I think that's the point. The idea is to come up with every reason to deny people. It's a backdoor handgun ban unless you're wealthy and well connected enough to deserve one.
Including social media account vetting? Because [1] doesn't mention it, and there's a monumental difference between a criminal history check, and forcing one to deanonymize all of one's 1st Amendment protected speech from the past 3 years.
There's a monumental difference between a person working for years to secure a job that they know will barely ever pay a living wage so they can help educate kids and a person applying for a license to own a tool the express purpose of which is to end lives.
You've now switched to a different argument, but okay. You think the state doesn't have just as great an interest in vetting who is allowed to educate and look after children, as in who may own a gun? Do I have to link to the many stories of teachers found abusing students before you will stop pretending to not understand?
Your link on background checks is kinda shallow, and while they may not be statutorily mandated it's a fair bet that they are checked informally. Also, teachers are effectively subject to constant ongoing supervisions via school boards, which are statutorily mandated, ubiquitous, and have high levels of parental participation.
Your abuse argument seems self-defeating. After all, there are no statutory requirements whatsoever to start a religious ministry, and most religious denominations seem to struggle with abuse and accountability issues.
Maybe you should reread the HN guidelines before accusing others of posting in bad faith, and try approaching discussion as conversation instead of combat.
There have been 246 mass shootings in 2022 to date. More than 18,000 people have died from gun violence. To date. That data is from a month ago. Of course you might say that few of those were directly caused be people with concealed carry permits, but how many of them involved guns stolen from people who legally purchased?
Your entire comparison is facetious. You seek to draw a parallel between educators teaching things you don't like and the deaths of eighteen thousand people. It's dishonest and unworthy of further debate.
Your recent comments seem to be using HN for political/ideological battle. That's not in keeping with the intended spirit of the site, so can you please not do that?
It's inevitable and fine to comment occasionally on divisive topics, but the primary use of the site should be for intellectual curiosity. That's a very different thing from battle, and incompatible with it.
Your last paragraph stoops into name-calling and personal attack, which is definitely against the HN guidelines and not cool, regardless of how wrong another commenter is or you feel they are.
> There have been 135 teachers convicted of sexual misconduct [..] More than 18,000 people have died from gun violence. To date. [..] you might say that few of those were directly caused be people with concealed carry permits
> It's a massive difference of scale, however.
If we're going to compare scale by looking at all gun homicides, shouldn't we also look at all rape?
There were 14,000 gun homicides in 2018 [1], and 431,000 rapes in 2015 [2]. 15% of rape victims are children (ages 12-17) [3], meaning 64,000 rapes/year of children alone, i.e. 4.6 child rapes for every homicide.
There's also [4], giving it was found that roughly 290,000 students experienced some sort of physical sexual abuse by a public school employee between 1991 and 2000. That's 29,000/year by public school teachers alone - equivalent to licensed, background-checked gun owners. Though it is not limited to rape, but all "physical sexual abuse".
Granted murder is worse than rape (and even more so for the vague "sexual abuse"), but I think the scale is comparable.
Speaking of scale, the scale of the countermeasure must also be taken into account. There are fewer teachers than gun owners in the US, so a requirement that only affects teachers is less imposing than one that affects all gun owners.
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_in_the_United_States#Prev... - The 2016 National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), which measures sexual assaults and rapes that may not have been reported to the police, estimated that there were 431,840 incidents of rape or sexual assault in 2015.
Please don't cross into personal attack. We ban accounts that do that, and you can make your substantive points without it.
Please also don't use HN primarily for political/ideological battle. That's another line at which we ban accounts—it's not what this site is for, and it destroys what it is for.
The express purpose pf a firearm is to contain a rapidly produced gas charge from a chemical explosive to acceperate a projectile out the barrel at high speed.
This high speed projectile happens to have mamy uses. Sporting, launch of flares or bean bags, propulsion of maritime ropes across gaps...
