The Roanoke Times: The Wild Life

Comments

# 1

[March 12, 2007 2:49 PM]

-KIT-

Mark

I am appreciative of your commentary and feel that you fully grasp the issue at hand. Here is how I responded to mr Trejbal's article.

-KIT- ------------------------------

March 12, 2007

Carole Tarrant – Managing Editor The Roanoke Times & World News 201 West Campbell Avenue P.O. Box 2491 Roanoke, VA 24010-2491 Phone: (800) 346-1234 (540) 981-3340 E-Mail: Carole.Tarrant@roanoke.com

Dear Mrs. Tarrant

I am writing in response to a recent article published by the Roanoke Times written by Christian Trejbal titled “Shedding light on concealed handguns”. Speaking as a Virginian who is also a concealed carry permit holder I find this article to be both unethical and an irresponsible abuse of journalism.

Specifically, I find that the posting of such personal information openly on the internet to be not only irresponsible but also completely unacceptable. While it may be the right of every citizen within the commonwealth to have access to state police concealed carry data that legal right does not also provide them with the license to publish the data in an open forum. The data that Mr. Trejbal published contains not only names but also the complete address of all permit holders within the Commonwealth of Virginia. Many of us consider this information to be confidential and prefer not to have it openly published in such an irresponsible fashion. I would suggest to you that the title “Concealed” implies more that just the legal right to carry a weapon ‘out of sight’ but it also provides the carrier with some degree of anonymity. Many concealed carry holders are judges, lawyers, doctors and retired law enforcement/correctional officials, active duty and/or retired military who would prefer that criminals or terrorists they have interacted with during their career not have access to the address of their personal residences. Many concealed permit holders also feel that by publishing our home addresses you also openly invite the criminal element to vandalize our property by identifying us as gun owners. Regardless, I personally do consider this information to be highly confidential and am outraged that your paper would appear to support such irresponsible behavior from an employee. The detailed information that your employee has seen fit to post potentially places all of us in some degree of unnecessary jeopardy as a result.

Furthermore, I strongly resent Mr. Trejbal’s comparison of concealed carry permit holder data for individuals who comply with the law to the available data of heinous sex offenders who do not respect individual freedoms and disregard the written law. I am a law abiding citizen of the Commonwealth of Virginia who legally acquired my permit to carry a concealed weapon and I simply will not tolerate such irresponsible commentary from one of your employees.

I feel that Mr. Trejbal not only abused his journalistic powers he has also abused the trust that your paper has placed in him by his utilization of the Roanoke Times as an accomplice for such an irresponsible action. I would also offer that by writing such a clearly unacceptable article this employee has clearly demonstrated his total lack of professional ethics.

I would trust that following your review of this issue that The Roanoke Times will take the appropriate action and terminate Christian Trejbal’s employment. I would suggest to you that your newspaper does not need this type of individual tarnishing its reputation or disrespecting the contributions of your other professional employees.

Respectfully

# 2

[March 12, 2007 2:55 PM]

Alex

I think you would serve the shooting and hunting community better by choosing to write for a newspaper that chooses not to publish a list of all Concealed Handgun Permit holders in the state. I highly encourage you to get a CHP! It's up to you whether or not you write about it. On a final note this is the definition of "Concealed" - to prevent disclosure or recognition of (From Webster.com)

# 3

[March 12, 2007 2:56 PM]

TScottW : →http://www.vcdl.org

Hello Mark. Nice article. I really hope the Roanoke Times see the error that they have made and will take the list down.

As soon as I woke up Sunday I had a telephone call from a local lawyer telling me that he, my wife and I were on the Roanoke times webpage.

To say I was unhappy is an understatement. The first thing I did was contact the president of the Virginia Citizen's defense league. The second was to let every one I know who was on that list know. Third was to blast the gun forums with the article. I might have also let everyone know Christian's home address in the process.

I really do not see how he thought this was a good idea. I guess he got the lead from the reporter in Ohio who also thought this was a good idea.

Hopefully Christian has helped us gunowners though. There are quite a few elected officials, judges and law enforcement officers on his list. I am hoping there will be a bill passed now to keep anyone else from doing such an irresponsible act.

# 4

[March 12, 2007 2:57 PM]

John C

This is what I was going to post in Mr. Trejbal's article before he limited our freedom of expression:

Mr. Trejbal,

How dare you imply that the state ought to create a CCW permit database similar to the sex-offender database. Those that have a CCW are LAW ABIDING CITIZENS, without criminal records, and you try to put us in the same category as child molesters, and rapists. There is a reason to search for sex offenders: to keep ourselves and our children away from actual criminals. What is the reasoning behind a CCW database? To know who is a law abiding citizen? To know who hasn’t broken the law?

Your arguments are weak and non-sensical: In the name of FOI, you trample on our privacy rights. Your assertion that "knowledge is power" assumes that the "gun-toter" is implicitly a would-be criminal. How dare you libel law abiding citizens!

The only reason for such a database is for employers, neighbors, etc. to treat law abiding citizens in a prejudicial way.

you state: "Open government laws arose from distrust of government."

Let's see what laws we can pass out of a distrust of reporters!

