• Gun rights advocates can publish lawmakers' addresses, judge rules
    133 replies, posted
[QUOTE]SACRAMENTO, Calif. – Gun owners' rights advocates are free to publish the home addresses and telephone numbers of California state lawmakers who voted for firearms restrictions, a federal judge decided Monday. It is the second time in a week that judges decided that California lawmakers went too far in protecting the private information of public figures. U.S. Chief District Judge Lawrence O'Neill of Fresno issued a preliminary injunction Monday blocking a state law that lets public officials demand that their private information be removed from the internet if they fear for their safety or the safety of their families. O'Neill ruled that the state law is too broad and violates the advocates' free speech rights. Publishing the lawmakers' personal information "is a form of political protest," he said in a 38-page opinion. The bloggers were protesting a law that requires the state to collect the personal information of those who buy firearms and ammunition in California. When viewed in that context, the judge decided, "the legislators' personal information becomes a matter of public concern."[/QUOTE] [URL="http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/02/27/gun-rights-advocates-can-publish-lawmakers-addresses-judge-rules.html"]Source[/URL]
This is just wrong, you don't win arguments by doxxing.
[url=http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/25/us/new-york-gun-permit-map/]Gun Control activist started the fire[/url], we merely adopted it for our own means.
[B]EDIT:[/B]Damn that was quick. Reminds me of when that New York paper published a map of people who had gun permits/owned guns. [URL]http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/25/us/new-york-gun-permit-map/[/URL]
[QUOTE=JoeSkylynx;51886657][url=http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/25/us/new-york-gun-permit-map/]Gun Control activist started the fire[/url], we merely adopted it for our own means.[/QUOTE] Two wrongs don't make a right.
[QUOTE=Lord of Boxes;51886660]Two wrongs don't make a right.[/QUOTE] They are public servants though right? So I assume they have like 24 hour police protection, something your average Joe doesn't.
[QUOTE=zerglingv2;51886664]They are public servants though right? So I assume they have like 24 hour police protection, something your average Joe doesn't.[/QUOTE] Lol they dont. We dont quite live in a judge dredd yniverse yet.
[QUOTE=Cyke Lon bee;51886665]Lol they dont. We dont quite live in a judge dredd yniverse yet.[/QUOTE] They should buy a gun for protection then, in case someone tries to break into their home and hurt them.
[quote]A California blogger who [B]goes by the pseudonym "Doe Publius"[/B] and writes under the name "The Real Write Winger" posted the identifying information for 40 state lawmakers[/quote] Doxxing other people while you hide behind a fake name, such bravery What exactly does this accomplish besides being able to threaten people who disagree with you?
While gun laws in this state need to change, this is probably not a constructive way of going about it. I mean I advocate for getting in touch with your reps, but when I do that I only provide publicly available numbers from the official congress website. Personal addresses is a little too far.
Yeah, because this will help their cause. If you make it look like you have to resort to intimidation of lawmakers to push your agenda, it doesn't exactly show that your argument can stand on it's own merits.
[QUOTE=zerglingv2;51886672]They should buy a gun for protection then, in case someone tries to break into their home and hurt them.[/QUOTE] It'd be funny if lawmakers actually got shot by some nut because of this. Oh wait no it wouldn't.
[QUOTE=fulgrim;51887074]Yeah, because this will help their cause. If you make it look like you have to resort to intimidation of lawmakers to push your agenda, it doesn't exactly show that your argument can stand on it's own merits.[/QUOTE] If arguments were invalidated by random individuals doing stupid shit in their name, there'd be no valid arguments.
[QUOTE=froztshock;51887158]It'd be funny if lawmakers actually got shot by some nut because of this. Oh wait no it wouldn't.[/QUOTE] It sure would intimidate other gun control law makers into rethinking whether or not their job is worth their life. ... wait a minute What if that is the goal? To scare people from doing their job properly. :shock:
[QUOTE=mdeceiver79;51887184]It sure would intimidate other gun control law makers into rethinking whether or not their job is worth their life. ... wait a minute What if that is the goal? To scare people from doing their job properly. :shock:[/QUOTE] "Maybe, if they were scared for their lives that they'd got shot by people with guns, they'd realize how much they need a gun and stop trying to take my toys away!" I'm not even a gun control advocate but honestly fuck off zergling. Christ.
Guess if I publish this judge's personal information, kid's place of school, their parent's address, etc, it's all cool then because I mean, in this context their "personal information becomes a matter of public concern.". right? :downs:
Their kids information would be overstepping bounds
[QUOTE=Lord of Boxes;51886646]This is just wrong, you don't win arguments by doxxing.[/QUOTE] If the lawmakers want to make public names and addresses of firearm owners it is only fair that they, too, have theirs made public. 90% of dumb legislation stems from the politicians voting in favor of it not experiencing its negative effects. Make them subject to those effects and you will see a drastic reduction in dumb bills like publically accessible firearm registries.
[QUOTE=TestECull;51887503]If the lawmakers want to make public names and addresses of firearm owners it is only fair that they, too, have theirs made public. 90% of dumb legislation stems from the politicians voting in favor of it not experiencing its negative effects. Make them subject to those effects and you will see a drastic reduction in dumb bills like publically accessible firearm registries.[/QUOTE] Yeah tbf I have to agree that I'd rather there not be a public registry of gun owners' places of residence as well, seems like the same kind of intimidation/shaming bullshit. Would make sense to have a law enforcement database primarily for connecting firearms used in crimes with their owners and I'm not particularly up on gun law but I figure we already have that anyways.
[QUOTE=JoeSkylynx;51886657][url=http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/25/us/new-york-gun-permit-map/]Gun Control activist started the fire[/url], we merely adopted it for our own means.[/QUOTE] publishing the names and addresses of lawmakers, while a shitty thing to do, is way way way less serious than publishing the names and addresses of private citizens
[QUOTE=froztshock;51887641]Yeah tbf I have to agree that I'd rather there not be a public registry of gun owners' places of residence as well, seems like the same kind of intimidation/shaming bullshit. Would make sense to have a law enforcement database primarily for connecting firearms used in crimes with their owners and I'm not particularly up on gun law but I figure we already have that anyways.[/QUOTE] No, we do not. The government is not allowed to have records on who has what. Right now, they have to contact the manufacturer, who tells them which dealer it went to, then the FBI goes to the dealer and goes through his logs or his 4473s to find out who the original owner was.
[QUOTE=Code3Response;51887501]Their kids information would be overstepping bounds[/QUOTE] No it wouldn't it's about my fundamental first and second amendment rights, it's a "matter of public concern" we have to be able to hold these lawmakers accountable for their actions! :downs: /s Doxxing people is already massively overstepping bounds. Two wrongs don't make a right, and no one deserves to have their home address, telephone number etc, made public without their consent. I don't give a shit what side of the argument anyone is one, it's fundamentally wrong when anyone does it.
[QUOTE=zerglingv2;51886672]They should buy a gun for protection then, in case someone tries to break into their home and hurt them.[/QUOTE] I dont disagree but we could also just not publish addresses of contraversial lawmakers....
[QUOTE=F.X Clampazzo;51887681]No it wouldn't it's about my fundamental first and second amendment rights, it's a "matter of public concern" we have to be able to hold these lawmakers accountable for their actions! :downs: /s Doxxing people is already massively overstepping bounds. Two wrongs don't make a right, and no one deserves to have their home address, telephone number etc, made public without their consent. I don't give a shit what side of the argument anyone is one, it's fundamentally wrong when anyone does it.[/QUOTE] You have to remember they're a public official. You sacrifice a lot of that privacy working in the public sector
[QUOTE=Code3Response;51887723]You have to remember they're a public official. You sacrifice a lot of that privacy working in the public sector[/QUOTE] I get that, but you don't sacrifice all of your privacy, and there's a point, where you're releasing the private address and telephone numbers, etc, that you're fundamentally wrong. Under the idea that they can be "help accountable" in this way I may as well say voyeurism is fine if it's against celebs and politicians because they're working heavily in the public sector and they knew that they were sacrificing a lot of privacy working in the public sector. It's not fine. If they willingly put their shit out there for their constituents to contact them, that's fine. But publishing their private information is wrong, public official or not.
[QUOTE=Judas;51887646]publishing the names and addresses of lawmakers, while a shitty thing to do, is way way way less serious than publishing the names and addresses of private citizens[/QUOTE] i think it's serious when the obvious intention of publishing their names publicly is to intimidate them and by extension influence public policy and serve as a warning to others from doing likewise if a lawmaker in some state wants to pass some law, but then a guy comes along and threatens to doxx them then your government is going to start dysfunctioning
[quote]At least six state senators reported receiving threatening phone calls or social media messages that appeared to have been prompted by the blog entry, according to court documents.[/quote]
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;51887757]i think it's serious when the obvious intention of publishing their names publicly is to intimidate them and by extension influence public policy and serve as a warning to others from doing likewise if a lawmaker in some state wants to pass some law, but then a guy comes along and threatens to doxx them then your government is going to start dysfunctioning[/QUOTE] Right, let's change the law so you can't publish a comprehensive list of everyone with a gun permit in NYC. Until that happens, fuck the lawmakers' privacy.
[QUOTE=Silence I Kill You;51887669]No, we do not. The government is not allowed to have records on who has what. Right now, they have to contact the manufacturer, who tells them which dealer it went to, then the FBI goes to the dealer and goes through his logs or his 4473s to find out who the original owner was.[/QUOTE] Ooh, that's interesting, thanks for clarifying, I figured there was some methodology involved there considering I'd heard of such tracing being done before. Regardless, so long as there's some process by which it can be done I'm good.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;51887757]i think it's serious when the obvious intention of publishing their names publicly is to intimidate them and by extension influence public policy and serve as a warning to others from doing likewise if a lawmaker in some state wants to pass some law, but then a guy comes along and threatens to doxx them then your government is going to start dysfunctioning[/QUOTE] Lawmakers and representatives need to be transparent and visible to the public. We've got issues in the United States right now about lawmakers and representatives not communicating and even listening to their constituents, not doing what they were elected for and hiding behind their office. Ignoring official calls, letters, emails and generally doing whatever they please with no ability for the public to have their voices heard. It is an issue. They are first and foremost in service to their constituents, and they deserve to be heard.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.