.
Feedback

Statement by Senator Carlucci Calling On The Journal News to Remove their Map

Senator Carlucci Responds to The Journal News Gun Permit Map

 

"Lawful gun owners and all citizens have been outraged by the mass shootings around our country.  However, the timing of the disclosure of individuals possessing pistol permits by The Journal News when families are reeling from the tragedies in Newtown and Webster is troubling.  While exploiting the privacy of law abiding citizens may technically be legal, it is not the appropriate course of action.  Because of the safety concerns that have been brought to my attention by the residents of the Hudson Valley, I ask the Journal News to remove their map."

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from New City Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Denise January 11, 2013 at 08:50 pm
Thank you Mr. Carlucci for your attention to this irresponsible example of journalism!
Mike January 11, 2013 at 11:05 pm
Even the lib Dem politicians are condemning JN and yet they still hold to their position. This has got to be hurting them financially.
Don January 11, 2013 at 11:13 pm
"The timing is troubling"? How about it's troubling that it was done at all? The issue is that criminals now know where the pistols are and aren't. Regardless of Newton, this never should have been done. I hope you join other elected officials from stopping something like this from being published in the future.
stephany January 12, 2013 at 04:52 am
better late than never
Brian Goudie January 12, 2013 at 11:30 am
It's about time. I guess he was weighing the 'pros and cons' given that he is a Democrat.
Deejay January 12, 2013 at 01:28 pm
Correct. Day late and a dollar short.
Michael Gries January 12, 2013 at 02:18 pm
Very weak. Rather than just a 'naughty, naughty' response to the damage incurred, how about a commitment to end this misdirection toward gun owners and the 2nd Amendment. For instance, what is Carlucci's position on Cuomo's push for confiscation and additional harassment towards gun owners.
Pat January 12, 2013 at 02:30 pm
The gun Nuts have spoken!
Kathleen Johnson January 12, 2013 at 03:46 pm
Let's move beyond what is technically correct and do what's right, instead. What purpose does such a map serve? Journal News, please remove it.
CR January 12, 2013 at 03:57 pm
How about we all agree to never go to the Journal Rag's website, buy their paper or support their sponsors again. Pretty soon they'll have to take down the gun map because they'll be out of business.
Gnome, Sgt at Arms, NYXVIII, BKFFBK January 12, 2013 at 09:40 pm
I am all law abiding citizen. I own a gun. I have an inalienable right to defend myself and my property. The Journal News has compromised my ability to do so. If you are a lawyer looking to sign up clients for a class-action lawsuit, please post your phone number. I will sign on as your first client.
Carl Petersen III January 13, 2013 at 03:47 pm
Gnome, Sgt at Arms, NYXVIII, BKFFBK
4:40 pm on Saturday, January 12, 2013 "If you are a lawyer looking to sign up clients for a class-action lawsuit, please post your phone number. I will sign on as your first client." . . Are you familiar with the amendment that comes before the second amendment?
Mike January 13, 2013 at 04:31 pm
It does not appear from Gnome, et al, comments that he is seeking to impede the 1st Amendment rights of the JN. It does appear he is seeking to find out if the JN acted in a libelous or defamatory way that infringed upon his Constitutional right to privacy. I think he is acting in a reasonable manner to explore if the JN infringed upon his rights by publishing information that was by some media accounts 25% inaccurate. Yes, the news media are free to publish any information or opinion they desire. This freedom, however, does not immunize them from liability for what they publish. A newspaper that publishes false information about a person, for example, can be sued for libel. Most journalists strive to exercise their freedom to publish in a responsible and ethical manner. Good luck Gnome.
Carl Petersen III January 13, 2013 at 04:50 pm
Mike
11:31 am on Sunday, January 13, 2013 "I think he is acting in a reasonable manner to explore if the JN infringed upon his rights by publishing information that was by some media accounts 25% inaccurate." . . He states that he owns a gun. Therefore, if his name was on the list, it was not there inaccurately.
Carl Petersen III January 13, 2013 at 04:52 pm
Mike
11:31 am on Sunday, January 13, 2013 "It does appear he is seeking to find out if the JN acted in a libelous or defamatory way that infringed upon his Constitutional right to privacy." . . Does the Constitution include a right to privacy?
Carl Petersen III January 13, 2013 at 04:55 pm
Mike
11:31 am on Sunday, January 13, 2013 "Yes, the news media are free to publish any information or opinion they desire. This freedom, however, does not immunize them from liability for what they publish. A newspaper that publishes false information about a person, for example, can be sued for libel." . . Doesn't the existence of libel laws show that the Constitution allows limitations on the rights that it espouses? Do these limitations extend to the second amendment?
Gnome, Sgt at Arms, NYXVIII, BKFFBK January 14, 2013 at 12:36 am
Mike. I was thinking more along the lines you so well defined. To add insult to injury, I understand there was a burglary in White Plains today. Supposedly, guns were targeted. Mr. Peterson. Thank you for your input. Do you gentleman have any opinion with regard to the new law that allows a plaintiff to sue a sponsor of terrorism. In my opinion the Journal News has assisted would be criminals/terrorists by posting the information, thereby sponsoring terrorism against me.
Mike January 14, 2013 at 01:03 am
Carl, good quetions that are open to interpretation and judicial review. You ask Does the Constitution include a right to privacy? Explicitly, no, but one could argue and several Courts have indicated that several Amendments would imply a right to privacy. These would include protectionsm for privacy, of beliefs (1st), privacy against your home being used to quarter troops (3rd), privacy from unreasonable searches and seizures (4th), protection from being forced to reveal private information (5th). Lastly, the 14th Amend. "Liberty Guarantee," has been used several times in courts to also guarantee a fairly broad expectation to privacy. The Roe v Wade decision is really about a woman's right to control the privacy of her body. As far as your second question, yes i would say that even without libel laws, the Constitution is limiting
in nature. It does not allow freedom of speech for example in all cases and i would say it does not allow rights to every type of guns in every case to everybody. .
Anthony Mele January 14, 2013 at 05:58 am
Now read my post carefully to avoid mis-understandings on this:
I will not support a government imposed censorship of the Press either. They are protected by the 1st Amendment. What the JN did was malicious and abusive. They should feel the impact of their propaganda in the market place as the Framer's intended and where we have the muscle to flex. I will not ask the government to censor them. I expect the government to be better stewards and custodians of our privacy and tax dollars than they have been. What I do expect our government to do to cool this fire is to issue [Rockland County Legislature, NYS Assembly and NYS Senate] a resolution that they will never pass any legislation that would offend the Bill of Rights and specifically hinder our 2nd A. I would also ask of every local Sheriff to issue a public pledge, his office and deputies, will never enforce any law offensive to the Bill of Rights. This is what every American should demand and expect." ~ Anthony Melé
Anthony Mele January 14, 2013 at 06:00 am
Senator Carlucci: What we would support is your sponsorship of a resolution in diametric opposition to Governor Cuomo's unwise offensive attack on the Bill of Rights.
Anthony Mele January 14, 2013 at 06:04 am
"Inalienable" as it pertains to the Founding Documents and Bill of Rights means "untouchable", "non-transferable". I marvel at the pundits who claim the the Bill of Rights need to be interpreted as if the authors were not masters of the English language. The 2nd Amendment is perfectly clear.
Anthony Mele January 14, 2013 at 06:06 am
I am sure a threat of a 'time out' will protect our rights more effectively than adherence to the US Constitution. What say you?
Issy January 14, 2013 at 10:26 am
The Second Amendment is far from clear, in the recent DC v. Heller case the ruling was 5-4.. That does not indicate clarity.
Meg Wilson January 16, 2013 at 06:04 pm
I wont even look at the Journal News again.
Meg Wilson January 16, 2013 at 06:06 pm
Yes, Journal News, what purpose did this serve except to lower your readership significantly and put legal gun owners homes in danger. Amazing idiocy.
Defender January 17, 2013 at 03:54 am
Couldn't be all that much attention, he waited until everyone else and their mother had condemned it to join in the piling on.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something
Jimmy R June 14, 2013 at 05:10 pm
The first thing little Frankie wanted to know was that since he was mayor of Suffern for the day,Read More could he get his bicycle fixed at the village Department of Public Works.
Paul Williams June 16, 2013 at 08:33 am
He also wanted to know the most effective method of spying on the other kids so he could get electedRead More Class President.
Green Farmer June 13, 2013 at 01:39 pm
Why not cut out the middle man and just send the money directly to the religious schools.
Paul Williams June 16, 2013 at 08:27 am
If they reported all their income........if every other home was not owned by a "RABBI"Read More and tax free.....if they returned all the books and learning materials they "borrowed" .......ETC ETC.....Get real Weeder.
Green Farmer June 13, 2013 at 01:42 pm
It will never happen.
M. Leybra June 16, 2013 at 07:25 pm
Shouldn't be happening in the first place & "requiring" another law to stop rippingRead More off Joe Blow taxpayer for county government elite, disgusting.
Champs pose for a picture (photo by Craig Fetterman)
Kevin Zawacki (Editor) June 12, 2013 at 11:03 am
Congratulations to the Cubs!
Scott F. June 12, 2013 at 11:35 am
The boys were awesome last night and all season long, a well deserved Championship for a great groupRead More of boys
Lisa Buchman (Editor) June 13, 2013 at 11:20 am
Fantastic! Just posted the photo on New City Facebook too!
Aerial of United Water's proposed water treatment plant
Tom Nimick June 11, 2013 at 09:23 pm
Mr. Pointing says that an issues conference is unusual. The unusual step is called for because thisRead More project is highly unusual; it is unprecedented. This French-owned water company wants to implement its pet technology at our expense - it makes sense for the company because the project makes lots of money. There is information available that calls into question the "definitive" studies carried out by the water company. Of course they found that their technology was the best option - what a surprise! They have not made the case that they carried out a disinterested examination of the issues in the public interest. Yes there are still issues. Also, stop threatening us with increased costs from delay. First, it does not make sense and second, you are trying to bully us into accepting your proposal. That is one more sign that something is wrong in your proposal.
John Taggart June 13, 2013 at 08:08 am
An issues conference will be a wast of time and money. So many ' issues ' have been pulled out ofRead More thin air. The people who organized against the plant will just keep saying the same thing. No amount of info will be enough, no answer will be accepted. The issues conference will be a circus of endless questions, ideas, and demands. Haverstraw bay reclassified as drinking water will better protect it, provide an endless supply of water and finally help end the stereotype of the Hudson being polluted Recommend
mike sullivan June 11, 2013 at 08:14 pm
get a life
Tom Nimick June 11, 2013 at 09:12 pm
There were no open meetings. I attended the April meeting and Mr. Lettre was directed by the TownRead More Board to return with more precise estimates and to include options for other upgrades. I have attended every meeting of the Town Board since that time and Mr. Lettre never returned in an open meeting. Mr. Borelli indicated that Mr. Lettre had addressed his concerns directly and privately. According to the Open Meetings Law, the deliberations of the Town Board are to be open and visible to the public. Private individual meetings or communications with members of the Town Board so as to avoid open deliberations flouts the intent of the Open Meetings Law. Mr. Gromack's statement of other meetings is inaccurate and, since it was specifically in response to a question about open meetings, dishonest. Mr. Borelli, shame on you for accepting a private communication and not standing by your guidance to Mr. Lettre that he was to come back to an open meeting of the Town Board.
Watchdog June 17, 2013 at 04:27 pm
Borelli and Ho -Man are in the bag for Lettre. They are not Republicans...just political hacks forRead More Lettre. RINOS.
galledeb June 10, 2013 at 10:45 am
How can I get more information? When and where are auditions?
Maddie June 10, 2013 at 04:25 pm
You can contact Pastor Robin at rdemaggio@ramapocentral.org
Tracy Urvater June 13, 2013 at 09:25 am
What are the dates of this camp?
Cicadas emerging from their 17 year slumber.
Kevin Zawacki (Editor) June 9, 2013 at 09:32 pm
Thanks for sharing, Grace! Your thoughts on their noise?
Grace Anthony Zemsky June 10, 2013 at 09:00 am
The traffic from the nearby Palisades Parkway is more of a noise nuisance than the cicada chorus.Read More (We have triple-paned windows because of it.) There is something almost musical about the hum of the cicadas. Of course, it may bother me more if I lived in the "affected area" and heard it constantly. Upon entering this nearby neighborhood, the sound crescendos. And yet, it can't be heard a couple of streets away. The drone of locusts is more bothersome than these 17 year cicadas.
Coleen Crowe June 10, 2013 at 01:30 pm
There are swarms of them at my house in upper nyack. Take a ride down Broadway in Upper Nyack nearRead More Nyack beach and they are super loud.
Linda June 8, 2013 at 10:39 am
I missed this! Is there still a way to get a signed copy? Maybe he will do another signing?
John Murphy June 11, 2013 at 08:20 am
This is the most accurate word picture of one of the tragic corollary side effects of one ofRead More humanities ' gruesome failings , which is war. Thank you Pam Sitomer for putting your writing genius to work for a noble cause.