Upload
Login or register
x

Gun owners

This is the publish er at the
Journal News in New York
who thinks it is to publish
an en line map that gives
the names and addresses of
Intel registered gun
owners. Feel free to she re
her info reation as freely as
she sees fit to she re tithe rs'.
Janet Hassan
3 Gate House Lane
NY 10534
...
+932
Views: 32908
Favorited: 45
Submitted: 12/21/2015
Share On Facebook
submit to reddit +Favorite Subscribe to stealingbikes

Comments(309):

Leave a comment Refresh Comments Show GIFs
123>
[ 309 comments ]
Top Rated Controversial Best Lowest Rated Newest
Anonymous comments allowed.
193 comments displayed.
Reply
+315
#14 - assbandit ONLINE (12/21/2015) [-]
saw an opportunity and took it. Merry Christmas!
Reply
-10
#179 to #14 - anon (12/22/2015) [-]
Yeah, you're actually just a gullible asshole just FYI.

>>#96
Reply
+23
#188 to #179 - assbandit ONLINE (12/22/2015) [-]
Reply
0
#226 to #179 - anon (12/22/2015) [-]
Yeah, actually you're just a gullible asshole for robimwillamsons ********

/Gun+owners/funny-pictures/5775936/225#225
Reply
+20
User avatar #126 to #14 - thatoneiranianguy ONLINE (12/22/2015) [-]
When you consider this issue happened years ago and has been arguably resolved you just sort of come off as an asshole.
Reply
+28
User avatar #130 to #126 - thegoblingamer ONLINE (12/22/2015) [-]
BUT SHE SAID SOMETHING I DIDN'T AGREE WITH!!!!!!
Everyone's dumb.
Reply
-1
User avatar #227 to #130 - youregaylol (12/22/2015) [-]
No, she did something that endangered peoples lives

/Gun+owners/funny-pictures/5775936/225#225
Reply
+2
User avatar #245 to #227 - willgum ONLINE (12/22/2015) [-]
so clearly the best option is to do the same to her that will show her how peaceful gun owners are
Reply
0
User avatar #281 to #245 - youregaylol (12/22/2015) [-]
because sending a glitter bomb is the same thing as making you a target for theives and the people who raped you

its nice to see how logical liberals are
Reply
0
User avatar #290 to #281 - willgum ONLINE (12/22/2015) [-]
oh yeah reveling address doesn't make her the target of thieves or endanger her life in any way my mistake.
Reply
0
User avatar #294 to #290 - youregaylol (12/23/2015) [-]
possibly, but still not in the same category as revealing the addresses of rape victims and people who are being stalked for a political point

bitch got what she deserved, turnabout is fair play
Reply
0
User avatar #271 to #245 - maniacaltomcat (12/22/2015) [-]
Its a glitter bomb, not anthrax dude chill its just a prank look theres the camera
Reply
0
User avatar #291 to #271 - willgum ONLINE (12/22/2015) [-]
I was referring to revealing her address
Reply
+9
#16 to #14 - zombieplayground ONLINE (12/21/2015) [-]
where's the receipt?
Reply
+111
#17 to #16 - assbandit ONLINE (12/21/2015) [-]
Delivered
Reply
+1
#52 to #17 - sonexthehodgeheg (12/21/2015) [-]
What about giant ******* solids?
Reply
+1
#55 to #52 - somedudewhatever ONLINE (12/21/2015) [-]
There's a service for that, with a note that says :"Someone close to you thinks you should go **** yourself." Can't remember the name of the service. I imagine some use it on themselves.
Reply
0
#53 to #52 - sonexthehodgeheg (12/21/2015) [-]
*dildos
Reply
0
#34 to #17 - zombieplayground ONLINE (12/21/2015) [-]
well holy hell, good on you man.
Reply
+33
User avatar #33 to #14 - PenguinsOfMars (12/21/2015) [-]
damn i never knew those were so cheap.

whats your address bro? im gonna send you a cool christmas present that definitely is not glitter.
Reply
+62
User avatar #35 to #33 - assbandit ONLINE (12/21/2015) [-]
1220 L Street NW, Suite 505, Washington, DC 20005

Make sure you tell me how much of a slut I am in the note
Reply
+1
User avatar #91 to #35 - PenguinsOfMars (12/22/2015) [-]
there isn't going to be a notw

wtf did you even read my comment? i said i wasn't going to send you a glitter bomb.
Reply
+2
User avatar #175 to #91 - assbandit ONLINE (12/22/2015) [-]
whoops thats not my address, it looks like i sent you the address to this by accident

rainn.org/
Reply
+1
#156 to #91 - anon (12/22/2015) [-]
yeah, but if you are sending something not glitter bombs wouldn't you include a note on how slutty assbandit is
Reply
+116
#6 - affix (12/21/2015) [-]
Here is a map of people you should not **** with.
Reply
+36
#120 to #6 - anon (12/22/2015) [-]
dosent that also give robbers a map of people not armed with guns
Reply
-1
User avatar #203 to #120 - buddywuggle (12/22/2015) [-]
So you are saying the gun Illuminati payed her to do this to promote buying guns?
Reply
+328
#1 - grandautisimo (12/21/2015) [-]
so, what is the problem, this list only means those houses will not be robbed, because the owner is known to be armed
Reply
+34
User avatar #4 to #1 - fatsigurd (12/21/2015) [-]
and all the houses without guns now are now exposed easy targets, which means they have to acquire a gun, resulting in even more gun sales
Reply
+46
#29 to #1 - anon (12/21/2015) [-]
it also gives the crazies that say they want to kill gun owners the directions
Reply
+66
User avatar #37 to #29 - osamacare ONLINE (12/21/2015) [-]
But the crazies who are against guns don't have guns. Gun owners do. What are they gonna do, make the gun owners check their privilege until they die?
Reply
+15
User avatar #42 to #37 - satansferret ONLINE (12/21/2015) [-]
The thing about crazy people who think gun owners should die just might get a gun to do it. The whole end justifies the means mentality goes a long way.
Reply
+1
User avatar #60 to #42 - gotohemp (12/21/2015) [-]
wouldn't it also be safe to assume crazies on the other side might try to locate homes without weapons on this map for the purpose of 'proving a point'?
Reply
+2
User avatar #97 to #60 - satansferret ONLINE (12/22/2015) [-]
of course?
Reply
0
User avatar #276 to #97 - gotohemp (12/22/2015) [-]
which one do you think is more of a threat is my point
Reply
+6
User avatar #46 to #37 - severepwner ONLINE (12/21/2015) [-]
I don't know? Maybe cheeky breeky and burn their house down with legal items? Like gasoline and matches?
Reply
+3
#93 to #29 - anon (12/22/2015) [-]
>the crazies who want to kill gunowners
"Hey I don´t like guns because they kill people, so I'm gonna kill you"

I'm pretty sure these people only exist inside your head
Reply
+8
#113 to #93 - anon (12/22/2015) [-]
If irrational morons existed only in our heads, this world would have been a much better place, don't you think?
Reply
+1
#198 to #93 - anon (12/22/2015) [-]
You'd be wrong on both sides of the argument. Lots of gun owners have expressed the desire to kill people who want better gun management and anti-gun fruitcakes.

Lots of anti-gun dumbasses have expressed the desire to kill gun owners to 'be safer'. You underestimate the stupidity of extremes.
Reply
0
User avatar #283 to #93 - fatsigurd (12/22/2015) [-]
there are "pro-life" people who kill doctors
why wouldn't there be people who kill gun owners?
Reply
+42
User avatar #48 to #1 - amalone ONLINE (12/21/2015) [-]
Other than the fact that people have a right to their private information, it gives any invading force a nice little list of who's armed and who is not. My country is called "A." I invade the country called "B." Now B has a map like this of every known gun owner in that country. I know now to tell my men to attack and neutralize the gun owners first, since once their out of the way, the rest of B has no way to fight, and A wins. Didn't you watch Red Dawn?
Reply
-9
#79 to #48 - kez (12/22/2015) [-]
You're such a ******* psychopath.

No millitary force is going to give a **** about some retards with guns.

This isnt the 1700s. Having a gun doesnt make you a threat to any well equiped, well trained military force. They would probably just bomb you.

I hate this whole "I have a gun so I can take up arms like 250 years ago." None of that **** means anything anymore. 1000 people in a town with guns doesnt mean anything to an aircraft carrier or 1 single ******* tank.

Stop thinking you're rambo cos you have a gun. You are meaningless nearly every single possible military scenario.
Reply
+6
#102 to #79 - anon (12/22/2015) [-]
A bunch of third world dirt farmers bogged down the US in Vietnam for a decade and then a bunch of third world dirt farmers in Afghanistan did the same thing a few years later to the Soviet Union. Now, half the western world is still bogged down in the middle east due to a bunch of third world dirt farmers with daddy's Kalashnikov that he used to bog down the Soviet Union.
The US spent over ten years in Iraq after having dismantled the military regime in a couple of weeks.
Reply
+3
#146 to #79 - dyelfagget ONLINE (12/22/2015) [-]
1 single tank doesn't patrol a street. 1 single tank does kick down doors and oppress.

A predator drone can't stand guard, an aircraft carrier can't search a house, a fighter jet can't force you to follow tyranical rule. A MAN no different from us is needed to do any of these things and a MAN will always be killable.

No nation on earth can defeat an armed and motivated American populace. There are over 90 fire arms per 100 people in the US, there are over 300 million people in the US over 100 million soldiers.

There is no winning against such a force. No matter how large and advanced your military maybe at the end of the day all you have a chance at ruling is ashes.
Reply
0
User avatar #190 to #146 - straitedge (12/22/2015) [-]
There are not 100 million soldiers. Try 3% of that figure, and you'll get total military strength.
Reply
0
#191 to #190 - dyelfagget ONLINE (12/22/2015) [-]
I am saying that if you arm only a 3rd of the us population you have a massive army.
Reply
+9
User avatar #89 to #79 - wrpen (12/22/2015) [-]
Explain Al Qaeda, retard.
Reply
-6
User avatar #104 to #89 - novus (12/22/2015) [-]
Al Qaeda's threat is their explosives, the ability to take down helicopters from the ground, transport vehicles remotely, and crowds in an instant. You really think the US military would have a problem over there if they were fighting people with handguns and rifles?
Reply
+7
User avatar #111 to #104 - wrpen (12/22/2015) [-]
Most or all of Al Qaeda's explosive power comes from homemade **** , things an American citizen can buy and make with the right knowledge. Remote vehicles are literally a toy in America. Crowds are useless, they defeat themselves with the right weapons.

You can't beat an underground resistance with a bomb, a tank, or an aircraft carrier. Stop acting like you know how warfare works, you massive neckbeard.
Reply
0
User avatar #287 to #111 - novus (12/22/2015) [-]
I'll take your random insults to my intelligence as you feeling the corner behind your back.

I never said that the explosives weren't things we couldn't buy ourselves or that they were all some sort of fancy military-grade weapons. What comment were you reading? I said those items are what gives the resistance much of its ability to hurt a well-armed invasion force, regardless of how they're acquired. Do guns help Al Qaeda? Sure. But I bet US troops over there were more worried about running into an IED than a guy with an AK.

It also depends on what the goals of an invading force are. Are they trying to "liberate" us or annihilate us?
Reply
0
User avatar #269 to #89 - blackmageewizardt (12/22/2015) [-]
They have ******* militäry Equipment you nut Job?
Reply
-4
#109 to #89 - unclewalrus ONLINE (12/22/2015) [-]
People who give no ***** at about civilian casualties and minimal ***** about their own well-being that target civilian objectives and are commanded by assholes trained and equipped by once-allied special forces groups.
Compare and contrast to a regular army, made up of either teens or career soldiers who want to make it back alive, are targeting military or paramilitary targets and are commanded by who people who do retain some semblance of ***** for collateral damage.
Reply
+1
User avatar #110 to #79 - scuzzlebut (12/22/2015) [-]

A population armed with rifles and handguns would not be able to effectively engage a conventional army using conventional tactics. But if everyday US citizens were in a position to take up arms against a suppressing force, it would be against an external power that has already won a conventional war and is trying to maintain an occupation, or against their own government.

Conventional weapons such as tanks and bombs are very useful for obliterating your enemy -- not so useful for maintaining a peace during an insurgency or fighting against guerilla tactics, e.g. iraq, vietnam. A US population armed as it is now only with rifles would be impossible to rule against its will.

If we ever have a society that's mature enough to develop a system of government that doesn't **** its citizens in the long run, we won't need guns. But if that ever happens, I think we'd have developed the maturity to have guns without using them to needlessly kill centuries before.
Reply
0
User avatar #176 to #79 - notanotheraccount (12/22/2015) [-]
Really? Thats funny, because when we knock down regimes we disarm the people that we can, we even search their houses for weapons.
Reply
0
#100 to #79 - tyroneisanigger (12/22/2015) [-]
I think 1000 people with guns could beat an aircraft carrier as the aircraft carrier doesn't move so well on land, does it?
Reply
0
User avatar #218 to #100 - wootsauce (12/22/2015) [-]
It's got to come back to shore eventually....
Reply
0
#293 to #218 - tyroneisanigger (12/23/2015) [-]
And how is it supposed to get on shore? Pummeling through the sand, people, cement and even buildings?
Reply
+35
User avatar #49 to #1 - mrblueftw ONLINE (12/21/2015) [-]
and they have just let every robber know who has a gun and who doesn't. I.E. who to rob.
Reply
+20
#142 to #1 - ThatFatMummy (12/22/2015) [-]
And now the robbers know which house to rob.

Pic unrelated.
Reply
+2
User avatar #160 to #142 - thelastelephant (12/22/2015) [-]
Borderlands 2 Moments: (DLC) Tiny Tina "Cookie Rage" Relevant
Reply
+1
User avatar #151 to #142 - donbionicle (12/22/2015) [-]
What's wrong with Oatmeal Raisin? Done right they can be better than chocolate chip IMO.
Reply
+8
#153 to #151 - goticblake (12/22/2015) [-]
It's still a bitch if you expected chocolate.
Reply
+39
#36 to #1 - anon (12/21/2015) [-]
>Be criminal
>Not have gun
>Use map to rob hose of gun owner when they're away
>Now an armed criminal
>Former gun owner feels like **** because their gun is now being used to do evil instead of protect
Reply
0
#38 to #36 - anon (12/21/2015) [-]
But what if the gun owner doesn't store their guns in their hose?
Reply
+19
#41 to #38 - hitlerwasokiguess (12/21/2015) [-]
I'm fairly certain most people don't store guns in hoses.
Reply
+9
#152 to #41 - goticblake (12/22/2015) [-]
Guns 'n Hoses
Reply
0
User avatar #266 to #1 - themongoose (12/22/2015) [-]
www.rocklandtimes.com/2015/03/18/gun-map-publisher-janet-hasson-leaves-the-journal-news/

Article describes the problem...those people were targeted for thefts and the guns were stolen. Bad guys don't use legal guns. Only good guys do.
Reply
+22
User avatar #132 to #1 - dfgthree (12/22/2015) [-]
I agree with you, but I also agree that it's an invasion of privacy and it should be up to each individual person whether they are comfortable with their information being out there. Most people buy guns in hopes to never have to use it, but to feel protected if need be, but just because you're a gun owner doesn't mean you're some gun totting badass that takes on all challengers lol no one wants a target on their back.
Reply
+5
User avatar #180 to #132 - enlightednatzie (12/22/2015) [-]
And besides, dont you have to do any checks to see if your mentally fine to own a gun? I feel like politicians and journalists attack legal gun owner because its an easy target to attack because college liberals will agree with you. Much like hitler woult blame the jews for everything. Most people who commit massacres are owners of illegal guns, atleast here in europe where they buy cheap guns from the balkan area. And from my knowledge from watching breaking bad, illegal guns cant be tracable so criminals use those instead of legally purchased guns which can be traced to your name.
Reply
0
User avatar #264 to #180 - themongoose (12/22/2015) [-]
Not even here in CA do you need to have a mental check. Bought a shotgun a few months ago. Went like this:

Took gun safety test (didn't know about it, law change as of 2015 in CA)
Passed test (graded immediately)
Filled out information for background check
Answered Questions, one of which was "have you ever been under the care of a mental health professional"
Said no.
Gun was ready after cooling off period/background check came back.

