A couple of NY law makers want to make it mandatory to have your social media accounts and search history for the last three years reviewed before you can have a gun.  Guess in trying to kill the 2nd Amendment they want to kill the 1st Amendment as well.

 

https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2018/11/daniel-zimmerman/coming-to-an-anti-gun-state-near-you-ny-pols-want-social-media-checks-before-buying-guns/

20 minutes ago, Howard said:

A couple of NY law makers want to make it mandatory to have your social media accounts and search history for the last three years reviewed before you can have a gun.  Guess in trying to kill the 2nd Amendment they want to kill the 1st Amendment as well.

 

https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2018/11/daniel-zimmerman/coming-to-an-anti-gun-state-near-you-ny-pols-want-social-media-checks-before-buying-guns/

My first instinct is to say "No WAY!!!" Can't happen, this is AMERICA!" 

Then I think for a moment about all the nonsensical crap these bleeping people have already shoved down our throats,,,,,,,,,,I'm sure our esteemed (koff koff) guvnah Murphy will jump at the chance to back this.

I'm torn between thanking you for alerting us about this, and wanting to play ostrich.

The worst part is that most social media companies are fairly anti gun and generally unfailingly progressive.  They will most likely allow it to happen and not try to fight for privacy.  It would, in my under-educated mind, be stomping on 1, 2, and 4.  All in the name of protecting us from ourselves.  

I'm curious to see if the ACLU jumps in on this. 

Oh snap, this thread topic was already started earlier:

 

Hope Murphy doesn't find out about this one.

 

He will. He’s got that goofy governor club he started. 

Lets,make a list of things that would trigger our public servants to strip us of our rights by State force:

If you criticized government.  

If you got mad at something.  

If you like Trump.  

If you farted in an elevator.  

 

Anything else?

The problem is that a select few states are in competition for who can make up the most dumbass laws. NY can't let Cali or Jersey win, so here comes this shit. Next up will be requiring video cameras that automatically upload clips every time a swear word is uttered installed in cars of people who want to own guns, requiring 150 "randomly picked" social media friends to sign off on your application, the approval of your 1st grade teacher, and a state senator personally signing a notarized form allowing you to own guns. If any of the above are unobtainable, any 3 plus a $150,000 "donation" to your governer may be ok.

 

Would be interested in seeing full social media accounts and search history of those politicians though. Wonder how many search histories would show things like:

Best inconspicuous ways to ask for bribes

How to hide money

How to hide payoff

Best places to conduct deals away from office

How to tell if someone is wearing a wire

Is it cheating if i only fuck her ass

Age of consent in ny

Statutory rape punishment

Do motels still accept cash only

Why do my constituants keep talking about the book "animal farm"

How to delete pictures so fbi can't find them

How do i delete computer history

How do i delete google search history

How can i bribe google

Has any state law punished google

How to copy and paste text

2 hours ago, deerpark said:

Lets,make a list of things that would trigger our public servants to strip us of our rights by State force:

If you criticized government.  

If you got mad at something.  

If you like Trump.  

If you farted in an elevator.  

 

Anything else?

You're breathing.

 

21 hours ago, Bully said:

The worst part is that most social media companies are fairly anti gun and generally unfailingly progressive.  They will most likely allow it to happen and not try to fight for privacy.  It would, in my under-educated mind, be stomping on 1, 2, and 4.  All in the name of protecting us from ourselves.  

I'm curious to see if the ACLU jumps in on this. 

They haven't jumped in on any of the other stuff affecting people who are suffering from anti 2A discrimination. 

8 hours ago, 345Sire said:

They haven't jumped in on any of the other stuff affecting people who are suffering from anti 2A discrimination. 

Actually I remember them jumping in on one although I can’t remember the details at this moment. I remember thinking it MUST be bad if they’re coming out against anti-gun legislation. 

Found it..

 

16 hours ago, Bully said:

Actually I remember them jumping in on one although I can’t remember the details at this moment. I remember thinking it MUST be bad if they’re coming out against anti-gun legislation. 

Found it..

 

I stand corrected. I guess they DO do at least a smidge for us now and then.

Thanks for the clarification. Obviously you have been able to keep up with things better than I have, and I do appreciate the input.

I was always of the opinion that the no-fly lists were painfully poorly developed, explained, or fairly applied. Since one can be added to it at anytime, and without recourse (in most cases) and so called "mistakes" are all but impossible to get corrected, one can hardly accept the idea of summarily being added to another denial list merely due to inclusion on that one. 

I'm glad others on here keep better informed than I. It helps to have another easy to find info source like this one.