Just when you thought there may only be one Christian Trejbal in this world, low and behold the Washington Post produces one of its own defending the actions of Trejbal. Marc Fisher doesn’t get it any more than Christian Trejbal doesn’t get it. What is this, part of the “journalists must stick together” mentality?
First of all, Fisher lays claim that Trejbal was not targeting the rights of people to own guns.
Trejbal made no effort in his original piece to criticize the carrying concealed weapons law or permitting process.
That’s sincere! Are you kidding me? Just the language he used in describing gun carriers not to mention that he outright said that there was reason to question why one would need to own a gun.
This is not about being for or against guns. There are plenty of reasons people choose to carry weapons: fear of a violent ex-lover, concern about criminals or worry that the king of England might try to get into your house. There are plenty of reasons to question the wisdom of widespread gun ownership, too.
To say that Trejbal had nothing against gun ownership is bogus. His ignorance compares permit holders with criminals.
A state that eagerly puts sex offender data online complete with an interactive map could easily do the same with gun permits
Getting back to Fisher’s article, he does no better.
Just as newspapers like the Post have taken real estate records and put them on our web site so that readers don’t have to troop down to the courthouse to check on the assessed value of the houses on their block, the Roanoke paper took an existing public database and made it readily available to the public. Nothing Trejbal did in any way changed the public nature of the list of gun permit holders; he simply removed an obstacle to easy checking of the list.
Trejbal sees no difference between lawful citizens, some making every attempt to protect themselves from attackers, and sex offenders. Fisher sees no difference between the value of a house and protecting the life of an innocent law abiding citizen.
Fisher also believes as most anti-gun leftists do, that concealed weapon permit holders are dangerous people.
Maybe deep down, those people with carrying permits know that having that permit renders them dangerous and odd to many of their fellow citizens
Fisher defends Trejbal’s skewed logic when he says, “Because the government handles the permitting, it is everyone’s business.” I read a comment from another reader that said essentially this: So using Trejbal’s and now Fisher’s logic, Government handles all Social Security numbers so therefore let’s print them.
Fisher continues to show his readers that he is clueless by once again likening the revealing of concealed gun permit holders with barking dogs. What a fool.
I’m waiting for publication of a database of who owns dogs that bark every morning at dawn–that way I won’t ever again make the same mistake I made a few years ago, when I moved out of one house thrilled to get away from a nuisance dog, only to land at another location where a dog sometimes serves as our early morning alarm
I did go back to the Washington Post website to make sure I wasn’t really in the comic section. Someone, perhaps Fisher’s editor, should slap Fisher across the face and tell him this is serious debate. He’s right this isn’t about gun rights it’s about public safety, it’s about an irresponsible reporter overstepping his bounds and abusing the Freedom of Information Act.
In the end, Trejbal and Fisher, who continue to believe that they have a right to know everything about anybody because they can, will make things better for most appreciative Americans. Their actions will more than likely cause a new law to be written that will protect lawful citizens from the abuses of others.
The Freedom of Information Act was made to keep government more transparent. Laws are always made because of the abuses of liberties. Trejbal abused his liberty. Fisher condones it and now, more than likely, a new law will be made. And who will be first in line to cry about that new law?
Tom Remington