# 5

[March 12, 2007 3:05 PM]

countertop : →http://countertopchronicles.com

I think Trejbal should be fired. Short of that, the good citizens of Virginia should begin a boycot of anyone advertising in the Roanoke Times until the paper takes the list down.

Your column is great, but I've got real propblems with the Roanoke Times so willingly assisting rapists and abusive spouses in tracking down their victims. I'm a lawyer, and while my primary practice isn't domestic violence, I have assisted large numbers of women who have been raped, stalked, or otherwise abused manage their way through the legal system (and when they are from Virginia) obtain a concealed carry permit.

The Roanoke Times has just done them a tremendous disservice. I pray for their safety and suggested (after taking the list down ASAP - while I would hate for anyone to get hurt, I would love to sue your paper if one of my clients was harmed) that Mr Trejbal follow his pinko friends back to Canada.

# 6

[March 12, 2007 3:08 PM]

Dan

Christian Trejbal's posting of all CHP holders name and addresses on the Internet is the most irresponsible thing that I have seen a reporter do.

This just proves that education doesn't make a stupid person smart.

# 7

[March 12, 2007 3:09 PM]

Jo

It isn't so much that those with concealed carry permits fail to appreciate having their information a mouse click away, though that IS some shockingly obnoxious editorial grandstanding, right there.

The intrusive arrogance and childishly sly implications push that column over the line. No, not simply "over the line"; the line has been burnt in effigy and Trejbal has taken a p*** in the smoking ashes. Concealed carry permit holders are spotlighted as "wrong", compared to sex offenders, insinuations are made that if you annoy these folks THEY WILL SHOOT YOU OH MY GAWD.

We're talking about folks who have abided by all the proper laws to purchase their firearms and then went out of their way to further prove to the state of Virginia that they are trustworthy, law-respecting citizens to additionally be granted the right to CC. Trejbal clearly has so little respect for the authorities who have already run background checks and character assessments on potential gun owners and applicants for CCP, that he feels the need to fire up a vigilante posse with a biased bit of tripe. Go look at the gun owners! And then what, Mr. Trejbal? What, precisely, did you want your readers to do or say to the gun owners you hunted down?

Double-plus ungood. Insult to injury is that we may no longer comment or read the comments because someone, in a fabulously ironic turning of the tables, posted Trejbal's own address. Clearly Trejbal thinks posting the private information of others is a good laugh but the same treatment for him is dirty pool.

# 8

[March 12, 2007 3:33 PM]

Mike S

Pull the list off the website it was just stupid to do.

I am laughing at all the public information posted about the reporter on the web. His address,( its only fair ) tax information, realestate sales inforation on his home, map to his home, and its growing.

I pray he has done nothing wrong, because we will know about in in the next few days!

PULL The information from the web!

# 9

[March 12, 2007 3:40 PM]

C Green

Apparently your writer C. Trejbal, doesn't have enough real news to keep him busy. I wish you would remedy that problem. Maybe his time would be better spent on publishing lists on CRIMINALS rather than the law-abiding. Maybe even a list of Trejbal's tax return, parking & speeding tickets. How about the names, ages & schools his children attend.....Doesn't sound very appealing does it? His misguided attempt at doing a story on 'open government', by publishing the private information on over 138,000 Virginia citizens is inexcusable. This is a lame attempt at portraying holders of a Virginia Concealed Handgun Permit as people not to be trusted. We........yes I said "WE", I am one of those on the 'list'. I have held a valid permit for more than fifteen years in the Commonwealth. In order to be granted a permit, you have to go through a lot. Here is some of what you have to go through: I had to present evidence to the court of state approved training in firearms & safety. Classroom training includes when it is legal & when it is NOT legal to carry or use a concealed weapon. I had to submit an application & pay the fees involved. I had to pass local & state background checks. I was fingerprinted & a further background check was performed by the FBI. All this was before I was granted a permit to protect my family & myself. I am not a drug dealer, felon, stalker, thief or even a jay-walker. I'm not an illegal alien, I am a citizen of the USA & I vote. I'm well aware of the responsibility of carrying a firearm. I train regularly, probably more than most Virginia law enforcement officers. I'm aware of the laws as they apply to carrying a concealed firearm. I know when, where I can legally carry. I also know where it is illegal for me to carry. I don't go to 'bad' parts of town looking for trouble. I go out of way to avoid conflicts. I prefer to be anonymous, however since Mr. Trejbal's article, that isn't possible now is it? If the need arises, I will act intelligently & decisively to protect my life & the lives of those around me....even Mr. Trejbal's. (since he is not on the 'LIST') You work for a newspaper. How many permit holders have committed crimes?........Can't remember any?...That's because overall, permit holders are among the MOST law-abiding in this country. There are more law enforcement officers charged with crimes than Concealed Handgun Permit holders. There aren't any instances of a police officer being injured by a permit holder. On the other hand, there have been instances where policemen have been assisted by permit holders. Do I wish we lived in a world where there was no risk of being a victim....YOU BET! ...But that is fantasy, the world we live in is dangerous, just look through your own publication to see all the bad things that happen to good people. In closing, Trejbal shows that he is really anti-gun. His own words betray his bias...."There are plenty of reasons to question the wisdom of widespread gun ownership, too." That makes his true motives for publishing this information a little clearer. Maybe we should do as Frank Lloyd Wright said....."I'm all in favor of keeping dangerous weapons out of the hands of fools. Let's start with typewriters." C Green Fork Union, Va.

