Tag: moral panics

Canada’s Experience Provides Evidence Marijuana Legalization Doesn’t Fuel Gun Violence

On Fox News this week, Laura Ingraham and Alex Berenson pushed the narrative that marijuana use is fueling violent crime and mass shootings, with Berenson claiming cannabis is regularly found in autopsies and warning that rescheduling would put “public safety at stake.” It’s a familiar line from prohibition-era talking points — and one that falls apart when you look at Canada.

Canada legalized recreational marijuana for adults 18 and older in October 2018. In the years since, millions of Canadians have consumed marijuana legally, with usage rates climbing steadily. If marijuana truly triggered psychosis and mass violence on the scale Ingraham and Berenson suggest, Canada would have seen a dramatic rise in gun deaths and shootings. That hasn’t happened.

Statistics Canada data shows the homicide rate in 2019 — the first full year after legalization — actually declined slightly from 2018. Gun deaths have fluctuated year-to-year, but there has been no sudden increase linked to cannabis policy, with mass shootings remain exceedingly rare. The country’s worst modern mass shooting, in Nova Scotia in 2020, involved illegal firearms and police have confirmed that it had nothing to do with marijuana. In response, Canada tightened gun laws further, banning more than 1,500 models of assault-style weapons.

Meanwhile, cannabis consumption has grown. Surveys show that adult use climbed from around 22% in 2018 to about 27% in 2021. Emergency room visits related to cannabis rose somewhat, but public health experts attribute this to more people being willing to disclose use, not to a sudden surge in dangerous outcomes.

In short, Canada provides years of data proving that legalizing marijuana does not drive psychosis-fueled gun deaths or mass shootings. Claims to the contrary are rhetoric, not reality.

Keep reading

Analysis: Marijuana Retailers Not Associated With Increased Prevalence of Motor Vehicle Accidents

The opening of marijuana retailers is not associated with any immediate increases in motor vehicle accidents, according to data published in the journal Cannabis and Cannabinoid Research.

Yale University researchers assessed motor vehicle crash data for the weeks prior to and after the adoption of adult-use marijuana legalization in Connecticut. They also compared motor vehicle crash data during the same period with that of a control state (Maryland). 

Researchers reported “no significant changes” in the prevalence of either statewide accidents (compared to Maryland) or local (within proximity to dispensaries) accidents.

“Here we show that the introduction of recreational cannabis dispensaries in Connecticut did not lead to a significant rise in MVA [motor vehicle accident] rates statewide or at the local level near cannabis dispensaries,” the study’s authors concluded. “The lack of substantial differences in crash rates within the eight weeks before and after recreational dispensary openings suggests that dispensaries may not be a relevant determinant of traffic safety in the proximity of these outlets.”

The study’s findings are consistent with those of a three-year analysis of motor vehicle crash data from Washington state, which reported “no statistically significant impact of cannabis sales on serious injury/fatal crashes” following retail commercialization. By contrast, assessments from other states evaluating longer-term trends in traffic safety following legalization have yielded mixed results. 

Keep reading

US Plan To Copy UK’s Disastrous Online Digital ID Verification Is Winning Friends in the Senate

The Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA) is moving forward in the US Senate with 16 new co-sponsors as of July 31, 2025, reviving a proposal that copies the same type of provision found in the UK’s controversial Online Safety Act, which has caused much backlash across the Atlantic.

In Britain, that measure forces online platforms to implement digital ID age checks before granting access to content deemed “harmful,” a policy that has caused intense resentment over privacy violations, the erosion of anonymity, and government overreach in the realm of free speech.

Now, US lawmakers are considering a similar framework, with more senators from both parties throwing their support behind the bill in recent weeks.

Marketed as a way to shield children from harmful online material, KOSA has gained prominent backing from Apple, which has publicly praised it as a step toward improving online safety. Yet beyond the reassuring branding, the legislation contains provisions that raise serious concerns for free expression and user privacy.

If enacted, the bill would give the Federal Trade Commission authority to investigate and sue platforms over content labeled as “harmful” to minors. This would push websites toward aggressive content moderation to avoid liability, creating an environment where speech is heavily filtered without the government ever issuing direct censorship orders.