They don't check medical records, that's illegal under HIPAA. They can only ask you personally if you've been under supervision for being crazy.
Reply
0
User avatar #211 to #180 - dfgthree (12/22/2015) [-]
I'm not entirely sure, I thought the only stipulation was that you couldn't be a criminal offender for a certain amount of time or something like that, but I've never bought a gun so i'm not completely sure on that, but you could be, and probably are, correct.
Reply
+30
User avatar #125 to #1 - reallifepolandball (12/22/2015) [-]
There will never be a justifiable reason for posting someone's personal information without their consent. This bitch got karma.
Reply
+1
User avatar #235 to #125 - willgum ONLINE (12/22/2015) [-]
I feel morally obligated to point out the hypocrisy of that statement
Reply
+1
User avatar #260 to #235 - reallifepolandball (12/22/2015) [-]
I didn't say people posting her info was right or wrong it's just what goes around comes around, I ain't gonna stand up for her
Reply
+44
User avatar #2 to #1 - huntergriff ONLINE (12/21/2015) [-]
some people with stalkers now have their public address known.
Reply
+22
User avatar #10 to #2 - SuperSixONE (12/21/2015) [-]
Yeah, and a lot of people with stalkers buy a gun.
Reply
+35
#15 to #1 - zombieplayground ONLINE (12/21/2015) [-]
That would stop a random robber. If it's someone who cases a house they'll learn when they leave and now know theres hundreds maybe thousands of dollars worth of firearms in there, and even if thats not the case why even post their info in the first place?
Reply
+37
User avatar #18 to #1 - geofalke (12/21/2015) [-]
This gives would be robbers a heads up on which houses to break into for free guns.

all they would have to do would be stake out the place and break in when no one's home.
Reply
+35
User avatar #25 to #1 - crusaderzav (12/21/2015) [-]
It gives burglars a heads up on which homes are gunless. Currently their best bet is guessing.
Reply
-6
#73 to #25 - anon (12/21/2015) [-]
>thinking burglars are going to see that ****
Reply
+4
User avatar #133 to #73 - curveball (12/22/2015) [-]
For a lot of criminals, this is all or most of their livelihood. The same way people like you and I wake up and go to work, these people wake up, have a cup of coffee, and break into cars and houses. If there's a way for them to predict whether or not they'll be facing armed resistance when they rob someone, they'll make use of that information, the same way a stock broker would use a quarterly business report to make an investment .
Reply
+37
User avatar #31 to #1 - zekeon ONLINE (12/21/2015) [-]
Maybe because it's not okay just to give out people's personal information like that?
Reply
+1
User avatar #231 to #1 - elcreepo (12/22/2015) [-]
>guy known to have gun
>robber now knows he must have gun and shoot fast
>fatal robbery ensues.
Reply
+1
User avatar #174 to #1 - masterboll (12/22/2015) [-]
or alternatively,
it means a robber needs to be heavily armed and quick to kill in order to rob those people rather than simply going into the house unarmed
Reply
0
User avatar #265 to #174 - blackmageewizardt (12/22/2015) [-]
... Hey... mate nothing against your... brain capacity... but most robers just want your stuff, killing you is not on their ******* plan, most either wait until you sleep or when you are not at home to pull it off.
Reply
0
User avatar #280 to #265 - masterboll (12/22/2015) [-]
thats the point im making, einstein

the only reason for a robber to carry a gun is because the owner is carrying one aswell
Reply
+22
User avatar #123 to #1 - Fgner (12/22/2015) [-]
Along with previously stated arguments. Someone's stalking a gun-owner. They did not know where they lived, but now they do.
Reply
+1
User avatar #164 to #123 - drekinn ONLINE (12/22/2015) [-]
I'm like 99% sure that if you know a persons name nothing is easier than finding out where they live, we live in an age of information.
Reply
+2
User avatar #170 to #164 - notanotheraccount (12/22/2015) [-]
I know my dads name and i cant even find a state. It isnt as easy as you think it is, especially if they have a common name.
Reply
0
User avatar #172 to #170 - drekinn ONLINE (12/22/2015) [-]
Yeah true, i didn't think outside the box, in my country it's veeeery easy to find someone with just a name, unless they are intentionally trying to hide. OC is about USA so i guess it's probably a lot harder there but i still think finding someone with just a name is easier than ever in todays day and age.
Reply
0
User avatar #173 to #172 - notanotheraccount (12/22/2015) [-]
Well, it is as easy as its ever been, but it still isnt easy. You must live in either a very open country or a very small one.
Reply
+2
User avatar #165 to #164 - durkadurka (12/22/2015) [-]
So that makes it okay for a journalist to publish their information?
Reply
+1
User avatar #166 to #165 - drekinn ONLINE (12/22/2015) [-]
That's not what i said. I'm answering a person talking about stalking, if somebody is stalking someone i'm pretty sure they don't need a journalist posting their address, they can very easily find it themselves. Journalist ethics is a whole complete different package and i didn't comment on that.
Reply
0
User avatar #224 to #123 - admiralen (12/22/2015) [-]
Its ok, the gunowner has a gun to protect themselves with
Reply
0
User avatar #206 to #123 - mcburd (12/22/2015) [-]
But they have a gun
Reply
0
#186 to #1 - adrenalinbbq (12/22/2015) [-]
Sorry to say, but that's not true. I got a report at work (which is about 9999% concerned about security) saying the gangs around here target potential gun owners for robberies and break-ins specifically to steal their guns. This is from an insider-report, not some guy speculating.

btw, I live in Las Vegas.
Reply
+42
User avatar #19 to #1 - loganmadder ONLINE (12/21/2015) [-]
>robber watching guy leave his house
>knows he owns a gun
>Now that he's gone, you can steal his gun and murder someone and it will be a good throw away
Reply
-3
#95 to #19 - anon (12/22/2015) [-]
He can't steal your gun if it is properly locked away. Dumb ass.
Reply
+3
#98 to #95 - anon (12/22/2015) [-]
>steals safe
Reply
+3
#103 to #98 - anon (12/22/2015) [-]
And a safe isn't a safe if it can be easily stolen.
Reply
-2
#101 to #98 - anon (12/22/2015) [-]
The fact there is more paranoia about someone going to steal someone's gun from their house, or their gun safe, rather than anything far more valuable just shows how completely disconnected you nut jobs are.
Reply
+1
#202 to #101 - anon (12/22/2015) [-]
First thing they do is go after your guns so they're better-armed. Plus guns always sell well. When they have your means of fighting back they can take EVERYTHING else they can carry.

Don't talk like you know **** anon. You don't live in the ghetto.
Reply
-4
#105 to #101 - anon (12/22/2015) [-]
If it isn't the government, it's the thieves, or someone always someone coming for the guns.
Reply
+1
User avatar #213 to #95 - loganmadder ONLINE (12/22/2015) [-]
A man with enough time can do anything
Reply
+37
#50 to #1 - anon (12/21/2015) [-]
Or they can steal their guns and then rob people with them.
Use your noggin there boyo.
Reply
+4
User avatar #58 to #50 - gotohemp (12/21/2015) [-]
Wouldn't that apply for any random house, then?

for robbers it's an unnecessary risk to take, there'll always be houses without guns. That's more of the problem, it makes it easier to find homes who do not have guns
Reply
+8
#67 to #58 - anon (12/21/2015) [-]
You do realise that they could also specifically be looking for guns, right?
Reply
+6
#92 to #58 - antexic ONLINE (12/22/2015) [-]
Robbers looking for guns to sell or use in a crime will stakeout a house and wait for the owners to leave for work. Then break in and look for guns or attempt to break into any safes/take them.
Reply
0
User avatar #277 to #92 - gotohemp (12/22/2015) [-]
and then wait for them, right? you could do that to any home. The risk here is knowing whether this person keeps the gun on his person, in his car/home or maybe all three. Why would they put themselves in that sort of danger when they can just use the gun map and look for easier targets??
Reply
0
#298 to #277 - antexic ONLINE (12/23/2015) [-]
Because guns are a guaranteed higher pay out. Plus how many gun owners have only one gun? The probability that a gun owner has multiple firearms is extremely high. Firearms are sought after in burglaries because once stolen, they are untraceable murder weapons. Meaning they fetch a higher dollar on the black market or you can skip the purchasing all together and just steal your own.
Reply
0
User avatar #299 to #298 - gotohemp (12/23/2015) [-]
We're talking about the possibility of losing some gun to the possibility of someone losing a life. At least they wouldn't get cocky with the gun owners, since they know they own guns. If they knew that they didn't, then they could easily get at any time of the day and kill people to get what they want. This list makes that easier for them. If they want guns, all they need to do is find an NRA membership list, or any home with the sign '' home of a proud gun owner''. But you don't hear a lot of these homes getting robbed, why do you think that is?
Reply
0
#300 to #299 - antexic ONLINE (12/23/2015) [-]
You seem to think that burglars are looking for a confrontation. Hint: They are not. Burglars are not interested in killing people, what you are referring to is a home invasion and a completely different crime than is being discussed.

"But you don't hear a lot of these homes getting robbed, why do you think that is? "
Robbery statistics collected by the FBI do not differentiate between gun owners and non-gun owners. Therefore any hearsay would be inaccurate and dependent upon the source. Would you advertise the fact to people that your house got broken into even though you owned guns? A lot of people do not like to discuss such matters with the media.
Reply
0
User avatar #307 to #300 - gotohemp (12/25/2015) [-]
well they wouldn't because they don't know whether the person is armed or not. It would sound a bit more tempting to do it, though, if you knew this person was not armed. Stealing free **** would be a whole lot easier if you knew they wouldn't put up a fight. And of course they don't invade with the intention of murdering, that sort of thing just seems to happen anyways, whether by a misunderstandings or unwillingness to cooperate. If it makes you happy it puts gun owners at higher risk for robbery when they're not home and non-gun owners at gun point confrontation invasion, which may not be what was discussed, but is certainly a whole lot worse.
Reply
+1
#62 to #58 - pyrusd (12/21/2015) [-]
Beat me to it, was going to raise this point.
Reply
0
#117 to #50 - secondlawprevails (12/22/2015) [-]
Which is why gun safety is a thing m8. If they aren't locked up, then you ought to be responsible for whatever happens involving them.
Which is why gun safety is a thing m8. If they aren't locked up, then you ought to be responsible for whatever happens involving them.
Reply
-2
#200 to #117 - anon (12/22/2015) [-]
Locking up your guns is stupid. I keep mine in reach at all times. You put that **** in a safe, you're sleeping, suddenly you hear your window busted in and wake up, you're ********* asleep trying to flail about with the combination dial on your safe of it's got keys maybe you knocked them over in your haste and have to search the floor in the dark for them.

If I was a robber, I'd have made my way to your bedroom and neutralized your stupid ass already.

We should always keep our weapons close at home.
Reply
0
User avatar #268 to #200 - blackmageewizardt (12/22/2015) [-]
god damn it you retarded anon, why would the robber want to kill you? Most robers flee the Moment they notice the owner is back or awake, BECAUSE they don´t want to have murder additionly on their Problems.
Reply
+151
User avatar #3 - fatsigurd (12/21/2015) [-]
"doxing is wrong so I will dox this person to show them doxing is wrong"
hypocrite.
Reply
-1
User avatar #250 to #3 - infinitereaper (12/22/2015) [-]
fight fire with fire
faggot
Reply
-1
#112 to #3 - wagastragas (12/22/2015) [-]
Well, she needs punishment, what better than giving her a spoon of her own medicine.
then she can see and feel why what she did was wrong.
Reply
0
User avatar #139 to #112 - srskate (12/22/2015) [-]
she "needs punishment"

what are you, her mother?
Reply
0
#221 to #139 - wagastragas (12/22/2015) [-]
Am i the one administering the punishment? no

if you are otherwise insinuating only parents can administer punishment, then i guess you should go tell that to all the people in jail, and the judges that placed them there.
Reply
0
User avatar #286 to #221 - srskate (12/22/2015) [-]
I'm insinuating you sound juvenile.
Reply
0
#288 to #286 - wagastragas (12/22/2015) [-]
That adds so much to the topic.
Reply
0
User avatar #289 to #288 - srskate (12/22/2015) [-]
color me unconcerned
Reply
0
User avatar #247 to #112 - willgum ONLINE (12/22/2015) [-]
no it wont it will prove to her that gun owners are as violent as she imagines what she did was wrong but 2 wrongs don't make a right (that 3 lefts),
Reply
+9
User avatar #13 to #3 - imofcnotharveydent (12/21/2015) [-]
fighting fire with fire will burn our world down
Reply
+20
User avatar #21 to #13 - heartlessrobot ONLINE (12/21/2015) [-]
Except firefighters actually fight some fires with fire.
Reply
0
User avatar #22 to #21 - imofcnotharveydent (12/21/2015) [-]
Thought they used water, or caustic soda No fun allowed
Reply
+17
User avatar #23 to #22 - heartlessrobot ONLINE (12/21/2015) [-]
They usually fight forest fires by burning down or blowing up a section of forest so the fire doesn't have fuel to continue burning. The fires they start are much easier to put out.
Reply
-1
User avatar #24 to #23 - imofcnotharveydent (12/21/2015) [-]
ok, you found an exception A little fun allowed
Reply
+14
User avatar #26 to #24 - heartlessrobot ONLINE (12/21/2015) [-]
Yeah, so instead of fighting fire with fire here, we should use explosives.
Reply
0
User avatar #27 to #26 - imofcnotharveydent (12/21/2015) [-]
yeah, blow everything up!
Reply
+5
User avatar #28 to #27 - heartlessrobot ONLINE (12/21/2015) [-]
Well, it's done to stop a fire from spreading.
Reply
-1
User avatar #30 to #28 - imofcnotharveydent (12/21/2015) [-]
A job well done
Reply
+18
User avatar #47 to #3 - heartlessrobot ONLINE (12/21/2015) [-]
This is more of a "taste of their own medicine" thing.
Reply
+9
#69 to #3 - atomicjojo (12/21/2015) [-]
dox the person who wants to dox to show them how it feels to be doxxed.
Reply
0
#75 to #69 - anon (12/21/2015) [-]
Yeah no that's not how morals work
Reply
+2
User avatar #131 to #75 - thejusticar (12/22/2015) [-]
Who said this was moral? I'm pretty sure they are just showing her what it feels like to be doxxed.
Reply
0
User avatar #249 to #69 - willgum ONLINE (12/22/2015) [-]
now that they know they'll want to do you back and thus a cycle is born
Reply
+16
#81 to #3 - mikepetru (12/22/2015) [-]
"There are those...who words alone cannot reach...."
Reply
+43
User avatar #9 - penileburglar (12/21/2015) [-]
Just because a monkey is throwing it's feces at you

Does not mean you have to pull down your pants, take a dump, and return fire.
Reply
+12
User avatar #20 to #9 - heartlessrobot ONLINE (12/21/2015) [-]
Well no, you use a firehose to knock the feces back.
Reply
+21
#39 to #9 - crushking (12/21/2015) [-]
Like hell it doesn't. As an american I must always return violence with an equal or great amount of violence. I'll make a **** catapult. A ********* if you will. ****** monkey wants to go lets go.
Reply
+12
#54 to #39 - paraxo (12/21/2015) [-]
Rest of the world: "Violence is not the answer"