# 10

[March 12, 2007 4:01 PM]

Gary Jeter

I am very disappointed in the Roanoke Times' absolute abuse of discretion in posting online all the names and addresses of persons who hold Concealed Handgun Permits in Virginia.

This outrage occurred in Christian Trejbal's column. See http://blogs.roanoke.com/roundtable/columns/comment_on_trejbals_column_12.html For some reason the blog function there seems to be disabled. So, I am posting here.

Mr. Trejbal compared holders of Concealed Handgun Permits to sex offenders, and at the same time revealed to the criminal element the exact residence address of over 130,000 gun owners in Virginia. How can the Roanoke Times rationalize this?

This publicized list reveals the home address of numerous Judges, Commonwealths' Attorneys, Bail Bondsmen, crime victims, and multitudes of people who never suspected that a newspaper would be so scurrilous as to place them in danger by revealing their personal information in such a mean-spirited and flambouyent manner.

This is unnacceptable.

I am a former police officer and a former Assistant Commonwealths' Attorney. I served the citizens of the Commonwealth and the District of Columbia. In doing so, I took deliberate efforts to maintain as much confidentiality of my address as possible. Now, the Roanoke Times has published my address for every criminal to see. This is an outrageous invasion of privacy.

I demand that the Roanoke Times remove my address from the online database.

# 11

[March 12, 2007 4:01 PM]

Rob

Every CCW holder whose home is burglarized should file suit against your paper. I'll bet that would get this taken care of.

Granted, many people are upset about the law itself, that lets this stuff be published, and that is a problem with our rulers, who don't quite understand what "shall not be infringed" means, and not your paper.

But publishing this list shows your paper's contempt for people who have DEMONSTRATED themselves to be law abiding citizens. It's a violation, pure and simple.

# 12

[March 12, 2007 4:01 PM]

FredZiffle

I wonder if the James Webb in the list is our own Senator?? Also some other big shots listed...I bet they love having their address posted here.

thank you fred

# 13

[March 12, 2007 4:27 PM]

98C5

This Trejbal guy has stepped over the line. Regardless if this is Freedom of information or not, he had to do some digging WITH money to get this list. As a permit holder myself, I am beyond outraged at his article. What was he trying to gain? Does he have any idea what firestorm he has created? Lawsuits will be filed, Trejbal AND Roanoke Times will have to answer. What a poor way to get attention. Do us all a favor and fire Trejbal.

# 14

[March 12, 2007 4:28 PM]

Al R

I know Trejbal's column has gone national on shooting and hunting boards so it wouldn't surprise me if the feedback has overwhelmed our server.

Or, more likely, the management of the Roanoke Times has pulled it down on purpose, now that the tables have turned and the comments page has been filled with publicly-available information about the newspaper's various writers and editors.

# 15

[March 12, 2007 4:35 PM]

Bryan

Asside from the obvious issues with break-ins that Trejbal seems clueless about, there are others. What about the women that have fled an abussive ex-husband and kept their location a secret, while getting a CHP to protect themselves and their children? This ding-dong just published their address.

Kick Mr. Trejbal to the street.

# 16

[March 12, 2007 4:41 PM]

Shea D.

Nice article, Mark. I appreciate your well thought out and logical response, as well as your understanding of the views of those who have been upset by Mr. Trejbal's article. I find his article article in the Roanoke Times to be very arrogant and self-righteous. His article is a perfect example of the recklessness of the press and is comparable to the worst inflammatory journalism of the Hurst days. He has reduced law abiding citizens who exercise their constitutionally given right to bear arms to the level of sex offenders and deviants whos' names are published in the paper for all to see. Those who obtain permits are not felons and enemies of the public, they are law abiding people who wish to exercise their right to bear arms and to defend themselves, their property, and their family in a legal and proper manner. Those who conceal and carry WITHOUT a permit because they do not care if they have one or not and/or cannot get one are the people he should be concerned about. I personally am obtaining a conceal and carry permit and am a firearm owner. For the last four years while attending college in Virginia I worked as an EMT helping to serve the community I lived in. Now, I am in medical school working hard to become a physician so that I can continue to serve. I am not a felon (I could hardly possess an EMS license or hope to obtain a medical license if I was), a sexual deviant, nor am I an uneducated hick with guns. I result the implication by Mr. Trrejbal that I should be though. His article marks a sad day for journalism in Virginia and an even sadder day for the Roanoke Times. It shows the downfall of a great newspaper reduced to little more than sensational journalism, poor writing, and illogical arguements made for inflammatory purposes.

# 17

[March 12, 2007 5:27 PM]

Dave

Hello Mark,

Thanks for your article. I think we are all still stunned that Trejbal decided to make our information so 'public'. My guess is there will be a law against posting this information by this time next year.

