Apple Watch, Google & Bureaucrats could soon control who owns a gun


A new report claims that tech giants and bureaucrats could get to decide who owns a gun

According to The Washington Post, the President is considering giving the right to decide who owns a gun to the tech giants, the same far-left autocrats who silence millions of Americans they disagree with.

Trump has already distanced himself from more intensive background checks since none of it would have stopped any of it, so don’t believe this story outright. Give it at least 24 hours. What you can believe is Democrats would do it in a New York minute.


The Trump administration is allegedly considering a proposal to use Google, Amazon Echo and Apple Watch to determine if citizens who have characteristics of mental illness should own a gun.

Those vehicles would collect data on users who exhibit characteristics of mental illness that could lead to violent behavior, The Washington Post reported Thursday.

The administration would create a new big government agency called the Health Advanced Research Projects Agency (HARPA) inside HHS. It would have its own big, fat budget and the President of the moment would appoint an unelected bureaucrat as director.

HARPA would be like the Pentagon’s DARPA. It was concocted by the Susan Wright Foundation, founded by Bob Wright, a former NBC chair and friend of President Trump’s.

WaPo writes: The attempt to use volunteer data to identify “neurobehavioral signs” of “someone headed toward a violent explosive act” would be a four-year project costing an estimated $40 million to $60 million, according to Geoffrey Ling, the lead scientific adviser on HARPA and a founding director of DARPA’s Biological Technologies Office.

HARPA would develop “breakthrough technologies with high specificity and sensitivity for early diagnosis of neuropsychiatric violence,” according to a copy of the proposal. “A multi-modality solution, along with real-time data analytics, is needed to achieve such an accurate diagnosis.”

This next paragraph is an important one from WaPo that challenges the idea it’s all about mental illness: Mental illness can sometimes be a factor in such violent acts, experts say, but it is rarely a predictor — most studies show that no more than a quarter of mass shooters have a diagnosed mental illness. More commonly shared attributes of mass shooters include a strong sense of resentment, desire for notoriety, obsession with other shooters, a history of domestic violence, narcissism and access to firearms.

The White House would not comment to The Daily Caller, but WaPo says the President reacted “very positively.” Ivanka is supposedly pushing it.


We don’t want no Apple Watch or Google or PhDs and leftist M.D.s near our Bill of Rights!


The report comes from Bezos’s WaPo (Washington Post), so who knows how accurate this is. Even just considering this proposal is bad, it should be rejected outright, but “considering it” doesn’t mean the President is doing anything more than looking at it. That is, if any of this is true. It could be in his wastebasket by now.

This sounds like the Chinese social credit system. They wouldn’t be looking at people who have necessarily committed a crime, but, in my vision, they would look at people who troll or insult leftists, scream at a government officials, or disagree with the leftist lunacy.

Try to imagine if you will, Alexa listening in to you, judging you, then having it compiled by some PhD. What could go wrong?

So, this is the way it goes down, people who haven’t committed violence, but who appear to have “early” signs of “neuropsychiatric violence,” will lose their 2nd Amendment rights. We don’t know if due process plays any role but we can guess that the targeted individual gets to pay the outrageous legal bills involved in fighting it.

We don’t even know the role mental illness plays in mass murders. There is such a thing as evil but half the nation doesn’t believe evil exists. Half the nation also blames the weapon for the crime, not the criminal.

The Odessa killer was a criminal who was just fired from his job and who threatened his neighbor. Shall we ban criminals, people fired from jobs, and those who go after neighbors instead? They’re more likely predictors.

How about the fact that everyone involved in making judgments will most likely be people of the left — professors, psychobabblers, tech manipulators. Think about this next guy as one of the researchers:

That CNN psychiatrist wants Trump “contained” because he may kill many more millions than Mao, Hitler, and Stalin. Do you want a credentialed guy like that deciding the rules of the 2nd Amendment?

Remember if they can do this to the 2nd, they can do it to all the Amendments.

Two important questions: Will the people in charge first be tested for mental illness and who gets to pick them? Obviously, bureaucrats won’t test themselves and they get to pick them. This is a bureaucrat operation from top to bottom.

No one will be safe in this Orwellian world. It would be very easy to frame people, and forget ever seeing a gun in the hands of anyone with any mental illness, unless they’re leftists, of course. Judging from the left’s hatred of the Bill of Rights and their penchant for illogical thought and going back forty years to find fault in a person, if you hit someone in 6th grade, you’re in trouble.

Apple Watches, Amazon Echo and Google Home have been mentioned as the vehicles to collect “enormous” amounts of data with the help of lots of “scientific rigor.” Would the scientific rigor include the loons who think the world is ending in twelve years?

What about privacy?

They’re talking about volunteers submitting to the state to come up with the indices, but that’s a joke.

In conclusion, mentally ill people will stop seeking help when they need it, it will be corrupted as is everything in government, and lastly, none of us trust you buggers. Imagine biased control freaks with this kind of power!

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Notify of
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments