3 years worth and net search history of 1 year b4 buying a gun.

Cant make this up.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

Horse poop!

Three years of looking up gun guns and more guns.... 

Any "profile" they create from social media posts and Internet search histories will be unconstitutional.

Unless that "evidence" includes threats of violence, inciting violence, or contradicts their responses to the 4473 questionnaire (like pot use), posts are covered under the First Amendment.

If the gov't denies a gun permit because of your posts with no specific, articulable suspicion you have committed a crime or are planning to, they are denying a Constitutional right without due process.

It's also an invasion of privacy.  Imagine a gay gun buyer who hasn't yet come out with his sexual orientation, or worse -- is in the military and is gay.  Allowing access to his private posts, searches, messages, etc. could have much deeper consequences than suffering another federal gov't intrusion into one's background.

If this passes, I predict tons of people in NY will be availing themselves of anonymizes to hide their online activities. 

Check out Iron Key if interested.  Unless you store your passcode on their server, there's no way for law enforcement to get to your Internet history even with a warrant, assuming you always carry and use the browser installed on the device.  All temporary files, cookies, browser history, etc. are kept contained on the USB drive that's protected with hardware encryption.  The gov't can't even crack the thing open to get at the circuits without destroying the thing, because it's filled with epoxy.

https://www.kingston.com/us/usb/encrypted_security/IKS1000

Any "profile" they create from social media posts and Internet search histories will be unconstitutional.

Unless that "evidence" includes threats of violence, inciting violence, or contradicts their responses to the 4473 questionnaire (like pot use), posts are covered under the First Amendment.

If the gov't denies a gun permit because of your posts with no specific, articulable suspicion you have committed a crime or are planning to, they are denying a Constitutional right without due process.

It's also an invasion of privacy.  Imagine a gay gun buyer who hasn't yet come out with his sexual orientation, or worse -- is in the military and is gay.  Allowing access to his private posts, searches, messages, etc. could have much deeper consequences than suffering another federal gov't intrusion into one's background.

If this passes, I predict tons of people in NY will be availing themselves of anonymizes to hide their online activities. 

Check out Iron Key if interested.  Unless you store your passcode on their server, there's no way for law enforcement to get to your Internet history even with a warrant, assuming you always carry and use the browser installed on the device.  All temporary files, cookies, browser history, etc. are kept contained on the USB drive that's protected with hardware encryption.  The gov't can't even crack the thing open to get at the circuits without destroying the thing, because it's filled with epoxy.

https://www.kingston.com/us/usb/encrypted_security/IKS1000

Everything you say is true, but as we've clearly seen here in Hawaii as well as elsewhere, being "unconstitutional" is not of the slightest import or significance to the "lawmaker" "public servants" who have an agenda to fulfill (total civilian disarmament/gun prohibition/whatever you want to call it).

We're now 10 years out from Heller, 8 years out from McDonald, and 5 years out from Moore v Madigan, and still not a single person is "allowed" to bear arms outside their home.business for self-defense in the entire state of Hawaii. And I'm guessing we're still many years away from that coming to pass, if ever. "Unconstitutional" is of absolutely no concern to "them" at all. In fact, it might be a badge of honor in their circles, or a competition to see who can come up with the most obviously unconstitutional law that will take the most years to be overturned by the courts. I wouldn't be surprised.

Unconstitutional, but won't stop them from hearing it or passing.  Look at all the other infringements in that state.

So, if you don't "do" social media, you are hiding something, so no guns for you!

So, if you don't "do" social media, you are hiding something, so no guns for you!

Hiring employers are already starting to request you "friend" them so they can see your timeline and posts, likes, retweets/shares and who you follow.

They can theoretically pass you over for your political views and/or gun stance/ownership without explanation.

I deleted my FB account, and changed my login and screen name on Twitter to something vague.  If anyone asks, I'm not a social media user.