The legislation also instructs the Secretary of Commerce, FTC, and FCC to explore “systems to verify age at the device or operating system level.” Such a mandate paves the way for nationwide digital identification, where every user’s online activity could be tied to a verifiable real-world identity.

Once anonymity is removed, the scope for surveillance and profiling expands dramatically, with personal data stored and potentially exploited by both corporations and government agencies.

Advocates of a free and open internet warn that laws like KOSA exploit the emotional appeal of child safety to introduce infrastructure that enables ongoing monitoring and identity tracking. Even with recent changes, such as removing state attorneys general from enforcement, these core concerns remain.

Senator Marsha Blackburn defended the bill, stating, “Big Tech platforms have shown time and time again they will always prioritize their bottom line over the safety of our children.” Yet KOSA’s structure could end up reinforcing the dominance of large tech firms, which are best positioned to implement costly verification systems and handle the resulting data.

The bill’s earlier version stalled in the House after leadership, including Speaker Mike Johnson, questioned its impact on free speech. Johnson remarked that he “love[s] the principle, but the details of that are very problematic,” a sentiment still shared by many who view KOSA as a gateway to lasting restrictions on online freedoms.

If this legislation moves forward, it will not simply affect what minors can view; it will alter the fundamental architecture of the internet, embedding identity verification and top-down content control into its design.

Keep reading

Age-Restricted Taxi Tracking? The Absurd Consequences Of Britain’s Online Safety Act

I was recently travelling in the UK and, after a lot of sightseeing on foot, decided to order a taxi to go back to my hotel.

I searched the internet for a local taxi firm and found one with relative ease. I called the number and went through an automated process which worked well. I managed to book a taxi quickly. The computer-generated voice told me that my taxi was on its way. I was sent a link so that I could monitor the progress of my taxi. The message also said that I would know the taxi driver’s name and the type of vehicle and registration number that was on its way….

I can’t understand why anyone would consider a link to show you the progress of a taxi that you have ordered to be age-inappropriate content.

I can only assume that it is to do with the recent Online Safety Act, although coincidentally I had recently changed mobile providers, so it might purely have been that the mobile provider that I’d switched to had a different standard as to what was considered adult content.

I doubt this on the basis that the company I moved to, Talkmobile, is a wholly owned subsidiary of the company I had used previously, Vodafone, and, as you can see, the block was from Vodafone.

Whoever has decided that this link contains age-restricted content hasn’t necessarily thought this through.

Consider the scenario where a 17 year-old girl can’t get hold of her parents and it’s too far away or she does not want to walk home, so she orders a taxi through a reputable taxi service.

A link is sent to her so she can see the progress of the taxi that she has ordered.

Of course, she can’t open it because it’s considered age-inappropriate and, being only 17, she’s not in a position to prove that she’s over 18 and thus get the link to the taxi.

Thankfully it’s rare, but we do know that there are predators out there who will look for people who are vulnerable, and it’s not difficult to spot someone who’s waiting for somebody to pick them up or waiting for a taxi, because every time a car approaches the person will look up from whatever they’re doing to see if it’s the car that’s picking them up.

All it would take would be for a predator to be around at that time, pull the window down and say, “Did you call for a taxi?” and, of course, because she’s just ordered one, she believes this is her taxi, so she gets in, perhaps never to be seen again — all because some moron has decided that a link to follow the progress of a taxi is something you’re not allowed to see if you’re under the age of 18.

Keep reading

DIGITAL ID: The Shocking Plan to Kill Free Speech Forever

The U.S. is on the verge of launching a dystopian online surveillance machine—and disturbingly, Republicans are helping make it law.

The SCREEN Act and KOSA claim to protect kids, but they’re Trojan horses. If passed, every American adult would be forced to verify their ID to access the internet—just like in Australia, where “age checks” morphed into speech policing. In the UK, digital ID is already required for jobs, housing, and healthcare.

This is how they silence dissent: by tying your identity to everything you read, say, or buy online.

The trap is nearly shut. Once it locks in, online freedom vanishes forever.

