Posted on 02/05/2013 11:52:24 PM PST by neverdem
In December, a New York newspaper inspired a heated debate about transparency of public records after it published a (somewhat inaccurate) interactive map showing where all the gun owners in its community lived. After much criticism, a few death threats, and some legal concerns, the newspaper pulled the map down. This week, there’s an interesting development in the ongoing saga as to whether we should be able to map-stalk people with guns. A New York appellate court ruled in a different case that the NYPD doesn’t need to provide the New York Times with the addresses of gun owners because of privacy and safety concerns.
Interesting, the court dives headlong into questions of the nature of the data and how it’s provided, ruling that even though the information is public, it shouldn’t be overly public. “The fact that Penal Law § 400.00(5) makes the name and address of a handgun license holder ‘a public record’ is not dispositive of whether respondent can assert the privacy and safety exemptions to FOIL (Freedom of Information Law) disclosure, especially when petitioners seek the names and addresses in electronic form,” wrote the court in its opinion...
(Excerpt) Read more at forbes.com ...
that`s the name of that game
Flash Mob Mayhem: Violent Groups Of Teens Leave NYC Businesses In Ruins
FReepmail me if you want on or off my New York ping list.
Flash Mob Mayhem: Violent Groups Of Teens Leave NYC Businesses In Ruins
FReepmail me if you want on or off my New York ping list.
LOL! A good comment to send to them. They wouldn’t publish or ask for such a list.
By all means lets tell the criminals where they can steal a gun. I remember when they stopped publishing vacation and honeymoon plans in the paper because of criminal use of the information.
NYPD doesn’t need to know, either.
This holding would appear to set up an invasion of privacy lawsuit by everyone whose names was published by that newspaper against the newspaper and whoever provided the names to them.
This could easily bankrupt the paper if enough people filed suit.
If my name were published I would file a small claims court suit for the maximum allowable amount. Imagine if everyone did that? How many names did they publish? Multiply that by $7500. That should teach them a lesson.
These papers need to be sued out of existence for liability for any crimes perpetrated against the owners of the targeted homes.
Silly, silly people you are....
If you don’t know who has the guns.................
JUST HOW ARE YOU GOING TO TAKE THEM AWAY??
I highly disagree that the information on gun registrations is public information at all. The FOIA laws were made to force disclosure of information pertaining to public employees, officials and their activities in their official capacities.
The government requiring an individual citizen to provide information to them in order to obtain legal (even constitutionally protected) rights to comply with the government mandated rules and then distributing that information without the individuals express permission is a blatant invasion of privacy.
When a person applies for a security clearance, they are forced to provide personal and sometimes embarrassing information about themselves, is that anyone else’s business and should a publication be able to demand that type of information be exposed?The use of the gun owners information is nothing more that an attempt to intimidate citizens and keep them from exercising their rights under the law.
How about a list of those getting abortions?
Thanks for the ping!
Pong!
I can see how this will go: The cops, jail guards and other government types will exempt their addresses from the FOI requests, and then allow John Q. Publics’ addresses to be posted as a bone to their pals at the papers.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.