Congratulations... AR-15.co made the list!

[theGinsue]

No, I don't accept that this is okay.

We are in some government filter, and we are being weighed and judged for everything we say.

I saw this happen on 4chan, where one day it was a free site, and the next day it was government controlled.

Tucker Carlson just interviewed a guy about how deep this goes, here...

https://tuckercarlson.com/uncensored...-of-democracy/

-John

This is nothing new and has been going on for longer than either of us has lived. It got turbo-charged post 9/11 with the passage and implementation of the Patriot Act - all in the name of security for citizens.

When Americans realized that bad actors (i.e. terrorists) used the internet and email to plan their attacks, and that monitoring these venues could help prevent another 9/11-type event from occurring, we initially applauded the Patriot Act. However, it didn't take us too long to realize that this meant that everyone's electronic communications were being monitored and some push back began. Yet, the programs under the Patriot Act continued to grow and with technological improvements, the capability to spy on Americans increased exponentially. Americans had long felt secure in their privacy as we understood that surveillance of citizens by our own government was strictly prohibited without a very specifically spelled out warrant approved on a case-by-case basis by the courts. The Patriot Act swung open the doors of those limitations to a great degree.

With the Patriot Act, freedom to monitor electronic communications of every citizen, bad actors within our government (politicians) realized that they could not just monitor, but restrict our free speech and also help form public opinion in the way they want Americans to think.

This was aided greatly by the passage of the Smith-Mundt Modernization Act. This act is sold to citizens as just allowing the U.S. Agency for Global Media and the media organizations that it supports to now make their content available in broadcast quality upon request within the United States by lifting some restrictions on the domestic dissemination of government-funded media, often government generated propaganda.

Additionally, laws were implemented to censor “hate speech” and disinformation. While, on the outside, this sounds like a good thing, the determination of what is “hate speech” was weaponized to censor any speech that didn’t agree with the government’s official agenda. We clearly saw this with government interference on Social Media for any anti-Vax and pro-Trump communications.

After so much success with monitoring and censoring our communications, politicians saw how they could use these tools to push their agendas while articulating their actions as “protecting” us from threats (even though the reality is that is used as a tool to control the narrative and limit online posted dissent to what Americans perceive as attacks on our freedoms.

So, of course, sites such as ours are (and have been for some time) on lists of sites requiring addition monitoring. To believe otherwise is either naive or wantonly ignorant. Whether on this site or elsewhere online (email, Social Media, other online forums, etc.) the exercise of Freedom of Speech also comes with a responsibility to consider possible consequences for that exercise. Avoiding government control of sites like this begins with individual members using discretion in what they post.

[FoxtArt]

I think it's a "shoulder thing that goes up".

Similar to if a mountain hermit asked other mountain hermit to compile a "list" of dangerous car websites when they don't even know the difference between a Buick, Peterbilt, and a Schwinn.

[Joe_K]

This is nothing new and has been going on for longer than either of us has lived. It got turbo-charged post 9/11 with the passage and implementation of the Patriot Act - all in the name of security for citizens.

When Americans realized that bad actors (i.e. terrorists) used the internet and email to plan their attacks, and that monitoring these venues could help prevent another 9/11-type event from occurring, we initially applauded the Patriot Act. However, it didn't take us too long to realize that this meant that everyone's electronic communications were being monitored and some push back began. Yet, the programs under the Patriot Act continued to grow and with technological improvements, the capability to spy on Americans increased exponentially. Americans had long felt secure in their privacy as we understood that surveillance of citizens by our own government was strictly prohibited without a very specifically spelled out warrant approved on a case-by-case basis by the courts. The Patriot Act swung open the doors of those limitations to a great degree.

With the Patriot Act, freedom to monitor electronic communications of every citizen, bad actors within our government (politicians) realized that they could not just monitor, but restrict our free speech and also help form public opinion in the way they want Americans to think.

This was aided greatly by the passage of the Smith-Mundt Modernization Act. This act is sold to citizens as just allowing the U.S. Agency for Global Media and the media organizations that it supports to now make their content available in broadcast quality upon request within the United States by lifting some restrictions on the domestic dissemination of government-funded media, often government generated propaganda.

What it is actually for is to ensure that most of you hear, watch, or read on the Tell-A-Vision or Enter-Net is in fact a LIE.

Additionally, laws were implemented to censor ?hate speech? and disinformation. While, on the outside, this sounds like a good thing, the determination of what is ?hate speech? was weaponized to censor any speech that didn?t agree with the government?s official agenda. We clearly saw this with government interference on Social Media for any anti-Vax and pro-Trump communications.

Liars hate the truth, thus truth = hate. The only speech that should ever be censored are lies.

After so much success with monitoring and censoring our communications, politicians saw how they could use these tools to push their agendas while articulating their actions as ?protecting? us from threats (even though the reality is that is used as a tool to control the narrative and limit online posted dissent to what Americans perceive as attacks on our freedoms.

So, of course, sites such as ours are (and have been for some time) on lists of sites requiring addition monitoring. To believe otherwise is either naive or wantonly ignorant. Whether on this site or elsewhere online (email, Social Media, other online forums, etc.) the exercise of Freedom of Speech also comes with a responsibility to consider possible consequences for that exercise. Avoiding government control of sites like this begins with individual members using discretion in what they post.

The government wants to censure your speech, so do it yourself for them? The problems we face today in our Country are largely driven by Men who knew the truth and did not say it out loud, and Men that did not know the truth, and did not care to find out what it was. It matters little what reason or excuse either group did what they did, the results remain.

[theGinsue]

If you're willing to spout out things that could be expected to draw more government scrutiny or even get you arrested, have at it - but not on this site. Discretion is the better part of valor.

[arbol]

I appreciate the forum and the ops, and sometimes rely on them too much to censure my speech (so thank you!)

But I do think that as a discussion point, the collective "we" have lost free speech, and moreso, are being targeted, manipulated, censored, by our own Government. Which is ludicrous, in the framework of which our nation was designed.

-John

[BushMasterBoy]

Personally I'm in favor of a different approach to the problem. Active shooter seems to be the issue in the public eye. Address the shootings with sensors. It is not perfect, but it is way better than nothing. It gives first responders an edge over the shooters. With an AI analyzing the shots it could save many lives.

https://www.dhs.gov/science-and-tech...ems-fact-sheet

[FoxtArt]

I don't think every gunshot sound needs a SWAT team and an arrest, myself.

Should cars come with a ticket printer that automatically prints violations anytime speed is excessed?

Or was our country founded on a concept, of many, that not every law broken requires a prosecution, and not every rulebreaking event is a crime?

ETA: My thoughts are probably even more controversial. Stop arguing about the guns, or the schools, and start addressing the Cluster-B disorder that underlies it (Sociopaths, Borderlines, Bona-fide narcissists). Deal with that and Crime would go down about 85%. Mass shooters would decrease exponentially.

I'm all for treating people the way they themselves treat people. Which makes dealing with sociopaths pretty easy.

[BushMasterBoy]

I am talking about schools, shopping malls, colleges, arenas, etc. If you fire a gun in a grocery store, it will sound an alarm. This may allow a LEO to respond quicker. Too much resistance from behind.