Will Americans wake up before it’s too late? Watch Maria Zeee expose the full blueprint—and how little time we have left.

Keep reading

Extremist influencers ‘weaponizing femininity,’ warns Canadian intelligence report

Women’s workout routines that devolve into anti-government rhetoric. Makeup tutorials with anti-feminist commentary. Personal finance videos that blame immigrants for stealing jobs.

According to a Canadian government intelligence report obtained by Global News, extremist movements are “weaponizing femininity” on social media to attract more women into their ranks.

Prepared by Canada’s Integrated Threat Assessment Centre (ITAC), the report warns that female “extremist influencers” are using popular online platforms to radicalize and recruit women.

Their strategy: embed hardline messages within “benign narratives” like motherhood and parenting, allowing them to draw in women who weren’t intentionally seeking out extremist content online.

“A body of open-source research shows that women in extremist communities are taking on an active role by creating content specifically on image-based platforms with live streaming capabilities,” it said.

Keep reading

Government-Backed Study From Japan Finds No Evidence That Marijuana Is A ‘Gateway Drug’

A new study looking into patterns of drug use in Japan casts further doubt on the notion that marijuana is a gateway drug, concluding that cannabis use in the country usually comes after people first use alcohol and tobacco, and that they rarely go on to use other substances.

Published this month in the journal Neuropsychopharmacology Reports, the research—which authors describe as “one of the largest and most significant studies on community-based cannabis users in Japan to date”—also found that nearly half of respondents who reported marijuana as their third drug “did not go on to use other substances afterward.”

“Cannabis use in Japan typically follows alcohol and tobacco, and rarely leads to further drug use,” concludes the report, which was supported by the Japanese Clinical Association of Cannabinoids and the government’s Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare. “These findings challenge the gateway hypothesis in the Japanese context.”

The research acknowledges that cannabis “is often labeled a ‘gateway drug,’” but it notes that “strong causal evidence for progression to other substances is limited.”

Its findings suggest that rather than cannabis use itself leading to other drug use, “shared vulnerabilities”—involving factors like age, educational background and socioeconomic status—”and strict drug policies may shape these patterns.”

The study consisted of an anonymous survey conducted in January 2021, asking 3,900 people in Japan who had used cannabis in their lifetimes about other substance use. Researchers then analyzed the data to assess the chances of people using other drugs after trying marijuana.

“Rather than implying a causal gateway effect of cannabis use,” authors wrote, “results highlight the importance of considering the broader life context in which substance use occurs. Social determinants such as age cohort, educational background, and socioeconomic position appear to shape patterns of substance progression independently of the pharmacological properties of cannabis.”

Authors’ assessment of the responses found that “Odds for subsequent use of alcohol, tobacco, methamphetamine, and other illicit drugs after cannabis use were 1.25, 0.77, 0.08, and 0.78, respectively, suggesting low probabilities of progression.”

Keep reading

Spotify Threatens to Delete Accounts That Fail Digital ID Checks

Spotify has begun warning users that their accounts could be permanently removed unless they complete a new age verification process, part of a broader shift toward stricter content access and censorship controls on digital platforms.

The company has introduced a system that uses facial recognition technology to estimate a user’s age, with further ID verification required if the software detects someone who appears to be underage.

A notification recently began appearing within the app, instructing listeners to verify their age through Yoti, a third-party application that scans faces via smartphone cameras to assess whether a user meets the required age for access.

If the system concludes that a person might be too young, Spotify will ask for additional documentation and show ID. Anyone who does not complete the verification within 90 days will lose access to their account entirely.

According to Spotify’s updated policy page, “You cannot use Spotify if you don’t meet the minimum age requirements for the market you’re in,” adding that users who cannot confirm their age “will be deactivated and eventually deleted.”

The platform, which allows users as young as 13 to join, said it will begin prompting certain individuals to verify their age when they attempt to view content labeled as suitable only for adults.

“Some users will now have to confirm their age by going through an age assurance process,” Spotify stated. This may occur, for example, when someone tries to watch a music video rated 18+ by the rights-holder.

