If you are unaware, China is developing a system in which all people will have a “social credit score” that is based upon compliance with laws and social codes of conduct.  The more loyal and obedient you are, the more social credit you have.  The less obedient you are, the lower your score.  A low score can get you banned from public transportation, housing in nicer buildings, even cost you a job, or determine which schools your children attend.

Here is a video from CBS about how the system will work.

This is a video shot from inside a Chinese train reminding passengers about the program.

So I go online today and see this:

If someone in your contact list has a perfect voting record, the OutVote app puts a smiley face with red hearts for eyes next to their name. Wayward voters who missed elections get a sad-faced emoji dripping a tear. https://t.co/bQ6Obp1E2f

— NYT Politics (@nytpolitics) November 4, 2018

OutVote, the company that developed the app, is partnered with the Democrats, Move On, and Swing Left.

So here we have a social media app that will tell you if your friends voted.

It’s partnered with only Left leaning groups and the DNC.

So how long until the app puts smiley faces next to friends who vote Democrat and frowney faces next to those who vote Republican?

Welcome to voting based Chinese social credit system designed to shame anyone who doesn’t vote blue.

Just wait until this comes standard on any Apple or Google device as one of those OEM apps you can’t delete.

Update:

Boy that didn’t take long.

This is a US Senator from Hawaii

If you dislike what’s going on in the country and you aren’t planning on voting please delete your account. No offense.

— Brian Schatz (@brianschatz) November 5, 2018

Here is a sitting politician using social media to shame non voters, more specifically people who are inclined to vote Democrat but don’t.

That was replied to with this lovely tweet:

https://twitter.com/thaneofcawdor8/status/1059338420336525313

That one is the end goal.  Have a social media app the broadcasts that you voted – and potentially who you voted for – so everyone knows if you didn’t vote Democrat they can shame you, scream in your face, and beat you up (or worse).

It really didn’t take them that long to reveal themselves, didn’t it?

Nothing political. Funny memes, videos (both funny and interesting) and I may even allow myself to copy/paste puns from Old NFO.

I may say something after 8:00 PM EST when the Florida polls are closed although I expect lawyer shit if the things are close. In that case, politics will resume Wednesday.

In the meantime, a nice picture of a plane.

One of the issues I have with Kindle is that I download books and then I forget about them. This is the case with “In the Name of Self-Defense: What it costs. When it’s worth it” by Marc McYoung.

I bought the book in 2016 and I discovered I had not read it till a couple of days ago while doing an obligatory pit stop in my porcelain palace.

GET THE FRIGGING BOOK NOW.

Just the first chapter alone contains the best advice in self-defense you can ever learn. And don’t rush it, read it at a controlled pace, make notes if needed, re-read as necessary. Just this first chapter titled “What are we going to cover in this book” will tech you some basics I learned the hard way through the years and several I was unaware off. And it is just a preview of coming attractions.

The book is $7.99 in Kindle and $23.99 in Dead Tree edition.  I don’t recommend books if I have not finished them, but I am making an exception with this one. That should tell you enough.

This from The Trace:

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

What?  Okay, I have to read this.

Lawmakers Drafting Bill That Would Allow Social Media Checks Before Gun Purchase

This is from WCBS, a news and talk radio station in New York City.

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.

Holy fucking shit!

I’ll get to the Constitutionality of this in a bit.  There are other issues I want to address first.

First of all, how do they plan to get this info?  Will I have to hand over my computer, tablet, and cell phone to law enforcement?  Will they log onto my Google+ account?  Will they subpoena all this from my ISP?  Is the goal to turn the internet companies into a backdoor big brother?  This part alone is worthy of a thousand different bills.

Second, what does internet search history tell you about someone?

One of the things I have to do to bring you readers good posts is wade through the filth of the internet.  If I want to draw a parallel between some current policy and some Nazi policy, I have to dig up the Nazi policy, which means searching for Nazi stuff.

I have no idea what some bureaucrat would thing looking through my search history, seeing gun blogs, gun reviews, and Stormfront, in my browser history.  What it doesn’t mean is that I’m a  Nazi bent on mass murder.

God help any history major or person doing research on a topic for a book or paper.  I remember in school, I was called to a dean’s office because the school computer flagged that I searched for the word “cleavage.”

I was going to be punished for looking up porn on the school computer.  I had three professors from the materials engineering department come to the dean with me to explain what cleavage was in terms of crystallography and how stupid the school was to flag that word.

