Here we go - NYS to check social media before issuing gun licenses

What a great idea. Surely this will stand the test of time and be a responsible use of public money

And just how, exactly, are they going to verify you even HAVE any of you chose but to admit to any? Searches only go so far.

This kind of stuff is deliberately designed to clog up the court system, because they know it will be challenged.

"We need you to list all your social media accounts."

"Sorry, don't have any to list."

"We need contact information for any adults living at your residence."

"Sorry, that's private information I'm not privileged to give out."

RetiredUSNChief said:

"We need you to list all your social media accounts."

"Sorry, don't have any to list."

"We need contact information for any adults living at your residence."

"Sorry, that's private information I'm not privileged to give out."

Click to expand...

They would take those responses as grounds for denial and you'll need a couple million dollars to appeal it to the Supreme Court for them to specify otherwise. Remember, these are the same folks who consider having no social media accounts to be an indicator of psychopathy.

I wonder who is going to read all of the posts and I wonder if they'll read posts by NY applicants to gun forums like this one and what they'll do with that information?

Golly gee it sure sounds like a violation of privacy and the president says that the right to privacy is a fundamental right.

C0untZer0 said:

Golly gee it sure sounds like a violation of privacy and the president says that the right to privacy is a fundamental right.

Click to expand...

When it comes to pursuing the 2A, all other rights are evidently not reserved.

General Geoff said:

They would take those responses as grounds for denial and you'll need a couple million dollars to appeal it to the Supreme Court for them to specify otherwise. Remember, these are the same folks who consider having no social media accounts to be an indicator of psychopathy.

Click to expand...

No different that challenging their stance in the first place, since the outcome would be the same.

Social media accounts are not subject to government inspection and monitoring without a search warrant UNLESS they're public.

Facebook accounts, for example, are not accessible by others if the privacy settings are set as such. If government agents, such as law enforcement, want access they can get a warrant. If individuals choose, they can allow it as they see fit.

Many social media accounts aren't under a real person's name, though an email may ultimately tie them. Like my account here.

I say "screw them". If it's THAT important to them, they can spend the resources finding that info themselves. I'm not about to hand them any such thing.

And if they should refuse?

Well, the way things look I'm sure there will be attorneys chomping at the bit to gather lots of clean-cut people for law suits that have a decent chance at making them a name as attorneys that took up a cause that successfully made it through the Supreme Court in challenge.

RetiredUSNChief said:

I say "screw them". If it's THAT important to them, they can spend the resources finding that info themselves. I'm not about to hand them any such thing.

Click to expand...

"Applicant shows disregard for authority. Permit denied"

At Volokh Conspiracy there was a story of a technician who moved to a job in New York City and who posted on social media that he wished there was a one stop supermarket handy because the system of Bodegas (specialized corner convenience stores) confused him. A cabal of cancel culture Karens started a social media campaign to make his employer fire him over his "gentrification" attitude, and they did.

Reason #273 not to move to New York so you won't have to escape from New York.

I'd be like, no FB, Twitter, Instagram, only gun forums; read my posts and follow my advice (example), thank me later.

Oh sure... my online handles are goodguy, angelsRus, and lovepuppies... and good luck researching any of them... Then I'd carefully list the most popular on line forums - that every lefty knows and loves..

More than one way to skin a cat... or an overwhelming bureaucracy dedicated to making sure you KNOW you're in New York...

Seriously - very glad I'm not living in Democrat land... Me, I figure if I ever had to go there it would be part of a probation agreement because I did something bad (or tongue in cheek...).

I've never logged onto (and never will) the "big box store" social media sites (Twit, FB, etc). I wonder if they'll believe people when they are told that, and how they intend to confirm it's true.

What about late night (or afternoon) drunk posts? Some people......... huh?(NewYork tone in voice) Hell some people say ANYTHING just to get “likes.” How can they possibly take anything seriously online when most people are fake as hell online or on their Fakebook accounts?

One more flaming hoop to make people jump through. It is all in order to make legal gun ownership so onerous that no one in the future will try to buy a gun anymore.

Stay safe.

Force through a change to include EVERYBODY ELSE who currently carries a firearm, or otherwise will be required to carry a firearm, in which EXACTLY THE SAME RULES APPLY.

Let's see how the works with the largest police force in the country.

And this includes the periodic, ongoing background checks required, as well.

That would be an interesting scenario for me and people like me. The only places I post are you tube (where I have an account and comment, but produce no content) and here- where, unlike cheers, no one really "knows my name". They probably would assume I was living under a log like Ted Kazinksy if they found out I had none of the big social media time wasters, and deny me just based on that.

Have a similar criterion for voting. Have a similar criterion for publishing your opinion after your past opinions are scrutinized for political correctness. Is this not a First Amendment problem as what you opine is punished by the state? Seems obvious to me.

As I said repeatedly, the problem is whether the courts will deal with this with alacrity or will it take years to resolve. I think the latter is the case. NY obviously had this set up for the decision but Scotus was (expletives here) to predict or short circuit this. The idea that they only deal with what was in front of them is negated by Clarence discussing sensitive areas and then blowing it.

CC permits have long been used as trading cards for the wealthy and influential in NY- if just anybody can get one, they lose their value as political rewards to Democrat donors and Union bosses.

So how do they plan on actually enforcing this?

Crazy...

It is silly. I really don’t have any social media accounts due to job requirements for high trust. Working on firewalls and such. Is this site social media? Wonder how they will handle license renewals and such.

dh1633pm said:

It is silly. I really don’t have any social media accounts due to job requirements for high trust. Working on firewalls and such. Is this site social media? Wonder how they will handle license renewals and such.

Click to expand...

For them THR will be considered social media, anywhere you post or say thoughts, and it is by design to burden the system to deny someone from having a gun. I'm sure this will go to court.

It will go to court because it is beyond being rediculous it is flatout unconstitutional.

"But this approach worked so well in China... ."

If "good cause" is unconstitutional, due to being a subjective judgement, is not "good character" also, and for the same reason?