Spotify’s decision arrives amid a wave of newly mandated age-check measures driven by the UK’s new censorship law, the Online Safety Act, which came into force recently.

Under the law, platforms must restrict access to content not suitable for minors, including pornography and violent material, and enforce age thresholds set out in their own user policies. Companies that fail to comply face fines of up to 10 percent of global turnover.

Keep reading

Australia Bans YouTube for Children Under 16

The government of Australia has reversed its decision to grant YouTube an exemption from its sweeping ban on social media for children under 16. YouTube’s parent company, Google, is threatening legal action, but Australian officials vowed to push ahead with the ban.

“We can’t control the ocean, but we can police the sharks, and that is why we will not be intimidated by legal threats when this is a genuine fight for the wellbeing of Australian kids,” Communications Minister Anika Wells said when Google threatened to sue.

Australia announced its “world-leading” plan to bar children from using social media in November 2024. Despite resistance from Internet freedom advocates, and difficult questions about precisely how such a ban could be implemented, the relevant legislation was quickly passed, and the ban is set to take effect in December 2025.

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese gave a press conference on Wednesday in which he pledged to promote Australia’s social media ban to other countries at the United Nations General Assembly in September.

“I know from the discussions I have had with other leaders that they are looking at this and they are considering what impact social media is having on young people in their respective nations, it is a common experience,” Albanese said, appearing with the parents of children who were bullied to death on social media.

“We don’t do this easily. What we do, though, is respond to something that is needed here,” he said.

YouTube was granted an exemption from the ban when it was passed by Parliament in November, for several reasons. One was that YouTube was viewed as an important source of information for teens, so even though it carried potentially harmful content, the good was thought to outweigh the bad.

LGBTQ groups insisted YouTube was an important resource for gay and lesbian children, while public health groups said they used the platform to distribute important information to young people. Australian parents found YouTube less alarming that competing platforms like TikTok. YouTube also featured less direct interaction between users than most of the social media platforms that troubled Australian regulators.

A final objection to banning YouTube was that logging into the service is not required – visitors can access the vast majority of the platform’s content as “guests.” This meant there was no practical way to hold YouTube accountable for policing the age of its users.

Naturally, many of the platforms that were targeted by Australia’s social media ban resented the exemption granted to YouTube. These complaints might have had some bearing on the government’s decision to cancel YouTube’s exemption.

According to Australia’s ABC News, YouTube was added to the social media ban at the request of eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman Grant, who wrote a letter to Wells asking for YouTube’s exemption to be rescinded. Inman Grant said her recommendation was based on a survey of 2,600 children that found nearly 40 percent of them had been exposed to “harmful content” while using YouTube.

Keep reading

Marijuana Legalization Doesn’t Increase Youth Use, Top Researcher Says At Federal Meeting

At a webinar hosted by the federal Substances and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) last week, a leading cannabis researcher threw cold water on the notion that legalizing marijuana leads to increases in youth use of the drug. He also touched on problems with roadside assessments of cannabis impairment, the risk of testing positive for THC after using CBD products and the need for more nuanced regulation around cannabinoids themselves.

The public talk, from Ryan Vandry, an experimental psychologist and professor at Johns Hopkins University’s Behavioral Pharmacology Research Unit, was aimed at providing continuing education on marijuana for healthcare professionals. Titled “Behavioral Pharmacology of Cannabis – Trends in Use, Novel Products, and Impact,” it focused primarily on how variables like dosage, product formulation, mode of administration and chemical components such as terpenes can influence the drug’s effects.

Vandry began by noting that marijuana is the most commonly used illicit drug in the United States. While self-reported consumption by adults has risen as more states have legalized in recent years, he noted, use by youth has generally remained flat or fallen.

“Use among youth is one of the biggest areas of concern related to the legalization and increased accessibility of cannabis,” he said, “but surprisingly, that cohort has actually maintained relatively stable [for] both past-year and daily use.”

Pointing to data from California going back to 1996, when the state ended prohibition for medical patients, Vandry said there has “really been no change in the rates of cannabis use among eighth, 10th or 12th graders. And in fact, in very recent years, we’ve seen a decrease in rates of consumption.”

Keep reading