Gannett to Publish ALL New York Pistol Permit Holders

46 thoughts on “Gannett to Publish ALL New York Pistol Permit Holders”

1. How can it possibly be legal ….and Constitutional to print private info like this!
   Time for someone to sue these people!

   1. First amendment would be stretched to cover, I imagine.

   2. Permits might be a matter of public record in some places. In CT, I think the paper went via the Freedom of Information Act.

      1. Not a lawyer, but this seems to violate Title 5, Section 6, where “personnel and medical files and similar files the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy” are specifically exempted from FOIA.

         1. Is that state or federal? FOIA only applies to the feds, but most states have analogues to FOIA. This would be subject to the transparency laws of the State of New York, rather than the feds.

      2. Here in CT, permit info is sealed from FOIA requests. They that some years back when they realized that these permit info dumps also include the addresses of police, judges, and politicians who have permits.

2. It is really time that the board members, managers, etc of these organizations be vetted themselves. Not just where they live, but what they do. I bet several either have guns themselves or employ security that has guns. Just like global warming, when the people who scream about it the most actually start practicing what they preach, then I will at least listen. Until they are ready to give up their own protection, they can kiss my ass.

3. If you really want to hurt the newspapers, get their advertisers to quit spending money with them. A respectful call or letter explaining that you cannot support a business that sanctions this behavior by spending money with the Gannett Corp can be effective.

   Starve Gannett!

   1. In places with only one newspaper, this hurts the advertisers more than it hurts the paper.

      1. Hmmm; is that an acceptable cost in an existential struggle?

         I suppose one factor is that we expect the management of these papers to ride them all the way down instead of changing their editorial stance.

4. How did Indiana stop this. Didn’t the legislature pass a bill blocking this ? Ny could do the same. Will they?

5. I live in Phoenix. The Arizona Republic is struggling and grossly lackluster paper. The paper promotes the Obama agenda and tried to help force Top Two elections and increased taxes down our throats. Gannett could be dangerous but if The Arizona Republic is an example of the company in general, readership is low and the influence is nearly non-existent.

6. In the public interest I think we need to know what buses their kids take to school. With maps. And pictures.

   Also credit reports, phone numbers everything for them, their relatives, kadult kids etc.

   If the unions can do it so can we.

   The best situation would be little Jimmy going home to a Gannett employee parent and asking why some random person asked them about mommy.

   1. Don’t worry, by the time this is over we’re going to know every public detail about higher level Gannett employees there is to know. Check out William Jacobson’s Legal Insurrection blog, he’s a part time NY State resident and is all over this.

7. The solution to this is very simple.

   Each NY State Pistol Permit Holder with administrative restrictions on their permit should apply for a “full carry” permit.

   1. If it is issued, they will be able to defend themselves and turn NY State into a de-facto “shall-issue” CCW state.
   2. If is is NOT issued, they will have legal “standing” to sue the counties should they be injured or killed.

   Either way, the forces pushing this lose. More “full carry” permits issued, or the prospect of multi-million dollar lawsuits against the counties when (not if) a permit holder is attacked, injured, or killed due to the corrosive public atmosphere that this newpaper created.

   1. right on i will go for a full carry

8. Lots of info that you think is private is actually fully and freely available to any old person via the FOIA. For example, have you ever filled out a change of address card for the U.S. Post Office? That info is available to anyone who asks for it via the FOIA. Have you ever taken out a P.O. box? The identity of the box holder is free, public info to anyone who asks for it. Have you ever had a ham radio license? Ever see the guys who have their ham radio license call sign as their vanity license plate? They are giving anyone and everyone who sees their license plate a very easily obtained free access to their name and home address. Lots of stuff is actually public. It sucks, but it is true.

9. I don’t understand the point of this exercise, actually. In NYC, the “full” permit holders have to be assumed to be “someone who matters” and even most of the “premises/range” permit holders have some juice, likewise the neighboring counties. NY is a Blue state. Why piss off the handgun owners?

10. This may reach a bad situation.

    The one I suspect and worry the most is someone that genuinely has it for personal protection and they are trying to avoid a stalker, violent partner, undercover cop and so on. If something bad happens that is traceable to this outing it’s the responsibly of those involved. FOIA says you can have information not that you can abuse it.

    The more names they release, the more likely.

    Eck!

11. This may not be a bad thing. The press has been trying to sell the idea that there are fewer gun owners who are just a fringe part of society. This map could be very useful to us. I wonder if our favorite gun banner from NY, McCarthy still has her NY pistol permit. I think we’re going to see a lot of liberals (media, press, politicos) from the island on those maps.

12. Please publish my name! That way the bad guys will know whose house not to unlawfully enter. I have a preferred caliber and it leaves no doubts!

13. Someone already put the Chair of Gannet’s personal info online:
    http://legalinsurrection.com/2012/12/if-the-names-and-addresses-of-gun-permit-holders-are-fair-game-what-about-this/

    Goose, Gander, etc. Jacobson blacked out a good portion of it.

14. Where do you think the NRA will stand in this issue Sebastian? I can tell you right now that the forums I frequent are filled with the people who stayed away from the polls just to spite Romney. And they have no great love for the NRA either for some of the “compromises” that the NRA did. In any other time I would have said to heck with them, but in this situation, every warm body counts.

    1. NRA has pushed privatizing permit lists where they’ve been able to. I would expect they’d back any effort in New York to do that as well.

       This is often not a controversial issue, once Newspapers do this. Illinois managed to pass a law privatizing its licensee information. Passed and signed by an anti-gun governor. Why? Because the dirty little secret is a lot of anti-gun pols have guns.

       1. I’m really beginning to wonder about this. In NJ, anyway, one of the biggest problems with organizing gun owners for politics is that not only is the number of gun owners low, but there’s the perception that it’s lower than it actually is. This kind of thing shows that even in NY there are other gun owners.

          And it peeves the PTB and their hangers-on. What the heck is the Gannett oversight board thinking?

    2. It’s really time to stop crying about the NRA compromises of the 60’s and 70’s. The NRA is wise not to waste time on these complainers and focus its energy on signing up new members and getting existing members to donate more.

       The GOA exists for these compromise whiners. They can cut a check to the GOA and watch it go nowhere but Pratt’s pocket and ego. The GOA is not feared on Capitol Hill, most people don’t know who they are – so they can keep singing their no compromise tune.

       1. Oh please. How about 2007, the “Veteran’s Disarmament Act” after VT, crafted with our favorite NYC “shoulder thing that goes up” Congresscritter, only fixed in the Senate thanks to Tom Coburn and company?

          How about every major piece of gun control legislation until the 1994 assault weapons ban? For the ’90s, that would include the 1993 Brady Bill with their beloved NICS (which Clayton in this forum has convinced me is needed in this era of deinstitutionalization, but that’s not how they sold it!). What’s the history on the Lautenberg Amendment, didn’t it pass with their blessing? When did the AP ban pass, which the BATF has been abusing massively?

          1. “Veterans Disarmament Act” was a lot of horse shit peddled by GOA. And that bill was fixed by two House members, John Dingell and Rick Boucher. It was a way to run a bill to “do something” about Virginia Tech that was actually a net benefit for us. That bill was a compromise, but it was the antis who were forced to comprise, for once.

             I wish getting out of this pickle we’re in now could be so easy.

             1. “Veterans Disarmament Act” was quite accurate in that it would have enshrined into law BATF regulations which have been used by the VA (and the military???) to illegitimately revoke the RKBA of more than 100,000 veterans starting with the Clinton Administration.

                Look, the NRA explicitly and publicly went to Carolyn McCarthy to work out a bill; there is absolutely no possible way to spin that as something good and you make yourself look foolish when you try.

                1. They did not. Her bill was gutted and pretty much wholly replaced. The only thing she was allowed to keep was her name on it. Yes, Coburn did propose changes to the bill in the Senate, changes which were fully supported by NRA.

                   1. Perhaps; it’s time for bed, but I’ve not yet found confirmation for what’s implied by “explicitly and publicly”. She says they worked with her, she or the usual suspects said they’d only acknowledge this if we got something very nice (and it was obvious that she’d never give it up), the official story as of the voice vote (!) passage is that Dingle brokered a deal between the two of them.

15. I wonder how many newspaper or TV owned buildings will suffer broken windows for this?

    1. Fortunately there are no Gannett newspapers in TX according to the link. And I threw out Comcast years ago because they sucked service-wise.

