New York Law Would Check Social Media Before Issuing Gun Licenses

The bill was announced by Sen. Keving Parker and borough president Eric Adams. (Photo: Adams/Twitter)

A proposed New York law would set forth a stunning precedent for gun owners if passed. Senate Bill 9191 would require that anyone getting a state handgun license to have “his or her social media accounts and search engine history reviewed.”

“We hear about these instances where there’s a mass shooting,” said assemblywoman-elect Jamie Romeo, “but there were all these red flags. People should’ve seen this activity or somebody should have … is there a way that we could’ve seen this before tragedy struck?”

State Sen. Kevin Parker of Brooklyn introduced the bill. If signed into law the bill would allow law enforcement to audit applicants’ search engine history as far back as one year and their social media accounts back three years.

People applying for or renewing their handgun licenses would have their histories searched for “commonly known profane slurs or biased language used to describe the race, color, national origin, ancestry, gender, religion, religious practice, age, disability or sexual orientation of a person.”

The police would also scan applicants’ social media and search histories for language mentioning violence or terrorism.

“Today, @SenatorParker and I are announcing legislation to authorize the @NYSPolice and authorities like the @NYPD to conduct social media and internet search history reviews as part of the background check process for purchasing a gun,” said local borough president Eric Adams on Twitter. “Our primary goal must be to #endgunviolence.”

See Also: ACLU Backs NRA, File Brief Condemning New York Gov. Cuomo

“#Hatespeech that incites violence, or indicates the intent to commit violence, is not part of our constitutional tradition,” Adams continued. “As much as we want to eliminate hate speech entirely from our society, our primary goal must always be to end #gunviolence.”

“The Bill of Rights is totally under assault with this particular bill,” said New York Shooters Committee on Political Education, or SCOPE President Tim Andrews. “It’s an invasion of privacy. Some would see it as a Fourth Amendment violation and a violation of the First Amendment, freedom of speech.”

“What might seem offensive to you might not to me, and vice versa,” said Andrews. “And, unfortunately, even bigoted, tasteless speech is protected under the Bill of Rights. Your right to bear arms under the Second Amendment shouldn’t be subject to potentially limiting your First Amendment rights.”

The bill isn’t attached to any other initiatives and it is, most likely, just to continue the push for increased gun control in states with strict restrictions on the Second Amendment already in place. Legislators are using their letterhead to toss around ideas for new kinds of gun control even if it infringes on other amendments in the process.

***Buy and Sell on GunsAmerica! All Local Sales are FREE!***

About the author: Max Slowik is a writer with over a dozen years of experience and is a lifelong shooter. He has unwavering support for the Second Amendment and the human right to self-defense. His ambition is to follow Thomas Paine, as a journalist by profession and a propagandist by inclination.

{ 47 comments… add one }
  • ExGob March 22, 2019, 1:48 pm

    Following this, you will be required to have a social account before you can qualify to have a gun. Just what we need, more ignorance in positions of power.

  • Jory Humphreys December 3, 2018, 8:00 pm

    Who determines what is acceptable or not? Once passed, legislation like this become an open paradox for whoever is in control of the gov’t at the time to say we’re going to include everyone who’s ever said a racial wording that we choose to be barred or banned from this or that. If these rules are for safety to stop people from buying guns, wouldn’t it only make sense to stop them from voting as well since they clearly cannot be trusted?? It will never end, they will tie this link to everything in your life. Your driver’s license should be revoked as you’re deemed unsafe, your bank funds frozen until they look at what you’ve been buying. It’s endless and reeks of communist control and complete loss of freedom and privacy. Saying you hate (choose any random word) online does not make you mentally unstable or a threat to society. But this proposal will have you looking like a home grown terrorist for not playing nice to every snowflake online.

  • Floyd November 27, 2018, 2:16 pm

    More communist control!

  • Maybe Not.... November 26, 2018, 3:28 pm

    I was going to post a link to this article on social media, but then again……

  • Fal Phil November 26, 2018, 1:42 pm

    We shold return the favor. Have the elections officials check social media and search engine queries before approving candidates on the ballot.

