A rarity, a legitimate lawsuit

[LDB]

Here's a legitimate lawsuit just waiting to be filed. I hope the newspaper corporately and it's editor personally are bankrupted and if the next incident leads to injury or death the editor is jailed as an accomplice.

http://radio.foxnews.com/toddstarne...s-home-outed-by-newspaper-is-burglarized.html

 

[Brisco]

I'm not sure if this one incident would support a Lawsuit......

Maybe......if the Burglars targetted the Gun Safe only. IOW - Let's say it looked like the Burg Perps spent their whole time trying to get the Gun Safe open and ignored/bypassed the $74,000 in Jewels the Home Owner had in a Jewelry Box sitting in plain site up on top their dresser, or the 4 LapTops that were sitting in Plain Site on top of the Kitchen Table, then maybe there may be a direct correlation to the article that published their Address in the first place.

So far all the article says is this:

Police said it appears the burglars targeted the homeowner’s gun safe.

It doesn't say if other items in the house were taken or not............

Now.......If over the next few months a HIGH pattern of Burglary Thefts are occuring in home addresses that were NOT Published in that article, as well as "Gun Specific" thefts in the homes that WERE published in that article, then Yes......a Class Action Lawsuit CAN be established and possibly proven in a Court of Law that will put those smarmy A** people out of work, and that Media Outlet in Bankruptcy...and Hopefully OUT OF BUSINESS for good.

 

[LDB]

I've reached that stage in life where I haven't the patience to go into that much detail but that's just what they'll hopefully be looking for, a trend showing the malfeasance of the editor and publisher hopefully leading to their prosecution as an example to others.

 

[zorry]

Trampling on the paper's right to free speech ?
Weren't these public records that any street gang could have accessed? If so, I would think making gun permits public is the problem.
I have a concealed carry permit. That info should not be public unless I reveal it publicly.

 

[layoutshooter]

I KNOW I am going to get jumped on AGAIN for saying this, but I was taught that every RIGHT carried a binding responsibility with it. Just because a paper CAN print something does NOT mean that it is the RESPONSIBLE thing to do. NO ONE should exercise ANY right other than in a responsible manner.

Go ahead, fire away. I know it makes many feel better!

 

[RLENT]

Trampling on the paper's right to free speech ?
Weren't these public records that any street gang could have accessed?

Correct.

If so, I would think making gun permits public is the problem.

Congratulations - unlike the terminally stupid, you apparently possess the necessary discernment and observational capability to correctly determine the true cause of the "problem" ...

I have a concealed carry permit. That info should not be public unless I reveal it publicly.

And I'm sure if you resided in a state where the law allowed the info to be a matter of public record you would probably attempt to undertake effective action as a citizen to right the matter in the correct and appropriate manner (ie. appropriate legislation) ... rather than ineffectively whining and ranting online at the wrong target like a petulant, spoiled child ...

 

[Brisco]

Trampling on the paper's right to free speech ?
Weren't these public records that any street gang could have accessed? If so, I would think making gun permits public is the problem.
I have a concealed carry permit. That info should not be public unless I reveal it publicly.

I KNOW I am going to get jumped on AGAIN for saying this, but I was taught that every RIGHT carried a binding responsibility with it. Just because a paper CAN print something does NOT mean that it is the RESPONSIBLE thing to do. NO ONE should exercise ANY right other than in a responsible manner.

I wholeheartedly agree with BOTH Statements.......Even the Free Speech statement. But.....even with the Free Speech agreement.......just because you're allowed to stand out in a public area yelling Fart - Pyss - Poop - Kaka.......doesn't mean it's right to do so.........

And I'm sure if you resided in a state where the law allowed the info to be a matter of public record you would probably attempt to undertake effective action as a citizen to right the matter in the correct and appropriate manner (ie. appropriate legislation) ... rather than ineffectively whining and ranting online at the wrong target like a petulant, spoiled child ...

Do you agree with the Publishing of CCW Permit Holders Home Addresses for the whole world to see.......even if it is Legal to do so.............

 

[RLENT]

Do you agree with the Publishing of CCW Permit Holders Home Addresses for the whole world to see.......even if it is Legal to do so.............

I don't know that I agree with it ... or disagree with it ...

It, like many things, is (or can be) a somewhat complex issue ...

Generally, I tend to come down on the side of things that favors more freedom not less ... whether that be a free and unrestrained press ... or the right to bear arms ...

 

[layoutshooter]

I don't know that I agree with it ... or disagree with it ...

It, like many things, is (or can be) a somewhat complex issue ...

Generally, I tend to come down on the side of things that favors more freedom not less ... whether that be a free and unrestrained press ... or the right to bear arms ...

I think that they should publish the security access codes for the White House. It is, after all, public property, owned by the People. There is NOTHING there that should be allowed to be protected more than anything at my PRIVATELY owned house. MY family's lives are JUST as important as HIS. Any bets? Any problems? After all, fair is fair. The Secret Service should also be UNARMED. If Obama wants me to disarm, he can start with his own protection.. They can sing Kumiba to stop the bad guys.

 

[RLENT]

I think that they should publish the security access codes for the White House. It is, after all, public property, owned by the People.

I rather suspect that under the law such info is not deemed to be "public info" ...

There is NOTHING there that should be allowed to be protected more than anything at my PRIVATELY owned house. MY family's lives are JUST as important as HIS.

To who ?

Any bets?

Only one: you'll be able to come up with an equally silly reply to this post, similar to the post to which I am replying ...

Any problems?

I need a load ...

After all, fair is fair. The Secret Service should also be UNARMED. If Obama wants me to disarm, he can start with his own protection.. They can sing Kumiba to stop the bad guys.

Leave it to you to conflate the inevitable unintended consequences of an action by a State Legislature with someone who had nothing whatsoever to do with said action ...

If you don't like the law, seek to change the law ...

 

[skyraider]

Ok, now we are in a big boy pizzing contest and you know it. Ok , on one hand we have freedom of speech going on and freedom of press. Now that freedom of press right has jeopardized many folks in their homes imho. He said and she said arguments can be argued till the cows come home and there are valid points on both sides of the fence

Here is a solution to protect yourself, your goods and your kids.

ADT Authorized Dealer | Protect Your Home

Yes it works. I have one in our place. If something falls, walks, or makes a sound it will hear it, fire, smoke, break-ins, it gets it. Its on windows and doors. Well, that's my 2cents worth--- oh, I forgot, the alarm system calls the fire and police department and that LOUD HORN THAT BLOWS IS HIGHLY , IRRITATING. How do I know, because I have set it off b-4 and it will blow u out of the houseeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee...amen

 

[mjmsprt40]

Skyraider, I have to ask. Does that ADT system have some kind of battery back-up in case of power failure, and does it rely on a landline to notify the authorities in case of trouble? Sooner or later someone is going to ask because this is a potential Achilles Heel of the alarm system. It won't help you much if bad guys can disable it by cutting the phone wires, for example.

About the subject of this thread: The people at the newspaper didn't think this one through. Nothing new there, where politics is concerned a lot of people don't think it through before yapping. Sure you have First Amendment rights to say what's on your mind, but having said it you may have to stand in court if what you said causes unnecessary risk/injury to someone. Publishing all those addresses was just asking to get sued if a burglar breaks in and steals guns AND it can be proven that the burglar chose that house based on the newspaper reports. The newspaper leaves itself open to charges that its report could be why a gun is loose on the streets when otherwise it might not have been.

Sure, you can walk into a housing project and yell some racial slurs. It's your First Amendment right. Don't be surprised if the people who live in the project exercise their right to deal with a pest if you do that, though. With rights comes responsibility-- the first of which is to consider the results of what you say.

 

[davekc]

As mentioned earlier, legislative action to remove gun owners from public information records is the only way to really address this. One has the free speech argument of course, and one could even sue on the grounds of negligence. That is much different than actually winning a case if the information is publicly accessible.
I don't think they should have printed the information as it was purely agenda driven, but they do have that right. Certainly wasn't done to provide a public service and sometimes it takes a little effort to fix "stupid".

 

[Ragman]

. . . sometimes it takes a little effort to fix "stupid".

I was told, ya can't fix stupid.

 

[cheri1122]

It was only a matter of time until the first person combined the fact that his name was published with the fact that he got burgled to 'prove' that one caused the other. It may have, but there's zero proof - as Zorry mentioned, the info is publicly available, and was before & after the newspaper put it out there.
[I actually think that the fact that the burglar left disappointed because the guns were properly locked up is a plus - another responsible citizen to rebut the crazies, yes?]
Newspapers have long chosen to cite the 'public's right to know' as the rationale for printing what they want, and what the public actually wants to know [ie: how much money is the government actually giving to whom?] is entirely ignored.
The people who need to hear your displeasure are the publishers who decide what to print. I gave y'all the woman's address - did you tell her how you feel?

 

[RLENT]

Ok, now we are in a big boy pizzing contest and you know it.

... but Dad ... Joey started it !

 

[zorry]

Any chance someone broke in at random, saw the safe,and decided that was the best stuff to get ?
Could have seen his NRA plates or stickers on a vehicle.
If I were doing break ins I might have used that paper's list as homes to avoid.
Why break in if you know the owner carries ?

 

[cheri1122]

If I were doing break ins I might have used that paper's list as homes to avoid.

Is your real name Bernie Rhodenbarr?!

[Fictional character created by Lawrence Block: a burglar who tries to avoid occupied places and is afraid of guns, lol.]

 

[muttly]

Any chance someone broke in at random, saw the safe,and decided that was the best stuff to get ?
Could have seen his NRA plates or stickers on a vehicle.
If I were doing break ins I might have used that paper's list as homes to avoid.
Why break in if you know the owner carries ?

Sometimes criminals want to steal guns. They might want to sell them or use them in future criminal acts. They might still want to break into those homes,but for burglars in general ,they want to do it when no one is home.

 

[Turtle]

Ball is introducing legislation Monday to protect the names of New Yorkers who have legally obtained gun permits.

Unintended consequences. Now we have a proposed law as a patch for another law. The very definition of a permit (as a noun) is a written order granting special permission to do something. Hey, here's an idea! How about learning the meaning of the phrase "shall not be infringed" and eliminate the gun permits in the first place? You don't need a written order granting special permission to exercise any other rights.