Can You Believe This?!?!

Not sure on Virginia case law, but if anyone is injured/robbed/murdered/raped, etc. after this he could definitely be held to criminal charges of reckless endangerment and possibly as an accomplice to a crime if a DA would push it hard enough. Considering the outcry from the public up there I'm sure the jury would hang him.

I definitely agree a lawyer in Roanoke needs to step up to the plate.

I work for Fedex and one of my flights go to Roanoke. Let me find a package with his name on it lol.

Looks up at the sky. Just kidding Mr.Smith...I know you're watching me. (looks around):D
 
The names and addresses were a matter of public record and The Roanoke Times fully within it’s rights to publish them. It did so without malice, so a defense against libel is absolute as the information is assumed to be true and correct.

Like it says on the Aspen, CO Daily News masthead, “If you don’t want it printed, don’t let it happen.”

What is appalling here is that no one has raised the issue of the individual right to keep and bear arms in connection with concealed carry, said right guaranteed by the Second Amendment and confirmed Friday by a Washington D.C. federal appeals court.

The Second would have specified that concealed handguns be registered if that was the intent of Congress. It was not, and there were also no limits placed as well on what to carry and how to carry it. Consequently, you can carry any way you damn well please in this country, including unplugged from a database. But it is to their own perceived benefit that certain governmental agencies enforce gun public gun control policies. So this right is not so absolute, as the enforcers have absolutely no legal ground to stand on but do have the upper hand and infrastructure to persecute the citizenry.

Insofar as public records may reveal the identity and whereabouts of concealed carry permit holders, you feel lucky today do ya, punk?
 
"Might as well weigh in on this.

This was information that was already available. According to his article, at least, anybody could get it. The problem I see here is that a single citizen was able to request the names of every permit holder in the entire state, and obtain it with relative ease...not that he went and published it afterwards."


The problem is this is a searchable database for anyone to use. Yes, any person could request the list from the VA state police and pay $100, but I bet most bad guys wouldn't do that.

If a couple of the comments are correct, it is a crime to publish the information of crime victims, whether the intent was malicious or not. Seems a number of CHP holders are victims of domestic abuse who have fled violence. I think this rag is facing big liability problems. I know I will support VCDL's efforts on this. I did not appreciate seeing my name and address online.
 
Sounds to me like going to the courthouse to access public records is a trivial hurdle and anyone disturbed by the fact that their name and personal information is available even easier was living under a veil thinking it was a helmet. There is no actual difference in safety.

That said, I don't think it should be public information. Aggregate, sure, but personal? nope.
 
No, I didn't appreciate seeing my name and address online either, and will most definitely be joining in on any class action lawsuit that comes along.
Here's his address and photo so everyone can know what the little weasel looks like.
Oh yeah, if you're in Norfolk on the 23-24th stop by the Norfolk Waterside Marriott...the 2007 Virginia Press Association/AP News Conference & Annual Meeting will be taking place.
Although, he may not have a job by then...hopefully!

Christian J Trejbal
675 School Ln
Christiansburg, Va 24073
 

Attachments

  • trejbal_100x135.jpg
    trejbal_100x135.jpg
    5.8 KB · Views: 82
I'm glad to see his home address being published. With a little effort, one could publish directions to his home, pictures included, for everyone to see.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately Google-Earth doesn't show any real detail of that area. Otherwise I could have sent him a nice aerial view of his house. :eek:
 
Just a thought.

Given that real estate tax assessment records are public record in Virginia, you should be able to get a fair amount of information about the value of his home and infer, from it, his personal worth.
 
Article on List Removal

A new article has shown up regarding the list:

Concealed-carry list removed from Roanoke.com

The list of Virginia weapons permit holders was linked to an editorial column about open government.
By Laurence Hammack


Selected text:
One day after igniting a firestorm of criticism, The Roanoke Times decided Monday to remove from its Web site a list of Virginians licensed to carry concealed weapons.
Click to expand...

Meade said the pros and cons of running the list were discussed in advance.

The decision to publish the list was made, with Meade’s knowledge, by Editorial Page Editor Dan Radmacher, who was out of the office Monday.
Click to expand...

In other words, the newspaper condoned his publishing of the data. Obviously no one there thought through the repercussions to the permit holders of making their names public.


However, Meade said heated opposition to Trejbal’s column was not a factor in pulling the list.

A written statement released by the newspaper stressed that the decision to remove the list was made “out of a sense of caution and concern for the public” that was based on questions about whether some names should have been included
Click to expand...

The heated opposition probably wasn't. My guess is that they've probably heard from both lawyers and state legislators about this.