America: "If violence is not solving your problem, you're not using enough"
Reply
+2
#118 to #54 - secondlawprevails (12/22/2015) [-]
To be fair it worked until counter culture ********* started defeating us from within our own borders and tying back our arsenal of " **** YOU YOUR ANCESTORS AND ALL THE LAND EITHER OF YOU HAS EVER WALKED" with miles of red tape and political correctness.
Reply
0
#297 to #118 - anon (12/23/2015) [-]
I mean, yes, it obviously worked for us. I wouldn't particularly say it worked well for anybody else.
Reply
0
User avatar #254 to #118 - brobathehutt ONLINE (12/22/2015) [-]
Funnily enough, the same thing happened to Rome in a different sense. Rome used to be really brutal with how it would treat anyone who opposed their military, but eventually the church convinced them to lighten up and they suddenly started having issues because they weren't able to quell rebellions as well as they could before and they weren't able to hold on to all of their land.
Reply
+1
#121 to #39 - secondlawprevails (12/22/2015) [-]
Nah mate, we must return violence with overwhelming and ruinous levels of retribution. Build **** carrying ICBMs and wipe that little fart catcher out with such violent fecal delivery that his great great grandchildren still fear their own feces.
Reply
+8
#189 - kristovsky (12/22/2015) [-]
>SJW's turn up to gun owners homes
>SJW's harass gun owners on their own property because they are stupid entitled SJW *****
>SJW's get shot and killed for being dumb ***** on someone else's property
>Ruled as self defence because what the **** were they doing harassing someone they know own weapons legally
>SJW's dead, all is well

I am okay with this.
Reply
0
User avatar #272 to #189 - scowler (12/22/2015) [-]
Totally okay with this. Any naysayers are dependent on the SJWs being calm and respectful, which they aren't.
Reply
+1
User avatar #199 to #189 - wertologist ONLINE (12/22/2015) [-]
The thing is you can't really get away with shooting people even if they are on your property anymore. The only way to get away with it is to make sure there are no witnesses, shoot them in the head/chest, drag the body in your house, open your window, grab a knife from your kitchen, put it in their hand, then call 911. Even if someone is vandalizing your property or assaulting you on your property, you can still be sued for shooting them. It's ****** up. Laws are now protecting criminals over law abiding people.
Reply
0
User avatar #270 to #199 - scowler (12/22/2015) [-]
Not in Texas, they aren't.
Reply
+1
User avatar #262 to #189 - capslockrage ONLINE (12/22/2015) [-]
Not 100% sure but I think New York might be one of those states that treats someone defending themselves worse than the criminal that tried to victimize them.
Reply
+6
User avatar #122 - notenoughtortillas (12/22/2015) [-]
>houses of gun owners revealed
>sjws go to teach the 'gun toting psychos' a lesson
>killed in self defense by gun owners
that must not have been the initial purpose of the map cause it accomplishes nothing
Reply
0
#148 to #122 - vivjames (12/22/2015) [-]
......why does it sound like the zombie apocalypse is already happening and SJWs are the zombies.

Bloody hell, can you yanks help us with these zombies? We don't have guns.

you're still Wankers though, but you're our Wankers
Reply
+59
User avatar #96 - robinwilliamson (12/22/2015) [-]
Ya'll some overreactive, gullible ************* . Especially the asshole here who ordered a glitterbomb to her house, not even knowing what the **** was going on.
FJ, you are children. You are children.

Here's the reality.
www.snopes.com/politics/guns/gunmap.asp

The article:
archive.lohud.com/interactive/article/20121223/NEWS01/121221011/Map-Where-gun-permits-your-neighborhood-?gcheck=1
-literally just a map with dots now
-used to have an interactive map, but it was taken down about three years ago because legislation changed, in part because of the privacy issue the article raised, so you're welcome
-can't find the names or addresses now
-this was three years ago

The backlash:
-she recieved threats
-the editor also received threats
-no indication that any gun owner recieved threats after the article
-her information still roams the internet and obviously still gets threats
-gun owners don't have their info roaming the internet, and still haven't received threats

It's done. The article raised an issue, it went to legislation, legislation passed, gun owners won and are fine, it's over.
Reply
-1
User avatar #273 to #96 - scowler (12/22/2015) [-]
Too bad, she revealed her views against The Constitution through her actions. For that, she will suffer.
Reply
+1
User avatar #275 to #273 - robinwilliamson (12/22/2015) [-]
The views were of the author of the article, and maybe the editor, not the publisher.
Reply
0
User avatar #278 to #275 - scowler (12/22/2015) [-]
The publisher has to green-light it, though.
Reply
+3
#108 to #96 - eanan (12/22/2015) [-]
Fair play mate. Have a green thumb and **** you OP. Take this ******** down before more retards think that it's true...
Reply
+11
#225 to #96 - youregaylol (12/22/2015) [-]
oh wow, someone did some dumb **** that endangered peoples lives and property but its okay because it was three years ago

plus she got death threats, for literally doing nothing but posting a log of peoples addresses and posting their personal information for everyone to see

and they took the list down guys, it doesn't matter that the info was later leaked online regardless
news.slashdot.org/story/13/01/20/0317245/new-york-pistol-permit-owner-list-leaked

oh and there no indication that any gun owners received threats after the article, just people breaking into their homes that criminals targeted because of the gun map

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2264194/Burglars-steal-guns-home-listed-controversial-weapons-permit-map-published-newspaper-just-days-similar-break-in.html

oh and just some rape victims hiding from their perpetrators, no biggy

www.nationalreview.com/article/337035/guns-me-not-thee-john-fund

but guys, she got death threats, just like Zoe Quinn. That makes her a victim.

