Re: ARMED CITIZEN ARMORY
Posted: Thu Sep 19, 2019 12:30 pm
58 subscribers.
The focal point for Texas firearms information and discussions
https://www.texaschlforum.com/
Thanks Dan!
Y'all #1 - thank you so much!!
Something needs to be done about YouTube censoring speech. Yes, it's a private company, but elected officials use it to communicate with the public and their constituents. There is a case prohibiting elected officials from banning posters from their Facebook accounts, when such accounts are used by elected officials for non-personal posting. I think that concept could be expanded to include all social media outlets used by elected officials. Otherwise, it will be quite easy to sway public opinion based upon who YouTube/Instagram/Facebook, etc. allow to post.The Annoyed Man wrote: ↑Fri Sep 20, 2019 12:12 pm MAC just posted on Patreon that YouTube just removed his "verified" status. He’s only got 975K subscribers...
C0CAB07C-22E4-4A66-906D-92D3D2E2A6F9.png
Thank you very kindly!
To clarify, my friend's Armed Citizen Armory is not going to be another youtube channel ... it is a website with relevant content for home defense and concealed carry to folks relatively new to firearms and carry.The Annoyed Man wrote: ↑Fri Sep 20, 2019 12:12 pm MAC just posted on Patreon that YouTube just removed his "verified" status. He’s only got 975K subscribers...
C0CAB07C-22E4-4A66-906D-92D3D2E2A6F9.png
5 months later, and still no content, and only 53 subscribers. Unsubscribed.
If your providing a public service such as gas, water, electricity, what prevents a public utility from "censoring" somebody their service? What's the difference from a CEO from turning off your water for political reason from removing your web page from their server for political reasons?Charles L. Cotton wrote: ↑Fri Sep 20, 2019 2:05 pmSomething needs to be done about YouTube censoring speech. Yes, it's a private company, but elected officials use it to communicate with the public and their constituents. There is a case prohibiting elected officials from banning posters from their Facebook accounts, when such accounts are used by elected officials for non-personal posting. I think that concept could be expanded to include all social media outlets used by elected officials. Otherwise, it will be quite easy to sway public opinion based upon who YouTube/Instagram/Facebook, etc. allow to post.The Annoyed Man wrote: ↑Fri Sep 20, 2019 12:12 pm MAC just posted on Patreon that YouTube just removed his "verified" status. He’s only got 975K subscribers...
C0CAB07C-22E4-4A66-906D-92D3D2E2A6F9.png
Chas.