(ROANOKE, VA) PAPER RECEIVES FLAK FOR LIST: Threats of violence, litigation and legislation ....

The Roanoke Times ^ | March 14, 2007 | Laurence Hammack

[Perseverando]

Threats of violence, litigation and legislation sprang up after a list of people allowed to carry concealed weapons was released.

The Roanoke Times will not re-post a list of gun owners on its Web site, even after being told amid continuing public furor that releasing the information does not violate state law.

First published Sunday, the database of more than 135,000 people allowed to carry concealed handguns has become the most controversial content in roanoke.com's history -- sparking threats of violence, litigation and legislation.

One day later, the list was removed from the site because of concerns that state police might have inappropriately included the names of crime victims on a list it provided to the newspaper.

Although there is a law that protects the identity of some victims in certain circumstances, state police spokeswoman Corinne Geller said Tuesday the restriction does not apply to the concealed-weapons list.

"The information released to The Roanoke Times was in total compliance with the Freedom of Information Act," Geller said. "It is up to the recipient of that information to be a responsible guardian of the information."

While Geller declined to comment on whether the newspaper acted responsibly, hundreds of angry readers have said in e-mails, phone calls and even threats that it did not.

By naming everyone in Virginia who has received court permission to carry a concealed weapon, critics said, the newspaper invaded the privacy of law-abiding citizens and all but invited criminals to burglarize homes for guns. Another concern is that victims of domestic abuse, who might have armed themselves for protection, are now in danger of being tracked down by their abusers via the database.

Although the legal concerns stated by the newspaper as the reason for removing the names no longer seem to apply,

[Drango]

I hope that someone does successfully sue them.

Why litigate??? Use the same energy to get the advertisers to stop advertising. Car dealers, grocery stores and other advertisers fund the paper. Follow the money.

[Equality 7-2521]

I'd sure like a link to that story so I can read it and LMAO.

[No Truce With Kings]

"There are good reasons the records are open to public scrutiny. People might like to know if their neighbors carry. Parents might like to know if a member of the car pool has a pistol in the glove box."

So essentially what the twit that wrote the article is saying is that the RT wants criminals to know which members of the community are armed (and should be avoided) and which are unarmed (and can be safely victimized).

While I am sure many in the criminal community are pleased at the public service rendered by the newspaper, I sincerely hope they do not rely on that information for their safety. After all, people that do not have CCW permits may also have firearms. No doubt, if some mugger gets shot after robbing someone not on this list, the next thing we can expect is a civil suit against the paper for for physical and emotional damages experienced by that mugger because the paper provided bad information.

[dashing doofus]

"So tell us, do you think it's OK to leave a package that was apparently meant to scare him, thereby necessitating closing down the street, tying up law enforcement time and forcing some of his neighbors to evacuate? Is it OK to send enough personal threats that the newspaper hired a private guard?"

Whoever did that is playing right into the weasel reporter's hand. A stupid, illegal, and outrageous thing to do.

Since the newspaper apparently disagrees with the idea of individuals' rights to privacy, maybe it will next publish the names and addresses of those women who had taxpayer funded abortions during the last year.

[Pete from Shawnee Mission]

This arrogant short-sighted reporter idiot got the law of intended consequences shoved up his rear end. An easy list for any burglar or abuser. Good Job.

It would be satisfying if the NRA contacted him and let him and his editor know that their home addresses and work phone numbers were going to be published in their newsletter unless they published an apology and admission that they were wrong.

If not, threaten to solicit members to share their (non-threatening, non-violent) viewpoint with them. Tie up their time at work with angry phone calls, and make them sort through bags full of angry mail to avoid accidentally discarding important mail, like utility credit card bills.

Of course, nobody should really publish this information. Just use the threat to play them a little, let them know how it feels, play on the paranoia they already have about guns. The unintended consequence of publishing their home address is that there are those who are angry enough, or irrational enough, or victimized enough who just might actually decide to track these guys down.

[jocwhales]

http://www.roanoke.com/editorials/trejbal/wb/108160

http://blogs.roanoke.com/roundtable/columns/comment_on_trejbals_column_12.html

http://thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=261555

[jiggyboy]

So tell us, do you think it's OK to leave a package that was apparently meant to scare him, thereby necessitating closing down the street, tying up law enforcement time and forcing some of his neighbors to evacuate? Is it OK to send enough personal threats that the newspaper hired a private guard?

In the columnist's mind, you are allowed to do anything you are capable of doing. There should be no consequences. Laws that interfere with your wishes should be disobeyed. And anybody who criticizes you is a bully who wants to take away your rights.

[hemogoblin]

The paper needs to publicly apologize for this without lying about it, or it will never go away.

Trejbal and his supervisor, Dan Radmacher, need to be dismissed. The paper then needs to acknowledge that its editorial department (this was not the news department) did something reckless and arrogant for bigoted reasons (i.e. presupposing that all gun permit holders are borderline criminals).

If these things don't happen, this mistake will be felt for months and even years to come.

[Al Gator]

"So tell us, do you think it's OK to leave a package that was apparently meant to scare him, thereby necessitating closing down the street, tying up law enforcement time and forcing some of his neighbors to evacuate? "

A fantastic irony here is that this twit may be so frightened, he runs down to the courthouse and gets his permit to carry! Then his own name will show up on his published list!!

If only.......

[Gopher Broke]

The writer of the article:

christian.trejbal@roanoke.com

[dashing doofus]

Thank you for posting this link. The author takes the time to respond to posters on the paper's blog, and he is absolutely an infuriating, self-important, hypocritical leftie. A worthwhile read into the mindset of the loonie left.

He claims at one point the article is not about concealed carry, but rather about open government. He claims he has no positon on CCW, but state in his stupid column that people better not "annoy" any elected officials who carry, clearly implying that anyone who does carry is emotionally unstable.

I believe the author to be emotionally unstable, intellectually dishonest by constantly changing his rationale for the article, and an incredibly unethical reporter. And now he gets a guard who obviously carries, because the reporter fears for HIS SAFETY. LOL.

He should be fired by the paper immediately. If I lived in VA, I would cancel subscriptions to the paper and write to any advertisers, informing them I will not do any business with them until this reporter is canned.

[NewJerseyJoe]

On the same page as the RT article, there is a sidebar with a link to reader comments to unChristian's article. Everyone should print or save a copy of those comments -- they read like an apologetics course against gun-grabbers. Very informative, very handy, very useful comments. Every day, I am admiring more and more the work being done by the VCDL and the just plain citizens of the Commonweal.

[Equality 7-2521]

I was hoping for the article about the package left on Mr. Trejbal's porch that shut down his entire street and caused his neighbors to evacuate.

Thanks for these links, though.

[2nd amendment mama]

The ultimate hypocrisy in all of this is from their own website:

Privacy Policy

We will not disclose any personal information without your advance permission except when we believe the law requires us to do so or the disclosure is necessary to protect the rights or property of Times-World Corp. In order to describe our services to prospective partners, advertisers and others, we may disclose user information -- but only in an aggregate form. For example, we might disclose that a certain percentage of our users are male or within a certain age range.

and

Submission Rules
You agree not to submit Content:

That harasses, degrades, intimidates or is hateful toward an individual or group of individuals on the basis of religion, gender, sexual orientation, race, ethnicity, age, or disability;
That includes personal or identifying information about another person, or uses the name or likeness of another person for commercial purposes, without that person's explicit consent;

[dashing doofus]

FREEP THE POLL! (Halfway down the article)

http://www.roanoke.com/editorials/trejbal/wb/108160

[dashing doofus]

Christian, the boy who sits while urinating, is in violation of the paper's privacy policy and should therefore face immediate disciplinary action, as should the editors who approved the column.

[mombrown1]

Last night I posted the following on his comments

"Can you show me the law that allows the Virginia State Police to maintain this database/"

He must approve the posting. I am waiting to see if he allows it to be posted or answers me.

If I had been able to copy this list before it was removed I would contact every person and tell them to file a class action suit using the 4th amendment to the constituion. It would not be too expensive to 150,000+ gun owners and it would set a new precedent for other states.

I believe the list was removed because the state police are not permitted to keep the database and this opens a hugh "can of worms" for the paper, columnist, and state police. I also know that the state police should not be requiring a Social Security Number for ID. That is against federal law. (See Privacy Act of 1974)

[gracesdad]

The article at the top is the article of this thread is the one that has the info about the package.

Somehow, I don't think you'd find it so amusing if YOU were evacuated from your house or if YOU were one of the cops who wasted his time.

Somebody else on this thread said the columnist probably thought everybody on the CW list was a dumb redneck. We know that's not the case. But some folks who are mad about the column certainly are ACTING like dumb rednecks.

[rickomatic]

"So tell us, do you think it's OK to leave a package that was apparently meant to scare him, thereby necessitating closing down the street, tying up law enforcement time and forcing some of his neighbors to evacuate? Is it OK to send enough personal threats that the newspaper hired a private guard? "

Illegal activities can never be excused. HOWEVER, it is time that all of these leftie twits learn a very important lesson.

"You sow the wind......you reap a whrilwind"

They've gone unchallenged for way too long.

[ctdonath2]

Most are missing the real issue.
Why does ANYONE - gov't included - have access to that info? Why does the gov't require that info be handed over?
Seriously: what good does CCW registration do?

Don't get mad at the newspaper.
Get mad at VA legislators.