• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Gun Control Law- Give Police Your Social Media Passwords, or be Refused a License?

Should Americans be Required to Give Police Their Social Media Passwords, or be Refused a License?

  • Total voters
    43
Myview said:
Everyone has their opinion. Social media background checks are now common. I understand that connecting it with guns will cause the right to piss in its collective pants at the very mention. There isn't much chance that such a gun related law will be passed in Democrat controlled New York State. Depends on how limited or expansive the law is. I have my opinion, you are welcomed to yours.
Click to expand...

That (bolded above) assertion is based on what, exactly? I see no such reference on form 4473 - do you?
 
ttwtt78640 said:
That (bolded above) assertion is based on what, exactly? I see no such reference on form 4473 - do you?
Click to expand...

Social media background checks are common for certain types of employment. No one has connected social media to gun background checks until now.
 
Myview said:
Social media background checks are common for certain types of employment. No one has connected social media to gun background checks until now.
Click to expand...

Yep, thus they are not "common" by any means. A law allowing the limiting of individual constitutional rights based only on one's refusal to (potentially) self-incriminate should be ruled to violate the 5A. Certain types of employment are not a constitutional right and also do not require posting a non-refundable deposit.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Yep, thus they are not "common" by any means. A law allowing the limiting of individual constitutional rights based only on one's refusal to (potentially) self-incriminate should be ruled to violate the 5A. Certain types of employment are not a constitutional right and also do not require posting a non-refundable deposit.
Click to expand...

is there anyone out there who DOES NOT think that people will be denied based on politics?
 
TurtleDude said:
is there anyone out there who DOES NOT think that people will be denied based on politics?
Click to expand...

One must be a "hater", or at least capable of serious evil intent, if they had ever visited a website also viewed (or sponsored by) someone on the SPLC's "hate group" list.
 
truthatallcost said:
Should Americans be Required to Give Police Their Social Media Passwords, or be Refused a License?

Other stories I've seen say the NY legislators want to expand the law if passed, to iinclude everyone who buys or already owns a gun.
Click to expand...

Oh sure. Your thoughts and opinions will be subject to a committee. What can possibly go wrong? Why have we not seen the answer sooner?

There is something about the left and liberals that ignore the negative consequences of their dumb assed ideas.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Yep, thus they are not "common" by any means. A law allowing the limiting of individual constitutional rights based only on one's refusal to (potentially) self-incriminate should be ruled to violate the 5A. Certain types of employment are not a constitutional right and also do not require posting a non-refundable deposit.
Click to expand...

Gobbley gook is not an answer. I like this. I will have 1000 posts in no time. To bear the second 6A in forbearance will not nullify the first precedents right to question the law. Condensed down to its common denominator I have liberal views on gun control; to wit, common sense gun control is possible. I'm not going to change my mind. You have Libertarian/Conservative views; to wit, any gun control is a attack on my first amendment rights. You are not going to change your mind. I look forward to your next pointless gobbley gook and my pointless answer. We are just spinning our wheels and adding nothing to the conversation.
 
Myview said:
Gobbley gook is not an answer. I like this. I will have 1000 posts in no time. To bear the second 6A in forbearance will not nullify the first precedents right to question the law. Condensed down to its common denominator I have liberal views on gun control; to wit, common sense gun control is possible. I'm not going to change my mind. You have Libertarian/Conservative views; to wit, any gun control is a attack on my first amendment rights. You are not going to change your mind. I look forward to your next pointless gobbley gook and my pointless answer. We are just spinning our wheels and adding nothing to the conversation.
Click to expand...

COMMON SENSE laws to me are ones that are honestly and intentionally designed to reduce gun crime. However, most of the stuff liberals push as Common sense are only sensible if you see their efforts as designed to harass lawful gun owners and gun ownership. As crime control measures-those schemes are not sensible at all
 
I try to tell people that nothing good comes from social media. It can cost a person more than their job.
 
Waddy said:
I try to tell people that nothing good comes from social media. It can cost a person more than their job.
Click to expand...

never was on SM when I was a DOJ attorney for that reason alone
 
Another asinine idea brought to you by the Unthinking Left.
 
TurtleDude said:
COMMON SENSE laws to me are ones that are honestly and intentionally designed to reduce gun crime. However, most of the stuff liberals push as Common sense are only sensible if you see their efforts as designed to harass lawful gun owners and gun ownership. As crime control measures-those schemes are not sensible at all
Click to expand...

I don't think anyone's 2nd Amendment rights are in any danger. The perception on the right is even something as simple as banning bump stocks will start us down a slippery slope so many on the right are against any gun measure.
There are 11,000,000 AR15 type weapons alone already in circulation by the latest figures I could find. Any gun control measure seems like spitting into a hurricane.
 
Myview said:
I don't think anyone's 2nd Amendment rights are in any danger. The perception on the right is even something as simple as banning bump stocks will start us down a slippery slope so many on the right are against any gun measure.
There are 11,000,000 AR15 type weapons alone already in circulation by the latest figures I could find. Any gun control measure seems like spitting into a hurricane.
Click to expand...

are you familiar with the state laws in Md, NJ, NY, California, and Connecticut?
 
joko104 said:
The CDC will do anything to have a bigger budget and to divert from who most often wrongly kills people are doctors - over 250,000 people a year.

The proposed law is just another example of the Democratic Party trying to keep firearms out of the hands of black people or anyone who isn't a rich, white Democrat. As a side benefit it allows spying on any political opposition to continued white Democratic control.
Click to expand...
You have zero insight regarding the goals of the CDC.
Zero. Nada. Nothing.
 
Should Americans be forced to give a list of medications before exercising their 1st Amendment right? Many medications have mood altering side effects which may lead to unintended speech which could cause hate, divisiveness, offense, and violence.

Should Americans be forced to give a detailed account of what they have done before exercising their 5th Amendment right? They might have actually killed someone and the fact that this antiquated amendment gives them the opportunity to get off scot-free because only they know what they've done for sure, has allowed countless crimes to go unsolved.

Should Americans be forced to give a detailed account of their calendar for the next 2 years before exercising their 6th Amendment right? If their schedule is wide open why on earth should they get a speedy trial? The system is backlogged and our poor civil servants are sooooo over worked. Let their ass rot for a few years before we get to them if they ain't got nothing better going on.


I could go on but, seriously. This is one of the most dumb ass things I've heard in a while, and in these times, that's saying something.
 
truthatallcost said:
Should Americans be Required to Give Police Their Social Media Passwords, or be Refused a License?

Other stories I've seen say the NY legislators want to expand the law if passed, to iinclude everyone who buys or already owns a gun.
Click to expand...

Yes. We should also give them our bank account numbers and our ex-wives... oh wait... that one would be alright.
 
I am a gun control supporter but would never support this idea, ever.
 
Myview said:
Yes, why not? Many American companies require your social media keys before they hire you as part of a back ground check. If you are a wacko making threats on social media why should you be given a gun license? America's independence and privacy obsession should end where the rights of the public to safety begin. There are too many shooters who after the fact are said to have given red flag signals on social media. Why don't we give anyone a gun, no questions asked? That is what it amounts to in America today. You can have serious mental issues and not have a criminal record. It does not surprise me that so many Americans have no problem with giving anyone without a criminal record guns and permits.
Click to expand...

The US government isn't a private entity. Also, if someone is making terroristic threats, there are laws already passed that deal with it. This proposal not only looks for any terroristic threats, but also look for any opinions deemed offensive to minorities.
 
Maccabee said:
The US government isn't a private entity. Also, if someone is making terroristic threats, there are laws already passed that deal with it. This proposal not only looks for any terroristic threats, but also look for any opinions deemed offensive to minorities.
Click to expand...

given the politics of cuomo I suspect that if on FB or other sites you stated

1) affirmative action is racism

2) many illegal immigrants are criminals

3) that the Democrat party is trying to eliminate gun rights

4) the wall should be built

5) men should be restricted to using men's designated bathrooms

6) abortion or homosexuality is a "sin"

etc, the bannerrhoid bureaucracy would deny you a license
 
Gun Control Law- Give Police Your Social Media [SM] Passwords, or be Refused a License?
Click to expand...
I don't know really what you're getting at, OP-er, but the behavior/requirement noted in the title wouldn't bother me.
  • If cops want my SM passwords so they can background-check me prior to approving my purchase of a gun, fine.
  • Why would cops need one's password? Aren't one's SM postings public to begin with?
  • That cops may want one's SM passwords is yet another reason not to use SM
  • If one insists on using SM, at least be prudent enough not to air all of one's "business," madnesses/choler, and "dirty laundry" on it.
    • Alternatively, if one must air one's choler and "dirty laundry" on SM, do so in a manner so that it's clear one is a sane and rational person who is angry and has "dirty laundry," rather than doing so in ways that suggest one is a choleric/wrathful/vengeful, mad and/or irrational person.
It seems to me that once one has obtained the firearm, one can change one's passwords. Is that not so?
 
TurtleDude said:
given the politics of cuomo I suspect that if on FB or other sites you stated

1) affirmative action is racism

2) many illegal immigrants are criminals

3) that the Democrat party is trying to eliminate gun rights

4) the wall should be built

5) men should be restricted to using men's designated bathrooms

6) abortion or homosexuality is a "sin"

etc, the bannerrhoid bureaucracy would deny you a license
Click to expand...

Well said. Who here is so dense that they cannot recognize a veiled threat to our First Amendment rights? Actually, the threat is obvious. To have free speech, a person must be feel comfortable expressing free speech. On top of it, this proposal is also an assault on the Second Amendment.
 
Only Conservatives. They are the ones sending out bomb threats, shooting up schools, churches, and synagogues because of Trump's Neo-Nazi hate rhetoric.
 
Logician Man said:
Only Conservatives. They are the ones sending out bomb threats, shoot up schools, churches, and synogogues because of Trump's hate rhetoric.
Click to expand...

so many silly lies in two sentences. First of all is the rabid blind hatred of conservatives and claiming that only conservatives should be subjected by a stupid law that is proposed by mendacious liberals in the first place. Second is the lie that left-wingers aren't sending out bomb threats and ignores the fact that a liberal shot up a GOP baseball game wounding a GOP congressman severely. The third lie is trying to pretend that the few cases of alleged conservatives engaging in mass mayhem is because of Trump. It shows the intrinsic dishonesty in the anti gun left
 
I don't believe in free gun control but to me that is too intrusive in someone's right to privacy. Why the hell should the police have those passwords to begin with, it ain't none of their business what someone does legally on their social media.
 
TurtleDude said:
so many silly lies in two sentences. First of all is the rabid blind hatred of conservatives and claiming that only conservatives should be subjected by a stupid law that is proposed by mendacious liberals in the first place. Second is the lie that left-wingers aren't sending out bomb threats and ignores the fact that a liberal shot up a GOP baseball game wounding a GOP congressman severely. The third lie is trying to pretend that the few cases of alleged conservatives engaging in mass mayhem is because of Trump. It shows the intrinsic dishonesty in the anti gun left
Click to expand...

:lamo:lamo:lamo Gonzo Gunny to the rescue!!! fricking comedy gold :spank:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom