A Note on Publication of Home Addresses:

(As much as it is personally and fully appreciated that our members take the initiative ….)

Recently, we had a thread, entitled, “NY gun permit holders homes listed”, begun with the publication of the name and home address of an executive/‘editor’ apparently responsible for content decisions, as well as that of a reporter/‘journalist’.

The thread has been removed, and, unfortunately, some worthwhile comment from members was lost. I hope you all have good memory, or have seen fit to save your worthwhile commentary.

Publication of an individual’s private information is an ages-old mode of business and recourse, the motivations limitless, the contexts vary, the results ranging from titillating …. to tragic. The so-called left-leaning activist and the paparazzi and the mortgage-lending intimidators and the gun-control activists, generally, have been known to acquire and publish the otherwise private information (whether sound, image, or data) of people with guns, or money, or positions of discretion, with, at best, the slightest of concern for harm and serious injury, even death. If one cares to look, the examples abound, even an unfortunate one within the past week.

In any event, there is no question that a newspaper publishing the names and addresses of those who’d made application for a firearms purchase-permit, would pose an extremely dangerous threat to the lives and safety of those same law-abiding gun owners and their families. It is a 'trend' all of us need to examine, carefully, and it would be a welcomed topic of discussion, in an appropriate sub-forum.

Whether these publications have been made with deliberate and malicious intent or in willful ignorance of the potential dangers, or whether the passions of the gun-control cause had made some unreasonably unaware of the possibilities, all of the dangers, nonetheless, and now and forever after, cannot be eliminated or decreased or defended against by anything those same publishers have within their power, should they even be inclined to make amends. And so, the possibility remains: a potential ‘target’ has been provided for, among others things, home invasion, murder, burglary or other equally felonious attack, stalking, and unreasonably injurious public harassment.

We, thusly, are aware of the dangers. And we must take responsibility for our actions, or for our inaction, even if others do not.

We will not condone (and will redact) public mention of the home address of a useful idiot of the VPC or of any other gun-control advocacy group, especially where a specifically apparent and serious physical danger may be posed by that publication. (Likewise, it’s not advisable to publish another member's personal information, or even one’s own address, here, even if merely to negotiate the terms of mutual combat. ) There are other types of public information and other methods of communication, the range of which would fall clearly within the boundaries of acceptable civil conduct, with proper appreciation of the magnitude of cause, and the effect of any one person’s individual action. These discussions, similarly, would be welcome in an appropriate sub-forum.

This is all notwithstanding the fact that we hope, somehow, in some way responsibly manifested, that news media professionals will acknowledge and endeavor to have proper appreciation of the extreme dangers they present, when they publish information of this magnitude and sensitivity. It cannot be undone.

These irresponsible publications only highlight the righteousness of all those who would defend the principles of the right - and the obligation - of self-defense, and of the right to keep and bear arms. For some, upon whose back a target may have been placed, the stakes have always been the same, but, today and forever after, the odds have changed. They may well be forced to the proving. Our prayers are with them.