NEW YORK — A
newspaper's publication of the names and addresses of handgun permit
holders in two New York counties has sparked online discussions — and a
healthy dose of outrage.
The Journal News, a Gannett Co. newspaper covering three counties in the Hudson Valley north of New York City
and operating the website lohud.com, posted a story Sunday detailing a
public-records request it filed to obtain the information.
The 1,800-word story headlined,
"The gun owner next door: What you don't know about the weapons in your
neighborhood," said the information was sought after the Dec. 14 school
shooting in Newtown, Conn., about 50 miles northeast of the paper's
headquarters in White Plains. A gunman killed his mother, drove to an
elementary school and massacred 20 first-graders and six adults, then
shot himself. All the weapons used were legally owned by his mother.
The Journal News story includes
comments from both sides of the gun-rights debate and presents the data
as answering concerns of those who would like to know whether there are
guns in their neighborhood. It reports that about 44,000 people in
Westchester, Putnam and Rockland counties are licensed to own a handgun
and that rifles and shotguns can be purchased without a permit.
It was accompanied online by maps of the results for Westchester and Rockland counties;
similar details had not yet been provided by Putnam County. A reader
clicking on the maps can see the name and address of each pistol or
revolver permit holder. Accompanying text states that inclusion does not
necessarily mean that an individual owns a weapon, just who obtained a
license.
By Wednesday afternoon, the maps had been shared about 30,000 times on Facebook and other social media.
Most online comments have
criticized the publication of the data, and many suggest it puts the
permit holders in danger because criminals have a guide to places they
can steal guns. Others maintain it tells criminals who does not have a
gun and may be easier to victimize, or where to find law enforcement
figures against whom they might hold a grudge.
Some responded by publicizing the
home addresses and phone numbers of the reporter who wrote the piece,
along with other journalists at the paper and even senior executives of Gannett.
Many echoed the idea that publicizing gun permit holders' names is
tantamount to accusing them of doing something wrong, comparing the move
to publishing lists of registered sex offenders.
The Journal News is standing behind the project. It said in the story that it published a similar list in 2006.
"Frequently, the work of
journalists is not popular. One of our roles is to report publicly
available information on timely issues, even when unpopular," Janet
Hasson, president and publisher of The Journal News Media Group, said in
an emailed statement. "We knew publication of the database (as well as
the accompanying article providing context) would be controversial, but
we felt sharing information about gun permits in our area was important
in the aftermath of the Newtown shootings."
Roy Clark, a senior scholar at the Poynter Institute, a Florida-based
journalism think tank, said publishing the data was "too
indiscriminate."
He, too, compared the maps to
similar efforts involving sex-offender registries or lists of those
arrested for driving under the influence, noting that such a move is
usually done to indicate a serious problem that requires a neighbor or
parent to maintain vigilance.
"You get the connotation that somehow there's something essentially wrong with this behavior," he said of the gun permit database.
"My predisposition is to support
the journalism," Clark said. "I want to be persuaded that this story or
this practice has some higher social purpose, but I can't find it."
Also common among the comments on
the lohud.com were suggestions about suing the paper for violating
permit-holders' privacy rights. Such a move would likely be
unsuccessful.
"The media has no liability for
publishing public information," said Edward Rudofsky, a First Amendment
attorney at Zane and Rudofsky in New York. The issue does present a
clash between First and Second amendment rights, he said, but in
general, the law protects publishing public information unless the
intent was to harm someone.
Post a Comment