Journal News hiding behind PR firm after gun-map fiasco

posted at 11:01 am on January 15, 2013 by Ed Morrissey

Normally, one expects politicians and celebrities to go shopping for high-end public-relations firms to fend off journalists during and after a scandal.  It’s quite another thing when a media outlet has to spend big money to fend off other media outlets.  The Washington Post’s Eric Wemple reports that the newspaper that published an interactive map of gun-permit holders now has an expensive Manhattan firm dealing out the “no comments”:

Last week, the Erik Wemple Blog pressed Kathy Moore, an editor at the Journal News, for an interview regarding the newspaper’s very controversial maps of gun-permit holders in Rockland and Westchester counties. We got turned down — not by Moore herself but by one Edmund Tagliaferri: “I just wanted to let you know that there isn’t going to be any further comment at this time.”

Who is Tagliaferri? He’s an executive vice president at DKC, a Manhattan public relations, marketing and government affairs firm. (According to his bio, he also put in 17 years as an “award-winning” journalist with the Journal News.)

In the days since that initial exchange, Tagliaferri is the fellow we turn to when we’re looking for a polite and timely interview rejection or a simple “no comment.” Seems like a pretty easy job, and one that the Journal News, which is owned by Gannett, could handle on its own without assistance from a Fifth Avenue PR firm.

Well, you’d think so anyway, but that assumes that a media organization should act like a Hollywood celebrity after a drunken night on the town.  The Journal News is supposedly a news organization, no?  Shouldn’t they be cooperating with media outlets, especially on a story about which they felt so strongly that they pulled that kind of a stunt in service of it?

Of course, the Journal News editorial staff may not be making those decisions any longer.  The no-comment policy started last week, but the burglary at one of the homes identified on the map points to a much larger problem the Journal News created for its ownership.  The victims of the crime can make a case that the burglary and their losses were related to the decision to publish their address and identify them as gun owners, and argue that the newspaper has liability for their losses and any other emotional and work-related damages.  It’s going to be very hard for the Journal News to argue that there was no malicious intent in revealing the addresses of people who aren’t involved in any sort of legal issues or other newsworthy events as part of their crusade against guns.  Any statements they make from this point forward might end up proving that malice, and as any good defense lawyer will instruct in liability cases, the defense starts with silence on the part of the respondents.

One might lament that kind of outcome in regard to a news organization, but the Journal News stopped being a news organization when they decided to act as activists and put law-abiding private citizens (including prison guards and people hiding from stalkers) at risk to satisfy their own sense of outrage over firearms.  The new no-comment policy makes the transition all the more obvious.

With that in mind, here’s the latest from Project Veritas, which asked journalists — including a few from the Journal News — if they’d put up a sign in their yards saying that their homes were “proudly gun-free.”  Not surprisingly, they’re less than enthusiastic about identifying the status of their own homes (via Twitchy):


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

When a news organization is intent on making news and not reporting it, then it is a simple advocacy group and needs to be taxed and regulated as such.

ajacksonian on January 15, 2013 at 11:06 AM

The PR firm has an onsite office right next to that of the supervisor of the armed security company the paper hired. A good first step would be to fire the editor who made the call on listing the gun owners.

Bishop on January 15, 2013 at 11:08 AM

It seems to me that a good attorney is going to make the Journal News liable for every burglary or homicide that occurs in a home those jurisdictions for some time to come. The arguments cut multiple directions – homes of gun owners are identified, homes of non-owners are identified, law enforcement types are exposed, those who’ve concealed themselves from stalkers are exposed…..

2nd Ammendment Mother on January 15, 2013 at 11:08 AM

The question for me is, who put together the map for the newspaper in the first place? Was it someone in-house at the newspaper who knew or had to learn some GIS software, or was it an outside firm which the paper hired?

If it was an outside firm, perhaps the homeowners might be able to sue? This could be an ethics violation on the part of an outside GIS firm.

Logus on January 15, 2013 at 11:08 AM

Journal News hiding behind PR firm after gun-map fiasco

…..and hiding behind armed security that they would love to see denied for the common citizen who can’t afford “armed guards.”

Baxter Greene on January 15, 2013 at 11:08 AM

Does the Journal News publish the names (and addresses) of rape victims? After all, the name of someone who accuses another of rape is a public record (the name is in court records) and someone convicted of such a crime will spend years deprived of liberty. Shouldn’t, by the Journal News “standards” (and I use that word loosely) such names be published and let others know who’s testimony is sending other people to prison?

rbj on January 15, 2013 at 11:09 AM

They wanted to harm the gun owners so they should be rejoicing.

pat on January 15, 2013 at 11:11 AM

With that in mind, here’s the latest from Project Veritas, which asked journalists — including a few from the Journal News — if they’d put up a sign in their yards saying that their homes were “proudly gun-free.” Not surprisingly, they’re less than enthusiastic about identifying the status of their own homes

It sure is a b!tch when the chickens come home to roost.

Bitter Clinger on January 15, 2013 at 11:11 AM

With that in mind, here’s the latest from Project Veritas, which asked journalists — including a few from the Journal News — if they’d put up a sign in their yards saying that their homes were “proudly gun-free.” Not surprisingly, they’re less than enthusiastic about identifying the status of their own homes (via Twitchy):

And by posting a map of those not “proudly gun-free” they did not realize they were outing themselves. This is a very dangerous kind of stupid we’re dealing with. These people may well own scissors and be running thru the house as we speak.

onomo on January 15, 2013 at 11:13 AM

URISA is one of the major GIS associations out there which many GIS firms and individual professionals are members of and they have a code of ethics.

There has also been a move over the years for GIS professionals to have a national/international certification – something beyond just on the job training or even a degree. One of/the primary body for that has their own ethics rules and there are many in the GIS industry who are and are becoming certified.

Logus on January 15, 2013 at 11:14 AM

This is awesome!

The visit to Eric Holder’s house was interesting, the cops got there QUICK!

ButterflyDragon on January 15, 2013 at 11:14 AM

Sounds like somebody needs to sneak around that PR firm and out them.

MelonCollie on January 15, 2013 at 11:15 AM

Cowards

UltimateBob on January 15, 2013 at 11:15 AM

Q – So who is at fault … the PR Firm or the Journal News?

A – YES.

listens2glenn on January 15, 2013 at 11:16 AM

Normally, one expects politicians and celebrities to go shopping for high-end public-relations firms to fend off journalists during and after a scandal. It’s quite another thing when a media outlet has to spend big money to fend off other media outlets.

Degrees of separation, preparing for the forthcoming lawsuits. There may not be much going on now but when the first woman is beaten up by her estranged abusive spouse once the journal let him know where she was hiding….. Once the first law enforcement official who comes home to find his family slaughtered in retribution……

The Journal has need for a PR firm.

Happy Nomad on January 15, 2013 at 11:17 AM

Q – So who is at fault … the PR Firm or the Journal News?

A – YES.

listens2glenn on January 15, 2013 at 11:16 AM

Let’s not forget the public officials that released the information in the first place.

Happy Nomad on January 15, 2013 at 11:18 AM

From GISCI’s code of conduct:

3. We shall not engage in conduct involving fraud or wanton disregard of the rights of others.

4. We shall hold paramount the safety, health, and welfare of the public.

6. We shall not accept an assignment from a client or employer when the services to be performed involve conduct that is known to be illegal or in violation of GISCI Rules of Conduct.

From URISA’s code of conduct:

IV. Obligations to Individuals in Society

The GIS professional recognizes the impact of his or her work on individual people and will strive to avoid harm to them. Therefore, the GIS professional will:

1. Respect Privacy

Protect individual privacy, especially about sensitive information.
Be especially careful with new information discovered about an individual through GIS-based manipulations (such as geocoding) or the combination of two or more databases.

2. Respect Individuals

Encourage individual autonomy. For example, allow individuals to withhold consent from being added to a database, correct information about themselves in a database, and remove themselves from a database.
Avoid undue intrusions into the lives of individuals.

And GITA, another major GIS association has their own code of ethics.

Seriously. Find out who produced the map for the newspaper and go after them legally.

Logus on January 15, 2013 at 11:20 AM

So when is the Journal News going to fire those ARMED security guards and put up “THIS IS A GUN-FREE ZONE!” sign?

Yeah. That’ll happen.

Be great to see them slammed with a law suit.

GarandFan on January 15, 2013 at 11:21 AM

Seriously. Find out who produced the map for the newspaper and go after them legally.

Logus on January 15, 2013 at 11:20 AM

Unfortunately, any established slander-rags has all kinds of money and connections, so that would require a huge legal effort.

