As Voros McCracken notes, this violates Amendments “1, 2, 4, maybe 5, and certainly 14. That’s pretty impressive” (via Twitchy)
Two New York lawmakers are drafting a bill that would allow authorities to review 3 years of social media history and 1 year of internet search history for anyone who wants to buy a gun. https://t.co/W9xh13OwnN
— The Trace (@teamtrace) November 3, 2018
Perhaps we should have a referendum on changing the NY State Constitution which would require the same searches for elected office and those who want to be hired for government work in NY. From the link
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.
“A three-year review of a social media profile would give an easy profile of a person who is not suitable to hold and possess a fire arm,†Adams explains.
The two are hoping to identify any hate speech on social media profiles, which are often revealed only after someone is arrested in a mass shooting.
This would violate a large number of NY state laws, much less their own Constitution, which has similar provisions to the federal Constitution, and, as stated, violate numerous provisions of the federal Constitution. Democrats who wanted to essentially protect Islamic jihadis constantly paraphrased the Ben Franklin saying, writing “those who would give up temporary freedom for security will get neither” are now super enthused to give Government and it’s various whims by temporary elected residents the ability to define hate speech and empower government authorities to search people’s information without a warrant based on criminal activity.
The NY State Constitution specifically states in Article I Section 8 “Every citizen may freely speak, write and publish his or her sentiments on all subjects, being responsible for the abuse of that right; and no law shall be passed to restrain or abridge the liberty of speech or of the press.” Think these Democrats trying to pass this anti-gun law care?
Interestingly, that Ben Franklin saying is also being applied to the government spying on U.S. citizens. Which is what this would be. Along with a measure meant to discourage people from even applying for a gun purchase license, and a way of denying as many as many citizens their 2nd Amendment Rights they can get away with.
That will take years to search 3 years worth of social media. Oh wait thats their plan.
FYI………INSURANCE.
FYI. Republican candidates are lying to you. They did not ‘support’ pre-existing conditions until Dem candidates started beating them with it. Number one concern of voters? You got it. Healthcare. The people of America are forcing the GOP to the middle.
Pre-existing conditions are covered under the ACA, or Obamacare! You know, the insurance program that Republicans vote daily to repeal. GOP attorneys general have filed a lawsuit to eliminate the provision, and the tRump administration refuses to defend the federal law.
The least bad GOP alternative so far is to cover pre-existing conditions but allow insurance companies to charge whatever they want. Same as it ever was. 39 yr old mom with breast cancer recurrence, $4287/ month and you’re covered!! Really? Is she really covered?
TRump and the tRumpublicans promised better, cheaper healthcare insurance with everyone covered. Where is it?
You keep saying this, but never give any real proof.
You’re the one that’s lying.
Which Republican lie bothers you?
Does the GOP favor or want to repeal Obamacare? Repeal.
Would repealing the ACA remove the guarantee to cover existing conditions? Yes.
Did GOP state AGs sue the federal gov’t to stop the ACA? Yes and ongoing.
Have GOP candidates suddenly found Mohammed and now support covering existing conditions? Yes.
You may not realize this but health insurance is designed to spread the risk. Since no one can predict when or if they’ll need services, it works best if everyone participates. No question certain groups require more health services than others. For example, most older folks require more health services than young people. Market insurance was unobtainable at reasonable costs, hence Medicare! For insurance companies, covering sick people is bad for business, but it’s sick people who need insurance, and that model explains perfectly why companies want to cherry-pick healthy customers and allow anybody else to cover the sick. Pre-existing conditions is another category that private insurance runs from – a child with Type 1 diabetes, leukemia or other cancer, or hemophilia – have lifelong expenses and are bad for business.
NuCons appear to support the On Your Own philosophy – if you’re sick and can’t afford insurance, tough. Perhaps reasoning that this will remove ‘bad’ genes from the pool.
You have been told about Obama care abound refuse to accept facts. O care allows you to see a doctor, once. Then you must get permission for all exams, follow up, and treatment. At the end of the day, O care is worthless.
Everybody wants IdiotCare repealed.
I don’t remember anybody who cried when the Rs started gutting it except Democrats.
The angry little black fella doesn’t need proof.
His constant paranoiac rantings are all he needs.
Nobody supports the “on your own philosophy” except the demons in your mind. But as you pointed out the object of insurance is to “spread the risk” and “risk” is the key ingredient. Companies cannot buy claims and stay in business which is why preexisting conditions are uninsurable. They are NOT a risk, they are an existing cost. Just like you can’t buy life insurance after you are dead health insurance is for the healthy. If we as a society believe (as I do) that preexisting conditions need to be treated and attended to then we need to make a Preexisting Pool for these things separate from standard health insurance similar to the High Risk Pool for bad drives. But insurance companies don’t buy claims that would be called a Patron not an insurer.
What insurance companies can do and did do very well before government got involved is compete for customers. Life insurance companies compete so do car and homeowners compete. The idea that the government has to supply insurance (of any kind) is stupid. All the government needs to do is mandate the bare necessity of coverage and step back. The companies will respond to the demand and include all sorts of options to compete and at the same time prices will fall. They always do in a free market. Hell, why do you think almost every other consumer product (which insurance is) in our society seeks the lowest level of price vs demand? health insurance is not exempt from the laws of economics and only fools think it is.
First, for any of you reading Jeff’s stupid stuff, pre-existing conditions have been covered in large part since Clinton.
Kye,
I have been a doc since the early 70s’. I saw medicine before the government got into it big time, Medicare was just taking off. By the 80’s, the government said that the cost of medical care was too high and they needed to do something, so they did, a bunch, and the cost of medical care took off like a rocket. Want an interesting graft? Look up the number of doctor, versus the number of hospital administrators versus the cost of care. It is amazing to see that doctors have been relatively low, but administrators and cost follow hand in glove.
And yet, health care in the US is the world’s most expensive. Every other advanced nation pays less per capita than the US, and they cover every resident, and they rely LESS than the US on the so-called ‘free market’.
And what is that mandate? To cover all comers, no questions asked? Or would you let insurance raise their rates for smokers, gun owners, the obese, cancer survivors?
Do you think that as a society, the only fair thing to do is let uninsured people die rather than treat them? After all, someone has to pay for their treatment.
So you advocate getting rid of Medicare and letting the insurance markets decide if they want to insure seniors?
Jeff,
Always amazing how you just jump out there and say very stupid things with zero knowledge. Yes health care here is very expensive, why??? Your jerk government. What people don’t know or understand is the way a charge is generated. The Federal government is the main culprit in this issue. Medicare and Medicaid assign prices. But all insurance companies index payments based on these schedules. This started in the 80s. An example is ECHOs. These are common exams. A few years ago, the cost of one of these exams was $200 a few years ago. With Obama’s interference, this went to $1000 or better. Now some doctors own these machines, the majority by hospitals and other large groups. If you desire to reduce expenses by at least 30%, get the government out. But the main thing is for people like you to understand you know very little.
dave,
There is no evidence to support your notions that the US government is the reason health care inflation is so high in the US when compared to other advanced nations.
The other nations have MORE government control but lower costs, on average 1/2 as much as the US!
Far-right Republicans control the White House, all the executive branches, the House, the Senate, the Supreme Court, most circuit courts, most state houses and legislatures. Why don’t they just fix everything as you describe? If your beef is with the gov’t, you should take it up with Republicans.
Maybe tRump needs to fire the entire executive branch and start fresh with right-wingers in every position.
Look at little Jeff saying stupid things just to get others upset, called troll.
Health care in the US is also the best and you get what you pay for.
And before little Jeffery goes into his song and dance about the the Euro socialized medicine is better, my wife, nurse of now 50 years, was told constantly by foreigners who came here to be treated, “Why are you getting rid of all this? Believe me, you don’t want what we have”.
CommieCare is even worse. It killed Fidel and it killed Chavez.
Do you think that as a society, the only fair thing to do is let uninsured people die rather than treat them?
Stick it. We have Medical Assistance. Not the world’s best deal, but nobody dies without care.
Oh I believe you, david7134. I’m almost 70 and as a kid I recall Dr. Faber making house calls when I was sick with the mumps, chicken pox and all that. He charged $5 a visit plus shots and scripts. Nobody had health insurance in 1958. I had allergies so I went for shots every other Friday and my mom paid $8 to the nurse. Government meddling and a giant growth in administration accounts for the high costs i my opinion.
There is nothing the government doe that it does well or cheap. In fact it’s quite the opposite. Anybody with a brain knows this and yet some perfectly reasonable people who would never trust government to regulate the price of hamburgers want them in charge of health insurance.
The other thing that pisses me off is when the left interchanges “healthcare” with health insurance”. They are not the same thing. Everybody in this country has health care. Just walk into a hospital. It’s health insurance that we all don’t have and part of that is because we all don’t want it. I don’t have all the answers but I know for sure putting the government in control of a life and death item like health insurance is not a good idea. Imagine if Maxine Waters was in charge of health care and a Deplorable came in for help. What do you think that partisan hack would do? She would do what any good collectivist would do: let him die and save it for her friends. Now multiply that by 100,000 Deep State bureaucrats doling out health care like no bid contracts in Detroit!
