As missed warning signs in mass murder investigations mount, New York State is implementing a novel strategy to screen gun permit applicants. People seeking to carry concealed firearms will be required to submit lists of their social media accounts for a “character and conduct” review.
It’s an approach applauded by many Democrats and national gun control advocacy groups, but some experts have raised questions about how the law will be enforced and how concerns about free speech will be addressed.
Some of the local officials who will be tasked with reviewing social media content also question whether they will have the resources and, in some cases, whether the law is even constitutional.
Read more:
State efforts to toughen US gun laws are being thwarted by polarization: experts
Sheriffs haven’t received any additional money or staff to handle a new application process, said Peter Kehoe, executive director of the New York Sheriffs Association. The law, he claimed, violates Second Amendment rights, and while applicants must list their social media accounts, he doesn’t think local officials will necessarily see them.
“I don’t think we would do that,” Kehoe said. “I think that would be a constitutional invasion of privacy.”
The new requirement, which goes into effect in September, was included in a law passed last week that sought to preserve some limits on firearms after the Supreme Court ruled that most people have the right to carry a firearm. fire for personal protection. It was signed by Gov. Kathy Hochul, a Democrat, who noted that shooters sometimes telegraph their intent to hurt others.
Increasingly, young people are turning to the Internet for clues to what is to come before carrying out a mass murder, including that of the gunman who killed 19 children and two teachers at an elementary school in Uvalde, Texas.
Under the law, applicants must provide local officials with a list of current and former social media accounts from the previous three years. It does not specify whether applicants will be required to provide access to private accounts not visible to the general public.
It will be up to local sheriff’s staff, judges or county clerks to review those profiles as they check to see if applicants have made statements that suggest dangerous behavior.
The law will also require applicants to undergo hours of security training, prove they are competent to shoot, provide four character references and appear for in-person interviews.
READ MORE: Highland Park Gunman Watching Second Shooting in Wisconsin, Police Say
The law reflects how the Supreme Court ruling has shifted responsibility to states to investigate those who carry firearms in public, said Tanya Schardt, senior adviser and director of state and federal policy at the gun control advocacy organization. Brady.
His group said it was not aware of any other states that required gun permit applicants to submit social media profiles.
However, the new approach comes amid a growing debate about policing social media posts and a legacy of unwarranted surveillance of Black and Latino communities.
“The question should be: Can we do this in an anti-racist way that doesn’t create another set of violence, which is state violence that happens through surveillance?” said University of Pennsylvania professor of social policy, communications and medicine Desmond Upton Patton, who also founded SAFElab, a research initiative studying violence involving youth of color.
Meanwhile, gun rights advocates criticize the law.
“You will also have to tell them your social media accounts because New York wants to thoroughly investigate you to find out if you are one of those dangerous law-abiding citizens who are sweeping the country and causing crime to skyrocket. says Jared Yanis, host of the YouTube channel Guns & Gadgets, in a widely viewed video about the new law. “What have we come to?”
Hochul, who has also tasked state police with cracking down on extremism online, did not immediately respond to a list of questions about the social media requirement, including how the state will address concerns about free speech and privacy. privacy.
“Often the sticking point is: how do we go about enforcing this?” James Densley, a criminal justice professor at Metro State University who co-founded The Violence Project research initiative, said. “I think it’s starting to open up a little bit like a can of worms, because no one really knows what the best way to do it is.”
READ MORE: 2-year-old boy orphaned after parents killed in Highland Park parade shooting
It can be tricky, he said, deciphering social media posts from younger people, who might simply express themselves by posting a music video.
“Where this will get tricky is the extent to which this is speech and the extent to which it is evidence of wrongdoing.” Densley said.
Spokespeople for social media platforms Facebook, Twitter, 4Chan and Parler did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
Instead, New York should consider giving the job to a trained group tasked with figuring out how best to reach people online who are showing signs of radicalization or trauma and may need help, Patton said.
“There are a lot of nuances and contextual issues. We speak differently; how we communicate, that could be misunderstood,” Patton said. “I’m concerned that we don’t have the right people or the right tools to do this in a way that’s helpful in preventing violence.”
Adam Scott Wandt, a public policy professor at John Jay College of Criminal Justice, said he supports gun control but worries the New York law could set a precedent for mandatory disclosure of social media activity. for people looking for other types of licenses. from the State.
New York law is vague and rushed, said Wandt, who teaches law enforcement personnel how to conduct searches of people through social media.
“I think what we could have done as a state here in New York is we could have confirmed your worst fears: that it will create a slippery slope that will slowly reduce your rights to bear arms and allow a bureaucracy to decide, based on little criteria. clear, who can have a gun and who can’t,” Wandt said. “Which is exactly what the Supreme Court was trying to prevent.”
© 2022 Associated Press