Friday, October 17, 2014

Watervliet, NY Asks Pistol Permit Applicants for Facebook Passwords



TTAG via Kurt Hofmann

The photo above shows an application for a pistol permit as used by the Watervliet, New York police department. It comes to us from “Mazz,” a member of the nyfirearms.com forum [registration required]. As you can see the app asks applicants for their “Facebook & Password.” Considering the document’s homemade look and the absurdity of the request, I called the Watervliet PD for confirmation and clarification. I got Chief Ron Boisvert . . .
The Chief told TTAG that the sheet shouldn’t have been in the application packet – and won’t be in future. “It’s for internal use only,” he said.
Yes, well, the Chief said he uses the form to gather the applicant’s Facebook deets during a face-to-face interview. Why make note of the password? “We don’t,” he insisted. “We ask the applicant to log on to Facebook in front of us.” So the Chief scrolls through the applicant’s Facebook page searching for . . . ?
“Pages they’re looked at, friends – anything that reflects on the character of the applicant.” I pointed out that there’s a big difference [in terms of privacy] between viewing a Facebook page as a friend and viewing it as the owner. The Chief wasn’t bothered by the distinction.
Kurt said, "I'm hoping it's a hoax."

I don't see why it would be.  To me it appears to be a bumbling attempt to effectively process the may-issue system of granting permits.  I say bumbling, because I suspect the tech-unfriendly folks who put that form together didn't know that one can view another's Facebook page without the password. They probably didn't know about the Friend status for viewing, which would accomplish the desired goal.

14 comments:

  1. I say bumbling, because I suspect the tech-unfriendly folks who put that form together didn't know that one can view another's Facebook page without the password. They probably didn't know about the Friend status for viewing, which would accomplish the desired goal.

    I'm no Facebook virtuoso, but I think possessing the user's password allows one to be sure he/she can see everything on the user's page, including posts the user intended for limited distribution (not to mention private conversations)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. But don't you think that some administrator in the police station might not know the difference between having a password and being Friended?

      Delete
    2. Sure, it's possible. I just don't find it likely. And in the end, I don't find the question to be particularly relevant. One's fundamental human right to armed self-defense can not legitimately be held hostage to one's willingness to surrender one's Facebook password or to "friend" some petty tyrant of a bureaucrat.

      Delete
    3. "May issue" is a bitch for freedom fighters like you, huh Kurt?

      Delete
    4. Not sure I follow you. If you're asking if I object to "may issue" licensing systems, of course. Actually, though, "shall issue" is far from good enough. A government that demands for itself the power to impose conditions under which it will grant "permission" (and charge a fee for the "privilege") to exercise a Constitutionally guaranteed, fundamental human right is an abusive government.

      Nothing short of Constitutional carry is good enough.

      Delete
    5. You mean like a poll tax? Making people pay before they can vote. Like pay for an ID to vote, a poll tax. Oops you can't get the ID until the election is over. Can you believe it some courts have found that "fee" to be constitutional.

      Delete
    6. I'll tell you what, Anon. When people can legally buy firearms (including fully automatic ones, suppressed ones, short barreled rifles and shotguns, and those considered to be "destructive devices") from any gun shop, without showing any ID, then I'll not complain about letting unidentified voters into the voting booth.

      I can be generous.

      Delete
    7. When you understand there are limitations on any right, we can talk, but you don't, so by all means shoot your uneducated mouth off. Thanks for the laugh.

      Delete
  2. Another in the long list of discretionary licensing abuses. You can't support this crap and claim to support civil rights.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "Civil rights?"

      Delete
    2. Yes, particularly ones enumerated in the Bill of Rights.

      Delete
    3. Are you talking about the right to privacy?

      Delete
    4. He obviously doesn't know.

      Delete
    5. And if I don't have a Facebook account and never had one? Or a twitter account or any other method of social media? There are those that just don't believe in this crap of posting everything you do for everyone to see, including taking a crap, every moment of every day. Then what?

      Delete