Facebook Has Been Showing Military Gear Ads Next to “Insurrection” Posts

Post by newacct583 » Thu, Jan 14, 2021, 9:06 PM UTC

itsoktocry wrote: post #134

newacct583 wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Parler had a moderation process . It verifiably failed to actually prevent violent rhetoric (c.f. Lin Wood calling for Pence's execution days before the crowd took the capitol chanting "Hang Mike Pence!"). In this interview (audio, but there's a transcript) Matze details some of it, and basically explains that violent-but-popular content is going to be left up because of "free speech": https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01…

> It verifiably failed to actually prevent violent rhetoric How do you suppose you prevent violent rhetoric? You can only react to it. And if that's the baseline, Facebook and Twitter have far more objectionable content yet-to-be-removed.

Post by titzer » Thu, Jan 14, 2021, 9:25 PM UTC

jjk166 wrote: post #218

titzer wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Armor costs money and it's heavy. If armor piercing rounds become common, it's a total waste. It's pretty ridiculous that we are having this conversation about civilian life. What the heck is happening in this country?

As someone who isn't buying armor, it in no way hurts me that it's expensive and heavy, but every dollar they spend on armor or weapons to specifically fight people wearing armor instead of a dollar spent on weapons meant to kill people like me is an improvement. I won't say it's smart to buy body armor, it isn't, but it's still in my best interest to encourage the whack jobs to waste their money.

Post by laverya » Thu, Jan 14, 2021, 9:41 PM UTC

skrowl wrote: post #216

libertine wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The most baffling thing to me is the fact that body armor, and military grade weapons, are sold in USA... Like, we're discussing ad delivery, not the fact that a country allows companies to sell all kinds of weapons, and equipment to the general public... so I think that accurate ad targeting is the least of the problems.

Despite what your TV told you, military grade fully automatic weapons are 50 state illegal in the United States. Civilians may not own them. The scary guns you see on TV just LOOK like military weapons, they don't FUNCTION like them.

Post by JeremyNT » Thu, Jan 14, 2021, 10:06 PM UTC

shoemakersteve wrote: post #202

JeremyNT wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you describe a typical scenario where a civilian might want to use body armor? I understand that shooting high powered rifles is a lot of fun, so recreation makes sense with respect to weaponry, but I'm legitimately confused about why a civilian would ever want to own body armor. I can't imagine it's terribly comfortable to wear, and it doesn't seem very fun to me.

Really? You can't imagine any? Regardless of how unlikely it might be, there's a very real risk that shit's gonna go down in the next week and who knows what might happen. Even if nothing does happen, there's been an increasing amount of unrest in the past few years, it doesn't hurt to be prepared for the worst. You probably won't ever need to use the spare tire in your trunk, but it's reassuring to know that it's th…

Post by jjk166 » Thu, Jan 14, 2021, 10:11 PM UTC

titzer wrote: post #223

jjk166 wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As someone who isn't buying armor, it in no way hurts me that it's expensive and heavy, but every dollar they spend on armor or weapons to specifically fight people wearing armor instead of a dollar spent on weapons meant to kill people like me is an improvement. I won't say it's smart to buy body armor, it isn't, but it's still in my best interest to encourage the whack jobs to waste their money.

Wow, I might suggest de-escalation, but yeah, feed that bear some more crazy. That'll work out fine.