I really wish hoplophobes would actually put some effort into researching the history and uses of that which they fear. It can be quite therapeutic.
Teachers are already instructed to purge and lock down their social media now too. Don't think every parent and teenager doesn't try finding their teacher's profiles.
That's true. It's futile. It should have gone back to 'well regulated state militia' instead of current interpretation straight from the minds of gun manufacturers.
Personally I'd make also BMI requirement for teachers, obesity is infectious by normalizing it. In Czechia we have also problem with average age of teachers, so I'd be up to also for age limit and since we are introducing gender quotas everywhere primary education teachers could use them, like 95% of teachers are women pushing their agenda/world views.
Some of the proposed changes seem reasonable, like checking for lack of convictions and completion of firearms safety training. The social media requirement is poorly defined and the phrase which immediately springs to mind is 'void for vagueness.'
People really need to understand that "bill filed" or "amendment filed" doesn't mean much, especially if it's just filed and not debated or voted on. Getting outraged over this sort of thing is silly because like you said, it'll never make it.
Outlandish bills and amendments are filed all the time to let somebody say "see, I tried!" to their constituency a lobbyist. Or to give someone something to offer to drop in negotiation, or the other side something to object to and get as a concession ("see, those evil liberals wanted you to have to submit your facebook account!")
This is all a big, carefully choreographed dance put on by the majority and minority leaders. The more junior the rep, the more likely whatever they're doing is directly whatever the party leadership wanted them to do, because they're desperate to get more power and influence. If they play along and they get better committee appointments, promises to give them actions they can take back to their district, pork, support in the next election...
Indeed - perhaps calling it a bill rather than a law in the headline caused people to assume it was inconsequential. I was looking ahead to likely challenges in court.
What does this even mean social media account vetting? Like facebook. Or one of my several anonymous reddit accounts? How will they know what I use for social media?
>Knowingly providing false information will be sufficient cause to deny this application and constitutes a crime punishable by fine, imprisonment, or both.
Who deems you of proper character from vetting your social media accounts? What is the test for this and how is it not opinionated for the so-called rules being applied?
Meanwhile in Japan. To legally get a gun you must:
1. Join a hunting or shooting club.
2. Take a firearm class and pass a written exam, which is held up to three times a year.
3. Get a doctor’s note saying you are mentally fit and do not have a history of drug abuse.
4. Apply for a permit to take firing training, which may take up to a month.
5. Describe in a police interview why you need a gun.
6. Pass a review of your criminal history, gun possession record, employment, involvement with organized crime groups, personal debt and relationships with friends, family and neighbors.
7. Apply for a gunpowder permit.
8. Take a one-day training class and pass a firing test.
9. Obtain a certificate from a gun dealer describing the gun you want.
10. Buy a gun safe and an ammunition locker that meet safety regulations.
Whether or not you think people should have guns is a separate issue from using social media vetting to prevent people from exercising constitutionally-protected rights.
If they tried to do this with voting, would you compare with other countries where it's still harder to vote?
52 comments
[ 5.7 ms ] story [ 132 ms ] threadThere needs to be some type of blowback for this government waste.
[1] https://www.backgroundchecks.com/blog/which-background-check...
Your abuse argument seems self-defeating. After all, there are no statutory requirements whatsoever to start a religious ministry, and most religious denominations seem to struggle with abuse and accountability issues.
Maybe you should reread the HN guidelines before accusing others of posting in bad faith, and try approaching discussion as conversation instead of combat.
It's a massive difference of scale, however. There have been 135 teachers convicted of sexual misconduct in 2022 to date.
https://go2tutors.com/135-teachers-child-sex-crimes/
There have been 246 mass shootings in 2022 to date. More than 18,000 people have died from gun violence. To date. That data is from a month ago. Of course you might say that few of those were directly caused be people with concealed carry permits, but how many of them involved guns stolen from people who legally purchased?
https://www.insider.com/number-of-mass-shootingsin-america-t...
Your entire comparison is facetious. You seek to draw a parallel between educators teaching things you don't like and the deaths of eighteen thousand people. It's dishonest and unworthy of further debate.
It's inevitable and fine to comment occasionally on divisive topics, but the primary use of the site should be for intellectual curiosity. That's a very different thing from battle, and incompatible with it.
Your last paragraph stoops into name-calling and personal attack, which is definitely against the HN guidelines and not cool, regardless of how wrong another commenter is or you feel they are.
If you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the intended spirit more to heart, we'd be grateful.
> It's a massive difference of scale, however.
If we're going to compare scale by looking at all gun homicides, shouldn't we also look at all rape?
There were 14,000 gun homicides in 2018 [1], and 431,000 rapes in 2015 [2]. 15% of rape victims are children (ages 12-17) [3], meaning 64,000 rapes/year of children alone, i.e. 4.6 child rapes for every homicide.
There's also [4], giving it was found that roughly 290,000 students experienced some sort of physical sexual abuse by a public school employee between 1991 and 2000. That's 29,000/year by public school teachers alone - equivalent to licensed, background-checked gun owners. Though it is not limited to rape, but all "physical sexual abuse".
Granted murder is worse than rape (and even more so for the vague "sexual abuse"), but I think the scale is comparable.
Speaking of scale, the scale of the countermeasure must also be taken into account. There are fewer teachers than gun owners in the US, so a requirement that only affects teachers is less imposing than one that affects all gun owners.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_Sta... - Opening paragraph, deaths minus suicides
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_in_the_United_States#Prev... - The 2016 National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), which measures sexual assaults and rapes that may not have been reported to the police, estimated that there were 431,840 incidents of rape or sexual assault in 2015.
[3] https://www.rainn.org/statistics/victims-sexual-violence
[4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_harassment_in_education...
Please also don't use HN primarily for political/ideological battle. That's another line at which we ban accounts—it's not what this site is for, and it destroys what it is for.
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
This high speed projectile happens to have mamy uses. Sporting, launch of flares or bean bags, propulsion of maritime ropes across gaps...
I really wish hoplophobes would actually put some effort into researching the history and uses of that which they fear. It can be quite therapeutic.
Outlandish bills and amendments are filed all the time to let somebody say "see, I tried!" to their constituency a lobbyist. Or to give someone something to offer to drop in negotiation, or the other side something to object to and get as a concession ("see, those evil liberals wanted you to have to submit your facebook account!")
This is all a big, carefully choreographed dance put on by the majority and minority leaders. The more junior the rep, the more likely whatever they're doing is directly whatever the party leadership wanted them to do, because they're desperate to get more power and influence. If they play along and they get better committee appointments, promises to give them actions they can take back to their district, pork, support in the next election...
It was signed into law by Governor Hochul yesterday.[0]
0. https://www.governor.ny.gov/news/governor-hochul-signs-landm...
https://troopers.ny.gov/system/files/documents/2020/12/ppb-3...
1. Join a hunting or shooting club.
2. Take a firearm class and pass a written exam, which is held up to three times a year.
3. Get a doctor’s note saying you are mentally fit and do not have a history of drug abuse.
4. Apply for a permit to take firing training, which may take up to a month.
5. Describe in a police interview why you need a gun.
6. Pass a review of your criminal history, gun possession record, employment, involvement with organized crime groups, personal debt and relationships with friends, family and neighbors.
7. Apply for a gunpowder permit.
8. Take a one-day training class and pass a firing test.
9. Obtain a certificate from a gun dealer describing the gun you want.
10. Buy a gun safe and an ammunition locker that meet safety regulations.
11. Allow the police to inspect your gun storage.
12. Pass an additional background review.
13. Buy a gun.
source: https://www.fastcompany.com/90162749/its-absurdly-easy-to-bu...
If they tried to do this with voting, would you compare with other countries where it's still harder to vote?