MelonCollie on January 15, 2013 at 11:22 AM

Do those Oppressives realize that they want to declare the whole country to be “Gun Free”?

Galt2009 on January 15, 2013 at 11:24 AM

It will be interesting to see who was in the loop on the decisions to publish this.

FiveG on January 15, 2013 at 11:28 AM

It will be interesting to see who was in the loop on the decisions to publish this.

FiveG

We’re still waiting on fast & furious so I guess we’ll never know.
Start getting used to it.

LeftCoastRight on January 15, 2013 at 11:32 AM

listens2glenn on January 15, 2013 at 11:16 AM

.
Let’s not forget the public officials that released the information in the first place.

Happy Nomad on January 15, 2013 at 11:18 AM

.
Sorry … oversight on my part. You’re exactly correct.

In fact, public servants involved deserve the greater condemnation.

listens2glenn on January 15, 2013 at 11:33 AM

Great video, Ed … : )

listens2glenn on January 15, 2013 at 11:34 AM

Irony. So now to sleep better at night these freaks require the presence of armed, legal gun owners on their property? So much for conviction.

RepubChica on January 15, 2013 at 11:34 AM

I wonder what the paper’s board of directors has to say about the needless spending of money like this. If the liberals who helped get those maps out there didn’t pull such a stunt, the expenditures would not have been needed.

I love when sanctimonious liberals have to actually pay for their own misdeeds.

Liam on January 15, 2013 at 11:38 AM

Unfortunately, any established slander-rags has all kinds of money and connections, so that would require a huge legal effort.

MelonCollie on January 15, 2013 at 11:22 AM

Depends. It could be as “easy” as finding out exactly who produced the maps for the paper, in-house or outside firm. Then, find out which GIS organizations that individual or firm is a member of and bring the fiasco to the attention of those organizations. Let the organizations then do their own investigation and possible expulsions, etc. Professionals and firms need these organizations for their ability to give legitimacy.

Considering the nature of GIS in the world, such membership organizations don’t want such a pr flap. Trust me, this story is NOT going away in the GIS community. There’s a lot of discussion and everything I’m reading says that many in the community are not happy about it.

The problem is that GIS is still primarily a tool, software that anyone can learn to use and apply, so it’s easy for there to be “rogue” individuals who don’t pay attention or care about ethics or principles. That said, still, press the organizations to disavow such abuses of GIS as this whole incident, which may eventually lead to more pressure against rogues and others who care not for privacy, safety and principle.

Logus on January 15, 2013 at 11:38 AM

Not surprising. A lot of other media organizations crossed the line from Journalism to Performance Art a long time ago.

Kaisersoze on January 15, 2013 at 11:41 AM

I’ve been remarking how troll-free the posts on the gun-related threads have been. I think (or hope) we’ve found the issue where stepping into it, the libs have gone to a place the public simply can’t go. Morgan has shown himself to be an ass and the publishers of this map have violated a very basic privacy right, certainly not illegial but unethical.

We can’t give up on this issue, because at it’s heart is a major philosophical point; is there a moral defense to a moral defense? In the protection of our lives, our loved ones, and our property, do we have the right to use deadly force?

Our constitution says this is a right not given by governments but a natural right bestowed to us from our Creator. On this point, the morality of a moral defense stands.

itsspideyman on January 15, 2013 at 11:42 AM

Seriously. Find out who produced the map for the newspaper and go after them legally.

Logus

1) The AMA, ABA and other orgs have ethics/codes. Yet Doctors and lawyers are not upholding these ethics. When you consider that 80% of Congress are lawyers do you think them ethical?? Thought not. You place too much trust in thinking that entities like the ABA care about ethics. They don’t. Their primary function is suppression of practitioners to keep prices up.

2) Go after them legally? Doubtful at best. Look up the term `Law of Agency`. If it was contracted work high chance there was a contract for service involved with clauses of indemnity for the contractor. Though they maybe dragged into court, it will be the paper footing the bill not the GIS developer. The only out would be that the work was sourced illegally and considering the database used was public record, that is a dead letter.

Dr. Dog on January 15, 2013 at 11:44 AM

Typical, the hate filled freaks of the left really don’t believe most of the nonsense they affirm, their entire lives are constructs of self deceit, a totally false, skin deep image of themselves. Push a little and this is what you get, people who use tax shelters instead of paying more for their beloved government, people who talk of racial intergration and equality but live in well off, all white areas, and yes, people who own guns and lie about violence and gun control.
Basically, nuts !

arand on January 15, 2013 at 11:44 AM

Our constitution says this is a right not given by governments but a natural right bestowed to us from our Creator. On this point, the morality of a moral defense stands.

itsspideyman on January 15, 2013 at 11:42 AM

This is exactly why Dumb-te, liveasaslaveanddie, and the resident pseudo-intellectual potheads are absent.

They know that no ‘argument’ they can bodge together will stand against a right bestowed from God himself that we do not have to cower in the corner while evil people run rampant, that in fact doing just that is morally wrong!

MelonCollie on January 15, 2013 at 11:45 AM

And GITA, another major GIS association has their own code of ethics.

Seriously. Find out who produced the map for the newspaper and go after them legally.

Logus on January 15, 2013 at 11:20 AM

So they have a code of ethics.

A code of ethics doesn’t matter to the left, even if they had one that they would abide by.

They’ve already dehumanized us in their own minds, which is how they justify their behavior toward us.

CurtZHP on January 15, 2013 at 11:49 AM

That-is-so-rich. best laugh of the week was hearing Toure twist in the wind.

ironked on January 15, 2013 at 11:50 AM

In fact, public servants involved deserve the greater condemnation.

listens2glenn

Why? The clerk who handed over the data was compelled by state statute that the information was public domain. Another words they had no choice. The real culprits are the legislators.

There is a reason we have common law. It requires the utilization of common sense which these days seems in short supply.

Dr. Dog on January 15, 2013 at 11:51 AM

Are folks figuring out that the media has become the enemy? Unchecked power. They cross a line when they harm me or mine. My advice, straighten your act up.

Bmore on January 15, 2013 at 11:53 AM

That-is-so-rich. best laugh of the week was hearing Toure twist in the wind.

ironked on January 15, 2013 at 11:50 AM

Funnier still, Toure is now whining on Twitter that he was ‘disrespected’ by being included in the video.

Liam on January 15, 2013 at 11:54 AM

These idiots should not be given a choice.

My wet dream in this situation is that when they think the situation has diminished, the private guards have left, and the weather gets better, a team of 5-10 tags the street with a 5 X 15 foot announcement in kind…..in front of each of their homes.

They probably do not find fault with such visitations of SEIU and OWS to the homes of executives, right?

Shaughnessy on January 15, 2013 at 11:55 AM

I’m not sure I even understand what the point of the video was. shrugs.

nonpartisan on January 15, 2013 at 11:55 AM

Sue the basta*rds ! OWN that rag, then shut it down.

ultracon on January 15, 2013 at 11:57 AM

Typical, the hate filled freaks of the left really don’t believe most of the nonsense they affirm, their entire lives are constructs of self deceit, a totally false, skin deep image of themselves. Push a little and this is what you get, people who use tax shelters instead of paying more for their beloved government, people who talk of racial intergration and equality but live in well off, all white areas, and yes, people who own guns and lie about violence and gun control.
Basically, nuts !

arand on January 15, 2013 at 11:44 AM

I’ve always thought of them as skin deep emotional people. The overriding focus is feeling good and being liked by others of their kind. For the self,”I feel so good about myself because I care about dolphins.” From the peer, “You are so progressive and wonderful because you care about dolphins.” You can substitute anything else for “dolphins”. Knowledge of the subject or acting on it is not needed because the whole point is just to feel good. It wasn’t conservatives that coined the phrase, “I can’t live another day knowing that ____________.” Fill in the blank with liberal cause of the day. We make fun of them for using incorrect terminology with firearms but it’s a concept that goes beyond them. They feel good opposing guns because they get praised for opposing guns. They feel good because they can say to friends, “I can’t live another day knowing that some kids could get shot at school again.” It makes them feel good and gets them high fives from their lib friends.

Dr. Frank Enstine on January 15, 2013 at 11:59 AM

In fact, public servants involved deserve the greater condemnation.

listens2glenn

Why? The clerk who handed over the data was compelled by state statute that the information was public domain. Another words they had no choice. The real culprits are the legislators.

There is a reason we have common law. It requires the utilization of common sense which these days seems in short supply.

if anyone bothered to read the law it exempts PII data(name address etc) from disclosure

RonK on January 15, 2013 at 12:04 PM

Another thing I’m enjoying about this liberal-made fiasco is that there are more news stories telling of how common citizens are thwarting crime with their firearms.

Liam on January 15, 2013 at 12:11 PM

In fact, public servants involved deserve the greater condemnation.
listens2glenn

The public servant in question was on Hannity’s gun show and stated that he pleaded with the Journal News on phone and in writing not to use the info.

can_con on January 15, 2013 at 12:16 PM

The public servant in question was on Hannity’s gun show and stated that he pleaded with the Journal News on phone and in writing not to use the info.

can_con on January 15, 2013 at 12:16 PM

Blaming the poor PS peon for this mess is simplistic and stupid.

MelonCollie on January 15, 2013 at 12:16 PM

The victims of the crime can make a case that the burglary and their losses were related to the decision to publish their address and identify them as gun owners, and argue that the newspaper has liability for their losses and any other emotional and work-related damages.

I’d love to see what kind of internal communications turn up in discovery.

Socratease on January 15, 2013 at 12:18 PM

Boo hoo: Touré whines that O’Keefe disrespected him by including him in exposé of anti-gun hypocrites
http://twitchy.com/2013/01/15/boo-hoo-toure-whines-that-okeefe-disrespected-him-by-including-him-in-expose-of-anti-gun-hypocrites/

@JamesOKeefeIII I treated the people who came to my home with great respect & engaged them at length & this is how you return that respect?

Touré (@Toure) January 15, 2013

Bless his precious heart. MSNBC’s Touré is all worked up about his inclusion in James O’Keefe’s hilarious new video.

Touré was among the gun-grabbing journalists O’Keefe caught declining to display a sign advertising their homes as “proudly gun free.” After a string of uhs and ums, Touré brushed off the Project Veritas crew posing as “Citizens Against Senseless Violence.”

Galt2009 on January 15, 2013 at 12:18 PM

Blaming the poor PS peon for this mess is simplistic and stupid.

MelonCollie on January 15, 2013 at 12:16 PM

The info in my comment was not an indictment of the “PS Peon”, rather was just a clarification of what happened. He looked sick about the whole thing, but was powerless to stop it.

can_con on January 15, 2013 at 12:20 PM

I’m not sure I even understand what the point of the video was. shrugs.

nonpartisan on January 15, 2013 at 11:55 AM

Being intentionally ignorant while willfully refusing to recognize the blatant hypocrisy of your leftist media hack heroes is no way to go through life, dude. If you really don’t “understand what the point of the video was”, you’re too stupid to waste an explanation on.

However, for the REST of us, it’s time to hit the tip jar at Project Veritas. James O’Keefe is doing the vital work that the LSM refuses to do, and we owe him a debt of gratitude.

Harbingeing on January 15, 2013 at 12:23 PM

The info in my comment was not an indictment of the “PS Peon”, rather was just a clarification of what happened. He looked sick about the whole thing, but was powerless to stop it.

can_con on January 15, 2013 at 12:20 PM

I’m not accusing you, I’m agreeing with you. There was absolutely no way the poor sod could’ve stopped what was happening without getting arrested in the process. Sorry if that came out wrong.

MelonCollie on January 15, 2013 at 12:23 PM

MelonCollie on January 15, 2013 at 12:23 PM

No Harm, No foul. We all know when discussing anything as “simplistic and stupid”, we are of course referring to B.H.O.!

can_con on January 15, 2013 at 12:29 PM

No Harm, No foul. We all know when discussing anything as “simplistic and stupid”, we are of course referring to B.H.O.!

can_con on January 15, 2013 at 12:29 PM

ROTFLOLMAO! Amen to that!

MelonCollie on January 15, 2013 at 12:36 PM

By-pass these PR Liars-For-Hire. The MarxistStalinistMinions always do.

Maybe go all grass-rooty? Rent a bus or two and pay some profesional protesters to “spontaneously” protest in the front yards of those responsible for the Interactive Second Amendment Exerciser Locator.

It was a “patriotic expression of free speech” when the pukes from Acorn did it.

Anyone know the number for the Buses-4-Protests department at the Huffington Post?

ROCnPhilly on January 15, 2013 at 12:36 PM

The victims of the crime can make a case that the burglary and their losses were related to the decision to publish their address and identify them as gun owners, and argue that the newspaper has liability for their losses and any other emotional and work-related damages.

Unless the robbery victim can establish that the robbery was a direct result of the article (i.e. the robber read the newspaper, learned of the gun, and robbed the house to get it), this case will be dismissed. Even if the home-owner can somehow establish that the robber got the idea from the newspaper, the case would likely still fail. You are asking the state to impose liability on the newspaper merely for reporting the exsistence of an item that is desirable to thieves. What if a newspaper did an article about an antique car or a valuable painting? Would the paper be liable if the car or painting was subsequently stolen? Not likely.

cam2 on January 15, 2013 at 12:43 PM

I’ve always thought of them as skin deep emotional people. The overriding focus is feeling good and being liked by others of their kind. For the self,”I feel so good about myself because I care about dolphins.” From the peer, “You are so progressive and wonderful because you care about dolphins.” You can substitute anything else for “dolphins”. Knowledge of the subject or acting on it is not needed because the whole point is just to feel good. It wasn’t conservatives that coined the phrase, “I can’t live another day knowing that ____________.” Fill in the blank with liberal cause of the day. We make fun of them for using incorrect terminology with firearms but it’s a concept that goes beyond them. They feel good opposing guns because they get praised for opposing guns. They feel good because they can say to friends, “I can’t live another day knowing that some kids could get shot at school again.” It makes them feel good and gets them high fives from their lib friends.

Dr. Frank Enstine on January 15, 2013 at 11:59 AM

Very well thought out diagosis there Dr.

Hat tip!

44Magnum on January 15, 2013 at 12:45 PM

Rent a bus or two and pay some profesional protesters to “spontaneously” protest in the front yards of those responsible for the Interactive Second Amendment Exerciser Locator.

ROCnPhilly

Or charter a bus to do a Hypocrisy Tour and point out the paper, the editors, press people by touring past their homes. $5/head, speakers on loud so the neighbors can hear what is said.

Dr. Dog on January 15, 2013 at 12:49 PM

limosine liberal hypocrisy, no guns here except for my armed security!

burserker on January 15, 2013 at 12:52 PM

Unless the robbery victim can establish that the robbery was a direct result of the article (i.e. the robber read the newspaper, learned of the gun, and robbed the house to get it), this case will be dismissed.

cam2

Like thieves won’t take an out if they can implicate another party?

[lawyer] Why did you go to that house?
[theif] because I knew they had guns and that was what I was after.
[lawyer] Who provided that information?
[theif] the paper.

If its a civil case, its preponderance of the evidence is it not? Besides if the object is bleed the paper dry its the whiff of a lawsuit that matters not that it goes to court. $10-20k out of court settlements times thousands of victims with no time limit starts to add up to serious money.

Dr. Dog on January 15, 2013 at 12:58 PM

As defenders of the God-given, Second Amendment reinforced, right to defend one’s person, one’s property and one’s country from assault, we should relish any opportunity exercise our right of free speech.

In that spirit, if one of these firearm owner “outers” lives next to you or in your neighborhood, just install a sign in your own yard explaining the outer’s treasonous opposition to the Second Amendment, directions to his/her home and, if possible, work schedule.

I mean, the people do have a right to know…

ROCnPhilly on January 15, 2013 at 1:00 PM

With that in mind, here’s the latest from Project Veritas, which asked journalists — including a few from the Journal News — if they’d put up a sign in their yards saying that their homes were “proudly gun-free.” Not surprisingly, they’re less than enthusiastic about identifying the status of their own homes (via Twitchy):

Not during election season. During that time you see “gun free zone” signs everywhere. Of course, the spelling is all wrong. It’s usually spell V-O-T-E F-O-R .

DethMetalCookieMonst on January 15, 2013 at 1:07 PM

ROCnPhilly on January 15, 2013 at 1:00 PM

I would like seeing signs like this on front lawns:

————————————————
-Ammo is expensive, so expect no warning shots -
-He doesn’t like ammo or the guns that use it -
– ————> -
————————————————

Liam on January 15, 2013 at 1:09 PM

Dr. Dog on January 15, 2013 at 12:58 PM

How many robbers do you think read the newspaper at all, ever? Who are these thousands of victims you speak of? Face it, Ed did not really think this one through.

cam2 on January 15, 2013 at 1:11 PM

Doc, Dr., Liam, …

Seeing some great ideas here. Let’s do them all.

ROCnPhilly on January 15, 2013 at 1:14 PM

cam2 on January 15, 2013 at 1:11 PM

I don’t know. How many robbers do the paper? Or watch tv since it was all over the airwaves in the very area the gunowners lived.

