As law-abiding citizens we are expected to navigate the labyrinth of conflicting state laws regarding firearms and we do successfully everyday. Although many of these laws don’t seem to make sense to firearm owners we still respect them and abide by them everyday.

Firearms are used more often by law-abiding citizens for self-defense than by deranged criminals to commit horrible acts of mass violence. For several examples for the recent use of firearms for defensive purposes not typically reported by the national media please visit: http://www.equalforce.net and forward this address to others to whom this information may be useful. @forceequalizer

Long ago growing up on Long Island, NY, I remember a story in the newspaper back in the 70's. A homeowner had killed a man who had broken into the home. I don't recall if the burglar was armed. Suffice it to say, this was in the middle of the night, and the homeowner did not take a chance. The local prosecutor filed charges to show how tough he was against guns, making a big stink that the homeowner did not retreat far enough nor ascertain fully enough whether the burglar was actually armed (sound familiar?). The jury chose to not convict, and the people exercised their better judgment at election time and fired the prosecutor. Hopefully enough people in Westchester etc. will exercise better judgment on the advertisers and bankrupt this newspaper.

If we could just get the same info on all the mental cases and criminals printed so easily them we would be making some progress. This is very much a misuse and abuse of media power. The freedom of the press is protected by the second ammendment, as is all of the constitution. The law abiding gun owners are not the problem in this country anymore than law abiding drivers are the cause of vehicle deaths. It's hard to imagine why people who concider themselves intelligent fail to see that a gun, by itself is just an object.

Don't know about recently, but in the past, as part of nyc pistol applications, you had to state on where/how pistol would be safeguarded when not in use. Most applicants I was aware of would list that they would keep the pistol in a locked box in a bedroom closet or other location. So most, if not nearly every license holder in nyc has in their file exactly how and where their firearm(s) are in their homes. I worded the answer to that question a bit differently so that the location in the home was unknown, and it didn't get kicked back to me or denied. They of course played the usual games before I finally got my permit but I knew the law and was successful in person against their tactics to draw out releasing the permit with their various excuses they tried over the phone which caused me to show up in person and catch them in their lies which resulted in them handing over the permit months after I initially applied instead of them stalling me for a few more months. I was also very aware of the statement on the application or instructions that all applicant information provided WAS PUBLIC RECORD. This eventually came back to permit holders sometime later when New York Newsday, in a front page article, published the names, addresses and pistol brands/calibers/numbers owned (iirc) for a large number of permit holders in the article as it continued on the inside pages. Mostly the article named famous/connected people that had permits (along with type ((carry?))) but it also included regular/unknown permit holders as well. Being pre-internet as we know it today, it wasn't a comprehensive list of the 30,000+ permit holders of the time, but it did name private individuals as well as famous ones like the Donald, Howard Stern and others. So what the regional NY paper just published wasn't a precedent for NY. NY Newsday did it previously. And this (NY Newsday) incident may be why the legislature changed the law to only provide name/address instead of providing firearm details as was provided to NY Newsday back in the day. And at that time, it's probable that NY Newsday didn't even need a FOIL filing to get the info on NYC permit holders, it stated right on the application or instructions that under NYS law the information provided on the application was public record. If correct, (as I'm sure it was) then the reporters didn't even have to file a FOIL request to get the info.

What short memories even firearm publications have over news making issues such as this.

The homes that were not published should worry … it means the criminals will target what they perceive to be weak, unprotected homes … rather than face someone with a loaded pistol waiting for them to break down the door! The news article naming all guarded homes is almost like taking out an insurance policy, or a sign in the front yard that says, "Beware, I may bite back."

After hearing about the irresponsible use of personal information by that publication. I wonderd if the publisher could be seud. after all the goal is to keep gunns out of the hands of would be criminals. And since the publication gave , to the genral public, a detailed map as to the posable whereabouts of firearms. Could it be argued that thay are now responsible the security of those wepons. Should thay have to provide proper gun safes and home security for thoes mentioned. After all it is unreasonable to expect all of these people to take all of thier firearms with them when thay leave thier home. Also it could be argued that this careless use of information could lead to furthe criminal gun use.