    • WilliamS November 27, 2018, 12:40 pm

      We should also check out the election officials. In addition, I am not aware that any of the shooters had applied for a license or had applied for and passed an NICS background check. Therefore, a law requiring a social media check would only intrude on a persons 1st Amendment rights, it would be extremely expensive. I do think ,however, that such a law would provide employment for the election officials lazy, good-for -nothing family members to feed at the public trough.

  • Adam Jeppson November 26, 2018, 12:14 am

    This is why the conventional wisdom states: “never post anything you wouldn’t want to see on a headline”.

  • Scott November 25, 2018, 5:06 pm

    So let me get this straight…New York first wants to disabuse you of your first amendment right of free political speech on social media to revoke your second amendment right. Did I miss anything?

  • darryl November 25, 2018, 1:08 pm

    now you see why i have no social accounts. they can’t look at what you don’t have.

    • Erick November 26, 2018, 11:59 am

      Or, they see you have no social media and deny your 2nd amendment anyway b/c you have no social media they can check.
      They’re going to find a way to disarm people; they don’t play fair and they don’t care about reason, logic and least of all, the Constitution.
      It’s disarmament one way or another, given time.

  • Stan d. Upnow November 25, 2018, 12:56 am

    “… would have their histories searched for ‘commonly known profane slurs or biased language used to describe the race, color, national origin, ancestry, gender, religion, religious practice, age, disability or sexual orientation of a person.”’

    Additionally, checks would look for disapproved shoe colors, types of pets owned, whether ketchup or mustard is preferred on their hotdogs, type of vehicle driven, and if they have any affiliation with a known Republican, Libertarian, or any Conservative group.

    Any info discovered will be used to concoct a bogus dossier to present to a FISA court for a rubber-stamped
    surveillance authorization handed to the corrupt FBI.

    Thank you for your understanding & support. Have a nice day.

  • SeppW November 24, 2018, 3:47 pm

    Irony of this is not directed at making harder for criminals to obtain a firearm, but to make it harder for law-abiding citizens to obtain a firearm.

    When a liberal utters “gun control,” it means forced pacification of the people by removing their last means of self-defense, thus making them helpless against crime as well as government tyranny and plunder. “Gun control” is an Orwellian term which actually means “disarm the citizens.” Its intent is to protect government against dissent – insuring that government power and abuse cannot be seriously challenged.

  • KurtW November 24, 2018, 10:39 am

    Well, I guess that da revrinzes sharpton and jackson won’t be getting permits anytime soon.
    And most of Hollyweird…….

    By logical extension, does this also apply to protective details for the above? Can’t have hate-filled wackjobs protected by eeeeevil guns, even if wielded by guards acting in their proxy.

  • Jeff November 24, 2018, 4:39 am

    When a politician calls the contents of our constitution “traditions” you know he has no respect for the rights it protects. This state is a mess and is being drug into the dung pile by politicians who respect our rights to choose so poorly that they tried to outlaw large fountain drinks.

    • Mahatma Muhjesbude November 25, 2018, 2:10 pm

      Yeah, and who, exactly, determines the effective criteria for assessment and evaluation? Everything anybody says or does, to some degree or someone’s personal perspective, can be subjectively determined to be ‘violent’?

      JEEsus, how this unfortunate House legislation power gain really open the gates of 2nd/A hell upon us? There’s no stopping them now. Soros and that ‘Media Matter’s Billionaire and a few other gazillionaires who have nothing else to do with their obscene millions but to stomp out the ringhts of others are hell bent to take back the Senate And the POTUS along with boosting enough additional Congress votes to garnish enough of a majority vote to override any of Trump’s Vetos should he unlikely survive to continue in 2020, instead of being crushed by that Beto JFK clone who just narrowly lost to Ted Cruz recently, who they’re already ‘gunning up’ for the blast against Trump in another fast countdown to 2020?

