Yesterday we shared an article from a Gannett Publication “The Journal News” located in New York. Many persons were, and are, outraged this media publication sought to publish the full names, addresses and contact information of lawful registered gun permit owners – essentially handgun owners.
The political ideology of the publication is abundantly evident in their articles, and to a larger sense visible within the editorial board who would advance such a decision to publish information. They hold far-left views.
Their decision to publish the registered gun ownership visibly exemplifies one of the most vocal arguments by Second Amendment advocates who rail against registration. Namely, f a political decision to confiscate was ever carried out only those who have lawfully abided by registration laws would be subject to confiscation. But there’s more.
The publication will obfuscate (already inferred within their construct) their decision based on the premise the registrations are “public record”. This is factually correct, however the issue is far more broad.
Unlike vehicle registration, or property registration, or, well, (fill in the blank) registration, which are all public record, the Firearm registration is different. In the matter of a Drivers License, Auto Registration, etc. the conveyed activity or ownership registered is considered a “privilege”. Gun ownership is a “Constitutional Right” – Big Difference.
You do not have a constitutionally protected right to drive, or own a motor vehicle, nor own a horse. You do have a constitutionally protected *right* to own a firearm.
The capacity of an individual to invoke their right in this example, has been somewhat restricted by the mandate of registration. In order for a person in New York to enjoy their constitutional right, the State of New York is requiring the person to register their intent.
This type of registration should NEVER be a matter of “public record”, because the person is constitutionally protected in their ability to enjoy the right. The public record aspect is no more valid a consideration than a person being required to register themselves with the State in order to express their First Amendment right, free speech.
Remember, it has been settled that these rights are NOT given by government, therefore any invocation of, expression of, or application of, should not be restricted by the government…….
*Unless*, in the capacity of the individual, they have shown an irresponsibility with said right, such as unlawful action. The unlawful behavior, can and does, place the State in the capacity to restrict further conveyance or expression. Hence, the state can restrict a convicted felon from owning a firearm (engaging in the expression of a constitutional right). The felon has already shown a propensity of incapacity toward self-governance by the engagement of unlawful/illegal activity.
The Journal News used an interactive map for a specific purpose, with a specific intent. In essence they were not just showing how many guns were owned in a particular geography - They could have done that with mere innocuous dots alone – No, in this example TJN/LoHud.Com had an additional implied agenda: “Social Shame”.
Based around the concept of the Scarlet Letter, TJN/LoHud.com expressed their ideological (left-wing) hatred for gun ownership, and wanted the reading public to join them in the consideration of who those horrid gun owners really are.
In the abstract this would be just mere insufferable political bias. However, in combination with all other public opinions expressed by the editorial board you can see clearly a strategic intention to Isolate-Ridicule-Marginalize. You can see their agenda.
The progressive left never thinks past their emotional attachment to the moment (mob mentality), and rarely do their advocates carry the thought process forward to its ultimate conclusion.
Why stop at gun owners, why not require medical record registration, so you can display names and locations of AIDS/HIV or tuberculosis, or Bird-Flu patients? You can always use the auspices of patient care tracking. Sounds crazy right. But, then again, that would require some kind of government run healthcare system with accompanying compliance registration system, and data reported medical conditions that would permit identification….. aaaaand just a large enough mob of people who become worried about the impact upon their community to join with politicians.
No, wait, wha?….
Here is the background on the staff involved.