User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 7/21/2019 1:52:32 PM EDT
[#1]
First Amendment covers .GOV infringement on your free speech.
FB is a private entity. Judge is correct. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2019 2:12:19 PM EDT
[#2]
Good.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2019 2:14:42 PM EDT
[#3]
Obama appointee.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2019 2:14:46 PM EDT
[#4]
they cant have it both ways, if they are not freedom of speech because they are a business... then they have to monitor / restrict whats on their platform.. some antifa thug murders people and he was freely posting calls to violence and threats for months, despite being reported? yeah, thats a big assed lawsuit, and possibly a conspiracy to promote violence and terrorist attacks by facebook.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2019 2:19:14 PM EDT
[#5]
If it offers its services free to the public, but by some arbitrary and capricious means decides to curtail and dissuade its use to certain people of a certain ideology and/ or political profile its no a service opened freely to the public. It's discriminating against people with opposing opinions/ beliefs.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2019 2:20:34 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So Facebook hasn't reached government status yet?  Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2019 2:20:52 PM EDT
[#7]
Fuck facebook
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2019 2:23:17 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted: This. Facebook can't have it both ways--either it is a publisher and can dictate what is put up and taken down and is responsible for it's content, or it is simply a platform and not responsible for it's content. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2019 2:23:38 PM EDT
[#9]
And add to the fact that FB makes ad revenue based on the content and information of the people it's censuring. THat's just not right.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2019 2:23:42 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If it offers its services free to the public, but by some arbitrary and capricious means decides to curtail and dissuade its use to certain people of a certain ideology and/ or political profile its no a service opened freely to the public. It's discriminating against people with opposing opinions/ beliefs. What Facebook and others are doing is needed, it's all of our responsibilities to stamp out racism and fascism wherever they rear their heads. We can't allow hateful ideologies a platform to spread their poison. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2019 2:24:17 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
the Obama appointee is not allowing a redress of grievances. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
So Facebook hasn't reached government status yet? Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2019 2:25:42 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Sorry but political beliefs aren't a legally protected class. What Facebook and others are doing is needed, it's all of our responsibilities to stamp out racism and fascism wherever they rear their heads. We can't allow hateful ideologies a platform to spread their poison. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
If it offers its services free to the public, but by some arbitrary and capricious means decides to curtail and dissuade its use to certain people of a certain ideology and/ or political profile its no a service opened freely to the public. It's discriminating against people with opposing opinions/ beliefs. What Facebook and others are doing is needed, it's all of our responsibilities to stamp out racism and fascism wherever they rear their heads. We can't allow hateful ideologies a platform to spread their poison. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2019 2:25:49 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
First Amendment covers .GOV infringement on your free speech. FB is a private entity. Judge is correct. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2019 2:26:52 PM EDT
[#14]
Facebook is either a publisher or a platform. The problem is they want the protections of both and that is not supposed to be allowed.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2019 2:27:23 PM EDT
[#15]
How is this news?
Your constitutional rights are not offered as protections against companies; they are protections against the government. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2019 2:28:03 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yup. This thread is full of commies. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
First Amendment covers .GOV infringement on your free speech. FB is a private entity. Judge is correct. That being said. LOL if you expect the average GD denizen to have a solid grasp of Constitutional Law. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2019 2:29:54 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
That will have to wait until Festivus. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
So Facebook hasn't reached government status yet? Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2019 2:30:32 PM EDT
[#18]
Muh social media!
Good ruling, it’s a private business and if you don’t like it then stop using it, but you won’t becuse of the attention you crave. Fuck Facebook. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2019 2:30:37 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Facebook is either a publisher or a platform. The problem is they want the protections of both and that is not supposed to be allowed. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2019 2:31:32 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Good. "I'm against all laws. ...that allow the kulaks to arm themselves or engage in speech." |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2019 2:31:39 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Muh social media! Good ruling, it’s a private business and if you don’t like it then stop using it, but you won’t becuse of the attention you crave. Fuck Facebook. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2019 2:31:46 PM EDT
[#22]
Sorry, but as far as I know, the Bill of Rights applies to Federal Goverment. It should apply to State Goverments only to the extent I think it has been incorporated into pretty much every states constitution (at least it was forced into all the “new” southern states when they were forced to accept a dictated constitution during reconstruction.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2019 2:33:48 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Then why aren't they censuring the terrorist organizations of Antifa and Muslim extremists cutting off heads and posting videos to their FB pages. consistency? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
If it offers its services free to the public, but by some arbitrary and capricious means decides to curtail and dissuade its use to certain people of a certain ideology and/ or political profile its no a service opened freely to the public. It's discriminating against people with opposing opinions/ beliefs. What Facebook and others are doing is needed, it's all of our responsibilities to stamp out racism and fascism wherever they rear their heads. We can't allow hateful ideologies a platform to spread their poison. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2019 2:35:51 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Sorry but political beliefs aren't a legally protected class. What Facebook and others are doing is needed, it's all of our responsibilities to stamp out racism and fascism wherever they rear their heads. We can't allow hateful ideologies a platform to spread their poison. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2019 2:37:51 PM EDT
[#25]
It's funny people are saying their business their rules without realizing Facebook enjoys the same protection as an ISP.
If first amendment protection doesn't apply they have to own everything posted. Evey death threat that gets posted they are now responsible for. Same as a newspaper. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2019 2:38:35 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Lol, says who? The reactionaries and antiquated hold outs are dying off, not without some futile whining but who cares if they whine, they can't do anything about it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2019 2:39:13 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So many closet statists here. Wow. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2019 2:39:44 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Lol, says who? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Sorry but political beliefs aren't a legally protected class. What Facebook and others are doing is needed, it's all of our responsibilities to stamp out racism and fascism wherever they rear their heads. We can't allow hateful ideologies a platform to spread their poison. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2019 2:40:46 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Sorry, but as far as I know, the Bill of Rights applies to Federal Goverment. It should apply to State Goverments only to the extent I think it has been incorporated into pretty much every states constitution (at least it was forced into all the “new” southern states when they were forced to accept a dictated constitution during reconstruction. The case law is very clear on this. It isn't a question of their business, their rules. Nor is it a question of whether FB is a Government agency. If you create a public forum, then you are protected from legal issues if someone uses your platform to commit a crime. But it's a public forum that is open to all. If you take steps to monitor and censor the content, then it's no longer a public forum. And in that case you are legally responsible for the content. The point is that FB, Google, Twitter, et al can't have it both ways. Unfortunately the courts haven't figured out that the web needs to have the same standards as other public platforms. Is that really so hard to understand??? |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2019 2:41:42 PM EDT
[#30]
But Trump can't block trolls on Twitter because of the 1st amendment.
Sounds legit. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2019 2:43:15 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Never punch left. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
If it offers its services free to the public, but by some arbitrary and capricious means decides to curtail and dissuade its use to certain people of a certain ideology and/ or political profile its no a service opened freely to the public. It's discriminating against people with opposing opinions/ beliefs. What Facebook and others are doing is needed, it's all of our responsibilities to stamp out racism and fascism wherever they rear their heads. We can't allow hateful ideologies a platform to spread their poison. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2019 2:43:17 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Luckily pretty much everyone with any semblance of power or influence. The reactionaries and antiquated hold outs are dying off, not without some futile whining but who cares if they whine, they can't do anything about it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2019 2:46:04 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Maybe on facebook (their rules) but not in “real life”. ?? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Luckily pretty much everyone with any semblance of power or influence. The reactionaries and antiquated hold outs are dying off, not without some futile whining but who cares if they whine, they can't do anything about it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2019 2:46:21 PM EDT
[#34]
 Failed To Load Title |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2019 2:47:27 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
But Trump can't block trolls on Twitter because of the 1st amendment. Sounds legit. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2019 2:48:56 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It's funny people are saying their business their rules without realizing Facebook enjoys the same protection as an ISP. If first amendment protection doesn't apply they have to own everything posted. Evey death threat that gets posted they are now responsible for. Same as a newspaper. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2019 2:49:37 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Luckily pretty much everyone with any semblance of power or influence. The reactionaries and antiquated hold outs are dying off, not without some futile whining but who cares if they whine, they can't do anything about it. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Lol, says who? The reactionaries and antiquated hold outs are dying off, not without some futile whining but who cares if they whine, they can't do anything about it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2019 2:51:20 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
But I copied and pasted the thing saying nothing I posted was Facebook property. What now? 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2019 2:54:34 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Social media is real life, who controls the information choke points controls the zeitgeist. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2019 2:57:08 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yet, here you are. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Social media is real life, who controls the information choke points controls the zeitgeist. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2019 3:01:43 PM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Social media is real life, who controls the information choke points controls the zeitgeist. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Luckily pretty much everyone with any semblance of power or influence. The reactionaries and antiquated hold outs are dying off, not without some futile whining but who cares if they whine, they can't do anything about it. 
Anyone have an over/under on how long this gem will last? |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2019 3:03:28 PM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I object to that. Some entities become so pervasive, so popular and powerful, that they in fact become utilities, and should be so regulated. No. Absolutely, no. I would love to hear a thorough, detailed explanation of your ridiculous values. First off, facebook is hardly all powerful. In fact, our elected US govt representatives could shut facebook down or tumble the stock in an instant. That hardly makes a case for omnipotence. It's just a company. A company that provides an alternative to government controlled communications (hint: that's a good thing.) It's also a product that clearly provides value to millions, if not a billion, people. So, what exactly needs to be corrected? What type of regulation would you pass (except the kind that makes what was once legal, illegal - turns law-abiding companies into criminals - trades threats for compliance). In the words of Varys, "power resides where men believe it resides." You'll have a hard time convincing me that it resides in Mark Zuckerberg. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2019 3:05:25 PM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Because feelings and outrage? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
NOT a public forum?? Is this judge on dope????  |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2019 3:09:06 PM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Not really. The entire purpose of freedom of speech/press is to facilitate free expression in the 'public square' for a whole host of reasons, with political-speech being a critical element. In the information age, social media IS the public square. We've reached a place where winning major elections without social media is impossible. It's not statist to support free speech in the public discourse...which is key to avoiding tyranny. Let's not forget, the speech that big social media wants to shut down is anything critical of the socialist Utopia...but whichever "side" they are trying to suppress, it's still nothing more than collusion between government hacks and statist members of a few mega corps. It's ridiculous to say "I don't want the government imposing tyranny on me, but I'm totally cool with the government paying a corporation to impose tyranny upon me". Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
So many closet statists here. Wow.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2019 3:09:21 PM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
And this means that Facebook is now a curator or publisher of ideas, and can be sued for libelous postings? To those who object to this; you're advocating AR15.com lose the ability to control what may be posted here, to the government. We really don't want to go down that road. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2019 3:09:29 PM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Good point they are just making up law in order to battle conservatives and that's it. They will honor the first amendment when it suits them and destroy it when it doesn't. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2019 3:10:41 PM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So Twitter IS a public forum but Facebook is NOT? Do I have that right based on the recent rulings, or does this overrule the twitter ruling as well? I'm fine with the ruling so long as it's applied equally. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2019 3:11:49 PM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Lots of folks here love big government when it suits them. Their company, their rules. Or, more government? You can't have both. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2019 3:12:23 PM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I guess it means a gaggle of Boomer justices who never used either will weigh in on the issue shortly, lol Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
So Twitter IS a public forum but Facebook is NOT? Do I have that right based on the recent rulings, or does this overrule the twitter ruling as well? I'm fine with the ruling so long as it's applied equally. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2019 3:14:02 PM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
time to start throwing all those net neutrality arguments back at the left. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