Imagine bureaucrats that thick, or thicker, choosing the internet history to flag.

Woe be unto the 18 year old who wants to buy his first gun and has to reveal what he was posting or searching for at age 15.  A lot of maturing happens in that time.  Should what 15 year old you said online after your first breakup be held against you at 18 when you are an adult?

Also, how much porn keeps you from being able to buy a gun?  Asking for a friend.

Third, what happens if you don’t have social media.  I have no Facebook, Twitter, SnapChat, Instagram, or anything else like that.  My LinkedIn is little more than an online resume, I don’t post or comment on anything.

I do have this blog, but I keep my name off of it.  Years ago I was involved in a Facebook fracas over a bad joke on a person’s wall.  After being internet hate mobbed, I quit Facebook.  This was 2008, before world wide hate mob shaming on Twitter was a thing.  I saw the writing on the wall and became an Internet gray man.  Now that one wrong Tweet and you lose your job and become unemployable is a regular occurrence, I’m glad I did.

So with no searchable social media, how would that affect my ability to buy a gun.  I have a feeling it would be treated like trying to buy a car and having no credit history.  The lack of information would be used against you.

“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.

Now comes the Constitutionality.

First Amendment:

I may not agree with what you say but I’ll defend your right to say it.  The First Amendment protects your right to be a racist asshole online.

Of course the big question is, who defines hate speech?  What about Don Lemon’s calling white men the biggest terror threat in America?  Is that hate speech if a Liberal posts that on Facebook?

You Like Alex Jones and no guns for you.  You Like the Black Panthers stumping for Stacey Abrams and that’s copacetic.  Call Muhammad a pedophile and you will never own guns, post a picture of a Crucifix stuck in a dog turd and there is a good chance the bureaucrat in charge will Friend you.

This is exactly why the First Amendment exists, out Founding Fathers didn’t want the government to take sides on speech.

Second Amendemnt:

The whole point of this bill is to limit this.

Fourth Amendment:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated.

I’m pretty sure letting a bureaucrat search three years of personal internet history is an unreasonable search.

Fifth Amendment:

No person shall be … compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;

I’m pretty sure that using a person’s internet history against them is a violation of self incrimination.

“Turn over all the racist stuff you have ever said on the internet so we can decide if you should be allowed to exercise your rights.”

Fourteenth Amendment:

No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;

Internet history is not a conviction.  Denying someone their Second Amendment rights based on their browser or social media history is in volition of due process.

There are some logistical concerns as free speech and gun rights complaints are likely to come up. Though, Adams and Palmer say it is doable and needed.

Actual legislators just sort of waved off defending the Bill of Rights as petty complaints.

“Fuck half the Constitution, this is New York, we don’t need that shit here.  We can do what we want because who is going to stop us.”

At least they are honest to the idea that if you don’t respect one Amendment, you probably don’t respect the rest of them.

It’s hard to imagine them violating any more rights in a single law, unless they decided to quarter the NYPD in you home while you are browsing the internet.  Having said that, I may have just given then the idea to do that.

I’d usually say that there is no way for this bill to pass, but it’s New York.  I don’t know anymore, it just might.

Colorado gun dealer offers local rabbis free AR-15 rifle

A gun dealer in Colorado Springs, Colo., has offered a free AR-15 rifle to local temples for protection following the mass killing of 11 Jews at a Pittsburgh synagogue by an anti-Semitic gunman.

Good for him.

Mel Bernstein, owner of Dragon Arms, told Fox News on Sunday that four local rabbis in Colorado Springs took him up on his offer and a fifth accepted the offer of a handgun.

Something inside me thinks that Mel Bernstein is Jewish.

Also, wonderful, that’s five synagogues, that after a little training, will be safer.

“I feel very bad that someone can walk in to a synagogue or church and start shooting and they can’t protect themselves,” Bernstein said.

That’s a nearly universal feeling in the gun community.

He said each rabbi filled out a background check.

Imagine that, everybody is obeying the law too.

“I don’t really like what’s going on in the country and I’m offering them a free AR-15 rifle with two magazines and hundred bullets,” he told the station.

*In my best Mel Brooks/Jew from Brooklyn accent* That’s a hell of a deal!

The station reported interviewing the president of one local synagogue about Bernstein’s offer.

“I think he wants to help and is very well-intentioned,” Jeff Ader of Temple Beit Torah said. “It just isn’t for us.”

He said the AR-15 was, in a sense, a “weapon of mass destruction.”

Oh FFS.