Yeah, somebody here isn’t thinking things through, alright, (but it isn’t Ed).

ROCnPhilly on January 15, 2013 at 1:21 PM

How many robbers do the paper? Or watch tv since it was all over the airwaves in the very area the gunowners lived.

ROCnPhilly on January 15, 2013 at 1:21 PM

TV reports on the map did not list addresses, so would be of no help to a robber. The bottom line is that the police have found no evidence that the robbery in question was due to the map and there were other, similar robberies in the area in homes that weren’t listed:

“We see no pattern of people breaking into homes based on the map, but we’re certainly paying attention and monitoring that.”

The burglary was one of four recent burglaries in the city. The other three residences burglarized do not appear on The Journal News pistol permit holders map.

http://www.lohud.com/article/20130114/NEWS02/301140080/White-Plains-police-call-burglary-s-connection-Journal-News-gun-permit-map-pure-speculation-

Sometimes a robbery is just a robbery.

cam2 on January 15, 2013 at 1:33 PM

Unless the robbery victim can establish that the robbery was a direct result of the article (i.e. the robber read the newspaper, learned of the gun, and robbed the house to get it), this case will be dismissed. Even if the home-owner can somehow establish that the robber got the idea from the newspaper, the case would likely still fail. You are asking the state to impose liability on the newspaper merely for reporting the exsistence of an item that is desirable to thieves. What if a newspaper did an article about an antique car or a valuable painting? Would the paper be liable if the car or painting was subsequently stolen? Not likely.

cam2 on January 15, 2013 at 12:43 PM

You’d probably need a multiple series of house burglaries across the two-county area targeting homes identified as either having guns, and where the guns are stolen, or houses IDed as not owning guns, where other items are taken, and then have the people doing the break-ins apprehended and police connect their pattern of house break-ins to the published list in order to have a case that would get a jury ruling. (Even then, it could still be nullified in appeals, but it would put the Journal-News through the legal wringer and make Gannett’s tort liability bills go up a bunch.)

jon1979 on January 15, 2013 at 1:45 PM

Keep out outing these hypocrites, good job Project Veritas.

jake49 on January 15, 2013 at 1:46 PM

jon1979 on January 15, 2013 at 1:45 PM

Agree.

cam2 on January 15, 2013 at 1:52 PM

What if a newspaper did an article about an antique car or a valuable painting? Would the paper be liable if the car or painting was subsequently stolen? Not likely.

cam2 on January 15, 2013 at 12:43 PM

The newspapers don’t typically publish the addresses of the owners of possessions that they feature in their human interest stories. Or pinpoint them on a map.

When John Ashcroft was AG, a newspaper published a photograph in front of his home showing a closeup of his mailbox, and explicitly calling attention to the lens of the surveillance camera that was mounted on it. There was no reason for the publication to do that except to be a$$h0les.

The media have absolutely no regard for the rights the citizenry.

cheeflo on January 15, 2013 at 2:02 PM

It seems to me that a good attorney is going to make the Journal News liable for every burglary or homicide that occurs in a home those jurisdictions for some time to come. The arguments cut multiple directions – homes of gun owners are identified, homes of non-owners are identified, law enforcement types are exposed, those who’ve concealed themselves from stalkers are exposed…..

2nd Ammendment Mother on January 15, 2013 at 11:08 AM

It actually gets better (or worse)…

You caught their first list (where to go to wait for the homeowners to leave to steal a gun).

You missed their 2nd list:

http://www.lohud.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2013301130071

The “highest taxpayers” in their area… aka “where to go rob someone once you got your gun off the first list”.

The only thing they’re not offering to do is drive the getaway car.

gekkobear on January 15, 2013 at 2:02 PM

When John Ashcroft was AG, a newspaper published a photograph in front of his home showing a closeup of his mailbox, and explicitly calling attention to the lens of the surveillance camera that was mounted on it. There was no reason for the publication to do that except to be a$$h0les.

cheeflo on January 15, 2013 at 2:02 PM

I agree, but mere a$$holery does not give rise to a valid lawsuit.

cam2 on January 15, 2013 at 2:13 PM

TV reports on the map did not list addresses, so would be of no help to a robber.

Find a thinking adult and ask them to explain to you why that statement is so incredibly stupid.

