(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 03 2022, @08:59AM
by Anonymous Coward
on Sunday July 03 2022, @08:59AM (#1257703)
I'm a staunch supporter of all the guaranteed rights but I really can't see much wrong with this.
It is not a violation of the First, Fourth or Fifth Amendments to read what someone is publishing. If it was a search of private communications, that would be one thing, but it isn't. Hands off private communications without a warrant, but read everything posted publicly. Most mass shooters (the big ones that are planned and kill a lot of people, not the ones that happen every day where someone shoots a couple of people at random) give obvious warning signs on social media. It shouldn't just be about guns, either, they need social workers too. Gun restrictions will at most slow them down long enough for someone to help them.
I agree that "good moral character" is vague, but it also seems to fit within the "well regulated" part of the Second Amendment. This is a devil in the details situation.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 03 2022, @08:59AM
I'm a staunch supporter of all the guaranteed rights but I really can't see much wrong with this.
It is not a violation of the First, Fourth or Fifth Amendments to read what someone is publishing. If it was a search of private communications, that would be one thing, but it isn't. Hands off private communications without a warrant, but read everything posted publicly. Most mass shooters (the big ones that are planned and kill a lot of people, not the ones that happen every day where someone shoots a couple of people at random) give obvious warning signs on social media. It shouldn't just be about guns, either, they need social workers too. Gun restrictions will at most slow them down long enough for someone to help them.
I agree that "good moral character" is vague, but it also seems to fit within the "well regulated" part of the Second Amendment. This is a devil in the details situation.