2,249.0 4.9 19.6 186.3 255.0 392.7 1,620.9 235.3
2004 19,280,727 2,632.9 440.4 2,192.5 4.6 18.7 173.8 243.3 366.7 1,613.2 212.7
2005 19,315,721 2,554.3 444.4 2,101.9 4.5 18.8 182.1 238.9 352.2 1,564.6 185.0
2006 19,306,183 2,487.6 434.9 2,052.7 4.8 16.4 178.6 235.1 355.1 1,531.1 166.4
2007 19,297,729 2,392.7 414.1 1,978.6 4.2 15.2 161.1 233.7 336.1 1,497.2 145.3
2008 19,467,789 2,394.3 398.3 1,996.0 4.3 14.4 163.0 216.4 336.6 1,530.5 128.9
2009 19,541,453 2,316.4 384.4 1,932.0 4.0 13.2 144.0 223.1 321.2 1,498.8 111.9
2010 19,395,206 2,352.2 394.4 1,957.8 4.5 14.4 147.6 227.9 339.5 1,511.9 106.4
2011 19,465,197 2,310.5 398.1 1,912.4 4.0 14.1 145.9 234.1 336.0 1,477.2  99.2
New York Crime Index Rates Per 100,000 Inhabitants

 

Statistics courtesy of The Disaster Center

I Will NOT Boycott Target For Supporting A Conservative Candidate

 

 

A “Social Media Militia” Can Preserve Our Liberties Today

 

 

 

 

” My recent post on “Independence Day” sparked a spirited discussion around poll data showing that only 8% of those questioned identified themselves as members of the “tea party” (hat-tip to gs).

This, in turn, became a topic of discussion among the a group of citizen activists formed to support our local group, SoCal Tax Revolt Coalition. This team, tagged as the San-Diego Local Order of Bloggers (the SLOBS), has been the cornerstone of our local independent-conservative information networking system.

During our exchange, three points were agreed upon in full:

1) The “tea party” is an idea, not a group. So while people may not identify themselves as members, that doesn’t mean they no longer believe in the value of small government, sane budgets, and the “little book“.

2) The “tea party” is in need of rebranding.

3) The retooling of the “tea party” must include better use of popular culture and social media.

As an example, I wanted to share the background on the SLOBs and how it is effectively used. The website was created by Charles Fettinger (aka “Doo Doo Economics”).  He offers some details:

“Our website is technically a blog aggregator with search engine optimization and social networking automation. Each time a blogger adds a new article, the article pops up on the website, Facebook, Twitter and in our Android App. Because the article is automatically available in several places on the internet , the article gains better position in search engines.

The website is intuitive and promotes our fellow bloggers work. It keeps us reading and commenting on each other’s work to promote the collaboration of ideas. The collaboration is not managed, which maximized innovation by allowing us to pursue stories and ideas. Many great ideas are built on the shoulders of other great ideas. In a battle of ideas, this is a tremendous advantage.  Because the fact that our bloggers hold diverse perspectives, the SLOBs is a rich collaborating team. “

Daily Video 1.11.13

NRA Ranks Swell After Newtown Massacre

image

” Over 100,000 Americans have joined the NRA since the Sandy Hook massacre in December.

The Politico reported:

The National Rifle Association has gained more than 100,000 new members in the last 18 days, the organization told POLITICO’s Playbook on Thursday.

The number of paid new me
mbers jumped from 4.1 million to 4.2 million in that time frame.

“Our goal is to get to 5 million before this debate is over,” the NRA told POLITICO’s Mike Allen.”

Did a Newspaper Act Irresponsibly by Publishing the Addresses of Gun Owners?

 

 

 

 

 

” The Journal News, a newspaper serving the northern suburbs of New York City, published the names and addresses of handgun permit holders in two counties in New York State. The interactive map received more views than any other article in the paper’s history and generated significant outrage across the nation. Calls and e-mails to the newspaper became so threatening that it decided to hire armed security guards to protect the safety of its employees.

Did the newspaper act irresponsibly by publishing the names and addresses of handgun permit holders online?

In “Outcry Over Newspaper’s Map of Handgun Permit Holders” J. David Goodman writes about the controversy surrounding The Journal News’s decision.

In the days after the Connecticut school killings, a newspaper in nearby Westchester County, N.Y., decided to respond by publishing the names and addresses of handgun permit holders in its readership area. The newspaper, The Journal News, said that informing people about legal weapons in their neighborhoods was a public service.

Not everyone agrees.

 

 When the Times proposed these questions to students 13 and older, the resulting comments proved very enlightening and can’t have been what the editors of that liberal fish-wrap were expecting . Apparently the youth of today , even in the liberal bastion of the NYC metropolitan area , are much more liberty-minded than their parents and teachers . Another sign that all that education spending (read:propaganda) has been a failure at creating wards of the state . Perhaps there is hope after all . 

 

 

Students: Tell us …

  • Did The Journal News act irresponsibly by publishing the names and addresses of legal gun permit holders? Did the newspaper stigmatize gun ownership or give gun owners a scarlet letter? Or did it make a positive contribution to the gun control debate?
  • Does publishing the names of handgun permit holders provide a public service in any way? Do people have the right to know who the gun owners are in their community?
  • Should gun owners have a right to keep what they own, including guns, private? Does revealing the addresses of gun owners, including police and corrections officers, endanger anyone’s safety?
  • In response to the newspaper’s article, some legislators in New York are rushing to pass a bill that will make gun permit information private. Other critics are organizing a boycott of The Journal News. What do you think about these responses to the online map?

 

 


Students 13 and older are invited to comment below. Please use only your first name. For privacy policy reasons, we will not publish student comments that include a last name.

 

 

 

  1. 14.January 8, 20139:03 amLink

    I think that by publishing names in a newspaper and the permit information for your gun should be kept private or should be asked if you want it in the newspaper. It is weird that the area is the same and it is not scattered out.

    — Cristina Engl2Period6

  2. 15.January 8, 20139:04 amLink

    Yes, I do not think because that it was okay to do that because other people wouldnt like for people to publish and it is not following the second amendment.

    — brayan per 6

  3. 16.January 8, 20139:04 amLink

    i think they shouldn’t post that map.

    — Edward S

  4. 17.January 8, 20139:06 amLink

    I think that posting gun permit information on a newspaper is really dumb. If you a reporter you want a good cover and putting peoples information on the cover it looks dumb.

    — Brittney H

  5. 18.January 8, 20139:06 amLink

    The journal News did act irresponsibly because the names that they mention probably wanted to keep it a secret or did not want their business on the news. I strongly believe that the people have a right to own a gun but they need to go through a process to get it. I strong believe that they improve the debate about gun holders. By announcing the names can hurt the people life. It can hurt them because their friends might stop talking to them and make them feel unsafe or even family don’t want to be near them.

    — Kassie P English2 per6

  6. 19.January 8, 20139:07 amLink

    I think the newspaper acted irresponsibly by publishing the address of gun owners. People like to have guns because it keeps them safe. People don’t want their address for everybody to see. He made a good point, knowing where the LEGAL guns are helps criminals. It would be much more helpful to know where the ILLEGAL guns are.

    — Kevin

  7. 20.January 8, 20139:07 amLink

    I think the newspaper was irresponsibly by publishing the names and addresses of the handgun owners online. Because know people would be scared to let their children out without thinking they could get kidnapped.

    — alex r

  8. 21.January 8, 20139:07 amLink

    i dont really care about if someone sais its wrong or right. im just tired of people arguing over stupid small stuff like this. i mean really, who cares if they own a gun or not juat as long as they have a license for it i ay its fine. just shows robbers and thuggs what house not to go to if they dont want lead in there chest.

    — noah

  9. 22.January 8, 20139:07 amLink

    I think it was wrong for the newspaper to post this. It violates people’s privacy, especially because they are giving these people’s address’s. That seems to me very irresponsible and rude. Just because the Newtown shooting happened, doesn’t mean we need to freak out about every one who owns a gun. Just because someone owns a gun does not mean they are going to shoot people. I agree that the Newtown shooting was horrible, but it bothers me that people keep saying we need to crack down on gun laws. People who have a desire to kill people will find a way to get a gun if they are really serious, no matter if they own one or not. Adam Lanza did not own a gun, it was his mother’s guns that he used in the Newtown school. Although I disagree with trying to stop people from buying guns, I do think that cracking down on gun laws in other ways is reasonable, for example the amount of ammunition you can buy at a time.

    — Hayley B

  10. 23.January 8, 20139:08 amLink

    yes, i believe that the journal news acted irresponsible by posting those addresses. i believe this because if they have a permit they are obviously trusted with a gun and don’t need to be announced to every one it should be kept quite

    — kristen

24.January 8, 20139:15 amLink

I believe that publishing a map with the names and addresses of gun permit owners in these to counties was extremely irresponsible. It was absolutely pointless to publish this interactive map which provided the general public with rather private information. It was unnecessary also to make the map interactive. If anything the dotes themselves without any other information would have sufficed without having to give specific details on the people in question. This map can cause to reactions among the people residing in these counties. Either they are provided with a false sense of security or now that cannot help but constantly look over there shoulder, act paranoid and afraid because they have just found out the specific location of a the couple thousand guns in there neighborhood. These citizens may begin to treat neighbors who they just found out owned a gun differently or another possibility is that the citizens who do not currently own a firearm will now take steps to acquire one to “protect” themselves from the neighbors. The houses marked on the map are possibly also more at risk of being robbed because criminals know were they can find a firearm. It is true that the information presented on this map is technically public knowledge because in can be found in public records but one thing is to be able to do something and another is to take the time to look up the couple thousand people that possess a firearm in these two counties. To conclude, It think that publishing this map was a naive and shortsighted decision that only will cause panic and unrest in these counties.

  • — Zachary 1er S “

 

We’re Now One Step Closer To America’s Coming Civil War

 

 

 

 

” Some have said my warnings about a coming civil war between makers and takers are exaggerated. It’s true that Argentina’s politicians have been waging class warfare since Juan and Eva Peron–and they aren’t fazed when it turns bloody. Obama and the Democrats are relative newcomers to the game. But Argentina reveals who really suffers when those who create a nation’s wealth get mugged by those who spend it–as just happened this week in Washington.

It’s the poor and the middle class, the very ones big government says it’s trying to protect. “

 

 

HT/Instapundit

From The Mind And Hands Of Jon McNaughton

 

 

 

Wake Up America

Wake Up America

 

 

 

 

The Forgotten Man

the-forgotten-man.jpg

 

 

 

   Do yourself a favor a explore Mr McNaughton’s website and his work . Some of his works are even displayed on interactive webpages that allow you learn exactly who and what is being portrayed and why in the artist’s own words . It is a very impressive body of work and needs to be seen by all freedom loving Americans who are weary of “p**s-filled” jars and elephant dung being passed off as typical American art .We will leave you with one last taste of Mr McNaughton’s creative genius . 

 

 

One Nation Under God

 

   This is a screenshot of one of his interactive webpages . As you mouse over the various figures in the painting the box in the upper right corner will give you a description of who and what EVERY character in the painting is and represents .

 

  Mr McNaughton goes so far as to address criticism , typically from the Left , of his works and to explain his thought processes involved with the creation of individual works .

 

McNaughton’s response to liberal criticisms of “One Nation Under God.”
I would like to take a minute to explain some of the points of confusion for those who wish to interpret my picture.

