|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Today's Posts | Search |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
December 10, 2009, 12:33 PM | #1 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: October 24, 2007
Posts: 551
|
NYPD releasing names of permit requestees???
I came across this WSJ BLOG STORY and was struck by the comment below:
Quote:
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:
[I ask in advance that we keep the discussion to firearms & law and not get focused on the people (Goldman employees) involved.] Last edited by jg0001; December 10, 2009 at 01:48 PM. |
||
December 10, 2009, 01:14 PM | #2 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 20,064
|
The best part is that Goldman Sachs fears a populist uprising. The interesting point for gun rights is that supposedly conservative upper class folks truly fear a general armed populace.
This reinforces past discussions that 'conservative' is not a useful term as a necessarily gun supporting descriptor. It also is warning that some folks should not be hoodwinked to think that some strata of a conservative ruling class really believe the social conservative mantra they speak. They use it to get votes from the social conservatives - but that's only to support their own power base. They actually don't agree with some fundamental tenets.
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc. - Aux Armes, Citoyens |
December 10, 2009, 01:24 PM | #3 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 15, 2009
Posts: 298
|
Goldman Sachs and the like were given the option of receiving the H1N1 vaccine well before supplies were made availabe to high-risk groups like pregnant women.
My grandkids' pediatrician was forced to wait a month beyond the time the Masters of the Universe got theirs. I'd like to think they worry about a populist backlash, but they'll be given protection equal to the funding they received, and from the same source. You may or may not get the government you deserve, but you certainly get the one you pay for. |
December 10, 2009, 01:24 PM | #4 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 24, 2007
Posts: 551
|
Jeebus, Glenn. If you weren't a moderator, I'd ask to have your comments stricken as being off topic. It's playing politics and demonizing certain "strata" as you call it that helped elect many liberals to power. Don't play that game.
Anyhow, the only topic I cared about was the one relevant to this forum -- the seeming lack of privacy afforded to those who seek to exercise their second amendment rights. It's as if they are being "outed". The "list" of people who apply for a permit to exercise a right shouldn't even exist, let alone be readily available to any schmoe that asks for it. |
December 10, 2009, 01:27 PM | #5 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 24, 2007
Posts: 551
|
Quote:
|
|
December 10, 2009, 01:34 PM | #6 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 20,064
|
I am scolded!
However, in my defense - my comment was that the incident points relates to a topic we had discussed before. Nowhere did I advocate a political position but was pointing out some of the cognitive discrepanices in common labels - which affects the battle for gun rights. Pointing out how rhetoric can be used for hypocritical selfish purposes is not demonizing the the Goldman Sachs strata. They do a good job of doing that on their own. The fear of populism is one of the real agenda in suppressing the RKBA and we should be aware of it as it does exist. You may recall support for renewing the AWB from the past administration and some of the candidates for the presidency who quote the past president in their rationale. Is this political - it touches on it but I was trying to expand on the incident. Sorry, again.
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc. - Aux Armes, Citoyens |
December 10, 2009, 01:43 PM | #7 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 24, 2007
Posts: 551
|
Still no comments on the most disturbing item, whether it was against an unpopular class of citizenry or not, there doesn't appear to be a boundry drawn that it would apply only to them:
Quote:
A snip - Your point was made that you want to discuss the privacy issue - thus this wasn't needed Last edited by Glenn E. Meyer; December 10, 2009 at 02:04 PM. Reason: We can both get off topic here. |
|
December 10, 2009, 02:23 PM | #8 | |
Junior member
Join Date: September 28, 2005
Location: Mesa, AZ
Posts: 6,465
|
Quote:
1) A reporter would ask for specifics like this; 2) The NYPD would release specifics like this. There is no focus on protecting those permitees. Merely a pandering to populist anger against "the rich" by giving some snack tidbits and saying (between the lines) "we'd love to give you their names, but these people are well connected and we're afraid of political reprisal." Whomever the NYPD press contact is for this story, and any employees who collaborated to produce information for this article, should be ashamed of themselves. ETA: I sincerely doubt that the upper echelon of power brokers at Goldman-Sachs are carrying ported Taurus L or N frame revolvers with heavy barrels. |
|
December 11, 2009, 12:22 AM | #9 |
Staff
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 28,839
|
just curious
But where is the line drawn between freedom of information (applying for a license from the govt) and personal privacy?
Wasn't there something a while back (maybe in FLA) about a paper publishing (or wanting to publish) a list of CCW holders? Didn't that turn into a privacy issue? How is this any different?
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better. |
December 11, 2009, 06:52 AM | #10 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 11, 2008
Posts: 1,931
|
Don't know about Florida but it came up in Virginia...In the Roanoke Times back in March.
http://www.opengovva.org/in-the-news...eapons-permits
__________________
Quote:
|
|
December 11, 2009, 08:57 AM | #11 | |
Junior member
Join Date: January 3, 2006
Location: Indpls
Posts: 1,159
|
Quote:
|
|
December 11, 2009, 09:50 AM | #12 |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 21, 2009
Location: West Central Missouri
Posts: 2,592
|
I understand the need to keep a list (although I do not agree with it) in states in which you have CCW laws. If you are stopped by the police, according to some, they see that you are a CCW holder when they run your name.
However, just because you have applied for and/or received a permit does not mean your information should be given to anyone who asks. What is the purpose of the information and why is it being kept? Who has a right to know and when is it released? 1. Hello, I am planning on breaking in and stealing Mr. Smuckatellies stuff and I would like to know whether he is armed or not, would you please tell me if he has applied for and received a gun permit? 2. I am with XYZ Media and would like to write a smear article on Mr. Smuckatellie. Right now we do not have much to go on, I was wondering if you could tell me, does he, or has he, ever applied for a pistol permit? You can not get any medical information about a person because of the HIPPA act. Maybe there should be the same program for handgun registration. Basically, it is none of your business, if you want to know something, ask the person.
__________________
Inside Every Bright Idea Is The 50% Probability Of A Disaster Waiting To Happen. |
December 11, 2009, 11:05 AM | #13 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 13, 2009
Posts: 232
|
Quote:
Anyway, maybe this is what you're saying and I missed your point, I can't tell, but we all need to agree that they have a right to arm themselves as much as anyone else. Now, if they are all getting CCWs in NYC and no one else can, then yes, let's get that corrected (let's get it corrected anyway). |
|
December 11, 2009, 01:57 PM | #14 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 20,064
|
Hey, I made a mistake by adding my view off topic - so let's stop discussing this. I'll PM you my thoughts.
Glenn
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc. - Aux Armes, Citoyens |
|
|