I came across this
WSJ BLOG STORY and was struck by the comment below:
Quote:
|
The “New York Police Department has told me that ‘as a preliminary matter’ it believes some of the bankers I inquired about do have pistol permits. The NYPD also said it will be a while before it can name names,” Schroeder wrote.
|
**edit: note that they seem to be continually 'correcting' this story, as is mentioned now above the first paragraph in the story -- very shadey**
Exactly when can they name names? I found this disturbing that it basically implied any so-called blogger-journalist could call up the police dept and ask if so-and-so applied for and/or received a permit. It wasn't just referring to carry permits either, but even included in-the-home permits (necessary for NY).
The Bloomberg story the WSJ blog references
can be found here.
That story makes clear it's anti-gun bias in the following paragraph:
Quote:
|
Common sense tells you a handgun is probably not even all that useful. Suppose an intruder sneaks past the doorman or jumps the security fence at night.
|
All so very disturbing that this is what passes for reporting these days.
[I ask in advance that we keep the discussion to firearms & law and not get focused on the people (Goldman employees) involved.]