Comments on: The public’s right to know and other myths

By: straightarrow

straightarrow — Wed, 27 Feb 2008 02:53:43 +0000

Lyle, you have really put the issue in perspective for those who don’t see clearly. Let’s hope some of them read what you said.

By: Lyle

Lyle — Tue, 26 Feb 2008 23:03:09 +0000

AIDS carriers. They do a 180 when it comes to that, proving that the “right to know” assertion is only a smokescreen to cover for their bigotry.

A public list of all anti-gun journalists and anti-freedom activists would be more helpful. We have the right to know who’s attacking our rights– their names, addresses, phone numbers, spouses, places of employment, and any public records on them such as bankruptcies, UCC filings, Corporate officer status, real estate holdings, vehicle registrations, law suits, arrests, et al, on a master database on-line. Why would they object in the slightest, after all, unless they have something to hide?

Any journalists out there? What do you have to hide, and why? Pony up, now, in the spirit of cooperation and openness. Start the database, and show us how open you really believe our society can be. Put all your information up first. Show us The Way. Be a leader. Lead by example.

For that matter, why aren’t journalists registered, licensed, and charged extra taxes? How do we REALLY know who it is that’s supplying us with our information? Where are the “Reasonable Restrictions” (any and all restrictions) on who can say what and when? Why aren’t Our Children protected against the recent spate of increasingly inaccurate and divisive anti-American journalism? Why don’t we have the BATFEJ (Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, Explosives, and Journalism). Isn’t journalistic deception just as dangerous as bullets? People in other countries certainly think so. They do something about it, and like everyone knows, America should be more like other countries.

By: Linoge

Linoge — Tue, 26 Feb 2008 20:33:14 +0000

*shrug* Sounds to me like WV should make the DMV records public… I mean, it is the people’s right to know if a friend of theirs is driving without insurance… or even registration. It is the people’s right to know whether or not a license plate matches up to the driver – after all, they could catch a carjacker that way!

By: Nick

Nick — Tue, 26 Feb 2008 18:25:19 +0000

As a citizen of the Great State of West Virginia, I would like to say that I approve of the “right to know.” I also would like to know anyone who owns or has owned a toothpick. For that matter, to know anyone who owns or has owned a jelly doughnut might be nice.

By: Cactus Jack

Cactus Jack — Tue, 26 Feb 2008 17:47:09 +0000

“who among us may be carrying concealed guns and, perhaps, that some are not doing so legally.”

Vermont and Alaska have solved the problem of whether or not someone’s legally carrying a concealed pistol. The rest of the states should do the same.

The clowns that are for publishing the names of CCW holders ought to have THEIR names, addresses, and phone numbers published on the web. Let’s see how they like it.

By: BobG

BobG — Tue, 26 Feb 2008 17:41:21 +0000

Hypocrites.
They are constantly reciting the “Right to Know” mantra—until you want to know their sources for an article, then they start hitting you over the head with the First Amendment.

By: Xrlq

Xrlq — Tue, 26 Feb 2008 17:19:46 +0000

Hmm, if they’re serious about the public’s “right to know” (read: their own right to scoop) that some individuals may be packing illegally, then perhaps they ought to publish a list of every WV resident who doesn’t have a CHP – including, presumably, the pinhead who wrote this piece.

By: ben

ben — Tue, 26 Feb 2008 16:51:24 +0000

…who among us may be carrying concealed guns and, perhaps, that some are not doing so legally.

By: bob r

bob r — Tue, 26 Feb 2008 15:50:53 +0000

A necessary condition for something to be a right: the alleged “right” must not impose an active obligation upon another.

The “the public�s right to know” fails this test and so is _not_ a right. In addition, it is a bad policy IMNSOH.