The bottom line is that the police have found no evidence that the robbery in question was due to the map and there were other, similar robberies in the area in homes that weren’t listed:

You seem to “know” a lot about thieves.
1. They don’t read the newspaper.
2. They don’t watch the local news, or if they do, they
3. Can’t look up things they see on the local news on their free ObamaSmartPhone (generously supplied in a joint equality-of-outcome effort by my tax money and a big-time Obama fund bundler.)
4. Thieves don’t look for guns to steal because they can’t legally buy them.

Here are some things you should know that also happen to be true:
More children are killed in swimming pools than by firearms.
More poeple are killed by hand guns than rifles.
More people are killed by hammers than by guns.
Out of pools, guns and hammers only the gun is recognized in the amended founding document of these United States.

And until you can muster 2/3 of the House, 2/3 of the Senate and 3/4 of the States to challenge my right to own and bear arms, you can pound sand. NUTS to you and your whole foolish, ignorant band of hand-wringing cowards.

ROCnPhilly on January 15, 2013 at 2:19 PM

You missed their 2nd list:

The “highest taxpayers” in their area… aka “where to go rob someone once you got your gun off the first list”.

gekkobear on January 15, 2013 at 2:02 PM

Is listing property taxes on these houses significantly different than listing the sale price of all houses sold in the area, which my local paper does each week in the Real Estate section? Between real estate listings and Google maps, anyone can find this info and more, including arial photos of the house and yard, on the internet.

cam2 on January 15, 2013 at 2:25 PM

ROCnPhilly on January 15, 2013 at 2:19 PM

1. I’m a lawyer, so yeah, I have known a lot of thieves. They’re not generally big on newspaper reading or internet research.
2. I don’t recall saying anything about gun deaths or your right to bear arms, just that there is likely not a viable legal claim against the newspaper. You may want to take a Valium and just breathe for a bit.

cam2 on January 15, 2013 at 2:38 PM

cam2 on January 15, 2013 at 2:25 PM

So Cam2….

Do you have guns in your home? What’s your address?
Or should I just hack it out for myself and publish my findings here?

ROCnPhilly on January 15, 2013 at 2:57 PM

Or should I just hack it out for myself and publish my findings here?

ROCnPhilly on January 15, 2013 at 2:57 PM

Why don’t you do that. Then you can spend the next while hiding behind rent-a-cops so cam2 doesn’t show up at your door and shoot your oxygen-wasting hide.

MelonCollie on January 15, 2013 at 3:00 PM

MelonCollie on January 15, 2013 at 3:00 PM

Cam2 is an attorney. He would be fine with my publicly disclosing his residential and weapons status. He knows that were he to be burgled, he would be hard pressed to prove I was in any way culpable. That is, in fact, my point.

What is your point?

ROCnPhilly on January 15, 2013 at 3:16 PM

cam2 on January 15, 2013 at 2:38 PM

Valium, uhhhhhh…., no. Some Tylenol? Probably. I have fallen ill with the flu that’s been ravaging my area. They’re not kidding about the high fever. Ouch.

ROCnPhilly on January 15, 2013 at 3:23 PM

Greetings my HA friends from England, just arrived from a 4 day stint at an International Trade Show in Germany. Home to America on Friday.

#1 Topic in polite conservation with our international friends is their insistence that we give up our Guns, as most have never had the right to own one or even learn to use one. HOW DARE US? It’s disgusting! The Violence! The Horror! Let one dictate for the masses! Let no crisis go to waste!

I’m sure I had a bunch of yellow belly liberals American colleagues at the Show agreeing gleefully that yes, we should be more like you!! The 2nd Amendment means NOTHING, and we should be just like everyone else.

At their insistence and when prodded I reminded my International friends of all colors that there was a reason that Americans fled their native lands. Whether in the 1600′s or now today.

It’s called Liberty.
Never surrender the law of the Land and the Constitution. Those dodgy old dudes had it just about right. The reason we have guns is to prevent what most experience every day. Subtle tyranny.

Long live our Freedom, and it comes from being able to defend our Liberty.

I love my Country, America and can’t wait to get home.

seesalrun2 on January 15, 2013 at 5:55 PM

I have to believe this ‘paper’ still relies on advertising to survive.
Can there be ANY more demanding need than to let advertisers know that they will be boycotted for doing business with this rag?
LOVE to see them try to stay in business with no ads…

HammerNH on January 15, 2013 at 8:49 PM