.

New Rockland Coalition Blasts Gun Map, Seeks Change

Bipartisan group disavows newspaper's map, calls for new gun initiatives.

Corrections officers at Rockland County jails are facing a problem entirely new to them, sheriff Louis Falco said Friday morning.

Inmates have been approaching the workers for the past two weeks and reciting the officers' home addresses.

Falco said the issue stems from a map published in December by a local newspaper that charts all legally licensed pistol permit holders in Rockland and Westchester counties. The map—created by The Journal News and hosted on LoHud.com—allows viewers to see the names and addresses of all residents who are allowed to own concealable firearms.

Falco was flanked by a coalition of bipartisan Rockland politicos at 11 New Hempstead Rd. in New City who find common ground in assailing the map—and the periodical that published it. A group of local police chiefs and leaders from the Democrat, Republican, Independence, Conservative and Working Families parties all disavowed the map.

"This is an issue of common sense," said legislator Frank Sparaco (R). "The Journal News' sensational actions have placed residents at risk." Sparaco also called on the periodical's editors to remove the map from their website.

Paul Piperato, Rockland County's clerk, said lawmakers are pushing for legislation in Albany that would make future attempts to publish gun data difficult, or impossible. Piperato spoke of a nascent bill that would make pistol owner data confidential, and searchable only by law enforcement.

A portion of the press conference also touched on gun safety—while condemnation of the map was unanimous, politicos called for a ban on assault weapons, as well. Legislator Ilan Schoenberger (D) also proposed a program that would distribute free cable locks to all legal gun owners in the county.

"Cable locks are better than trigger locks," Schoenberger said. "They work not just on handguns, but on rifles and shotguns, too."

Falco said the locks would be distributed at no cost to the taxpayer—the county has a surplus of 1,600. There would be a limit of four per household, he added.

In Putnam County, lawmakers have adopted a similar sentiment, and are declining to release the requested firearm information to the newspaper—a refusal that is illegal, as the information is public.

Friday morning's press conference included moments of action, too, when legislator Aron Wieder (D) officially filed for a pistol permit.

"I will do anything to keep my family safe," he said.

--

The Journal News has fielded many calls, emails and comments since the report's publication. Go here to read the FAQ they published in response.

Mr. Fred January 07, 2013 at 03:36 AM
EDITOR: Cynthia Lambert Miss Royle’s married name is Lambert. She lives in White Plains and here is her Facebook page complete with pictures of her and her kids. Hello Sanctimony. http://www.facebook.com/CynDeeRoyle Cynthia R Lambert 17 Mcbride Ave White Plains, NY 10603 (914) 948-9388 Work: 914-694-5001 croyle@lohud.com https://twitter.com/croyle1 https://www.facebook.com/cyndee.royle.7 https://www.facebook.com/CynDeeRoyle Drives a red convertible:http://s13.postimage.org/k8ffnxuo7/cyndee_royle_aka_cynthia_lambert_red_convertible.jpg Family photo: http://s7.postimage.org/dkqtytvyj/cyndee_royle_aka_cynthia_lambert_fb_alt_private.jpg Publisher, Janet Hasson, 3 Gate House Lane, Mamaroneck NY, 10543 (914) 694-5204 Reporter, Dwight R. Worley, 23006 139 Ave Springfield Gardens, NY 11413 (718) 527-0832 The “Visual Editor” responsible for the map itself is: Robert F. Rodriguez (w) Stephanie Azzarone Home (212) 222-4566 420 Riverside Dr, Apt 7A New York, NY 10025-7748 Publisher: Janet Hasson (@janhasson on twitter) 3 Gate House Rd, Mamaroneck, NY 10534 GANNET CEO: Gracia C Martore 728 Springvale Rd Great Falls, VA 22066 (703) 759-5954 H/T Atlantic Wire Christopher Foutain
White Feather January 08, 2013 at 04:39 PM
The second amendment as RATIFIED by the state’s. “A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” Maybe you can explain how for the entire history of English language, that the independent clause, a complete sentence capable of conveying a clear meaning, and must first exist for a dependent clause to have meaning, has always set the meaning of the complex sentence. (“the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed”) Yet some now infer the dependent clause, an incomplete sentence, incapable of conveying a clear meaning (A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State) is now the determinator of the complex sentence meaning and history and English scholars have all been wrong throughout the history of written English. Have at it, but warn us when Hades will be freezing over for you actually having data to support your claim. http://www.writingcentre.uottawa.ca/hypergrammar/sntstrct.html Lets see, have you removed the 30 plus references from the congressional writings 1774-1789 & the federalist papers showing well regulated as to meaning well trained in the arts of war? Much less all those dictionaries that say the same thing? No, you haven’t. Reference Karpeles Museum, CA. http://www.rain.org/%7Ekarpeles/ cont
White Feather January 08, 2013 at 04:41 PM
Maybe you removed that original draft of what became the second amendment. You know, the one that was clearly written as a collective right, but then was changed to what exists today. original proposed draft 
of 
the right to keep and bear arms 
of the 
BILL of RIGHTS 
(17 TH of 20 amendments) on display at the Karpeles Manuscript Library 
Santa Ana, California "That the people have a right to keep and bear arms; that a well regulated Militia composed of the body of the people trained to arms is the proper, natural and safe defense of a free State. That standing armies in time of peace are dangerous to liberty, and therefore ought to be avoided as far as the circumstances and protection of the community will admit; and that in all cases the military should be under strict subordination to and governed by the civil power." Why did our founding fathers change the amendment draft if it was what they wanted? Oh that’s right, actions do speak louder than words. Ref Karpeles Museum, CA again. http://www.wemett.net/2nd_amendment_(original_draft).html Then of course, here is the logic failure the anti’s always have. They always fail to prove, that the militia existed before the armed individual. cont
White Feather January 08, 2013 at 04:41 PM
The anti’s always fail to prove that a collective right can exist without the individual right first existing as how does a collective begin, oh that’s right, pre-existing individuals come together to form said collective, DOOOHH! Funny how all that was before the 2008 rulings eh? Funny how in the 2008 Heller ruling all 9 justices agreed that bearing arms was an individual right. That 5-4 vote was on the constitutionality of the Washington D.C. gun ban, read it, you will see! http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/07-290.ZO.html http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/09pdf/08-1521.pdf http://www.gurapossessky.com/news/parker/pleadings.html (links to Amicus Briefs for Heller) 10 USC § 311 - Militia: composition and classes (a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard. (b) The classes of the militia are— (1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and (2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia. cont
White Feather January 08, 2013 at 04:44 PM
Some have made the argument, bordering on the frivolous, that only those arms in existence in the 18th century are protected by the Second Amendment . We do not interpret constitutional rights that way. Just as the First Amendment protects modern forms of communications, e.g., Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union, 521 U. S. 844, 849 (1997) , and the Fourth Amendment applies to modern forms of search, e.g., Kyllo v. United States, 533 U. S. 27, 35–36 (2001) , the Second Amendment extends, prima facie,to all instruments that constitute bearable arms, even those that were not in existence at the time of the founding. Now, when you are God, you can demand that the BOR is not a control on government powers, when it always has been! You do realize since the govt. is the entity responsible for calling up the unorganized militia to train, that is just another example of the govt. failing to do their job, such a consistent trend! Oh yeah, also remember, the only version of the 2A ratified by the states, is the one comma version, hence any discussion about sentence structure etc of the 3 comma version, is irrelevant, accept that or not, your beliefs will never change that!

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »