Tag: police state

Launching a High Court Challenge Against Australia’s Social Media ID Check Law

Australia’s online digital ID checks and under-16 social media ban are now facing a constitutional challenge, with a coalition of Australians led by NSW Libertarian MP John Ruddick preparing to contest the new law in the High Court.

The Online Safety Amendment (Social Media Minimum Age) Bill 2024, scheduled to take effect on December 10, 2025, will require all users to prove they are over 16 before accessing major platforms such as Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, YouTube, X, and Snapchat.

To comply with this, people will have to give up their privacy by verifying with a government-issued ID.

John Ruddick announced the challenge after being elected President of the Digital Freedom Project (DFP) at its inaugural general meeting this week.

Ruddick said the DFP’s mission is to “raise public awareness about this East German-style intrusion by the state into our private lives” and to “launch a High Court challenge that argues the law is unconstitutional as it is a violation of the long-accepted ‘implied constitutional freedom of political communication’.”

He argued that the new law will be burdensome for both social media users and platforms, with companies facing fines of up to $53 million per day for breaches.

“The guts of the matter is that to have a social media account in Australia from 10 December, you will need to prove to the social media platform you are over 16,” Ruddick said.

He added that the verification process could require uploading identification documents, which would enable the eSafety Commissioner to “track what websites you visit to double check you really are over 16.”

Keep reading

Michigan Man Guns Down Teen Who Broke into His Garage – Is Charged With Multiple Crimes Including Manslaughter Despite State’s “Stand Your Ground” Law

A Michigan man is facing a lengthy prison sentence after killing a youth who broke into his garage, sparking a debate regarding the state’s “Stand Your Ground” law.

As The New York Post reported on Sunday, 17-year-old Sivan Wilson and six other “mainly teenagers” broke into 24-year-old Dayton Knapton’s garage in White Lake just after 1 a.m. on July 8.

Knapton received an alert from his home security system, grabbed his 9mm semiautomatic handgun, and subsequently took fatal action to resolve the situation.

The Oakland County Prosecutor’s office alleges that Knapton left this house and fired two shots through a windowless locked door, which sent the burglars fleeing. Then he continued to fire as they tried to race away to safety.

Knapton then supposedly went back inside his house to reload his gun and returned to the scene.

Wilson fled the scene with his cronies but was struck by one of the bullets. Unfortunately for him, he did not receive medical care for 30 minutes and later died.

Investigators later determined that one of the bullets fired by Knapton through the locked door struck Wilson. Another teenager in the group was also shot in the leg but survived.

On November 7, Oakland County Prosecutor Karen McDonald announced that she would be charging Knapton with multiple crimes, including Manslaughter, Assault With Intent To Do Great Bodily Harm, and two counts of Felony Firearm.

McDonald released the following statement explaining why she decided to pursue charges:

The rights to own firearms and protect one’s family and home are fundamental. Those important rights also come with profound responsibility. Our office worked closely with law enforcement to review the evidence, including the obvious mitigating factors, which led us to these charges.

We believe the evidence demonstrates this defendant crossed the line by firing outside his home at fleeing persons. His actions not only took a life but potentially endangered the surrounding community by firing his weapon into the night.

Knapton faces up to 15 years behind bars for Manslaughter, 10 years for Assault With Intent To Do Great Bodily Harm, and 4 years for the two counts of Felony Firearm. This means he could spend almost 30 YEARS in prison.

Keep reading

Rhode Island’s US Senators Defend Vote To Ban Hemp Despite Concerns It Will Kill A Growing State Industry

Mike Simpson is one of Rhode Island’s biggest cheerleaders for hemp cultivation and the plant’s derivative products—remedies, he believes, that may help where pharmaceutical medicines cannot.

It’s that very reason Simpson helped co-found Rhode Island’s only outdoor hemp farm, where he says many of the business’ products ship all across the country.

But Lovewell Farms may cease operations now that Congress has approved reopening the federal government under legislation that would effectively ban hemp products containing more than 0.4 milligrams of THC. Now that it has been signed by President Donald Trump, the ban will go into effect in a year.

“This might be the final straw,” Simpson said in an interview Wednesday. “I may have to shut my whole company down.”

Simpson doesn’t sell intoxicating products, but said crops grown at his Hopkinton farm can contain up to 1 milligram of THC in it, as is allowed under existing Rhode Island hemp regulations.

“I have 700 to 800 pounds of flower that I grew this year that under that law would not be legal,” he said.

Simpson said he would grow crops with lower concentrations, but as a USDA-certified organic farm, there aren’t that many seed suppliers he can buy from.

“We’re really at the whim of what those folks are providing,” he said.

