This will likely be the last thing I write about the crap pulled by the Commercial Appeal a while back. It is obvious that the staff of the paper are disingenuous and self-righteous about the issue as you will see in the latest (and probably final) statement by the editors on the matter.
By Chris Peck
Sunday, February 15, 2009
Misunderstandings with people who carry guns can turn ugly.
This past week it has been ugly at the newspaper, after passionate gun owners latched onto three very wrong ideas about why The Commercial Appeal’s Web site now lists all those in Tennessee who have a permit to carry a concealed weapon.
– Wrong idea No. 1: The newspaper is against the Second Amendment that gives Americans the right to keep and bear arms.
– Wrong idea No. 2: The newspaper is invading people’s privacy by posting the permit-to-carry-guns list on its Web site.
– Wrong idea No. 3: Posting the list is empowering criminals.
The Tennessee Firearms Association and others have fanned the frenzy against our Web site posting of the permit-to-carry list. Pro-gun groups orchestrated a protest campaign that has spread nationwide. By late last week, Commercial Appeal executives were receiving as many as 600 e-mails a day, along with dozens of phone calls at home, at work and on their cell phones. Maps to their houses, with ominous warnings, had been posted online.
Our crime? Putting up a Web-only database that allows people to search by name or ZIP code for those who have a permit to carry a concealed weapon in Tennessee. The list came from the Tennessee Department of Safety and is available to anyone who wants it, simply by contacting the agency’s office. The state of Tennessee, to this point, has decided that the right to carry a concealed weapon comes with the responsibility of agreeing to have a public record of who is packing…
The rest can be had here.
Be sure to check out the comments section. Well, that is the comments that the moderators of the site allow to be posted. It seems they were editing posts they objected to, not for violating rules for posting, but because they didn’t agree with what the post’s author wrote. Evidence of that can be seen here and here. That’s pretty low. The only thing I will delete or edit on my blog is spam or clearly unlawful. Feel free to criticize me to your heart’s content. I’ll approve it.
In Peck’s article on the controversy quoted above he fails to mention that his organization did, indeed, post the full name, street address, and birthday in their database search results and only changed the fields after public outcry pressured them into it.
The arguments the CA makes in favor are just trite. The writing has a bias that shines through. They equate guns with violence and insinuate that anyone who has a gun in dangerous. Anyone who objects to what they have done is obviously fearful and paranoid.
Here’s a good one: “Think about it for a minute. Many, if not most, households in Memphis possess a firearm. So you don’t really need a list to find a house with a gun.” Yeah, none of us have put any thought into the matter. What fools we are! <insert eyeroll here> You may not need a list, but it sure might help! Besides, it was not simply property crimes I had in mind being assisted by the easy access to permit data. Let me ask you a couple of questions. Why can’t I go to the state website and run tag numbers off automobiles to get the owner information? Why is access to drivers’ license data restricted to law enforcement? Clue me in, boss. People who got a handgun permit went through a hell of a lot more trouble and expense than they did to get tags for their car and a license to drive, so why isn’t it easier to get that information?
As for the point that “If it’s not The Commercial Appeal doing this, then it will be Google or a hundred Web sites,” does that mean that since my car is inevitably going to get a door ding in a parking lot I should just go ahead and do it myself, now? My answer to both is the same. I do not want either to happen so I am going to do what I can to make sure they do not.
It may seem like a nitpick, but what really irks me is something simple. Everything they have written about the permits refers to them as CONCEALED carry permits. You can stare at the card you must have on your person along with your hog leg until your eyes implode and you will not see the word CONCEALED anywhere on it. It is a Handgun Carry Permit. So much for in depth journalism.
In a cheap stunt to rustle up some buzz the Editors of the Commercial Appeal seem to have confused their job with those of law enforcement and good parents. They don’t understand that just because you can do something doesn’t mean that you should. And, I have given them and their dying media far too much attention already. My complaints and concerns have now been registered with everyone I feel needed to know. Thus, with these parting shots, I end my participation until somebody puts it in my face again.
Good day, sir!