  1. Each figure including Christ represents a symbol. Everything about the painting is symbolic. I don’t pretend to know what Christ looks like. As I stated in my interview, I wanted to create an image that would instantly be recognizable as Jesus. I am not painting an anthropological Jesus. Nobody would recognize him if I painted him that way.
  2. The figures in the background have been the source of great debate. Let me make myself clear from my writing that just because they stand behind Christ, does not mean they are devout Christians evoking all to come unto Jesus and be baptized?! What I am saying is that they represent those who have influenced our country and our Constitution in a positive way. Many of these men and women gave their lives so we could have the liberties we enjoy. We are now at a time when these liberties are in peril. Our government has grown so big and powerful that the rights of the individual are at risk. This is what the Constitution was about—to limit the size of government. The patriotic heroes who stand behind Christ and the Constitution are pleading with us to defend the cause of liberty. Except for the pregnant woman in the lower right corner, these people symbolize those who have pushed our country towards Socialism. (The pregnant woman’s place in the painting is explained on the website.)
  3. In connection to my last statement, I knew when I painted this picture that Thomas Payne (so sorry I offended some of you for spelling his name wrong), and Thomas Jefferson were Deists. That was irrelevant to me. I believe God brings about His purposes through different people. Even those who aren’t baptized or following the accepted Christian religion.
  4. Not only have I received flack for this painting from Liberals, but also from the Right as well. Why did you include JFK? Why Lincoln? Why Teddy Roosevelt? I painted this picture to reflect my personal feelings about America. This is not a Republican painting. This is not anything other than one artist’s personal feelings about his love for Christ, this country and a desire to make a point about where we are headed. I hoped that this painting would encourage dialogue and debate. It is important that you understand my position before you make assumptions.
  5. One of the most ridiculous criticisms I have read is that I don’t have enough minorities in the painting. The way people throw around the word “racist” these days is overkill. From the beginning of the painting I chose to include a variety for ethnicities under the “Strong Americans” category. I also used different races in the background where I could. One of the most important positions in the painting is where the black U. S. soldier is standing.
  6. Some of the chatter going around on these liberal blog sites I feel is unfounded. One of the things I said to myself from the beginning was the knee jerk reaction some people would have to the painting would be very revealing as to which side they personally stood in the picture. If you don’t believe the Constitution was inspired of God, fine. We will agree to disagree.
  7. Some so called “art experts” feel that a true painting should not be explained, but left to the viewer to interpret. I may not reveal all my thoughts, but I want the world to know what I think and feel—that’s why I painted it! Great art causes one to feel. To feel deeply. I knew this painting would evoke emotion on both sides. I knew it was a unique concept, having never been painted before. I don’t care if the composition is outdated or whether some other artist may have painted their composition better than me. The message stands alone.
  8. Why Satan? I don’t for a second believe he looks like that, but I do believe he is real. Again, the image is symbolic. Having Satan near these people doesn’t mean that they are Satanic. If you believe in God, surely you would believe in a Satan.
  9. OK, how could McNaughton be so ignorant about Charles Darwin and “Origin of the Species?” Yes, I have read the book and yes I do believe in many of the theories it espouses. What?! No, I don’t’ think the book should be burned and kicked out of the school curriculum. Some of the rebuttals I have heard in regard to this subject in my painting are unfounded. I believe that this book is a standard that the left uses to push Christianity out of the Educational Forum. I believe that we need faith in our schools. I believe that I did not evolve from an ape. You may disagree, but that is how I feel. Do I believe Evolution should be taught? Yes. Should Christian thought or any other religion be allowed to be discussed without reservation? Yes, as long as it doesn’t infringe on the rights of others.

This is my personal witness and testimony as to the state of this nation. If you would like to ask more questions about my painting, I invite you to do so. I would be pleased to answer any honest questions regarding, “One Nation Under God.”

 

SRST Inc.

 

 

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 2,346 other followers