---

As the debate over gun control rages on a newspaper in New York really stepped into, as we say in the newspaper business. A suburban newspaper published a map, marked with dots, that showed names and addresses of over 20,000 people who have legal permits to hold handguns.
In Wisconsin this information is protected and isn't available under the state's open records law, as well as it should be. There are reasons to have government information open and available, however the right and privacy of law-abiding citizens should also be protected. The privacy of 20,000 people was invaded to try to make a political point in the gun control debate.
Officials at the New York newspaper said the information is public so they have every right to publish the names, but should they have is the question that needs to be asked. There is already legislation being proposed to close this information in New York.
It is unfortunate that a newspaper would choose to violate the privacy of 20,000 people who did nothing wrong, except hold a legal gun permit that the newspaper finds offensive. Legal and law abiding citizens don't kill people and they shouldn't be used in debate to score political points.
I'm a huge advocate of the public's right to know and believe in open government, but not at the risk of infringing on the rights of people who did nothing wrong. This is something that all newspapers must weigh before they decide to use private individuals in a political debate.
The ironic part about all this is that after the newspaper published the information, the names, addresses and phone numbers of the publishers, reporters and other staff were published online. It didn't sit well with the newspaper. Because of the all the publicity surrounding what the newspaper did, they now have armed guards at their building.
By trying to make a political statement, the newspaper itself became part of the story. Newspapers have every right to editorialize their views on gun control and many have. It opens up public discussion and debate. However, what this newspaper did in New York was not the right thing to do.