Which Neighbors Have Concealed Weapons Permits? (Redwood City, Ca. publishes list)

[petronius]

40. There are no public safety benefits to publishing this - certainly none that outweigh

the potential harm to those who were listed, and none that don't rely on the same sort of nebulous reasoning that could be used on the examples I listed:

medical marijuana user? might drive too soon after smoking --> public hazard
past felony conviction? in desperate times, might relapse --> public hazard
alcoholic? might relapse, maybe even some long term cognitive damage --> public hazard

See? None of that is any different than the "threat" you claim from the average CCWer, and it certainly doesn't justify an invasion of privacy like this.

But, we all know that the paper didn't do this as a public safety service, they did it to make a political point, to try and embarrass or shame people who made a choice the paper didn't approve of. In other words, it wasn't to improve safety, it was to allow people to harass, avoid, pester, or discriminate against those who engage in an inoffensive, legal, private behavior. (Is there any area other than guns where you'd stand for that sort of journalistic behavior?) You're certainly free to avoid people you don't like, for whatever reason, but for a newspaper to invade others' privacy to help you do it is contemptible.

Your position may differ, but I believe that individual privacy deserves a great deal of respect - from government, media, business, other individuals - and unjustified and non-consensual invasions are reprehensible no matter the topic. Privacy is not deception, and personal information is just that: personal...