I wonder how many cops/other persons are on that list and now have their home addresses identified? This was a really bad idea.

Quote:

Two wrongs to correct the problem?

Though a lot of people will tell you otherwise, you do have a right to privacy thanks to the 10th amendment - and someone giving up your business to the public is *NOT* right.

Vernonb is right - publishing this list was a violation of every single one of those gun-owners right to privacy. This would be on par with me publishing all their medical records. Just because more than one party knows about it, doesn't make it "public."

Quote:

crzymorse...coincident? I think not...which leads me to the Sandy Hook "event" itself

I see the conspiracy boards going crazy but I can't seem to get a firm handle on the true source. I'm hearing Sandy Hook school was in the batman movie where the shooter in Colorado shot up the place. Now we have the school being shot up?

Any direct confirmation of this coincidence? I just hope its not that ABC owned disinformation puppet Alex Jones being cited as the primary source. This makes me wonder if the Sandy Hook shooter was motivated by this movie.

I've never seen the movie and likely will not.

Quote:

you do have a right to privacy thanks to the 10th amendment

Did I miss something?

Quote:

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Quote:

and someone giving up your business to the public is *NOT* right.

The Government IS THE PUBLIC.

Sorry, but government records, in the general sense, are public.

Should have thought about that before consenting to government LICENSURE of a fundamental RIGHT.

I never want people to know I have guns. Guns are a prize for a thief. Houses with guns are now targets for burglaries. They will lie in wait to make sure no one is home and then go in for the prize.

Quote:

I never want people to know I have guns.

The don't tell anyone you have them...ESPECIALLY not anyone from the government. ;)

Personally I could care less if people know I have them or not. I don't go around brandishing them and other precautions have been taken. People that know I have them also know I likely wouldn't need more than one round to end a conflict.

If anyone believes these *******s published this list as something to help the public at large then that person is a fool.

This list was published for one reason - MALICE and with forethought of intentional hopes to bring harm to anyone that may own a firearm - permitted or not. They make the list but they want the thugs and liberal zombies to do the dirty work.

So don't give be your BS about 2 wrongs not making a right. I damned well know the motivations and intents involved with these people. This "freedom of speech" action was a public declaration designed to terrorize any legitimate firearm owner.

It shows how much the lap dog media and politicians are working hand in hand.

Last night (Christmas) on our local TV news they claimed one of the shot firefighters calling for help in New York said -

"I think he has an ASSAULT rifle."

I call bull****. Nobody hiding on the ground behind his firetruck taking fire is going to say that. He might say he thinks it is a rifle. This bumps my bull**** meter over so hard it makes me wonder if the whole thing was staged and if we can expect a whole secession of these shootings until they have everyone so aroused they can get their bans in place.

By tomorrow it should be - "I think he has a Bulgarian AK assault rifle with a collapsible stock and a 30 round CLIP." (sic) - all from seeing a muzzle flash a hundred yards away...

The crazy gunman who shot the firefighters is dead. There will be no prosecution. So why aren't they releasing the full context of his written suicide statement? The only part released to the public were the quotes verifying what we already knew - that he was a madman. Let us understand the entire context of his message so that perhaps something could be done to prevent this from ever happening again. Why the concealment and secrecy here? Solutions require full disclosure so that we understand the entire problem.

Noodleman maybe he blamed it on Obama...

Quote:

I fear all we have done is to awaken a sleeping giant and fill him with a terrible resolve.

This is all going to get out of hand if they keep this up. And even if the anti-freedomers back down, I think the damage has already been done. Evena few years ago, the response to these types of incursions would have been tepid at best. Now - everywhere I go to read these kinds of stories the comments sections are running 100 to 1 against and the rhetoric is off the charts.

Methinks, they know not what they do.

Another moral dilemma: to risk prison time for exercising a right, vs. to risk one's safety and privacy by complying with the Law.

Karl is right, in terms of the Big Picture. But individually, as a result of the fact that most people give up their rights in degrees, we are faced with difficult moral decisions.

To remain private, many of us have not been able to buy any more guns since 1968. The only other option is to buy guns from illegal sources. But who knows if you're being watched and will be promptly arrested as you drive away from the seller's location?

BTW, driving a boat requires a license now in my state. 40 years ago, it did not. How things have changed. Auto licensing was supposedly brought about by the insurance industry, to improve actuarial risks.

Facebook'd the video posted by "Thatstockguy".

It is interesting to research the origins of the 2nd Amendment.

A quick synopsis: http://www.secondamendmentinfo.com/Journ....

I'd like to read the authors book sometime, it sounds like it is the definitive study of the history. ("The Origins of the Second Amendment" by David E. Young).

What is this but a registry where the government can pick up the guns of law abiding citizens. Under emergency, there is the rule of necessity, as necessity knows no rule. It is as simple as a off the cuff leader and a gutless Congress. Then we go to public policy. The propaganda machines have been running for years, but amped up on steriods since Sandy Hook. If they want the guns, they merely go get them, save for the criminals, who will still have theirs. Hitler loved gun registration.

Exactly.

The names, addresses, phone#, social media page links of that papers' staff have been published on a blog.

I wonder how many of the newspaper people have guns registered?

Hey, this rancher doesn't need a hi-cap mag in a semi-automatic rifle. He can just call 911, right? Never mind the smuggler shown with an AK-47 in the video.

Be sure to watch at least the first video. Those hidden camera smuggler backpacks look large and light enough that they're probably filled with just pot. The family points out that the US has effectively ceded 10 to 15 miles of the US to Mexican smugglers. At their location, the "border patrol" doesn't patrol the border, they patrol 10 to 15 miles inside of it:

Faced with gun-toting drug smugglers, Arizona ranchers demand security at the border

http://dailynightly.nbcnews.com/_news/20....

ARIVACA, Ariz. -- Just before nightfall, 73-year-old rancher Jim Chilton hikes quickly up and down the hills on his rugged cattle-grazing land south of Tucson, escorting two U.S. Border Patrol agents.

He wants to show them the disturbing discovery he made earlier in the day: a drug-smugglers' camp on his private property. Stacked together under a stand of trees are blankets, jackets, food, water, binoculars and bales of marijuana from Mexico wrapped in burlap. The smugglers, themselves, are nowhere in sight and are believed to have fled the area, which is about 10 miles north of the Mexican border.

"The druggers outrageously use my land at will," said Chilton, who frequently finds evidence of smugglers on his land -- well-worn trails, cut fences, discarded water bottles, clothing and shoes. His home has been burglarized twice and he is constantly on the lookout for armed smuggling groups while he and his employees round up cows on his remote land.

"Can you imagine riding your horse through here on your own land and running into a guy with an AK-47 and 20 or 30 guys behind him dressed in camouflage and carrying drugs?," he asked.

The land where Chilton raises his cattle covers 50,000 acres south of the small town of Arivaca, Ariz. About five miles of his property runs along the international border, where all that separates Mexico from the United States in most areas there is a four-strand barbed-wire fence. Chilton owns some of the land outright, but leases most it from the state and federal governments for cattle grazing.

[snip]

The Beckhams, like the Chiltons, scoff at the Obama administration’s claims the U.S.-Mexican border is safer than ever.

"It's a joke, they can believe what they want. They can live in candy land," said Beckham. "You can't have a safe and secure country without a safe and secure border, and we don't have it. We don't."

Sue Chilton says she believes a U.S. government decision to not to heavily patrol right along the border is, in effect, creating a free-access zone for Mexican smugglers.

"We have, without any reason or logic to it, decided to cede as much as 15 or 20 miles of the United States to the cartels, and we live in that section that has been ceded," she said. "They have lookouts in the mountains within a mile of our house."

If .gov bans any guns they're going to have a hell of a time with AZ. Those Ranchers would be sitting ducks without weapons.

Of course a dead rancher or two would not interest the media.

Quote:

Of course a dead rancher or two would not interest the media.

Its already happened and hasn't bothered anyone.

With regard to the 2nd Amendment and using it to prevent tyranny, we run into a curious conflict: where does tyranny prevention rate along the scale of insurrection? When is a rebellion against the government NOT insurrection? I think this question needs to be clearly settled before support for this amendment can be seen as more than a hunting license or the 'right' to join the military. The founders' intent was pretty clear to most of us, but there are many who think it's about state run armies.

While I agree with Gen about the government permit in the first place. This is ridiculous to publish the names. I guarantee you they did not publish all the names and addresses of LEOs in the area. The get special rights to keep there identity secret. I agree that their identity should be kept secret and so should who owns guns.

Quote:

To remain private, many of us have not been able to buy any more guns since 1968. The only other option is to buy guns from illegal sources.

Well, private sales are legal, at least in many places.. I'm not surprised they want people to have a license to operate a boat, they should mandate sticky gloves too because when boating it's easy to drop things overboard on accident.