Commercial Appeal - Wrong on Two Out of Three ...

... "Wrong Ideas"

-- Wrong idea No. 1: The newspaper is against the Second Amendment that gives Americans the right to keep and bear arms.

-- Wrong idea No. 2: The newspaper is invading people's privacy by posting the permit-to-carry-guns list on its Web site.

-- Wrong idea No. 3: Posting the list is empowering criminals.

And the only reason I give them credit for being right on one is [because I] can't prove beyond a shadow of a doubt they aren't against the Second Amendment. I can, however, make a strong circumstantial case by showing how they are wrong in numbers two and three. So, let's look at #2:

-- Wrong idea No. 2: The newspaper is invading people's privacy by posting the permit-to-carry-guns list on its Web site.

While they never come out and say "This is why it's not an invasion of privacy", they do list some privacy concerns. Of course, their justifications ring false:

The posting of this list somehow conjured up deep fears about personal safety, criminals and the media being soft on crime and hard on the Second Amendment.

This newspaper isn't soft on crime. We know that crime is the No. 1 issue that needs to be addressed in Memphis. We urge public officials to get tough on crime. We back Republican-led efforts to take a hard line on gun crimes and repeat offenders. Only last week we gave prominent coverage to Shelby County Mayor A C Wharton's call for a tougher gun-offender registry in Tennessee. We hope that proposal comes to pass so we can post the names of all who commit gun offenses and the names of all those arrested for carrying a gun without a permit.

Crime? Who said anything about crime. Nice strawman there, Chris. Also, it's nice to see your paper backs some Republican positions. Too bad it rings of "Some of my best friends are black Republican."

As to posting the offenders, go for it. I bet some of them respond with harshly worded emails and blog posts as well. Or not.

Funny how, once again, the publication of this registry is linked to criminal activity. more than anything I can say, your actions speak volumes.

Now, here are some scenarios where this database might do some good:

A mom might now check the list to see if the parents at her kid's sleep-over next door had a concealed weapon permit. If so, maybe it would be worth talking to them to make sure the gun is locked up.

And, maybe they should do it on June 21st. Seriously, if someone were to ask me that, I'd have to find out id the kid knew anything about gun safety. You know, the "Don't touch it, go tell an adult" kinda stuff. Gun safety is a two-way street.

A school official, concerned about whether teachers were bringing guns onto school grounds, might check the list to see whether anyone on the staff has a permit to carry, and then have a discussion about it.

Yeah, a discussion ending in "You're suspended", or "You need a psych eval." Or any number of other things.

Business people who sell goods and services that might be of interest to those who carry concealed weapons might use the list to generate new leads.

The gun business isn't that large, I doubt the database would do much good. It will, however, benefit a certain um, "clandestine enterprise" called the black market. Which leads us to the next point:

-- Wrong idea No. 3: Posting the list is empowering criminals.

To prove their point, they say:

Think about it for a minute. Many, if not most, households in Memphis possess a firearm. So you don't really need a list to find a house with a gun.

True, but why make their job easier?

And, if criminals were checking the permit-to-carry list before picking a target, would they likely choose a house where they know the owner could be carrying a gun, or would they more likely steer away from that house to avoid a possible confrontation?

Well, that would depend on the motivation of the criminal. If they wanted to steal guns, they'd simply wait until the house was empty and then enter and steal. Barring that, they'd go in armed, and bad things would happen.

Then again, maybe they don't want a gun. Maybe they're stalking someone. Maybe they want a fine piece of tail and are willing to take it by force. Maybe they want to do a home invasion. Maybe they just want to see what it's like to kill someone. This isn't an exercise in "what if?", it happens every day.

Good try, but in my opinion, you don't give a damn about legitimate gun owners and the Constitutional right they choose to uphold.

Update - Anonymous commenter makes a point I should have:

Wrong idea No. 1: "...the Second Amendment that gives Americans the right to keep and bear arms."

It does NOT.

The Second Amendment acknowledges a pre-existing, inalienable right while placing limits on the infringements the government may place on it; i.e. None.

I can't believe I let that slip.

.