Minister From James Talarico’s Church Admits They’re Not a Belief-Based Church
Since 1986, Geraldo Rivera Has Never Met a Rake He Couldn't Step On
CNN's Brian Stelter Says There Will Almost Certainly Be Layoffs After Paramount Merger
Boston Globe: Queer Community Splintered Over Lesbian Bar That Dropped Strict Mask Mandate
CBS News: Critics Say Converse 'Lynching' Ad May Have Been Intentionally Crafted to...
Vandals Spray-Paint ‘Kill Donald Trump’ and ‘Talarico — Love Wins’ at Site of...
Grand Jury Finds Zero Evidence of Foul Play in Death of Black Teen;...
Chris Christie Is Thinking About 2028, and X Has Thoughts
The Snark Is Strong With This One: JD Vance Echoes His Boss With...
What Alaska’s 50+ Voters Are Saying About the Senate Race
Choice of Color: Podcaster Joy Reid Sides With Clancy Trial Holdout Juror for...
Trump Made His First Remarks Without the TV Pool and Reviews Are Enthusiastic
Venezuelan Shot and ‘Denied Urgent Medical Care’ Released From Hospital
Sit This One Out, Slick: Gavin Newsom Tries to Hop on the Trump...
Abdul El-Sayed Flips OUT When Pushed on His Past Refusal to Support Kamala...

Online Safety Bill poised to become UK law - Is this the end of free speech?

(AP Photo/Charles Krupa, File)

The road to Hell is paved with good intentions. While this writer can appreciate the intent of the Online Safety Bill in the UK, we feel like it likely crosses the line. 

Advertisement

So, we guess that we can kiss freedom of speech goodbye ... in the United Kingdom, anyway. More to the point, who is the arbiter of what content is 'harmful?'

This bill does have some good points. It is an evil wind that blows no good, after all. We are pleased that access to adult sites will have to be better controlled. There is something to be said for stronger age verification, although this writer knows several people who bypass security measures for a living, so there is that. Where we see the biggest problem is in the requirement to scan encrypted messages for 'harmful content,' and remove it as soon as feasible or prevent it from being posted if possible. Yes, you read that right, dear reader. The UK government wants social media companies to scan encrypted private messages under the guise of 'protecting the children.'

X users, as usual, did not mince words expressing their opinions, both in favor and opposed.

The law of unintended consequences, unfortunately, is the one law that Congress (or Parliament, in this case) can not repeal.

Advertisement

It is generally a good idea to perk one's ears up when one hears that it's 'for the children.'

A number of users referenced the mid-80's.  Gee, this author wonders what's so important about 1984 specifically.

Of serious concern is that social media companies who, up until now, have protected the privacy of their users, will be forced to create a backdoor for the government, a la Liberty Safe. 

In case you didn't immediately see it, that was pure, unadulterated, English Sarcasm. (Some of his respondents didn't catch on, but that's a different thread)

We did say some were in favor of this, didn't we?

Some even bragged about being the author of their own demise.

Simply put:

Advertisement

At least it's staying across the pond, right? RIGHT?!

Well, there goes the neighborhood. But at least it's 'for the children.'

***

Editor's Note: Do you enjoy Twitchy's conservative reporting taking on the radical left and woke media? Support our work so that we can continue to bring you the truth. Join Twitchy VIP and use the promo code SAVEAMERICA to get 40% off your VIP membership!

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Twitchy Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement