(.... Itsa point-of-view (off-site link, no affiliation). Certain entries may not be suitable for young children. Or anyone else.)
Note: This blog is (mercifully going back) on hiatus.... (FWIW: There is much injustice to (attempt to) 'shine a light upon'. And with reactionary U.S. Republicans buying elections/sustaining oligarchy/pillaging the environment, more (injustice) is to come. Humor can be one response (no affiliation with source)...and a potent weapon: My future WWW location link will appear here when ready.)

...ALWAYS remember: "Winning takes care of everything.")

Thursday, January 3, 2013

My new heroes: The Journal News

 (Separate 1/3/13 post:)

Off-site link to 1/4/13 news article. New window opens, No affiliation: http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/01/03/gun-permit-database-fallout/1807293/?

Many of us want to know who's 'got 'em' in our neighborhoods. (Even legally.): If it's a matter of public record, publish away allow controlled public access to them. (I'd suggest not detailed maps in news outlets, though....) Fear NOT the armed (and potentially dangerous -- in a few cases. (Another. (link).)

(BTW...Then consider taxing 'em.....)

Update: A discussable point: Publishing public gun owner records might make someone more susceptible to a home break-in, possibly by a criminal looking to steal guns. Alternately, a detailed area map of such may readily indicate homes without (registered) guns. (Additionally, apparently some states do not currently require permits for "rifles" (as opposed to handguns).)

1. In armed America, there would be many, many potential "choices" (for the first possibility above).  The chances of one particular gun-owner's home being "targeted" may (still) be low. 
...Perhaps positive forms of identification might be required/recorded for those requesting access to such public records. (I.e., some form of legitimate control/accountability in place.)

2. In most American neighborhoods, something like the above happens less often than one might think.

2a. Alarms/cameras/dogs/'Tasers'/pepper spray, and other non-lethal forms of home protection are usually sufficient. Prevention and deterrence may be the best choice: Home break-ins frequently occur at clear "targets of opportunity".  E.g., no one home for long periods, unlocked doors, no lights on and/or motion lights outside, secluded from the road - including by trees/shrubs, newspapers/mail/trash left in visible locations; etc., etc.

 ....Does the public's right/demand to know in this case) outweigh possible adverse consequences/privacy concerns for gun owners?

No comments:

Post a Comment