One does have to wonder where their "sense of caution and concern" was when they decided to publish this. There certainly wasn't and caution or concern about putting the permit holders or their families at risk.
 
What a moron! Why publish a list of law-abiding citizens? Why not post sex-offenders or 2-strike violent felons? I hope karma catches up to this clown and I hope a good number of subscribers cancel... I know I would!

Maybe a crook will rob his house since he has pretty much announced he is defenseless.
 
For those interested in writing letters & emails...

First look at the Times published statement on their professional standards an conduct.

The Times is a holding of Landmark Communications. These people also own The Weather Channel and other media companies.

We should write or email their executive board to make sure they are aware that Trejbal hasn't lived up to their "professional standards" nor has the editor, Debbie Meade.


Frank Batten Jr., Chairman of the Board and CEO
Richard F. Barry III, Vice Chairman
Decker Anstrom, President and Chief Operating Officer
Frank Batten Sr., Retired Chairman and CEO
Guy Friddell III, Executive Vice President, Corporate Secretary and General Counsel
 
If you play with the bull you get the horn sometimes my Uncle used to tell me. Chalk one up for the bull this time.
 
Since this is my hometown rag I know it well. Safety wasn't the reason they pulled it. Someone in the subscription department got nervous. Seems they lost a sizable chunk of their business when they published a weekly section on the joys of being homosexual. That just doesn't fly around here. No doubt they're trying to avoid another hit.
 
It must be possible with a little reaearch to get a lot of his personal information (go thru his trash if necessary- that's legal) then publish it.
 
To BillCa, Just kidding. I really don't see why anyone would want to know everybody that packs. Maybe he woke up PARANOID. It don't make sense.
 
What the people of Roanoke should know is that it is not the names and addresses on the list that criminals will visit.

Those are the ones they'll now know to stay away from.
 
"What the people of Roanoke should know is that it is not the names and addresses on the list that criminals will visit."

No?

What if the criminal was looking for a ready, possibly easily accesible source of firearms?

Who better to case and burgle than someone who's on the CCW list?
 
Its one thing publishing the names of CHP holders, its something else to in addition to names also addresses, phone numbers, car plate tags, etc. Poor research and judgment on the Roanock Times part. If anyone is hurt by their irrational stunt, they and all involved should be wide open to criminal and civil suit. Just an unbelivable act of super stupidity!:barf:
 
Even just publishing the names is unethical IMO.

It may have been public info. but in the vast majority of cases, how often is a BG likely to do that level of investigation into a target? I'd bet the percentage would be decimal.

Poor judgment at best, and the only person who knows what the true intent was, is the creep that penned it.


I wonder if pigeons could be trained to S**t on sight.... :D
 
I just read the editorial and all I can say is what a jackass. The content of his editorial was only tangentially related to open government. It was clearly an attack on concealed carry laws and the people who choose to obtain a permit. His picture could be used as a definition of douchbag.

He is a pusillanimous windbag of the highest order. He ridicules CCW permit holders and implies that people should fear anyone who carries a concealed handgun, but claims that his topic is open government and not concealed carry laws. What a farce. :barf:

Additionally, just because something is a public record doesn't make it newsworthy. Maybe he should take a refresher course in journalistic responsibility.

However there is one positive. Mr. Pusillanimous Windbag provides a clear example of why the NRA argues that such lists should be confidential. A license or permit of any kind is in no way analogous to criminal offender lists. To imply otherwise was offensive and I hope this guy gets fired. After reading why the newspaper removed the list from its website, I wouldn't be surprised if he gets a promotion and a raise.

I am so :mad: I just may :barf:
 
It may have been public info. but in the vast majority of cases, how often is a BG likely to do that level of investigation into a target? I'd bet the percentage would be decimal.
Click to expand...

How likely is the average bad guy to even use the information now that it's published? A few might (in order to case homes of known firearms owners for burglaries) but I'm thinking it's also a very small number.

As for the cases where more percieved harm was done (say, an woman who got a permit to protect herself from her abusive ex-husband...or was even hiding from said ex-husband), then at that point I'd say those bad guys would be much more likely to conduct this level of investigation, which would be even easier considering they'd only be checking one person. The only reason they wouldn't have yet is because they likely didn't know they could.

But I'm not a fan of security through obscurity. If your defense is that you're hoping the person you're protecting yourself from is unaware that they can easily obtain the information, you're already screwed.

In the long run, I'd say this publication will result in a net positive. Now that everybody knows just how easily their information can be obtained, perhaps that can be changed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top