Well, I’m fucked

NEW YORK (WCBS 880) – Two New York lawmakers are working to draft a bill that would propose a social media check before a gun purchase.

Brooklyn Borough President Eric Adams and state Sen. Kevin Palmer’s proposal would allow authorities to review three years of social media history and one year of internet search history of any person seeking to purchase a firearm.
MORE
-Starvin’ Larry

*****

Strangely enough, I can see this passing in New York, New Jersey, California and Massachusetts, then spreading to other states, all because of school shootings and political assaults where the shooter or assailant broadcasted his intentions.
What these fucking idiots don’t realize is that some of us have dark and/or warped senses of humor and we post shit to reflect that. We see funny shit that made us laugh and we share it or pass it on. Hell, about half the crap I post here came from somebody sharing it with me because it made them laugh. That’s all – there’s nothing sinister or evil about it.

This entry was posted in FB, Gun Control, Liberals, Politics. Bookmark the permalink.

29 Responses to Well, I’m fucked

  1. nonncom says:

    “Next thing, we’ll be arrested for our thoughts”….who said that?….

  2. who me?#luis says:

    Hell, if they looks at your fans you’re fucked big time! ..not me, those other guys……

  3. Hiker Mike says:

    I live in upstate NY. The democrats control the assembly and the governor is a Democrat. I will not type his name because I consider him to be the most corrupted scum that’s ever occupied the NY governor’s office but as long as the state Senate remains in Republican control this bill has little to no chance of being passed.

    Now having said that we will have to wait to see the results of today’s elections and hope the state Senate stays in Republican control which I believe it will because if not then all bets are off.

  4. Elmo says:

    Sounds like a violation of the Fourth Amendment to me.
    But silly me. I grew up in a time when the Constitution and Bill of Rights actually meant something.

  5. Don in Oregon says:

    Have you heard about China’s “Social credit” program?

    https://www.news.com.au/technology/online/big-brother-chinas-chilling-dictatorship-moves-to-introduce-scorecards-to-control-everyone/news-story/6c821cbf15378ab0d3eeb3ec3dc98abf

    https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-34592186

    It’s very Orwellian and this “social media check” is a big step in that direction.

  6. Unclezip says:

    Nothing is funny to the self-haters. So yeah – we’re all fucked.

  7. Brian P. says:

    I’d be happy for this to be introduced and debated. In both New York or any other state. Under the single condition that it contains a “You First’ clause that would mandate that every single politition who supports or votes for this law MUST divulge their own internet history in full to the public prior to this law taking full effect. All under pentaly of the entire law being voided if a single lawmaker fails to meet whatever standard of time and thoroughness they wish to impose on the citizenry.

  8. Rob says:

    It’s about control, just finding still another way to force someone to live differently than they want to.

  9. MT says:

    Aren’t we all…
    The government always goes for the low-hanging fruit, never the root cause.

  10. GregN says:

    Ah but it’s the wrong think that you share that they want to stop as well. Words are bullets too. /Sarc
    Keep up the good stuff!

  11. AndyN says:

    I don’t think you’re giving them enough credit. Of course they realize that a lot of people have twisted senses of humor, or kinks, or any number of other personal quirks that would make them reluctant to do anything that would open their online history up to official government prying. These fascists will do anything they can to limit or discourage citizens exercising their rights, including trying to shame us into compliance with their totalitarian desires.

  12. MarkR says:

    Another thought crime, bought to you by the Fascist Democrats.

  13. QP says:

    Just another way for the government to say NO Constitutional Rights for YOU!

    What, you’re an Oakland Raiders fan? No guns for you!
    What, you do floral arrangements? No guns for you!
    What, you’re a Medal of Honor winner? No guns for you!
    What you played high school sports? No guns for you!
    What, you didn’t play high school sports? No guns for you!
    What, you don’t like broccoli? No guns for you!
    What you’re a climate change denier? No guns for you!
    What you drive a pick up truck? No guns for you!
    Etc. Etc. Etc.

  14. Eric says:

    on one hand I can see this as a good thing. It would stop a lot of crazy fucking Liberals from committing mass shootings…

    Of course the downside is Who decides what words can deny you a gun?

    I’m in the clear because I have no social media, but some of us aren’t so lucky

    • rayvet says:

      You post here so yeah, unfortunately you do have social media. I too thought I was safe cause no facebook, snapchat, instagram etc. etc., but nope, all these comments I post at web sites………social media. I’d be screwed if this came to fruition.

  15. SAM says:

    How much would this cost and how long would it take to do?

  16. ChuckN says:

    Killing the first and second amendment s in one swoop. The horrifying thing is dems are the first to scream when anyone calls them out on their own postings. But on another note,
    the conservatives who haven’t been shadow (or openly) banned are fleeing social media in droves. Soon the only ones left will be the commies.

  17. Aesop says:

    Stayed via injunction and overturned on First, Fourth, and Fourteenth Amendment grounds in 0.2 seconds, before it even gets submitted for a vote. Gets thrown out of court so hard and fast it doesn’t even hit the courthouse steps on the way to the gutter.

    All this did is out two jackholes as total anti-gun anti-liberty Nazi bastards.
    Well-played.

    Next problem.

  18. Ray says:

    That is a black letter violation of the First Fourth and Fifth amendments.

  19. Westcoastdeplorable says:

    It’s an infringement on your 2nd and your 4th. Sorry, I’d just say I don’t have any social media accounts (and I don’t). What do they do then?

  20. kdts says:

    Google your name and internet handles. That’s just the “free” one ya can look at. The gov’t has some pay ones that are more thorough.They already know.

    • IdahoHunter says:

      Dead on right. Just the fact that we read this and other blogs can be tracked and held against us. THOUGHT CRIMES.

  21. steve says:

    It boggles the mind. Big govt lovers wanting gun control and having citizens every orifice inspected before approving gun ownership are the same folks wanting open borders for non citizens to walk in without any inspection or search of their carried property. Giving automatic weapons and explosives to people in foreign lands without the kind of background check we have to go through.
    Whats to stop all that material walking across our southern border? Hell, maybe a new market in mexico.with americans going down there and bringing back the wet-dream toys via the open border policy

  22. Dan says:

    The purpose of laws like this has NOTHING to do with preventing crimes. It’s ONLY purpose is
    to prevent honest people from legally purchasing firearms….. Which is the SOLE purpose behind
    all gun control laws..

If your comment 'disappears', don't trip - it went to my trash folder and I will restore it when I moderate.