BobCav
Founder's Club Member
imported post
I just read anarticle in Iowa where a Trejbal wannabe Mike McWilliams published another list wih names and addresses of CHP holders:
http://www.hawkcentral.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070324/NEWS01/703240313/1079/HAWKS
Here's the letter I just sent to the followingpeople at the paper:
Mike McWilliams - Author mmcwilliams@press-citizen.com
Trisha DeWall - Asst. Managing Editor tdewall@press-citizen.com
Jim Lewers - Managing Editor jlewers@press-citizen.com
Mike Beck - Publisher mbeck@press-citizen.com
opinion@press-citizen.com
Mr. McWilliams,
I recently read your article in the Iowa Press Citizen titled "Who is allowed to carry a weapon?" (http://www.press-citizen.com/apps/pb...703240313/1079) and I am outraged that your paper has published not only the names but the addresses of Concealed Weapons Permit holders.
There is no need or purpose served by the wholesale publishing of the list, and doing so was nothing more than a malicious attempt to strike out against lawful gun owners. It also may have recklessley endangered some of those CWP holders, some of which may have them because they are victims of violent rape, sexual abuse, or domestic abuse and are in hiding from their assailants. The Supreme Court has already upheld that the police are not responsible for the protection of individual citizens, merely to enforce the law. Who then IS responsible? Each citizen is ultimately responsible for their own safety. One means is through the responsible and legal use of firearms, even concealed ones.
Had you merely wanted to prove that you could get the list, exercising your FOIA rights (while they exist), you could have listed only the names and permit data without including the addresses. That not having happened, it is merely an act of spite and malice toward legal gun owners who, being amongst the most law abiding citizens anywhere, have had mandatory background checks and handgun training.
"We the People" do indeed have the right to access those records as long as they remain public. However, I do not subscribe to the belief that the press speaks for "We the People".
I often hear the overused and misused statement from the press that "people have a right to know" throughout the journalistic world on a multitude of issues. While we indeed have that right, we do not necessarily have a need to know and sadly most will just not care because it doesn't affect them personally. Reporters and journalists are not now, nor have they ever been the keepers, custodians or guardians of the people's rights, nor do they speak on behalf of anyone other than themselves. The use of that statement is merely self-serving in the interests of "getting the story".
If an individual or other entity expresses a desire or need to gain access to a particular piece of information, for whatever reason, they have legal means to use the FOIA system as necessary and as is their right. But with that right comes responsibility. They must then be responsible custodians of that information.
Just ask my new friend Christian Trejbal, reporter from the Roanoke TImes whose ranks you have just joined:
[url]http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum54/1716.html[/url]
[url]http://michellemalkin.com/archives/007050.htm[/url]
[url]http://article.nationalreview.com/?q...RhMTYxYzMzNGU=[/url]
[url]http://thelibertysphere.blogspot.com...christian.html[/url]
[url]http://christiantrejbalfan.blogspot.com/[/url]
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&s...22&btnG=Search
This wholesale attitude of the media that thy can hide behind the statement that "the people have a right to know" does not now, nor has it ever empowered the media to act on their behalf, and most certainly not to act irresponsibly to the endangerment of others. We already have elected officials to do that and do not need more from the press. You and the "press" in general may be able to express your own opinion or that of those you interview, but not of all Americans.
Responsible journalism is nothing to be taken lightly. I sincerely hope that you can recognize the potential for real harm that this seemingly harmless article may bring to innocent citezens who have the right not to be victimized again, and certainly not in the name of your paper's need to "get the story" or its First Ammendment rights and will remove the data base immediately.
Thank you for your time. I look forward to seeing the list removed and to your response.
Sincerely,
Bob Cavalcante
Springfield, Virginia
Virginia Citizens Defense League
NRA Life Member
US Navy Retired
Member OpenCarry.org
"If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animating contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen!"
--Samuel Adams
I just read anarticle in Iowa where a Trejbal wannabe Mike McWilliams published another list wih names and addresses of CHP holders:
http://www.hawkcentral.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070324/NEWS01/703240313/1079/HAWKS
Here's the letter I just sent to the followingpeople at the paper:
Mike McWilliams - Author mmcwilliams@press-citizen.com
Trisha DeWall - Asst. Managing Editor tdewall@press-citizen.com
Jim Lewers - Managing Editor jlewers@press-citizen.com
Mike Beck - Publisher mbeck@press-citizen.com
opinion@press-citizen.com
Mr. McWilliams,
I recently read your article in the Iowa Press Citizen titled "Who is allowed to carry a weapon?" (http://www.press-citizen.com/apps/pb...703240313/1079) and I am outraged that your paper has published not only the names but the addresses of Concealed Weapons Permit holders.
There is no need or purpose served by the wholesale publishing of the list, and doing so was nothing more than a malicious attempt to strike out against lawful gun owners. It also may have recklessley endangered some of those CWP holders, some of which may have them because they are victims of violent rape, sexual abuse, or domestic abuse and are in hiding from their assailants. The Supreme Court has already upheld that the police are not responsible for the protection of individual citizens, merely to enforce the law. Who then IS responsible? Each citizen is ultimately responsible for their own safety. One means is through the responsible and legal use of firearms, even concealed ones.
Had you merely wanted to prove that you could get the list, exercising your FOIA rights (while they exist), you could have listed only the names and permit data without including the addresses. That not having happened, it is merely an act of spite and malice toward legal gun owners who, being amongst the most law abiding citizens anywhere, have had mandatory background checks and handgun training.
"We the People" do indeed have the right to access those records as long as they remain public. However, I do not subscribe to the belief that the press speaks for "We the People".
I often hear the overused and misused statement from the press that "people have a right to know" throughout the journalistic world on a multitude of issues. While we indeed have that right, we do not necessarily have a need to know and sadly most will just not care because it doesn't affect them personally. Reporters and journalists are not now, nor have they ever been the keepers, custodians or guardians of the people's rights, nor do they speak on behalf of anyone other than themselves. The use of that statement is merely self-serving in the interests of "getting the story".
If an individual or other entity expresses a desire or need to gain access to a particular piece of information, for whatever reason, they have legal means to use the FOIA system as necessary and as is their right. But with that right comes responsibility. They must then be responsible custodians of that information.
Just ask my new friend Christian Trejbal, reporter from the Roanoke TImes whose ranks you have just joined:
[url]http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum54/1716.html[/url]
[url]http://michellemalkin.com/archives/007050.htm[/url]
[url]http://article.nationalreview.com/?q...RhMTYxYzMzNGU=[/url]
[url]http://thelibertysphere.blogspot.com...christian.html[/url]
[url]http://christiantrejbalfan.blogspot.com/[/url]
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&s...22&btnG=Search
This wholesale attitude of the media that thy can hide behind the statement that "the people have a right to know" does not now, nor has it ever empowered the media to act on their behalf, and most certainly not to act irresponsibly to the endangerment of others. We already have elected officials to do that and do not need more from the press. You and the "press" in general may be able to express your own opinion or that of those you interview, but not of all Americans.
Responsible journalism is nothing to be taken lightly. I sincerely hope that you can recognize the potential for real harm that this seemingly harmless article may bring to innocent citezens who have the right not to be victimized again, and certainly not in the name of your paper's need to "get the story" or its First Ammendment rights and will remove the data base immediately.
Thank you for your time. I look forward to seeing the list removed and to your response.
Sincerely,
Bob Cavalcante
Springfield, Virginia
Virginia Citizens Defense League
NRA Life Member
US Navy Retired
Member OpenCarry.org
"If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animating contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen!"
--Samuel Adams