I guess what's good for the goose isn't necessarily good for the gander.

Politico:

The Journal News of West Nyack, N.Y., has hired armed security guards to defend its offices after receiving a torrent of phone calls and emails responding to the paper's publication of the names and addresses of area residents with pistol permits.

RGA Investigations, a private security company, "is doing private security at on location at the Journal News as a result of the negative response to the article," according to a police report first obtained by the Rockland County Times (Nanuet, N.Y.) and shared with POLITICO. The guards "are armed and will be on site during business hours through at least January 2, 2013."

Last month, in the wake of last month's elementary school shooting in Newtown, Conn., the Gannett-owned Journal News published interactive maps showing the names and addresses of pistol permit holders in New York's Westchester and Rockland counties. Conservatives and gun rights advocates publicly protested the paper's move; on Monday, the New York State Rifle & Pistol Association called for a nationwide boycott of the paper's advertisers, calling it a "wanton act" that "has put in harm's way tens of thousands of lawful license holders."

The Journal News continues to host the map on its website and has said that it will soon add a map listing all pistol permit holders in Putnam County.

According to the Clarkstown Police report, filed today, Journal News editor Caryn McBride had "previously reported a large amount of negative correspondence in response to the media outlet's publication of local gun permit holders." McBride shared one email with the police officer from "an unknown subject who wondered what McBride would get in her email now." The officer told McBride the email did not constitute an offense.

We shouldn't wish that harm comes to anyone. And it's probably a good idea to hire armed guards in light of the paper's outrageous publication of the names and addresses of gun permit owners. As we have seen, mentally unstable people can get their hands on weapons which could lead to tragedy.

But shouldn't there be some kind of retraction, or acknowledgement that guns have their uses in promoting self defense? The paper put gun owners in at least as much danger as they exposed themselves to. Why do they rate armed protection and everyone else doesn't?

This kind of blatant hypocrisy should be challenged at every turn.