The administrative costs of Medicare are much, much lower than for private insurance, what with no profits to distribute, stock to worry about or advertising.
In addition, the largely government regulated health coverage of EVERY advanced nation on Earth (think Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, England, Finland, France, Germany, Israel, Japan, South Korea, New Zealand, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland etc) costs much less (often 1/2 as much) as in the US. How do their governments deliver health care for half of what we do? And with quality as good or better.
You want to provide some figures on that?
And that wonderful socialized health care? You have to wait years for surgery. If they decide you’re worth it.
Remember Alfie Wise?
As Miss Sarah warned us, death panels.
Another misleading comment from the ill-informed angry little black fella.
But what else is new?
Jeff,
That series of comments is nothing but one lie after another. Is it so important to you to try and get people angry that you constantly lie?? You have a pathetic life.
In America, we have MRI machines at every major hospital, not just in a few cities. In other countries, you don’t get an MRI when you have a headache. In other countries, you don’t go to emergency rooms when you have an earache. In socialized med countries, you don’t get hip replacement and Knee replacement surgeries. They simply are not available. So if you are rich, you fly to the USA and get it done. If you get cancer, do the respectable thing and just die. You are old. and in places like Africa and REALLY bad places like Cuba, they are unwilling or unable to even pay for basics in reasonable care like disposable latex gloves. Other countries have lower prices for drugs because they do something called “stealing intellectual property”. In effect, Americans pay all the costs of developing new treatments and drugs and then foreigners produce it without licenses.
Bottom line, Health care in America costs more because we pay more and we expect more. If you really want to make a comparison, compare the actual cost of a similar treatment. But don’t be afraid of Socialized health care. The VA has had it for a long time and it works great, as long as you don’t really need it. And the rich people and politically connected will still get the best treatments available and you should feel good about that because they are really valuable to society and you aren’t.
Good analysis prof. But MRIs are at every mall as well.
Oh, And I forgot to mention that it costs more here because every person who pays his medical bills is paying for another 2 people who don’t. Poor people, and increasingly, poor people from other countries, visit our emergency rooms and demand the best of everything. Federal law requires that they get it. So hospitals are forced to shift those costs to people who CAN pay. To make it worse, Medicare and Medicade require providers to take a substandard payment that doesn’t cover the cost of health delivery. So those costs get shifted too. Military retirees use the same medical cost reimbursements. I know doctors who only take veterans as their “patriotic duty” because they know they are losing money every time one walks in.
I might add that in many countries, you can go to the drug store and buy almost anything you need without seeing a doctor. That includes opiates and most schedule drugs. But our drug laws force you to a doctor and this greatly increase cost as well as exposing you to unnecessary testing and treatment, often with bad results.
MY bad but I neglected to mention that when I was a kid most of the time the doc didn’t give you a scrip, the pharmacist did. Mom would go to the apothecary and tell him what was wrong and he would give her whatever to treat it.
One other point I’d like to make. As with Obummercare all these government fix all schemes require force. Everybody MUST comply. We are supposed to be a free country and that runs against my “built in American stubbornness”. The government doesn’t have to force me to eat at The Cheesecake Factory, or buy a Cadillac, or but an iPod, or Samsung TV because they compete for my dollar. They are all subject to government trade and other regulations designed to protect the consumer but after that the choice is ours. That was and should be the formula for a successful health insurance industry. Just my opinion.
Our current system of health delivery was set up in 1912. The intent was to completely socialize the system, pushed by the AMA. They only got a portion passed, which was the drug delivery. But the whole system is geared to make you go to a doctor, who is a government agent via control of his license. That is your only access to drugs that matter. It seems wrong to me and not that of a free society.
Finally,
In AMERICA, we call spending on Health care “Commerce”. A bigger number is BETTER. It means that more people are spending money to get stuff that makes them happier or healthier. We spend more on health care because we choose to. We also spend more on cars, more on air conditioning, more on Christmas presents, more on vacations, and more on every other category of human life on this planet. America is about 1/3rd of the planetary GDP. Our doctors charge what is appropriate because our doctors don’t live in grass huts. They went to the best schools and those schools aren’t free. You are comparing a 2018 Ford F-150 to a 1965 Lada. Of course the Ford costs 10 times more, it’s 50 times better.