“Blame the people who misuse the information.”
I would. But shouldn’t the newspaper also have the integrity to protect innocent lives?
“Regardless, why should a business be blamed for actions of criminals?”
I wouldn’t blame them for the actions of criminals. I would blame them for their own actions, however. Can’t you see the difference?
“Should Yellow Book be sued for publishing my phone numbers.”
Yes - if you have an unlisted number and you’ve been threatened with death.
“Spammers might harass me.”
But they won’t murder you, your wife and your baby. In this situation we are dealing with people who WILL.
I understand you have your own point of view. Fine. But you’re not making any sense in your argument. Having a business does not mean that the business should be run without regard for the safety of innocent people. Even if it is criminals who murder Wilson and his wife and baby, that doesn’t mean the newspaper bears no responsibility if the murderers use them as a source when the NYT usually doesn’t print such info. Spam is not the same thing as a triple murder.
Again, you can hold whatever view you want. You should, however, be able to make an intelligent argument for holding that view. So far all you have done is embarrass yourself with juvenile arguments that don’t make any sense and have no bearing on the matter.
” But shouldn’t the newspaper also have the integrity to protect innocent lives?”
Not really. Their job is to, hopefully, make money for their shareholders by, again hopefully, reporting on facts. In this case, the slimes fails miserably to make money for their shareholders. But they are still reporting facts when it comes to the officer’s address.
“I wouldn’t blame them for the actions of criminals. I would blame them for their own actions, however. Can’t you see the difference?”
All I see is your wanting for a business to not do what it wants/needs/pleases. It is no different from libtards ganging up on a cake business owners for not servicing homosexual wedding.
“But they won’t murder you, your wife and your baby. In this situation we are dealing with people who WILL.”
You cannot silence a business/individual for what that business/individual’s truthful action may or may not cause others from acting out against somebody else. Just smells so soviet-like.
“Even if it is criminals who murder Wilson and his wife and baby, that doesn’t mean the newspaper bears no responsibility if the murderers use them as a source when the NYT usually doesn’t print such info.”
Lots of “ifs” there. If Wilson is concerened about his safety, he should prepare for it. It is his responsibility to his wife and baby, not the slimes’.
Sorry, but you are appealing to the emotions like the libtards, not to reason.