People who approve publishing lists of gun owners cry foul over published list of Muslims

From Hotair:

This has become a running question in the internet age and it involves a lot more than just members of a particular religious group. Public officials of all sorts have had their personal information published in various forums and in newspapers. Just how “private” is that information? If your address is available on all manner of forms and documents, both government and commercial, is that really a secret? At the same time, making it easier for critics (and possibly those who wish to do you harm) to find you raises concerns. As I said… it’s at least a valid topic of debate.

But with that in mind, some of these same authors haven’t seemed to be quite as concerned when other people’s names and addresses have been published. In fact, sometimes it’s the mainstream media themselves doing it. How upset do you think these same folks were when lists of registered gun owners were published in the Journal News of Westchester County, New York? In that instance, the liberal opponents of gun rights at the newspaper actually went to court to sue Putnam County when their sheriff refused to turn over the names.

Where was the editorial board of the Washington Post when that happened? Were they concerned about pistol permit holders being “targets” of crazed anti-gun rights activists? I was unable to find any such protestations on a quick search, though perhaps I missed it.

I’m not saying that publishing the list of Muslims from a public, city council document (which only showed up briefly on Facebook, not in a newspaper) was a great idea. But at the same time, other groups who are not as prized or protected by the mainstream media don’t seem to generate such concern over their privacy. The lack of balance between these two instances is probably proof of all you need to know.

The Fourth Estate has not been a model of consistency, other than being liberal.