“If it can fire multiple rounds per second, anything can happen and my fear is that innocent bystanders get in the way and innocent people get hurt,” he said.

That’s why you get training.

The station reported that Ader was in talks with Bernstein over choosing a handgun instead.

On one hand, a rifle is more accurate and controllable than a handgun, and both being semi-auto, the rate of fire is the same.  I’d rather have a rifle at at gunfight, given the choice.

On the other hand, a handgun is better than nothing and in many cases a handgun is the gateway drug to bigger and better things.  This Rabbi has swallowed a lot of anti-gun bullshit, and there are some myths in his head the need to be dispelled, but he has taken the first step and I applaud that.

Scott Levin of the Colorado Anti-Defamation League told the station that a rabbi with a gun causes image issues. He said he felt it would be a disruption.

Fuck the ADL, those Lefty Bagel-Bolshevik Jews.  The ADL never found a Left Wing anti-Semite they couldn’t treat with kid gloves.

I’ll take the image of a Rabbi with a gun over the image of another Synagogue shooting memorial every time.  I want the image of a Synagogue to be of the Rabbi being armed.  If there is one thing we know about these types of mass shooters, they never attack defended locations.  Just the knowledge that the Rabbi can shoot back is likely to stop some nutjob from targeting that Synagogue in the first place.

Bernstein, who is Jewish, told Fox News he had gotten calls from rabbis around the country asking about his offer, but he said he couldn’t ship guns to them because they’re out of state.

That is a good sign.  Maybe the Tree of Life shooting was our Pulse moment.  Maybe it was enough to wake up some percentage of the Jews population that we need to be ready to defend ourselves, because it is in the minutes between when the shooting starts and the police respond to the 911 call, that the casualties happen.

I searched for “Dragon Arms Colorado” to check out this store’s website, and lo and behold, Mel Bernstein, the most armed man in America.

I suddenly have a much greater like for this guy than I had reading about this offer to local Rabbis.

I don’t know when I’ll next get a chance to go to Colorado, but I really want to see this place.

Stacey Abrams is running for Governor of Georgia and her platform includes severe gun control’.

It seems that the New Black Panther Party loves some Ms. Abrams and appears to is go pew-pew for her.

I have seen some in the gun side making fun of the BPs saying that they don’t get that id Abrams wins, they may end up having to give up the weapons they  display with so much pride.

Except they won’t be losing the guns.

There is a concept in with Latin American tyrants (elected or not) which is the keeping of irregular strike forces  of civilians they can officially deny they exist, but can do their violent bidding. In Panama under Manuel Noriega were known as the Batallones de la Dignidad (Dignity battalions) and in Venezuela under Chavez and Maduro are known as Los Colectivos (The Collectives) and their mission is the application of low-grade terrorist tactics on the opposition and citizens in general.

In Panama, the most well-known event was the mob attack on the opposition’s candidates which lower the little esteem Noriega had in Latin America and eventually led to the US having basically no political backlash at the Invasion of Panama.  But before that, the Battalions were  an effective force scaring the daylights out of civilians who may had something to say or protest against Pineapple Face.

In Venezuela, The Colectivos are still a very much viable and used when needed. Just a simple phone call or even a call from the President for “The people to hit the streets to defend the Revolution” and these packs will go and attack.

This was last year when Colectivos entered the National Assembly and attacked legislators from the opposition. Where was security? The military who is supposed to take care of things? Well, they are paid by the Executive so you do the math. Remember Baltimore’s Mayor ordering police to give rioters space? There you go, same principle.

These are from assorted days and attacks against the people of Venezuela who gladly voted for being a gun free country but they never thought it would not apply to the Colectivos and now they are subject to their whims. And if you are wonder where are they getting their guns, the answer is kind of obvious: The government.

There is also the criminal element that decides to protect themselves against possible Law Enforcement by declaring themselves a Colectivo and swear allegiance to the government.  Some gang have been so successful that they have created small separate states within Venezuela where cops do not dare enter and they even have their own markets,  medical care, dry good stores and even currency which has survived better the economy compared with the official one. Supposedly peaceful places, but then again there is only one penalty for infractions: Death.

Notice the masks? You may have seen  the before, right?

So if you are seeing Militant Left Wing groups with guns, they are not on the side of the Second Amendment or Freedom, they are just the are just announcing themselves as the future shock troops for the elected American Socialists.

And I ain’t crying wolf.

I do believe that no matter what the elections bring tomorrow, we will have to deal with an augmentation in violence.