I read most of the comments on the other article before the board bogged down and the thing that struck me most was how many people are trying to get away from abusive ex-spouses or have been crime victims in the past. I wonder if Trejbal gave it even a moments thought that he'd be potentially be putting those people in danger...most likely he didn't.

It was also pretty stupid to publish a list that DID contain info on police officers, judges, and other public officials. Some of those folks also have very legitimate needs to keep their personal information private.

We 'gun nuts' often joke about 'assault' typewriters and 'full auto' laptops, and I think in this case it's not so funny. If a 'journalist' can't use discretion and common sense then he has no business working in the mass media industry. Personal information in the wrong hands can and will cause harm to inviduals.

Thank you again for your article and it's good to see that there's at least one sane person at the Roanoke Times.

# 18

[March 12, 2007 6:20 PM]

Val

It was just on Ch. 7 news and they pulled the list according to a press release by RT.

Considering a lawsuit by the Defense league - was interviewed on CH. 7 - more tonight at 11:00.

# 19

[March 12, 2007 6:21 PM]

TJ

Mark,

This is a well written, thought out article. I am impressed with how you can see potential consequences, but your co-worker Mr. Trejbal cannot. Thank you for showing that there is some good sense at the Roanoke Times.

TJ

# 20

[March 12, 2007 6:42 PM]

Barent K Parslow

I'm #72 (IIRC) on Trejbal's message board.

The fact is that because you can say something doesn't mean that you should say something. Apparently, he not only "outed" me but others who carry concealed in the public interest. He for sure IDed 130K+ gun owners to criminals needlessly (does he WANT those guns "on the street"?) and he went so far as to say the most strictly vetted of all citizens were possessed of hair-trigger tempers (pun intended) and equivalent to pedophiles and rapists (one reason the WOMEN carry). He's what we referred to as an educated fool. I'm sorry, but a college degree and a skill at writing (or doctoring or lawyering) doesn't imply a genius ability to modify the world to suit oneself. That a thing is legal doesn't imply that it is moral.

The sunshine laws are meant to ensure that public officials don't do nefarious things behind our backs. They are not intended to put common citizens at risk from criminals.

What really chaps me is that this self-righteous fool will suffer nary a consequence of his action unless he's noted to not be on the list and thus a likely target of a criminal.

BTW, thanks for your article. I'm interested in hearing what went on in the office concerning this. I'd think that the Roanoke Times would think they were serving Roanoke and environs not San Franciscan liberals.

# 21

[March 12, 2007 7:19 PM]

BH

Mr. Trejbal needs to be fired for such irresponsible reporting/release of private information on victims of domestic violence. How could you paper have let this go to press and how could you have supported the development of a database to release this information????

B.H.

# 22

[March 12, 2007 7:40 PM]

Mark Taylor

So, apparently plenty of you weren't burned out on commenting about the issue...

As you all know, the database has been pulled, but I think we all would agree that this story isn't over.

I also have a pretty good idea what topic will dominate our letters to the editor section in the coming week or so. I know many of you are pretty fired up about this so I appreciate you all keeping the comments as civil as you did.

If you have new or different ideas or thoughts on this, post away. I will be busy on a couple of projects (not related to this) the next couple of days so I may not be too speedy processing comments.

Thanks for reading.

Mark Taylor

# 23

[March 12, 2007 7:44 PM]

Ed

Mark,

Thank you for the well tought out and reasoned posting, it's a shame your coworker doesn't have a quarter of the decency and sense that you do.

# 24

[March 12, 2007 7:55 PM]

Garrett

Do the Roanoke Times a favor and fire him now before you lose any more subscriptions. This story has feet and we the people can make it a national issue if you want to.

It is already all over the blogosphere, how long until it hits the Talk Radio circuit? How long after that til it makes the daytime news networks? How many readers are you willing to lose? How many sponsors are you able to lose before you start hurting financially?

Take a lesson from the Zumbo incedent: fire the author and pull his collumn now while you still can.

# 25

[March 12, 2007 8:33 PM]

AMP

My husband is a police officer and we had the pleasure of our address being posted in the newspaper as well. We are already subject to distruction to our home and harrassment just from my husband's cruiser being parked in our drive way. Now every criminal in the state has our address. I hope you got your point across in your article and I hope you sleep well at night knowing that you just endangered the lives of my entire family. This lack of ethics is unbelievable. I cannot understand how anyone could be allowed to post private information such as this in a newspaper. I hope that other gun owners will follow me in not reading this filth any longer.

# 26

[March 12, 2007 8:38 PM]

Larry Womble

At last, the voice or reason. Good article.

I think it would be a good idea if you, Mr Trejbal and the editor all take the course. Not saying any have to carry, but it would be a good learning experince for all.

# 27

[March 12, 2007 9:15 PM]

Robert B.

Those of you affected by this might want to see if any *criminal* charges can be pursued against C.T. and the editors at _The Roanoke Times_.

This statute seems relevant: http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?000+cod+19.2-11.2 It was posted in reply to the original article, but it's hard to find.

I am not a lawyer, Bob

# 28

[March 12, 2007 9:39 PM]

Bob Smith, Oregon

Debbie Meade, Carole Tarrant, the idiot author Trejbal and others have seen fit to put lives at risk by the stupendous act of publishing the full list of concealed carry licensees.

Let's just think about the sort of people that have been harmed by this ...

Abused spouses or people seeking to hide from those wishing to harm or kill them. Anyone involved in criminal proceedings against violent felons. Average folks who will know be under the microscope from colleagues and others who will now view them completely differently.

To say nothing of publishing the damned addresses of these people. What does the Roanoke Times think criminals are going to do with such a list? Smile and be done with it? Not a chance. That list is now out in the wild, and people will be seriously harmed in the coming weeks because of it.

I truly hope that crimes have been committed here, on the part of the Roanoke Times and the people involved. I hope prison time and tremendous fines are forthcoming for such irresponsible and hateful behavior.

Shame. Shame. Shame. Sunshine week, indeed. Well, Ms. Meade, Ms. Tarrant and Mr. Trejbal, you just lit a bonfire that won't go out anytime soon. Your criminal actions have put lives at risk. Take your medicine, 'cause it is coming.

# 29

[March 12, 2007 10:14 PM]

Roscoe Vinton

The editor of the paper implied in the statement that they will publish the list after the police have reviewed it...so this is not over.

When will you be publishing the list of little old ladies who get Social Security checks and their home addresses...surely the Social Security administration is a government organization subject to the freedom of information act! Maybe you should remind everyone what day the checks come in the mail too, you know, as a service. When will you publish the list of US citizens who come back from an oversees business trip carrying cash in excess of $10,000. It's a question on the customs service form, so it must be something everyone has a right to know. When will you be publishing the list of 12-14 year old girls who go to public schools in Virginia and their home addresses? Certainly the public has a right to know who goes to public schools! Might as well throw in the public school bus schedule as a link on your website, for that is everyone's right to know. It would make it so much easier for the law abiding citizen to know which children are alone at home in the afternoon.

# 30

[March 12, 2007 11:20 PM]

Jeff Buchanan

Hi Mark,

Thank you for your article. We appreciate your understanding and comments.

I, too, would like to comment on Trejbal's article. As conservatives, many of us have grown very used to being maligned, disparaged, and villified by America's leftists in the media and elsewhere; therefore, being equated to sex offenders has very little impact upon me personally and probably many other readers of Trejbal's article. We are thick-skinned, but not thick-headed. We will fight back. We are confident of who we are in our political ideologies and as citizens, in general, and we've assumed the great burden of responsibility that comes with legally carrying a concealed handgun. What troubles us most about his article is his blatant disregard for the safety of his very own community. He disregarded our safety and the well-being of our families and friends all across the commonwealth. With the stroke of a pen, we were outed as potential targets for burglary, physical harm and possibly more. Maybe some vindictive employers acquired names from the list as well. I, myself, am much less concerned about my own well-being as I'm concerned about the welfare of some single mom in hiding from an abusive ex-spouse. She's now exposed and maybe being jarred from bed each night at the least little noise. As a result of Trejbal's article, she may now be required to uproot her life and move elsewhere. We can only hope not one instance of this scenario will have to occur.

I was troubled to see some on my side of the argument attempt to shed light on Trejbal's family's whereabouts such as schools his children attend, etc., because that is NOT what the 2nd Amendment crowd is about. We are not about retribution or imtimidation, but we are about accountability. We support the protection of life, limb, and property from those who would deny us those things and we proactively take measures to prevent those denials from occurring.

Trejbal's smugness and indifference continued even after many of us tried to explain to him the damage he had done. He was unwaivering in his position and unwilling to remove the database. I'm sure many above him in rank supported his steadfastness. I, and many others, feel that he is unfit to occupy a position of such great social responsibility. We would appreciate the Roanoke Times assuming responsibility for their actions and Trejbal's and terminating his employment. There is too much risk associated with another such stunt should it occur. There is a campaign underway to discourage your advertisers until a final resolution is achieved. I'm sure it will continue unabated until Trejbal is relieved of his duties which he performed so poorly and ignorantly.

# 31

[March 12, 2007 11:26 PM]

Dex

Here's what I've been posting around, for the last few minutes.

[Begin Post] The list is, at the moment, down.

We have Victory, in Phase I. I have a suggestion for Phase II:

Cry "ZUMBO!", and let slip the Dogs of Economics.

If everybody on that list picks one advertiser and expresses displeasure, Mr. Trejbal might find his name changed to "Blackball". Something along the lines of,

"Dear Sir / Madam: I have noticed that you advertise in the Roanoke Times. As long as you advertise with them, and they continue to employ Christian Trejbal, I will assume that you don't want my business. I'll take my money somewhere that doesn't support invasion of my privacy.

Sincerely,

While I was composing that, I randomly clicked an ad on the Times page. Copy and paste, and off to their contact address it went.

# 32

[March 13, 2007 1:37 AM]

David Poling : →http://www.packing4life.com

Mark Taylor I appreciate your response and the fact that the list was pulled that is a big plus.

I am not trying to talk you or anyone into carrying concealed as that is every legal citizens right to do so and choice.

The comment you made was quick to dismiss the thought you may get a concealed carry permit but not to carry.

Find a professional training facility that deals with concealed carry and go through it and take a couple of more advanced classes to get a well rounded knowledge of the subject, even if you choose not to carry it will prepare you for home defense as well.

Discus carry issued with a local professional and consider instances where you or your family maybe placed into a life threatening situation and you are physically unable to defend or protect your wife, child or elderly parent and mesh that with the responsibility that comes with carrying concealed not only includes training into using deadly force, legal issues but into avoiding situations or lesser degrees of force. The proper use of a weapon and accuracy so if you had to you can be assured hit your target with out endangering innocent bystanders.

Carrying a weapon is for the protection of life or that of another.

May I also suggest reviewing real true life stories of citizens defending thier lives or the lives of another at Civilian Gun Self-Defense http://www.claytoncramer.com/gundefenseblog/blogger.html.

If you have a chance drop by my forum at http://www.packing4life.com and view the discussions of different matters of concealed carry, I am sure you will find mature responsable men and women.

# 33

[March 13, 2007 2:08 AM]

Harry

Mr. Taylor,

Excellent and well thought out article and response. Thank you. Much better than your peer. As one of those 138,000 law-abiding permit holders I am appalled at his (your peer) lack of responsibility and character. Thanks to him, anyone who downloaded the list from his article can now publish a Google Mapped version. At least before they would have had to pay for it.

# 34

[March 13, 2007 7:26 AM]

Alan Rose

So the paper has pulled the plug out of a sense of caution, because some info was not supposed to be there? Somehow I suspect a sanitized version is in the works. The paper better take their football home and keep it there.

# 35

[March 13, 2007 8:56 AM]

Paul B.

Mark,

Thank you for your informed article. Isn't it a shame you feel the need to qualify why you would think about a CHL? It simply does not matter why you want it, whether you plan to use it, or who knows you have it. Pass the hurdles and regain access to one of the Bill of Rights.

I see that this publication is trying to distance itself now and seems to be shifting blame for some names in the database back to the state police. They need to wake up, take responsibility for their reporter and their medium, apologize, take steps to rectify the problem (Mr. Trejbal) and make sure it NEVER happens again.

# 36

[March 13, 2007 10:55 AM]

Lee P.

First thing I would like to say Mr Taylor,is that this is the first time that I read an opinion/article that was pretty much 'objective' and not 'leftist', so I have to ask, does the RT know that you work for them? :)

Anyway, what seems to be the problem is 2 things. First is the way this article showed nothing about the 'government procedures' that 'Sunshine laws' are all about. That guise is all to transparent, especially when one notices the spead in which he deviated from his supposed point.

But what I would have to say is what really ticked-off the citizens of Virginia, was the inclusion of the home addresses. Yeah he wanted to 'expose' those he fears, and a list of names would have sufficed for his agenda, but there is absolutely no justification for the addresses to be posted as well.

Now time for my personal smear on C.J.T : He looks like Napoleon Dynamite, only not as cool. Sorry I couldn't resist my 'base' instincts.

# 37

[March 13, 2007 8:42 PM]

Mike Stembridge

The article by by Christian Trejbal is just about the sorriest thing a witer can do. I blame the editor of the paper as much as Terjbal for letting this personal informatoin be printed to start with. Thank you both for putting my wife & my daughter in danger! But what else would anyone expect from a far left loonie socialist liberal?

# 38

[March 13, 2007 10:16 PM]

Philip Balestrieri

C.J.T. has posted my name and home address in his article. I am a doctor in central virginia(and value my privacy) and have more training than CJT, not only in science and medicine which he has no training in but also more training in philosophy than he does(with several degrees in the subject). My many years of studying philosophy did not, however, turm me into an arrogant fool as they appear to have done to CJT. I hope he enjoys the celebrity of having harmed thousands of law abiding Virginians with his arrogance. This story is far from over and the Roanoke Times would do well to publish a front page apology to the thousands of us whom it has harmed. Journalism is supposed to promote the public good, not harm law abiding citizens. CJT should be fired today and the front page apology should be in tomorrow's edition of the Times.

# 39

[March 14, 2007 10:16 AM]

Tami H

I think that the public has a right to know who cares a concealed weapons premit. I (AS WELL AS ANYONE ELSE)can go to the virginia judicial systems website and find out a whole lot more than just a gun permit.

This is a free country and free press, so I feel like he had a right and as well as a duty to inform the public.

If you are embrassed to carry a gun permit THEN DON'T!!!!

# 40

[March 14, 2007 11:15 AM]

Bill B

Mark - thanks for your informed view and response to the completely irresponsible "reporting" by your paper. Unfortunately, I will not be renewing my subscription to the Roanoke Times as it has stepped way over the line on this one. Keep up your good work - I still may occasionally see it on boards I visit.

# 41

[March 14, 2007 12:58 PM]

AL STEED JR

Mr Taylor, Thank you for your article on the storm created by the Roanoke Times and the reporter (?) Trejbal.

I trust that he will very shortly be seeking employment elsewhere and that the Roanoke Times will be held responsible for possibly putting 135789 law abiding citizens of our beautiful state in harms way. To quote Trejbal in an earlier article: "Thats the law, but one of the first lessons I used to teach in my ethics class is that "legal" and "right" are often not the same". What Trejbal did is certainly not "RIGHT".

AL

# 42

[March 14, 2007 9:47 PM]

Conceal Carry

This is mainly in response to a remark made by Tami H. I don't think anyone on that list is embarassed about having a conceal carry permit. We all know that under the Freedom of information act that you can obtain a substantial amount of information, we aren't ignorant. The issue at hand revolves around the misuse of that information obtained. If you had read carefully you would have seen that the database put people at risk. Those groups of people include, but are not limited to current and former law enforcement officers and military personel, people that might have been in witness protection that still need a permit, former rape and abuse victims. Tejbal had to pay $100 dollars to obtain the information he posted, if you want acces to that information yourself, then pay for it yourself and be responsible with it. Just becasue we have the freedom of information act doesn't mean we have to make the information availible without a small nominal fee, as long as it is still availible. the other reason perit holders are in an upheaval is the comparison of permit holders to sex offenders and saying that criminals might be carrying. The truth is Mr Trejbal just didn't thuroughly research his article. Becasue of where I work I am familiar with the process of obtaining a permit and here is where I educate the unfamiliar.

First. Sign up for and attend an NRA certified basic pistol course fees may vary. This course consists of classroom training, a book, a written test and proficiency with a firearm at the range (shooting the gun) upon successfull completion you will receive a certificate with the NRA logo and instructor information and the date you completed the course.

Second. Go to the clerk of the court of the city or county of your residency, present your driver's license and ask for an application for a conceal carry permit. The application will ask for specific information and you will have to answer questons similar to those that are found on any Federal Firearms form. Answer the questions and otherwise honestly and completely fill out the information. Upon completion your application will be reviewed for accuracy and completeness and you will be assesed a fee for a backround check and processing. This background check can take as little as one week to no more than one month, during that time your history will be reviewed and your name will be put through the FBI and other agencies.

Third. Upon approval you must go back to the court where they will issue the permit only after your fingerprints have been added to the computer.

Fourth. Stay safe and get to the range to practice, practice and practice.

Nobody is denying the freedom of information, but when abused it causes problems, the Ronoke Times and Mr. Trejbal are currently experiencing this discomfort infact his blog has nearly 500 negative posts. You cannot be a journalist with and agenda or a bias, which it appars Mr. Trejbal has a bit of both.

# 43

[March 14, 2007 11:23 PM]

Ray Phillips

Dear sir,

It is with relief and sadness to see obvious evidence that not all staffers on the Roanoke Times are as careless and intentionally inflammatory in their commentary as Mr. Trejbal. The sadness comes from knowing that the end result of this affair may be troubled times for all who work there. Not "guilt by association" by any means, but more of "wrong place, wrong time". I feel this way because the follow-up actions of the man's superiors speak more loudly than original editorial. I have reviewed alot of Mr. Trejdal's work from various outlts across the country, and all I see is a young man, lacking any real world experience, who exhibits the in-your-face attitudes that our impolite society fosters. He only sought to abuse his position to expose a group he despises, much like his commentary on the ignorant and backward folks we are, evidenced in his mind by how different we are from him. No, he is just a kid, lacking any manners, enjoying the notoriety that all this and his other statements can make. However, his superiors, with longer tenures in the editorial field, and with more to lose, stand by him, and make general statements about how they could have thought this through a little more. Anything short of an outright condemnation of his actions, a complete retraction, and the dismissal of this staffer, is nothing more than an endorsement of his tactics, his philosophies, and his goal.

Noone can rightly believe that his actions had anything to do with a transparent government. Instead, they had everything to do with his political agenda. Had the reaction of the editor of the paper been swift and clear, the soon-to-be-announced actions that will be taken against the Roanoke-Times might have been avoided. It is truly unfortunate that these actions can affect those who would otherwise stand with us, but the fight is bigger than that. It is a fight against those who try to mold the world to their small view, to those who use their freedom to denigrate others, and hide behind it like some kind of religious talisman (I admit that;s a poor analogy in the case of Mr. Trejdal). But there it is. The paper's position is still strongly supportive of his actions, and that is the loudest of statements.

Thank you and good luck.

# 44

[March 15, 2007 10:25 AM]

JP

Good article, Mark. Unfortunately, it seems that the majority of writers at the Times follow most of the mainstream media in their liberal beliefs, and they lead the sheeple who read the paper and don't think for themselves. I would love to see the day when newspapers would have truly objective reporters and writers, and will give conservative editorialists an equal voice.

# 45

[March 15, 2007 11:21 AM]

P Williams

Mr. Taylor you seem to "get" this issue far more accurately than Mr. Trejbal or your editor.

The fact is that that Mr. Trejbal has a different view of issues than most Virginians. I am not making any judgement about that fact but it is a fact. He uses his position in your organization to "sniff" the air for things he does not personally agree with, and if he thinks he smells a skunk, he pokes a sharp stick in the hole to see what he can stir up. Until now the occasional skunk may have come out, but from what I can see researching this it is usually a litter of kittens.

There is nothing new in this approach, but the journalism that this method produces is of the lowest quality, because it is more about kicking up dusk for its own sake, and trying to upset people, than it is about news or helping the public understand issues.

What happen in this case is that there was in fact no skunk in the hole. Instead there was a sleeping bear. Mr. Trejbal has now awakened that bear, and he and your editor are somehow mystified that the reaction is so large and furious. Well let me explain that.

Mr. Trejbal moved here from out of state. He brought with him a viewpoint completely out of line with ANY of the mainstream views of native Virginians. He then proceeded to use his new soap box to call Virginians "haters", criticize their values, treat them like uneducated hicks and generally treat everyone in the Roanoke valley in a patronizing and offensive manner. Then comes this latest calamity where he spreads this venom state wide.

Mr. Trejbal claims the article was not about guns, yet by his own words in the article he hints at a distain for gun owners and concealed weapons carriers. He compares over 135,000 Virginians to child molesters and sexual deviants, he then publishes a list of them while suggesting that this should be the standard treatment for sexual perverts and gun owners.

Then when the paper provides a place for those 135,000 agrieved people to comment, you allow Mr. Trejbal, to decide which comments will be allowed to appear in the public forum. All while he occasionally inserts additional remarks which people also find to be sarcastic, caustic and offensive. At this point no additional messages are even showing up on that forum.

For its part your paper may or may not recognize the tremendous public disservice and damage they have inflicted on the Roanoke community, and the entire state of Virginia. But one thing is certain, in a subsequent article about all of this mess, the reporter specifically states, that Mr. Trejbal's article WAS in fact about guns. Despite his insistence to the contrary.

So there it is. You have so many negative responses to this reporter, his style of reporting, and his actions in this matter, that your servers cannot even handle the load. In your own survey on the matter, with almost 4,000 respondents 98% think this was a bad idea. Your own paper is reporting that a professor of ethics in journalism has said that the act was unethical. The standards of ethics listed on your website that purport to control the actions of your paper claim that NO personal information will be published without good cause and the individuals permission, they did just that.

Moreover, it is very hard for people to believe that this was not intentional. Mr. Trejbal has a degree in philosophy, which includes training in ethics. He has lived here long enough to know exactly the reaction this publication would cause. He is educated enough to KNOW that there are people on that list whose very lives would be placed in danger by disclosure of the information if it was on the internet. He also knew that the information was NOT readily available and described that fact in his original article. And when he obtained the data he paid for it out of his own pocket so the State Police could not possibley figure out that it was being requested by a news organization.

So you might forgive us, the backward people of Virginia, if we think this was intentional, and that the plan was to actually cause bodily harm to a number of people to create news. After all as Mr. Trejbal if fond of point out we are not sophisticated enough to understand his higher motivations or those of the Editorial staff.

In the face of all of this, at the very least this news paper owes those who may have been injured by this action an apology, yet there has been none. In the larger sense the Roanoke community has been telling you for a long time that Mr Trejbal, is philosophically, ethically, and morally not suited to the community in the Roanoke valley area, yet he is still there. People are now being denied their first amendment rights to respond by Mr. Trejbal's editorial selections in the forums on this issue, and your editor allows this. And last but most important, your editor continues to explain why they had a right to do what they did, and that it was legal to do it, at every opportunity.

This is the crux of the matter at this point in time. This article has endangered the safety of a lot of people. It has angered far more. If this was not the specific intent of your editor and your news paper, then you have an ethical, moral, and civil duty to act in the "sunshine" to make some reparations to those you have injured. If your editor does not see it that way, then I can only presume you are prepared to deal with the boycotts, and economic damage that this decision will bring. Not a very wise decision.

Regards P Williams

# 46

[March 15, 2007 12:33 PM]

J. Wellington Wells

To begin i thank you for your comments on Mr. Trejbal's arrogant nonsense. I'm fortunate, where i live there are no permits issued or required to lawfully own or carry a pistol so no records exist to be "sunshined" by irresponsible "journalists" such as Mr. Trejbal. To go on, I also compliment you on your readers, most of the letters I see above are well written and reasoned. No death threats or obscenities to allow Trejbal making spurious claims to "fear for his life" (which is in no real danger from permit holders, who are a law abiding bunch.) In sum Sir thank you for setting things straight and I hope your career is much longer, and more successful at the Roanoke Times than his is likely to be. JWW

# 47

[March 15, 2007 5:28 PM]

CJS

I have nothing to add, as I agree with the disagreement on the acts by the slime ball reporter that published the names (including mine) of those citizens that choose to follow the law.

Let it be known that 4 subscriptions to the paper have now been cancelled, and will remain cancelled until 'slime ball' is fired, as well as the editor that approved the article is fired. I will continue to visit the website, not click on a single link, and thus drive up the cost of having an on-line presence.

Thank you.

# 48

[March 23, 2008 12:20 AM]

Terry Knapp

Whatever happened to NOT having the right to "shout 'FIRE' in a crowded theater?" Is that not equivalent to publishing this list, for the number of frightened exwives trying to hide and defend herself from a former spouse who has tried to kill her?

# 49

[March 23, 2008 9:19 PM]

Mark Taylor

Terry,

Thanks for your comment. Your concern is one that was shared by plenty of others when the list was briefly made public a year ago, and certainly contributed to the database's short life.

mt