The irony is that eanan and madfunny believe your ******** without a second thought.

Bias effects perspective on everything, you faggots aren't better than anyone else.
Reply
+3
User avatar #253 to #225 - brobathehutt ONLINE (12/22/2015) [-]
Oh thank christ someone has some ******* sense. People need to learn that actions have consequences that can be far greater than you can perceive and can cause trouble further down the road than you can expect. It's ******* ridiculous too that a reporter got away with doing this **** and wasn't arrested. **** like this needs to have jail time attached to it, it's just as bad as a crooked politician.
Reply
+13
User avatar #107 to #96 - madfunny (12/22/2015) [-]
This seems like exactly the kind of **** FJers are always shaking their heads about from Tumblr. Someone posts picture bait and everyone jumps on their high horses and ride into action without fact checking.

Thank you for doing the research and sharing. We should know better than to take pictures at face value.
Reply
+10
#119 to #96 - secondlawprevails (12/22/2015) [-]
She's still a cunt for trying it in the first place, but yeah, I'll give you this one.
0
#204 to #119 - buddywuggle has deleted their comment [-]
Reply
+23
User avatar #7 - chaosraptor (12/21/2015) [-]
lets play tumblr rules

this bitch is "gun shaming"

how dare she try harassing poor gun owners
Reply
+8
User avatar #57 - cantfindausername (12/21/2015) [-]
So now gun owner's houses are identified. This also identifies houses that don't have guns, because they are the ones that aren't marked on the map. She'd removed the mystery of Schrödinger's gun: Do they have a gun to defend themselves or do they not?

Doxxing someone, regardless of who it is, is wrong. If people can't do it to you, then you can't do it to them.
Reply
+4
User avatar #149 - moldybreadcrumb (12/22/2015) [-]
What are people gonna do, picket my house? I have a gun.
Reply
0
#157 to #149 - sesshii (12/22/2015) [-]
Well, for one it's an invasion of privacy.
Second, now home invaders can check houses of who is armed and who is not.
GG.
Reply
0
User avatar #162 to #149 - Sinrik (12/22/2015) [-]
have shotgun buy bean bag rounds shoot some home invader in the beanbag with beanbags
Reply
+3
User avatar #167 to #162 - desacabose ONLINE (12/22/2015) [-]
>Have shotgun
>Buy bean bag
>Robber break in
>Can't resist bean bag
>Robber sits on the bean bag
>The bean bag is actually a shotgun
>Bean Bag Shotgun arrests robber
Reply
+3
User avatar #115 - fkbskt (12/22/2015) [-]
yall this happened in 2012, and she doesnt even work for the paper anymore. this is old ****
Reply
+3
#114 - anon (12/22/2015) [-]
doxxing is wrong guys
Reply
+2
#256 - solarisofcelestia ONLINE (12/22/2015) [-]
Letting people know you're a legal gun owner seems reasonable to me. As legally registered gun owners the government already knows who they are, so for the sake of transparency the public should have the freedom to know.
Reply
+3
#116 - Toshiro (12/22/2015) [-]
There are more options than glitter folks
Reply
0
User avatar #135 to #116 - thejusticar (12/22/2015) [-]
Might be a lil far to keep sending stuff, I think a glitterbomb and the threats were enough.
Reply
+2
User avatar #136 to #135 - Toshiro (12/22/2015) [-]
threats seem a bit much =L
Reply
0
User avatar #158 to #136 - thejusticar (12/22/2015) [-]
Yeah its past enough, sending someone a literal bucket of **** isn't gonna help either side, it will make us look like idiots and she will probably smell the bucket and just throw it away, then someone wasted 30$ on something she just threw away.
Reply
0
User avatar #196 to #158 - Toshiro (12/22/2015) [-]
I pussed out regardless tbh. I just didn't care enough. Idk maybe I should, but it seems like the governments doing so much other worrysome things that this is low on my radar.
Reply
0
User avatar #197 to #196 - thejusticar (12/22/2015) [-]
nah man, from what ive heard this is pretty old, and im guessing she has already had her far share of **** thrown at her, most likely changed her number or moved.
so just stay pussed out, its a big waste of money anyways, i mean who pays 36$ for literal **** .
Reply
+2
User avatar #99 - kidink (12/22/2015) [-]
>look for adresses who are not on the list
>rob it, ez game
>thx Janet Hasson
Reply
+2
User avatar #86 - Airmanator (12/22/2015) [-]
She deserves it for being so stupid in regards to the privacy of others. Send her all the glitter bombs.
Reply
+2
User avatar #12 - rishnock (12/21/2015) [-]
Does she have battletoads? Should I give that number a ring to check?
Reply
+3
#194 - sneezer (12/22/2015) [-]
What is this, tumblr? You gunna doxx her? Get a life.
Reply
+2
#263 - Tyranitar (12/22/2015) [-]
"Sharing people's information on the Internet is wrong, so we're going to spread your information all over the Internet"
123>
[ 309 comments ]
Leave a comment
<
>
 Friends (0)