Kudos to them for taking this stand which, for now, will protect the permit holders. This action will surely lead to a much larger battle in court between the individuals right to privacy versus the public right to know. Although the New York Supreme Court has ruled this information is public, the issue could still be heard by the US Supreme Court. In this instance, I believe the individual right should prevail, and here is why.
Unlike a driver's license or any other license or permit, firearm permits are granted as part of an individual right protected by the Constitution of the United States in its second amendment. All of the other state issued items are privileges. Not so a gun permit. Whether liberals like it or not, the US Supreme Court has upheld, over and over again, the individual right of a US Citizen to keep and bear arms based on that amendment. A Recent Supreme Court Decision
This is the wording of the second amendment as ratified by the States and authenticated by Thomas Jefferson, Secretary of State: A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. (Young, David E., The Founders' View of the Right to Bear Arms, p.222)
Technically, this wording could be interpreted to mean no permit should be necessary. After all, we do not require a permit to exercise free speech, religion or to own property. Having said that, I do not personally have anything against the permit process, except where it is used to intimidate people from exercising their individual constitutional rights, which the activity by The Journal clearly does.
If you take the time to use the map, you will instantly see how easy it would be for a criminal to make a plan for stealing guns. Yes, the paper claims it does not know if a gun is in the residence, but to the criminal, the odds are much higher there are some there compared to other addresses. In addition, if a criminal has a beef with the police officer who arrested him or her, well, here you go. Just pull up the map and voila! After a little bit of work, there will be the name and address of that officer, including his or her family since it is a requirement of the job to have a handgun permit! As a former police officer, I am outraged by this, as all law enforcement affiliated people should be.
One question I would like to ask the editors is why do this is in the first place. Allegedly it was done in response to the Newtown CT shooting but what did it accomplish? No rifle or shotgun holders are listed since there are no permits needed to own them in the first place in New York. You read that right, only handguns require a permit. One obvious explanation could be the editors of The Journal News are extreme liberals who only care about advancing their ideology instead of providing a real service to the public. This story and map do nothing to protect anyone or help in any way to mitigate the risk against some crazy person hellbent on doing harm. Instead, it could be argued it puts more people in danger.
Another question I have of them is why not publish the names and addresses of all people deemed mentally incompetent, or who have committed crimes, or who hold driver's licenses, contractor permits, etc. etc. As absurd as it sounds, it is a valid question and one which, if answered, would clearly expose them for what they are. Leftist zealots who do not care about the safety of law abiding people over their own biased views.
Hopefully legislators in New York and other states will create laws making this information private. They have the right to do that. If challenged, I believe the current Supreme Court would side with the legislators, as well they should.
