The Journal News newspaper in New York posted on its website the names and addresses of licensed gun owner in the New York area. Gun owners in Westchester and Rockland were “outed” by the newspaper with a map showing their locations.
The motivation behind such a move is the fiery debate over gun control, reignited after the horrific tragedy in Connecticut, according to a statement released by the paper:
The massacre in Newtown remains top-of-mind for many of our readers. In the past week, conversation on our opinion pages and on our website, LoHud.com, has been keenly focused on gun control.
Our readers are understandably interested to know about guns in their neighborhoods. We obtained the names and addresses of Westchester and Rockland residents who are licensed to own handguns through routine Freedom of Information law public-records requests.
But that does not answer the question of why outing legitimate gun owners accomplishes anything. Normally, you want to expose the criminals who have used guns to commit crimes.
This illogical action makes sense when logic is thrown out and emotions are engaged. Any sensible person would say Adam Lanza used a gun to kill children because he chose to kill. It is the same reasonable thinking that would say New York Nanny Yoselyn Ortega chose to kill when she used a knife to stab two children to death.
However, what matters to the left are not the facts of the case but the feelings. It is children that were killed and the heavy and intense emotions that accompany such an awful situation drive their thinking. With those emotions running high, the function of a gun, to use deadly force against a human being, becomes the “evil” that much be purged. Of course, to complete this logic, Adam Lanza, with others who have used guns to kill, are fundamentally innocent. People don’t kill people, gun do, according to left.
In the logic of the left, if one person used a gun to kill children, even if he did not own that gun, then all gun owners are killers of children. So outing licensed gun owners is the same as outing killers of children.
Yet, at the same time, they would not say that if a nanny used a knife to kill children, then all knife owners are killers of children. The reason is because they themselves do not own or use guns, but they own and use knives and to ban knife ownership would be mighty inconvenient for them. To ban guns would only affect gun owners, which they are not.
This is another example of emotional elites overriding common sense with common misery to make decisions that will have a profound impact on the people. The fact that eliminating guns will not eliminate children getting killed is irrelevant. Eliminating guns would make them feel better and feel as if they had made the world a better place.
And that feeling is all that matters.