Facebook Expands Definition of Terrorist Organizations To Limit Extremism (nytimes.com) 145
Facebook on Tuesday announced a series of changes to limit hate speech and extremism on the social network, expanding its definition of terrorist organizations and planning to deploy artificial intelligence to better spot and block live videos of shooters. The company is also expanding a program that redirects users searching for extremism to resources intended to help them leave hate groups behind. The New York Times reports: The announcement came the day before a hearing on Capitol Hill on how Facebook, Google and Twitter handle violent content. Lawmakers are expected to ask executives how they are handling posts from extremists. In its announcement post, Facebook said the Christchurch tragedy "strongly" influenced its updates. And the company said it had recently developed an industry plan with Microsoft, Twitter, Google and Amazon to address how technology is used to spread terrorist accounts.
Facebook said that it had mostly focused on identifying organizations like separatists, Islamist militants and white supremacists. The company said that it would now consider all people and organizations that proclaim or are engaged in violence leading to real-world harm. The team leading its efforts to counter extremism on its platform has grown to 350 people, Facebook said, and includes experts in law enforcement, national security, counterterrorism and academics studying radicalization. To detect more content relating to real-world harm, Facebook said it was updating its artificial intelligence to better catch first-person shooting videos. The company said it was working with American and British law enforcement officials to obtain camera footage from their firearms training programs to help its A.I. learn what real, first-person violent events look like.
Facebook said that it had mostly focused on identifying organizations like separatists, Islamist militants and white supremacists. The company said that it would now consider all people and organizations that proclaim or are engaged in violence leading to real-world harm. The team leading its efforts to counter extremism on its platform has grown to 350 people, Facebook said, and includes experts in law enforcement, national security, counterterrorism and academics studying radicalization. To detect more content relating to real-world harm, Facebook said it was updating its artificial intelligence to better catch first-person shooting videos. The company said it was working with American and British law enforcement officials to obtain camera footage from their firearms training programs to help its A.I. learn what real, first-person violent events look like.
Good. (Score:1, Insightful)
There's plenty of time to put pro-working class folks like Bernie Sanders, Liz Warren and AOC in charge (who's helping to primary another right wing "Republican with a D Next to their name" third way Democrat), turn this ship around and
We have always been at war with antifa (Score:5, Insightful)
We have always been at war with Oceana.
Re: (Score:2)
We have always been at war with Oceana.
4891
Expanding the definition of Terrorism is double-plus good. In Facebook's latest version of new-see there'll be nothing else. In the end the whole notion of goodness and badness will be covered by only artificial intelligence to better spot and block the double-plus bad. Don't you see the beauty of that, Winston?
--
Technology is a more powerful social force than the aspiration of freedom.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I think it's more likely that they'll use this as an excuse to ban anyone left of Mao that gets sufficient attention.
In other news ... (Score:2)
... this just in [bbc.com].
Facebook unveils its plan for oversight board
So (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
BINGO!
The entire place is rabid pack of hyper-authoritarian wokescolds.
Re: (Score:2)
There are a lot of gullible people out there, who are easily convinced. Extremist groups are different from people who we just disagree with.
There is a difference between I support Policy A, while I reject Policy B. Vs. I support Policy A, and you MUST Support Policy A too, and if your support Policy B, then you Must be an evil person who should injured in some way.
What makes it worse, is people who latch on to these people will actually go out and start injuring people.
The line falls when such groups enco
Re: So (Score:2)
Yeah, keep telling yourself this. Then one day, when it is as bad, youâ(TM)ll already be conditioned and will think little of it.
Corporations run the government. Using the corporate structure to oppress people is just an end run. If you can be oppressed for exercising a right, then itâ(TM)s not really a right. Some people have bought the notion that they can be oppressed, ye
Re: (Score:2)
i.e. pointing it's gun away from them, probably towards someone near the middle east.
Re: (Score:2)
If you don't think that corporations run the EU, then you didn't pay attention to the last parliamentary elections. Personally? I enjoyed the part where your media recording and desire to prosecute pirates exceeds that of even the RIAA 20 years ago.
Re: (Score:2)
or even the current EU parliamentary "elections" where the proposed Justice minister is accused of serious criminal acts [euobserver.com] involving arms dealing, fraud and bribery.
Or the new Foreign minsiter who is a convicted criminal, found guilty of insider share dealing (his defence was "It was only 8% of my portfolio", ie "I'm rich already, so what peasants")
Or Lagarde, now head of the ECB, convicted (but not punished, wink) for complete negligence.
Or the new president van der Leyen who is under investigation for corru
Re: (Score:2)
If the leaders are corrupt from the start, it means the chances of corporations exploiting them is huge.
Of course, it also might mean these leaders are the corporate stooges in the first place - I'd have to consult the internet but i seem to recall an EU leader being accused of such already
Can we get 1,000,000 Call of Duty Licenses? (Score:3)
To train AI, you need a data-set. Most data-sets that are worth anything have at minimum of a million data points. There are not that many first person shooter events on camera.
Either they are filming first person shooting videos themselves, or they are pulling this stuff from video games and TV shows.
--
Houdini used to pull rabbits out of a hat, but he never tried to make a living out of selling them when he had pulled them out of the hat - Tommy Douglas
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:1)
They said that 4chan and 8chan are banned from being linked, and probably text references as well.
I do love it when one social media company labels another "terrorist" and blocks them because of what a user posted. The delicious irony...
Re: (Score:2)
Most data-sets that are worth anything have at minimum of a million data points. There are not that many first person shooter events on camera.
1million is fine for an image training dataset, but you don't need them all to be of a shooter. That dataset will have hundreds or thousands of different categories.
Comment removed (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Even more lists to be on, awesome. I'm pretty sure the FBI already beat them to it, considering they believe
Why would the FBI rely on their own lists which are subject to scrutiny by Congress and the courts when they can use someone elses?
Training data (Score:1)
Anyone want to lose $500 (Score:4, Insightful)
As a German... about that second coming thing... (Score:1, Troll)
He definitely does have all the hallmarks. ... of making the USA great again.
- Country that lost its pride.
- Unemployment.
- "Great" speeches (in the eyes of his followers)...
-
- Nationalist.
- Racist*.
- Blaming scapegoats like the Mexicans or Chinese.
Making Germany great again is precisely what Hitler ran on.
Blaming the Jews, Gypsies, gays, disabled people and many others (Jews were just a fraction of the total), was the other key part.
So yeah... unless we know see with our own eyes what happens at the end of
Re: As a German... about that second coming thing. (Score:1)
Making Germany great again is precisely what Hitler ran on.
Right; so you should vote for the guy who wants to make your country shit again.
Lefty logic.
Re: (Score:1)
Um, no. There's a difference between saying you're going to make a country great again, and actually making it great again.
Trump is definitely doing the former, and definitely not doing the latter. Under Trump the US has haemorrhaged global influence, fallen out with it's closest allies, enacted legislation that increases inequality and decreases healthcare access, reduced the low end labour market, increased division, reduced environmental quality making it a worse place to live, and increased hatred, bigo
Re: As a German... about that second coming thing (Score:2)
There's a difference between saying you're going to make a country great again, and actually making it great again.
Thanks for the tip Einstein. That would be why I used the words "wants to".
Re: (Score:2)
Making Germany great again is precisely what Hitler ran on.
Right; so you should vote for the guy who wants to make your country shit again.
Lefty logic.
On a related note, now I'm left wondering precisely what socialist leaders ran on. Are the same marketing tactics that ultimately killed 100 million citizens in the 20th Century still working today? I'm guessing they are. I mean, it's not like we actually learn from history. If we did, I wouldn't be bringing this up as a valid concern in the 21st Century...
Re: (Score:2)
When you have a bag of tricks that works to get you elected that has worked time and time again, why won't you use it?
The psyche of the average voter hasn't changed since the dawn of democracy, the only thing that has is we now have the tools and understanding how to sway people one way or the other using biological imperatives. Ultimately it comes down to us vs something. Take your pick on what you want to be the latter.
Re: (Score:2)
On a related note, now I'm left wondering precisely what socialist leaders ran on. Are the same marketing tactics that ultimately killed 100 million citizens in the 20th Century still working today?
Look at the rich guy right there! See how much stuff he has! He STOLE it from YOU! You DESERVE his stuff! Give ME power, and I'll make sure you get HIS stuff! For the GREATER GOOOD!
It's a line as old as human history, and it never changes.
Re: As a German... about that second coming thing (Score:2)
Sounds pretty much exactly the same as this one National Socialist leader back in the 30s.
Look at the Jewish guy right there! See how much stuff he has! He STOLE it from YOU! You DESERVE his stuff! Give ME power, and I'll make sure you get HIS stuff! For the GREATER GOOOD!
It's really a very popular way of appealing to the masses.
Re: (Score:3)
You should vote for the guy who promises you something that you know he can keep.
Unfortunately that requires an electorate that has an education.
Re: As a German... about that second coming thing (Score:2)
You know, compared to the politicians we've seen over the last few days, Hitler was pretty damn good at keeping his promises. Didn't really turn out to be a good thing though ...
Re: (Score:2)
When people are too used to being bullshitted by politicians all the time, they simply stop taking them serious...
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah but he's missing that whole "Gassing of 3 million people" thing that made Hitler.... HITLER.
It took Hitler 8 years to get that far.Trump is only on year 3.
Re: (Score:3)
You're ignoring that the most important ingredient to Hitler's rise was a populace willing to buy into his authoritarian mindset. If you think Trump and his followers are the only people capable of this, YOU are the problem.
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe it's time to get off your local media diet. Go read some history books that haven't been infected by revisionist historians. Cause that whole "Making Germany great again is precisely what Hitler ran on." Isn't the actual case, I mean sure Germany was in a pretty bad spot being punitively hit for reparations from WWI. And there was inflation as bad as Zimbabwae's current state. And things were so bad, that the gap between rich and poor hadn't been seen in Europe since the 1400's. And really the KPD
Re: (Score:2)
And really the KPD(that's the commies), ran on the exact same platform from around 1929 until they were banned as their antifa thugs were engaging in street riots, beating people up,
And guess who they were usually rioting and fighting against? The SA (sturmabteilung). The enforcer/militant wing of the NSDAP.
Re: (Score:2)
And guess who they were usually rioting and fighting against? The SA (sturmabteilung). The enforcer/militant wing of the NSDAP.
You mean the SA wasn't created because antifa had been beating the piss out of people for years, and the police wouldn't arrest them. The courts wouldn't convict them. The politicians lauded their actions.
Seems like there's some heavy gaps in your history from that period.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
Then there is the other side, driving bulldozers over people, blocking food and medical aid, and bombing/rocketing targets which they claim are valid, however also happen to be in densely populated areas (at times even school and hospitals).
The estimated civilian death tolls are just short of 8000 Palestinians against just over 1500 Israelis.
And you you are SO sure one side only is at fault - interesting.
Re: (Score:3)
Military vehicles, in a war, driving over soldiers... shit happens
Blocking food and medical aid? Did Hamas get help from the IDF?
Bombing targets that are being used as bases, Hamas is using schools and hospitals to set up rocket launchers, making it a military target.
Just because Palestinians are bad at waging war, and sends masses of untrained brainwashed children to die, doesn't mean they're the good guys, there are plenty of conflicts where the bad guys lose a lot more, Nazi's, Communists under Pol Pot,
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Military vehicles, in a war, driving over soldiers... shit happens
Was Rachel Corrie a soldier [wikipedia.org]?
Just because Palestinians are bad at waging war, and sends masses of untrained brainwashed children to die, doesn't mean they're the good guys,
You mean like these unarmed Palestinian teens [theguardian.com] shot by snipers at over 200 meters?
Or how about this soldier [ynetnews.com] getting off clean after getting caught on camera executing a wounded Palestinian attacker?
The Palestinian side might not be perfect, but Israel isn't squeaky clean either.
Re: (Score:2)
I didn't say bad things don't happen. It's war. The US has committed war crimes in the fight against the Nazis as well, that doesn't mean the Nazis were any good or the fight at large against fascism, communism, evil theocracies and terrorism is bad.
Um... you do know Palestine doesn't really have (Score:2)
And yeah, in war both sides are bastards. News at 11.
Re: (Score:2)
a modern army, and that Israel does, right? This is what war looks like when it's asymmetric. The only way to end it is to either bring peace through compromise and a future for both people, or to wipe out the weaker side entirely. If you do the latter slowly enough nobody much notices...
This shit has been going on for over half a century. What exactly is your definition of slowly enough? Right now everyone notices this, so it's rather obvious that speed (or lack of) is not the answer to ending this conflict. And when a war rages on for this long (particularly an "asymmetric" one), I tend to question if anyone actually wants it to end.
And I know that war and related atrocities are horrible and we should not engage in them, but when looking at the death statistics I really can't believe t
Re: Anyone want to lose $500 (Score:3)
The estimated civilian death tolls are just short of 8000 Palestinians against just over 1500 Israelis.
Heh. I love this talking point. "Not enough Jews are dying; clearly they must be the bad guys!"
The good censor (Score:2)
article summarized (Score:1, Flamebait)
Article summarized:
Corporate Nazis who control Faceboot announce that henceforth anyone who is not a Corporate Nazi will be considered a "terrorist", and subject to the same arbitrary and capricious bans to which ordinary users are already subject.
The day before (Score:2)
Pretty convenient they roll out this the day before testimony. Who cares if it works. Who cares if it reduces anything. As long as they can deflect and claim they ARE doing something, why just yesterday we increased our scope an we are waiting to see what effect that has.
And congress is so fucking stupid theyâ(TM)ll fall for it. EVERY SINGLE TIME. It never gets old.
Truespeak is goodspeak (Score:5, Insightful)
All of us know that truespeak is the only goodspeak, and who better to decide what truespeak is than the geniuses at Facebook? We all are weak and desperately need someone to tell us what speech is acceptable and, more important, what speech is not. I suppose the Government could probably do a great job of this too, but Facebook seems to have arrived there first. All hail Facebook, our good shepherds!
Re: (Score:1)
Observations ... (Score:2)
"The team leading its efforts to counter extremism on its platform has grown to 350 people, Facebook said, and includes experts in law enforcement, national security, counterterrorism"
Aren't these all terrorist groups espousing real-world harm? Quick facebook, better loosen that petard before you hoist yourself!
"The team leading its efforts to counter extremism on its platform has grown to 350 people, Facebook said"
Out of how many billions?
Facebook expansion is good (Score:2, Funny)
Facebook should continue to expand its definition until it ends up banning itself from the Internet. Ditto for the colluding companies sharing in this scheme.
So "cops are harmful terrorists" ... (Score:1)
This is what their shitty excuse of a half-assed pseudo-imitationoid (NOT AI!) of a neural net will learn.
Privatising censorship (Score:3)
Censorship used to be the purview of the government, an elected, publicly accountable body. However, as our public discourse is increasingly digitized and run through a few large companies, the power is shifting.
The scary thing is not just that Facebook et al. are gaining more power in defining what speech is deemed acceptable, but that many government officials actually cheer this on. In many cases the government officials asked these platforms to do a better job of policing speech, without actually setting public standards or having an open debate about where the limits should be. Without staying in control.
On top of this, the companies further evaporate responsibility by using machine learning to asses the speech, which means that in many cases they themselves can't even predict or even explain how a new algorithm will deal with complex cases. All they can do is tweak the algorithm after it has misjudged.
The simplistic nature of this algorithmic monitoring could harm our public discourse. Speculatively, this situation could aggravate the situation by creating chilling effects for certain types of speech. For example, these algorithms are known do a very poor job of distinguishing things like parodies, often flagging them for removal. Yet humor is a vital means of de-escalation, and allows for self-reflection to occur by those who may have already settled on an extreme political position.
In a twist of irony, it seems the Californian Ideology - amongst other things a belief that digital technology could help spread democracy by empowering citizens - has mostly just shifted power from government bodies to companies instead.
In the movie Iron Man, Tony Stark quips that he has "successfully privatized world peace". But while funny in a movie, the real-world shifts in this direction should actually lead to more concern.
Re: (Score:2)
Okay (Score:2)
"The company said that it would now consider all people and organizations that proclaim or are engaged in violence leading to real-world harm."
Better take down those police recruitment ads, then. They are specifically hiring Americans to engage in acts of violence against Americans. And in fact, they had better drop everything from the FBI and CIA. Hell, everything from the federal government, really.
But they won't do that. They'll use this to chase unpopular speech off their platform. You know, the only ki
Are we there yet? (Score:5, Insightful)
So "terrorist" has now been finally stripped of all meaning it had remaining because it's now even officially relabeled to "anything we don't like"?
Folks, when I said that a few years ago, I was making a joke, I wasn't making a suggestion!
Re: (Score:3)
Come on now, stop being such a terrorist!
Re: (Score:2)
Well, "racist" stopped working, so they had to find another "ist" to turn to.
Re: (Score:2)
Folks, when I said that a few years ago, I was making a joke, I wasn't making a suggestion!
Great, just great. We have opportunists making terrorist threats again.
slashdot comments (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Just in time... (Score:2)
One trick pony (Score:2)
Problem: company isn't transparent, has vague draconian rules implemented by bad code
Solution: Expand opaque, vague, draconian rules implemented by more bad code.
So will Facebook consider me a terrorist? (Score:3)
I've heard that (sorry,no link) people are labeled as extremists for nothing more than believing that the constitution should be followed.
So, is Facebook going to delete my account?
Re: (Score:1)
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Perhaps you should approach the city of San Franciso as they've passed legislation declaring the NRA to be a terrorist organisation.
I'm sure they had reasonable grounds for this.
Re: Did they include the NRA? (Score:2)
Itâ(TM)s San Francisco. It doesnâ(TM)t need to make sense.
Re: (Score:3)
"Public disinformation about guns and gun safety."
Could you provide examples?
"Manipulation of the electoral system to keep gun-friendly politicians in office."
Could you provide examples of illegal behavior leading to this? Especially since the NRA is funded by private citizens who apparently agree it furthers goals they believe in.
"Manipulation of the legal system to prevent and suppress research on gun violence."
Could you provide evidence of this?
"Every mass shooter and murderous POS who has killed someone
Re:Did they include the NRA? (Score:5, Insightful)
You do know the NRA is the lobbying group FOR US citizen gun owners, right?
It isn't like the law abiding citizen gun owner and enthusiasts don't need lobbying groups, especially now.
Hell, a lot of gun owners are disappointed with the NRA for caving in and giving away rights over the past decades...allowing the Hughes amendment, and being for the bump stock ban, etc....the NRA has caved so many times.
But better than nothing I guess.....if it keeps the 2A in the "shall not be infringed" category.
And with the Dems outright saying "Hell yes" we'll take them away....well, what do you expect.
But the NRA is nothing but a lobbying group supported by us citizen members to keep their 2A rights.
Re: (Score:3)
if it keeps the 2A in the "shall not be infringed" category.
The 2A hasn't been in the "shall not be infringed" category for a long time, now. When a disgruntled girlfriend can complain to the government that she's afraid you're going to hurt someone with your nasty guns, and the government takes them away from you ("red flag" laws) you've gone well outside "not infringed."
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Well then it's time for you to get up to date, because they're back.. not that they ever went away, they just went underground.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
A Texas investigation into Planned Parenthood on Monday culminated in an indictment -- of the organization's accusers instead of the group.
https://www.cnn.com/2016/01/25... [cnn.com]
https://oversight.house.gov/pl... [house.gov]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You got a source available that one can actually read?
Re: Did they include the NRA? (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
Second amendment single-issue voters keep spewing that nonsense about defending themselves from the tyranny of government, but the only thing that seems to meet the definition of tyranny is someone from the government coming to take away their guns. Right now we have an illegitimate president put in the white house by Russian gangsters. He lies every time he opens his fish-like mouth. He steals tax payer money at every turn. But that's all OK, because he isn't trying to take away your guns. For years t
Re: (Score:2)
People who have been treated well by the government
Problem is, I just don't see them. If you need a cop, they are all hanging out at Lil John's Bar and Grill.
Re: (Score:2)
Because in the US, the government is not supposed to be there to care for you, or treat you right, it is there, supposedly, to do the minimum needed to allow you to enjoy your freedom and make your way in the world as best you see fit.
Our rights do NOT come from the government, in fact the rights the government has comes from the people.
And with respect to guns.....MANY of us enjoy
Re: (Score:2)
How do you define tyranny?
Is it an illegitimate, corrupt, amoral president put in the white house by Russian gangsters and fully supported by the GOP who gerrymanders voting districts to disenfranchise voters who might oppose them?
Is it CIA, FBI, NSA scooping up every phone call, email, and instant message?
The "Defending yourselves from tyranny" argument is bullshit and you know it. We've lived under tyranny for decades and none of you have ever done anything about it because no one from the government has
Re:Did they include the NRA? (Score:5, Insightful)
It should have been done a long time ago. Make their money so toxic as to be worthless, especially to politicians.
Now we have to get the feds to declare the NRA a domestic terror organization...
Rural teenage kids in the 1970's would drive their pickup trucks to high school with a shotgun hanging in the rear window, because they wanted to go hunting right after school. IF a cop ever stopped them, the only thing they would likely ask them is "Have any luck hunting lately?" No SWAT team called. No FBI on the news. No stories of terrorist plots being thwarted. So ask yourself, What changed between now and then? Let me give you a hint; it sure as hell wasn't the tool you're trying to blame.
You don't cure obesity by banning "high capacity" spoons and cups and gluttonous all-you-can-eat buffets. 65% of the gun deaths in America are due to suicide. Not sure when people will wise up to the fact that the tool is not the problem here.
Tobacco. Alcohol. Big Pharma putting opium in a pill bottle. If you want to talk about the real toxic sources in America that is killing by the thousands every single day, then fine. But don't come bitching about guns again. It's a downright stupid argument when looking at suicide rates, and only makes you look ignorant as to where the true problem is, which is mental health.
Re: (Score:2)
You don't cure obesity by banning "high capacity" spoons and cups and gluttonous all-you-can-eat buffets.
Well, ack...chew...a...lee...
Leftists seem to think they can. There was that ban against large soda cups in New York.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, come on, don't pretend you do not understand why guns are different.
I will not suddenly become obese. I will not start drinking heavily, and the time to experiment with drugs was in college. And I sure as hell am I not going to start smoking.
No, you likely will not. And the other 300 million Americans who are sane and possess firearms legally, also intend to never harm another human except in self defense. So why pretend you and everyone else calling for gun bans are somehow not targeting every law-abiding gun owner? If we're going to call out those who are pretending here, might as well start with you.
And you've done nothing to address my point of what has changed in America since the says of shotgun-toting teenagers. It sure as hell isn't
Re: (Score:2)
I don't want to get caught in your crossfire while you try to protect me or yourself from some nut-job intent on killing me and 20 other people. I'd rather take my chances with the nut-job (no, not you, the original nut-job).
More bullets flying is a recipe for disaster.
But of course, the NRA has seen to it that statistics about people killed or injured in cross-fire cannot be gathered, so until they are made irrelevant, we may never know the truth.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't want to get caught in your crossfire while you try to protect me or yourself from some nut-job intent on killing me and 20 other people. I'd rather take my chances with the nut-job (no, not you, the original nut-job). More bullets flying is a recipe for disaster.
Floors me that you completely fail to see that said "nut job" could be a police officer trying to save your damn life and many others. I guess the answer there is to disarm everyone then. Do you know many cops would quit tomorrow if you sent them on the streets of "disarmed" America without a gun? Would you do that job and feel safe? Try and remember the fact that in damn near every case, the bad guy with a gun killing people is only stopped by a good guy with a gun. Yes, it is quite sad that evil exis
Re: (Score:2)
There's a difference between a trained cop whose job description includes the possibility of being shot at and shooting others and some amateur yahoo who thinks that because he likes the noise his gun makes he's qualified to start shooting at people whenever he imagines an excuse to do so.
Your stats on war are nice, but they aren't the same thing as stats on a bunch of armed yahoos running around shooting at anything that moves in their direction. We don't have those stats because the terrorist NRA suppres
Re: (Score:2)
There's a difference between a trained cop whose job description includes the possibility of being shot at and shooting others and some amateur yahoo who thinks that because he likes the noise his gun makes he's qualified to start shooting at people whenever he imagines an excuse to do so.
You fail to understand what it takes to obtain a concealed carry license. Each shooter must be qualified by actually firing live rounds at a range. And said "yahoo" will be behind bars if they fail to prove they acted sensibly and in self defense when using a gun, which I am keenly aware of the impact of ever having to discharge any gun outside of hunting or sport. I don't ever want to have to go through that legal nightmare, but if I or my loved ones are alive and unharmed as a result, then it is worth
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
No, not at all.
Re: (Score:2)
You got your wish; Twitter just banned GOA.
I am sure censoring the various organizations which focus on preserving individual civil liberties will go well. What could possibly go wrong?
Re: Romper rooming the net (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
When college was more accessible, a degree had a modicum of meaning. Now unfortunately, the thing it signifies the most is that the person was able to get loans and go into significant dept or came from affluence.