And interesting debate
Critics Say Montana’s TikTok Ban Is a Violation of Free Speech. Here’s What to Know
On Wednesday, Montana Governor Greg Gianforte signed a first-of-its kind law to ban the Chinese-owned social media app TikTok in the state. The law, which is set to go into effect in January 2024, quickly came under fire for violation of free speech laws.
In a statement, Gianforte’s office called the law an attempt to “protect Montanans’ personal and private data from being harvested by the Chinese Communist party.” Tech and legal experts say that how the ban is handled in the coming months could set a precedent for how TikTok, which has over 150 million users in the U.S., is regulated across the nation, especially as states and federal legislatures look towards restricting the platform’s reach. (big snip)
A lawsuit against the ban seems likely to come. Keegan Medrano, policy director at the ACLU of Montana, said in a May 17th statement that the Montana legislature has “trampled” on free speech. “We will never trade our First Amendment rights for cheap political points.”
In a statement published on Twitter Wednesday evening, TikTok said, “We want to reassure Montanans that they can continue using TikTok to express themselves, earn a living, and find community as we continue working to defend the rights of our users inside and outside of Montana.” TikTok did not return TIME’s request for comment. (snip)
Any legal challenge might closely resemble the last time a TikTok ban was attempted. In 2020, courts blocked Trump’s executive order to ban TikTok and Chinese-owned messaging app WeChat, ruling that the Trump administration hadn’t demonstrated enough of a security risk to limit users’ speech.
Free speech or not? The platform is a company, and people have plenty of ways to speak (if we wanted to use the leftist argument about guns, we could say there was no Internet when the Bill of Rights was passed. Not a good argument, but, amusing). But, should government ban it? IMO, no, except on government property. No one should be using Tiktok on their government owned tablets, computers, and phones. The people are being forced to pay for these, and they should be used for business, not stupid videos where information ends up in the hands of the Chinese government. But, no ban for private citizens. If they are dumb enough to use it, let them. That’s their responsibility and problem.
But, what about Tiktok enabling users to suggest committing criminal acts?
Weird TikTok trend which sees users walk into strangers’ homes and film them is slammed
Social media users were left open-mouthed after watching footage of a teenager and his friends wandering into a person’s home uninvited. The TikTok video, entitled ‘Walking into random houses’, showed the three youngsters approaching a London townhouse and passing into the property.
A female occupant, who is tidying up outside the entrance of the residence, could be heard asking the teenagers “what are you doing?” as they strode past her into the building.
She called her partner for help, who briefly left their children to apprehend the intruders, one of which had made themselves comfortable on the sofa.
They could be charged with multiple felonies, and, it’s also a great way to get shot. There are tons of “challenges” on TikTok which are illegal, borderline illegal, and just downright dangerous, and the platform does almost nothing to scrub these.
Is access to tiktok that different from access to cigarettes, alcohol, pot, porn etc? Is it abridging speech to limit whiskey and cigarette advertising? To forbid selling pot to 15 year olds? To keep AR-15s from 16 yr olds?
tiktok, meta, instagram, twitter, snapchat, youtube are harming children.
Then pass a law banning children just like they are from cigarettes, pot, alcohol, and AR-15s. Why should adults have their first amendment rights eviscerated? Just as minors should not be exposed to communist/nazi propaganda or trans sex grooming they should be kept from tiktok.
It’s not hard unless we make it hard.
Mr White wrote:
I very much support public schools banning homosexual or transgender ‘grooming’ or support materials, because those are aimed at a captive audience — remember: school attendance is compulsory in the US — but private access, even if it is harmful, is something quite different.
Ther examples you gave — cigarettes, pot, alcohol, and AR-15s — show just how futile such laws would be. Yes, those things are banned, but how effective have such laws proved to be? Does anyone believe that having banned minors from cigarettes, pot, alcohol, and AR-15s have actually kept minors fron using cigarettes, pot, alcohol, and AR-15s?
Mr Dana and I agree! Why have any laws? Laws don’t work!! We banned murder and we still have murder. We banned dog fighting and we still have dog fights. We banned fentanyl and we still have fentanyl (a free market in fentanyl is self-regulating – those not understanding its use will die – solving two problems!). (Except laws dictating the actions of LGBTQ+ individuals and abortion, are OK).
The government overregulates everything. If a company can successfully market a chemical or product, caveat emptor! In a completely free society citizens will communicate to each other if a product is safe and/or effective. If a consumer has a complaint against a company they can sue for damages. If the suit is frivolous the company can countersue.
Similarly, the USDA, CDC, FDA, SEC, DEA, ATF, FBI, DOJ, CIA, BIA, Interior and any gov’t funded police or fire-fighting should be eliminated. If Piggly Wiggly sells you E coli contaminated meat, you can sue them. Other gov’t “scientific” agencies like NOAA, NASA, NIH, NSF, EPA, DOE, OFT etc serve to spread gov’t propaganda.
We can finally unleash the native competitiveness, strength, vigor and creativity of real Americans.
You can protect your own property as you wish or not at all. If you need more protection hire private. Burglars, rapists, kidnappers would quickly catch on to who are vulnerable. If the victims don’t catch on, we’re a stronger society without them. Criminals, knowing that every person they meet may be armed will be even more selective in whom they rob, rape and kill.
Can a neighborhood or community organize to offer police and fire protection and road maintenance for all in exchange for a yearly fee (tax)? Good question. Perhaps community orgs (local governments) would have to be banned.
Mandates for school attendance need to be rescinded. Parents know best. If parents wish to send their child to school, private schools will compete for their children and dollars.
Any other ideas for Making America Great Again?
The liberal but not libertarian Mr Dowd wrote:
We banned murder and we still have murder, but that’s different, because murder involves one person harming another; Mr Dowd ignored that difference.
The examples given, cigarettes, pot, alcohol, and AR-15s, have not been shown to be effective, and to seriously enforce such laws would entail a vast encroachment on people’s civil liberties; are we going to test kids for nicotine or marijuana without probable cause?
We have set legal ages of consent, 18 in most states, 16 or 17 in a few, but we all know that many teenagers do consent to sex, and with the introduction of so-called “Romeo and Juliet” laws, we now permit minors to copulate with other minors, or even adults, as long as the differences between their ages is not too great. Now all we are trying to do is keep 25-year-olds from screwing 15-year-olds.
How would you enforce ages of consent? We could, I suppose, lock up every teenager who f(ornicates) around, or imprison every underaged person who obtains contraceptives or seeks abortions, as evidence of underaged sex, but we certainly haven’t done that, have we?
Tik Tok? Are we going to surveil every iPhone in Montana, and seize it and pnish the owner if Tik Tok is found on it?
There are, of course, countries which can and do enforce such laws much better than we do, but I’m pretty sure that none of us would want to live in them.
Somewhere I read the real reason the gov. is opposed to TikTok is because they don’t control it.
TIC TOC has been around for a while not and it’s worst features have been there since the beginning. I have nothing against banning it, or even burning the servers to the ground, just curious about why now. It seems politicians love to go after the easy targets. It is too much for them to go after something hard.
Governments obviously have the right to ban Tik Tok from government-owned devices, and ban the use of Tik Tok on personally-owned devices of those who hold security clearances.
But privately-owned devices by private citizens? Not just no, but Hell no! If the government has the right to ban private access to Tik Tok by those not employed in some secure government access, then it has the power to ban privately-owned devices from accessing The Pirate’s Cove or The New York Times or CNN.
It is not a violation of free speech. The same words can be published on a hundred different sites. What is being banned is the CCP’s access to everything about us.
The Wylie1 has a point. Banning tiktok does not stop free speech, it stops tiktok. As he states the same crap can be published on other sites. So banning tiktoc basically hurts the Chinese commies and I’m quite okay with that.
OT. My dad purchased a 1959 Lincoln convertible yesterday at at Mecham Auto Auction. The thing looks like an aircraft carrier it’s so big. It’s got the “Chinese eyes” which in car talk are the dual headlights on an angle. Really cool. A girlfriend and I watched on live TV. We were listening to dad bid on my speaker while we watched the auctioneer bidding the car. It was cool. It’s bright red with a red and white leather interior and a white top. Huge chrome rear bumper assembly with the Continental wheel. It should be at his garage on the 25th. I can’t wait to drive it. That makes seven classic cars he has.
BTW, he finds his new Mercedes EV very “limiting”. IOW, it’s okay to cruise around Palm Beach but he wouldn’t try and drive to my house (a 220 mile drive). He doesn’t trust it yet. He did however, trust it enough to drive down to South Beach to inspect some work done at a couple of his hotels last week. But that’s not real far.