Source: Brietbart. This is reported as a thinly-veiled proposal to spy on us all and on some unstated basis to glean out a population subsegment from among us to be subjected to some form of prior restraint, without being in violation of the law. "Might offend" vs "has offended" span a gulf, especially when "might offend" fails to be precisely defined and delineated. This is not a proposal that would, as a part of background-check procedure, impliment some duly constrained database aspects.
Constraint in anticipation one might cause harm is too close to contrived excuse to further erode privacy as well as a denial or at least a curtailment of liberty and pursuit of happiness. Detention without probable cause, or surveillance without sufficient cause.
Recall: Credible background check proposals all would be initiated by applying for a permit. If there is no application there is no movement. That is not "red flagging" malcontents, ad hoc and in advance of anything.
Websearch. Second websearch. Don't worry, be happy?
Orwell told you forms to expect, but you were too busy watching the Seahawks and picking out the color and extras for the new Lexus.
