TexasCHLforum.com

Venus Pax wrote:

Mithras61 wrote:Truthfully, I don't care if my neighbors know I have a gun, aside from the potential harm that that information can do to me or others to have it be public (for example, the potential for break-ins to steal the handguns by BGs, or the impact it has on my childrens' lives).

Most people here don't mind anyone knowing we have guns in our homes; we're not ashamed of them.
However, it is wise to limited the number of people that know a) you have guns, and b) where you live for the reason you stated above.

Most of my students know that I have guns, and that shooting is a hobby. (Some have even brought their targets to school to show me how well they've done.) However, I don't make my address public knowledge-- I'm not naive enough to think there aren't a few aspiring felons in the mix.

stevie_d_64 wrote:Since the Richmond, Virginia paper did this to this incident, I am wondering why it became this "new" thing to print interesting public record information on just people with CCW permits in the first place...

Just because you can, and have space available on your paper to do so, doesn't mean it is right...

And once its out in the open there is just not much you can do about it...There are also many reasons to be extremely angry, and not very nice to editors and papers for pulling stunts like this, but if taking them to court and sueing for whatever reason you can come up with doesn't work, and they (paer and their minions) hide beside a lame shield like the First Amendment, I say that just incites futher need to remove the accessability of this information from public record...

We've successfully done this in Texas, and a few other states have moved on this as well...So if some state hasn't done so, until they are compelled to do so, doesn't seem like much can be done till then for those folks...

I think this is all an under the radar attempt by the gun-control crowd to instigate these public releases of personal information...To somehow create this negative stigma via public knowledge that your nieghbors carry a gun to kill people because thats what they are used for...(I'm being sarcastic in delivery there)...

I'm just not sure what recourse is proper and effective to stop this from happening...Other than protecting the information legislatively...

neal6325 wrote:Mithras61 the editor did not seem to believe listing CHL holders personal information was wrong so in his eyes printing his information must as well be public service; unless of course he has a double standard here one must make that assumption.

Retaliation does not exist if their is no victim. If the party that you are going after believes that it is acceptable behavior to publish this type of information then there is no victim applying the logic used by the editor.

In fact, the editor should be proud to take advantage of his 1st ammendment rights and therefore be grateful that someone positioned him as such paraphrasing from his own quote.

I love that they did this, what is good for the goose.......

Venus Pax wrote:Mithras,
I don't think that publishing his social security number was appropriate, but the publishing of his home address and other personal information was meant to drive home the point that most people do not want their personal information published for everyone to read. It makes one feel very vulnerable. I have not doubt that the newspaper's purpose was to intimidate CHL holders by publishing their personal information.

When I first read about this Ohio paper publishing personal information of CHL holders, the first groups I thought of were stalking victims and women fleeing abusive partners. These two sets of the population require that their addresses and whereabouts remain private in order to remain safe. I would hate to be in their shoes; to have this happen would be extremely disruptive to their already difficult lives.

The editor isn't likely being stalked, but there are members of the CHL community whose lives are not so safe.