16. We need a full time LOUD AND ARMED Protest outside the CEOs home in Great Falls. Every and all info on her needs to be published. And we need a complete and full boycott of. Anyone who advertises on any Gannet owned publication.

17. BTW, one of my neighbors is circulation manager for USA Today. 1st, she’s absolutely nuts (her husband managed to get custody of kids from her). 2nd, she’s the most anti gun individual I have ever met.

18. But remember, boys and girls, there’s no downsides to gun registration. How could anyone object to such reasonable gun control?

    I must say, I’m amazed at how badly the NY types are handling the politics of this latest gun control hysteria, variously calling for confiscation, magazine limits of 3 rounds, and this.

19. Sebastian,

    The Gannett brands are all listed online on their web site:

    http://www.gannett.com/section/BRANDS&template=cover

    It’s terribly important when your readers cancel their subscription/service that they let the company know. All of these companies know that they’re in trouble, and all of the departments that deal with service disconnects do meticulous tracking of the reason the customer gives.

    When we still lived in Massachusetts (spit) and my wife canceled our delivery of the Boston Globe, the person on the phone with her was careful to put down the reason (“Damn Commie Bastards” seems to be a reason at the Globe customer service center). This information absolutely goes up to the CFO when there’s this much red ink.

    If 1000 Gannett customers discontinued service next week saying “I won’t do business with people who publish the home address of gun permit holders” this will become a discussion topic in the executive suites.

    The next step is the Shareholder’s Conference. If the execs care more about their ideology than their bottom line, that’s of interest to the shareholders.

    Please tell your readers to (politely) give the Gannett customer service rep the reason (“Damn Commie Bastards publishing gun permit holder’s addresses”). This will be logged, and people will track this. You want to put the heat on, this is the way.

20. My local paper “peoria journal star” is a leftest anti-gun rag which isn’t owned by gannet. I’ve thought about cancelling my subscription several times and may yet even though It’s the only game in town.

21. Starve the beast. And out their board of directors, editors and known anti-gun reporters. I’m hesitant (but only slightly) to recommend a full staff outing. There may actually be a tiny handful that are on our side. I used to be a photographer at a small weekly paper and I’ve seen the ‘selective reporting’ from the inside. It was mostly aimed at not offending the advertisers. The idea of writing Gannet’s advertisers and informing them of our displeasure at their advertising with Gannet is one of the best I’ve seen come from this discussion. That may be the only way we can really effect change in the media.

    A technical question:

    I have been using Vonage as my primary land line equivalent for quite a few years. At this point I plan to stay with them. For VoIP to work I need a high speed cable broadband internet connection (or equiv.). I am actually a customer of a local ISP, unfortunately they contract with Comcast to provide the cable broadband service that I use. Comcast also handles the billing so I have to write the check to Comcast. Unfortunately, Comcast is THE cable provider in my area. How can I ditch Comcast yet maintain my VoIP telephone service? I ditched cable TV around 15 years ago and don’t miss it. So that is a non-issue.

    1. Similar problem here, our house has 6 networked computers, and our only options are comcast cable modem or dialup, and dialup doesn’t cut it for more than 1 or 2 computers. We can’t even get DSL service here….

22. Apologies for the double post, but I want to second Borepatch’s recommendation on telling the CSR why you are cancelling service.

23. Criminals will NOT avoid homes that they know have guns in them. Quite the opposite. They will burglarize the homes of gun owners first, as firearms are a hot item for theft and they will simply wait for you to got to work.

24. Gannett, like all newspaper publishers, is already sucking wind.

    http://www.wikinvest.com/stock/Gannett_(GCI)

    Circulation and ad revenue both have been sharply declining for years. Don’t know that protests by gun owners will hasten death faster than natural causes in the marketplace – but it would be interesting to try. Although as an old newspaperman myself, I feel bad for my friends still in the newspaper business who have nothing to do with poor editorial decisions, but will suffer the consequences of them.

25. Pingback: Are Pro-2A’ers On the Same Level as Sex Offenders | This Just In
26. Pingback: SayUncle » Dehumanizing

27. Well, one solution…if you live near these papers. Is to pay your $1 open up the newspaper box, and remove ALL the papers. And then burn them….

    ;-)

Comments are closed.