      I hate being a ‘prophet of doom’ but I like being an ‘I told you so’. I called all of this in several blogs and articles over the past few years but of course, the MOLAN LABE crowd stood their course in abject denial. It can never happen, they all insisted. some of the larger testicular bravado trumpeted all the firepower power their minions have that they believe–almost religiously–in their Rambo fantasies–they could stop the government tanks and armed tactical drones and electronic munitions, and invulnerable robots, not to mention special chemicals and tactics even if a ‘civil war’ resistance to totalitarian tyranny broke hard and furious on the super duped Molan Labers and other good citizens citizens against tyranny. Which some of us tactical thinking people know probably wouldn’t get very far since all they have to do is utilize their ‘cut the head off the snake’ strategies using all their spying resources and instant location and neutralizing tactics they’ve been building and setting up with all the unwitting ‘consent by inaction’ of the Molan Labers who should have been proactively organizing and stopping their municipalities from having things like mass license plate readers, and local city patrol drones (Chicago) and such other very ‘wet’ rain on your Rev parades.

      And in the two years of the so-called Trump MAGA politics NOT ONE FUCKING UNCONSTITUTIONAL GUN CONTROL LAW HAS BEEN REPEALED, AND NOT ONE TREASONOUS ‘LAWMAKER’ HAS BEEN ARRESTED, SHACKLED, AND PERP WALKED UNDER USCC 18-241-242?!

      So why the fuck do you think these Extreme Totalitarians don’t give dead dog shit about all the crybaby moutholutionists who talk shit, but never do shit, and are now going hog wild and slob crazing over taking away your rights–ALL of them eventually– while we just piss and moan like the mewling sheeple we are expected to be?

      “Nothing happens until something moves” –Einstein

      All we had to do was organize only half as well as the

  • Sean Carberry November 23, 2018, 7:41 pm

    …and what kind of porn people are watching. How is this not invasion of privacy?

  • WizBang November 23, 2018, 5:45 pm

    Same scrutiny for ANYONE holding public office. Equal justice. Equal treatment.

  • G November 23, 2018, 1:12 pm

    Does anyone understand the meaning of the word investigation? Anything requiring a background check indicates they can be checking information you make public. Why would anyone assume this is NOT being checked? For this or anything (job application etc) . If you think your social media info is somehow private you are fooling yourself. That is the world we live in. People need to put thought into what they post and show some maturity. If you act like a drug using lunatic on FB bragging about all your ho’s, maybe issuing a permit isn’t a great idea. If they are excluding you for reasons that are unconstitutional then that is a separate issue and can be addressed.

    • Mahatma Muhjesbude November 25, 2018, 2:55 pm

      Everybody see what G said. He’s absolutely correct in the current bad slippery slope reality manifestation, but not the libertarian presumption according to our Constitution.

      Background checks are highly susceptible to corruption through bias and misinterpretation. Always have been and always will be. But they became part of the convoluted system we have now. The original filter had to ultimately be if there was ACTUAL criminal intent in one’s vocal expressions followed by reasonable suspicion to look for probable cause for a conspiracy or a furtherance of action in pursuit of a statutory criminal act. Now it’s out of control agenda based tyranny in a nascent, but steadily proliferating form.

      Most social media hate speech , nonsense obnoxious internet and you tube videos, blogs, extremist social media exchanges, and whatever these Nazi gun permit checks want to conduct investigations on, DO NOT RISE TO THE AFOREMENTIONED REQUIREMENTS. And are still seriously protected by our Constitution, even while being eviscerated by insane leftists and in its death throes? So this should be an easy one to challenge in Court, (in fact, being a ramblin’ gamblin’ man, i’d venture a small wager that there already is settled case law on this exact premise?)

      Put another way, G was making a sincere, thoughtful point, but it just wasn’t correct, and illustrates how easily we all can be manipulated by mind control. Because ‘acting like a drug addict, and posting pictures of your arsenal on SM, and bragging about all the Ho’s you spank, in and of itself IS NOT A CRIME. This is done, in fact, all the time in movies. And these days outrageous behavior is becoming a way of new age cultural expression…as these same extreme Marxists have defended when it suits their own purpose?

      And everybody is simply way too ‘over-stressed’ on subjective evaluations these days. I accompanied a friend who asked me to go with her to pick up rent from a new tenant because she had some trepidation over the way they were acting the first time she picked up her rent. There were ‘culturally different’ Christians who seemed to live in a state of constant ‘penance’ in a noticeably austere home environment. I started a nice conversation with them and they couldn’t go one statement without mentioning their love of JEEsus and their serious hatred for this world of Satan that they live in where he and all his followers should be ‘cast in the sea of fire’…! They had weird shifty eyes and couldn’t or wouldn’t make direct eye contact. They stank from poor hygiene and there were no lights (on) only candles with all the shades down to keep out the sunlight? They did have the TV channel on tuned to a religious preaching station.

      I, personally, think this is much more ‘concerning’ than some wanna be hood rapper talking stupid shit on social media. But the fact remains, Nothing they were doing–just like the ‘lunatic who was bragging about his ho”– was illegal. So my ‘opinion’ does not mean much. And I told her if they make you nervous have them mail the rent check, and mind your own business.

      So that’s why people’s impressions should always ‘modulated’ by our Constitutional Rule of Law. Not the other way around. Other wise we’d have a world of constantly fighting way out of control nitwits when you consider that subjective opinions are like assholes. Everybody has one and they’re all full of shit.

      And you can’t use ‘Shit’ to determine if someone is ‘allowed’ to exercise their Constitutional Right to carry!

  • Henry Bowman November 23, 2018, 12:39 pm

    Well, it just might be time to open that fourth box. Ooops, was that considered hate speech?

  • GLS November 23, 2018, 11:59 am

    How’s about mandatory drug testing for all Senators and Reps?…

    • Tom B November 23, 2018, 12:19 pm

      yea along with checking their social media accounts and all their personal information for their whole life!!!!!

  • Phil November 23, 2018, 11:40 am

    The Insane Asylum is running the state! What will prevent such idiots from morphing it into any prerequisite to own property, motorized conveyances, sharp instruments, swimming pools, water buckets, sports equipment, rope, tape, etc. or anything they can dream up!

    • Stan d. Upnow November 25, 2018, 1:04 am

      Yup. Look what they tried to hang Brett Kavanaugh with– a few words scribbled on a calendar from 36 years ago!

  • Matt November 23, 2018, 11:10 am

    @NoMoreTribes
    Your point is valid thinking is incorrect/incomplete. Patriot Act already has ISIS (and slews of other) websites monitored. Therefore your argument was addressed better than 15 years ago.
    The point here is freedom to monitor, catalog and use information against citizens with guidelines that are, themselves, open to bias. “Hate Speech” is whatever the complainant says it is. Whomever is in power will decide who gets guns. Make it law and it is no different, in principle, than Jim Crow. That’s the worst possible situation and is the complete opposite of the 2nd amendment.

  • Jay November 23, 2018, 11:01 am

    So their wanting a law that in it’s basics are requiring you to be a liberal, socialist, communist, gay, lesbian, transie, thumb sucking, Non-white, PC ranting, safe space buffoon that will give up first amendment rights to have your second!

  • Buddy November 23, 2018, 10:41 am

    Voter fraud is placing these people in office and zero requirements to take and uphold oath’s of office. The slippery slope in now a cliff. Muslims and communists in office in DC. This defies any oath of office in the US yet not one protest or complaint filed..

    CA openly allowing ilkegals to vote.
    Not one investigation as to how many House Democratic members were added ftom CA to lose the House.

    Globalists are destroying America from within.

    • Clint W. November 24, 2018, 10:07 am

      Seems like Joe McCarthy was right after all.

    • Stan d. Upnow November 25, 2018, 1:08 am

      Isn’t the FBI supposed to conduct a thorough background check on each member of Congress before they’re sworn-in?
      Oh wait………..

  • Alan Dinehart November 23, 2018, 9:55 am

    “…..the right of the people to keep and bear (Carry) arms shall not be infringed.” Can’t find a better ban on ANY government interference with our right to keep and bear arms!

  • don j. November 23, 2018, 9:47 am

    this is typical of politicians in new York city trying to control the good people of upstate new York , these liberal lefties could care less about the people who never get to decide about what is said or done upstate. they are 100% clueless.

    • Stan d. Upnow November 25, 2018, 1:14 am

      don j., we consider your lack of approval & support for our outrageous bill to be “hate speech.”
      You are hereby banned from future purchases of firearms and ammo. The sheriff has been ordered
      to confiscate any firearms & ammo you now possess.
      Resistance is futile. Have a nice day.

  • nuthinmuffin November 23, 2018, 9:35 am

    first and second amendment supreme court challenges…brooklyn is the new western moscow

  • Eric November 23, 2018, 9:18 am

    This would be pointless, as much as it is unlawful. There are too many people that have rude humor amongst friends that would be found profane or racist. No harm is intended, but the government wouldn’t see it that way. And, these people are no real threat to anyone that isnt trying to harm them. Another thing is that people that commit these crimes are not likely to post these “signs”. They’re a different kind of stupid that’s smarter than that. The ones we need to worry about are not concerned with being able to get a gun at a gun shop or anywhere legally. This type of law would, once again, make it harder to get a gun in the hands of the man that needs it to protect himself, his family and other potential victims.

  • Jeffrey November 23, 2018, 9:12 am

    Its the beginning of George Orwells 1984!! Friggin scary!

  • David Welsh November 23, 2018, 8:57 am

    Stupid, uneducated “lawmakets” are de facto lawbreakers. One shouldn’t even need a license.

  • Norman Norris November 23, 2018, 8:48 am

    This is actually a well thought out first step to purge the population of citizens who have “wrong think”. Cheers! Cuomo. You and your family can’t seem to spread enough hate so make it the LAW!

  • krinkov5.45 November 23, 2018, 8:39 am

    Why are these anti gunner azzholes always vile pencil neck geeks?

  • DaveD November 23, 2018, 8:21 am

    Just another part of Communist government.

  • Ghost November 23, 2018, 7:46 am

    Sieg Heil, Sieg Heil, Sieg Hiel… Ve Vill Dis arm America

  • srsquidizen November 23, 2018, 7:24 am

    Search history is ephemeral and can be erased so well even expensive time-consuming forensic methods may not recover it. Passing it on to the government would require technology inserted into home networks or ISP’s that immediately sends all search info to humongous databases controlled by bureaucrats. Can you say “unreasonable search and seizure” boys and girls?

    Such an outrageous idea even the ACLU (usually right on board with any libtard thinking) can’t figure out a way that it’s even remotely Constitutional. What’s next? Government surveillance cameras throughout the house of anybody who wants to own a gun? Glad I live in a state which, at least so far, has demonstrated some respect for the entire Bill of Rights. The “license” required here is called the Second Amendment.

  • Mike Ross November 23, 2018, 4:34 am

    How can this happen in the US? Don’t those NY politicians know how profoundly un-American this is? Sieg f’ing Heil Senator Parker.

    • WVinMN November 23, 2018, 9:34 am

      Are you serious?!? “Don’t they know how profoundly un-American this?”! Of course they do! They HATE America, the Constitution, and anyone who believes in either! They are the ENEMY!

  • NoMoreTribes November 23, 2018, 3:01 am

    So, according to this author active participation in ISIS forums shouldn’t be a red flag to gun purchases. We have completely gone down the rabbit hole.

    • Mike Gee Wizz November 23, 2018, 10:30 am

      Let’s think about this for just a second, people. Someone who is active on a terrorist websites wants to legally obtain a firearm(neutered one at that) in the People’s republic of New Yorkastan??? The probability that this said person is on government watch lists is high! Everything we do in the public sphere is observed, categorized and sold off for profits. I am glaring at you Facebook and all other types of social media. The United States government intelligence apparatus is well developed and it’s tentacles goes far and deep. I do not think that some dim bulbs off colour jokes on I-spy-on-your-boring-life Facebook should prevent them from obtaining a firearm in the Orwellian hell hole that is NY state!

  • mtman2 November 23, 2018, 2:51 am

    Totally unConstitutional.
    4th-Amendment stands.

  • Mike V November 22, 2018, 9:35 pm

    The slippery slope gets more slippery.

    But why not, the place trusts government for everything else, why not trust them to judge whether your opinions are dangerous.

Leave a Comment

Send this to a friend