Site icon The Truth About Guns

Housekeeping: Censor “Extremists”?

Previous Post
Next Post

 A reader writes:

“I have often thought about writing to you about several of the extremist posters on TTAG but have backed off.  Some of the comments on the entry A Neo-Nazi Who Goes on a Shooting Spree. Who Saw That Coming pushed me over the top. I don’t think it is a good idea to allow individuals who fit a certain type of extremist profile free reign to comment. While the chances are small that someone in your community would go off and commit a similar atrocity, the consequences to you and TTAG would be quite high if they did . . .

TTAG is private property and you are not bound by the First Amendment. It seems that you are more upset about personal flames than about allowing racial supremacists from expressing their repugnant views. You can choose what you publish without severely restricting free speech or being intolerant of opposing views.

I am not suggesting a blanket ban on anybody. A political extremist can say something valuable about firearms or the right to bear arms. However, it would be in your best interests to weed out specific comments justifying or praising neo-Nazis/white supremacist ideas or groups.

It your space, your rules and your call.”

Yes. Yes it is. But I don’t own the TTAG brand. It belongs to you, our readers. My current policy is fairly clear: anything goes as long as the commentator doesn’t flame the website, its authors or fellow commentators.

That said, there are legal and ethical limits. The former are pretty straightforward. The latter not so much. Where do you think we should draw the line?

 

Previous Post
Next Post
Exit mobile version