The provision in the shutdown-ending appropriations bill was championed by GOP Sen. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky in order to close a loophole in the 2018 Farm Bill that legalized hemp but inadvertently paved the way for the proliferation of hemp-derived THC products like infused drinks—products which states have since scrambled to either regulate or ban.

Keep reading

German Police Raid a Libertarian’s Home for the Crime of Calling Civil Servants “Parasites”

A new insane German speech crime investigation just dropped.

On September 29th of this year, a German man of libertarian persuasion known only by the pseudonym Damian N. tweeted the following:

No, anyone who is financed by the state pays no net taxes; they live off taxes: every civil servant, every politician, every employee in a state-owned enterprise, everyone who is subsidised and financed by the state. Not a single parasite pays any net taxes.

You can find the tweet here; as I write this, it has a grand total of 402 views and 10 likes.

No matter: yesterday morning, police acting on behalf of the Ulm public prosecutor’s office raided Damian’s home. He is suspected of the crime of inciting hatred (in violation of Section 130 of the German Criminal Code) for his rough remark about government “parasites”.

Apollo News reports:

“At almost exactly 6am, my doorbell rang. I went to the intercom and heard: ‘Police, please open the door, we have a search warrant,’” N. recounts.

“They then gave me a choice: ‘Either you unlock your cell phone and give us the PIN, and we’ll take the cell phone with us, or we’ll take everything.

“Under pressure, I naturally cooperated, unlocked my cell phone, and gave them the PIN,” he said. The officers then took Damian N. to the police station for identification procedures. “The whole programme,” said N.: “Weight, height, photos from many angles, and all the biometric data from my hands. I felt like a serious criminal.” The police also asked for a blood sample – “for your DNA,” as one officer is reported to have said. N. refused. “I thought I hadn’t heard right.”

The identification procedures – roughly comparable to a police booking in the United States – were likely illegal in this case. Damian N. further claims that the police produced no search warrant and provided no receipt for his confiscated phone, which would represent a further violation of the law. Before leaving, an officer instructed our suspected speech criminal to “think carefully about what you post in future”, because “you must realise that you are now under observation”.

Keep reading

Korean President Vows Harsh Penalties for “Hate Speech” and “Misinformation”

Korean President Lee Jae Myung has pledged to impose strict punishments for spreading what he calls “misinformation” and for engaging in discriminatory speech, warning that such behavior divides society and threatens democracy.

“We can no longer overlook hate or disinformation disguised as opinion,” he said. “Acts that distort facts or violate human dignity are crimes that must be punished as such.”

Yet the president’s vow, made during a Cabinet meeting on Tuesday, has also deepened unease among free expression advocates who fear that broad definitions of “false information” could open the door to government overreach.

“Truly anachronistic discrimination and hatred based on race, origin, and nationality are rampant in some parts of society,” Lee said at the Yongsan presidential office in Seoul.

“As our society becomes increasingly polarized, these extreme expressions continue to exacerbate social unrest.”

The remarks come as groups hold anti-China protests in downtown Seoul, and after reports that the head of the Korean Red Cross made racist comments toward foreign diplomats.

Lee described such actions as “crimes” that threaten daily life and must be “eliminated.” He added that hate speech and falsehoods were “spreading indiscriminately” online and declared, “We can no longer tolerate this.”

He urged political leaders to help “eradicate these hate crimes and fabricated information.”

But that phrase, “fabricated information,” has caused worry that the government could classify dissenting political views or unpopular opinions as punishable offenses.

In recent months, activists, including supporters of impeached former President Yoon Suk Yeol, have staged demonstrations in areas like Myeong-dong and Daerim-dong, waving banners that read “China Out” and tearing down images of President Xi Jinping.

Their rallies have intensified following the restoration of visa-free entry for Chinese tour groups and Xi’s visit to the APEC summit in Gyeongju.

The animosity toward Beijing also reflects domestic political divides that widened after Yoon’s short-lived martial law order. His supporters accuse China of meddling in South Korean elections and claim the current government’s engagement with North Korea risks Communist influence.

Keep reading

UK Tech Secretary Urges Ofcom to Fast-Track Censorship Law Enforcement

UK Technology Secretary Liz Kendall is pressing Ofcom to accelerate the rollout of the controversial censorship law, the Online Safety Act, warning that delays could weaken protections for vulnerable users. In a letter to the communications regulator, she said:

“I remain deeply concerned that delays in implementing duties, such as user empowerment, could hinder our work to protect women and girls from harmful content and protect users from antisemitism.”

Kendall is determined to enforce the controversial law quickly, even as more people have finally realized that the Online Safety Act grants excessive power to regulators over what citizens can say or share online.

Ofcom has confirmed that it expects to publish by July next year a register identifying which companies will face the strictest obligations, including mandatory age verification.

That schedule is roughly a year later than initially promised. The regulator said the delay was due to “factors beyond its control,” citing a legal challenge that raised “complex issues.”

One challenge involves 4chan and Kiwi Farms, platforms often targeted by politicians seeking tighter online speech regulation.

Reclaim The Net recently reported that 4chan’s legal team had rejected Ofcom’s attempt to impose fines under the Act, arguing that the regulator’s enforcement powers overreach.

The law has also drawn criticism abroad.

The US State Department condemned the UK’s online censorship laws, including the Online Safety Act, warning that the powers granted to Ofcom could restrict the open exchange of ideas.

We also covered the growing concern among technology companies that the Act’s broad language and compliance costs could force them to reconsider their presence in the UK.

Keep reading

Hemp Provision in Spending Bill Could Kill Legit Industry

The hemp industry is gearing up for a lobbying effort following a provision in the recent government funding package meant to stop the sale of intoxicating hemp products but could inadvertently destroy a legitimate $28 billion industry and kill 300,000 American jobs.

The provision in the bill bans hemp products like gummies, drinks, vapes, and topical pain relief applications that contain low doses of THC — the part of the cannabis plant that can create intoxication in users at higher levels.

Hemp was legalized in the 2018 Farm Bill. It “required the FDA to establish a regulatory framework for hemp products, but it never did, allowing intoxicating hemp products to be introduced in the marketplace without oversight or standardization,” the Hill reported.

The new ban tucked into the spending bill prohibits products containing more than 0.4 milligrams of THC per container and is aimed at stopping the sale of intoxicating products often sold in gas stations and convenience stores.

However, the trade group U.S. Hemp Roundtable estimates the move would wipe out 95 percent of CBD products used to treat pain and other health issues, shut down small businesses and farms nationwide, and cost states $1.5 billion in tax revenue.

According to the trade group’s statement:

Despite misleading claims this language protects non-intoxicating CBD products, the reality is that more than 90% of non-intoxicating hemp-derived products contain levels of THC that are greater than the proposed cap of .4 mg per container. As a result, seniors, veterans, and many other consumers who depend on hemp for their health and well-being would be violating federal law to purchase these products, disrupting their care and leaving them scrambling for potentially harmful alternatives.

In Texas, for example, voters overwhelmingly supported the sale of legal hemp-derived products when properly regulated, according to Breitbart News’s reporting of a statewide poll in July. In June, Gov. Greg Abbott (R-TX) vetoed a THC ban bill that had passed the Texas Legislature.

While the spending bill was still in the Senate, Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) unsuccessfully offered an amendment to remove the language, but the Senate voted overwhelmingly to table it. Paul warned on the Senate floor that the measure would “eradicate the hemp industry” and “couldn’t come at a worse time for America’s farmers.”

Supporters of the provision in the bill argued it was long overdue.

Keep reading

The Disguised Return of The EU’s Private Message Scanning Plot

A major political confrontation over online privacy is approaching as European governments prepare to decide on “Chat Control 2.0,” the European Commission’s revised proposal for monitoring private digital communications.

The plan, which could be endorsed behind closed doors, has drawn urgent warnings from Dr. Patrick Breyer, a jurist and former Member of the European Parliament, who says the draft conceals sweeping new surveillance powers beneath misleading language about “risk mitigation” and “child protection.”

In a release sent to Reclaim The Net, Breyer, long a defender of digital freedom, argues that the Commission has quietly reintroduced compulsory scanning of private messages after it was previously rejected.

He describes the move as a “deceptive sleight of hand,” insisting that it transforms a supposedly voluntary framework into a system that could compel all chat, email, and messaging providers to monitor users.

“This is a political deception of the highest order,” Breyer said.

“Following loud public protests, several member states, including Germany, the Netherlands, Poland, and Austria, said ‘No’ to indiscriminate Chat Control. Now it’s coming back through the back door disguised, more dangerous, and more comprehensive than ever. The public is being played for fools.”

Under the new text, providers would be obliged to take “all appropriate risk mitigation measures” to prevent abuse on their platforms. While the Commission presents this as a flexible safety requirement, Breyer insists it is a loophole that could justify forcing companies to scan every private message, including those protected by end-to-end encryption.

“The loophole renders the much-praised removal of detection orders worthless and negates their supposed voluntary nature,” he said.

He warns that it could even lead to the introduction of “client-side scanning,” where users’ devices themselves perform surveillance before messages are sent.

Unlike the current temporary exemption known as “Chat Control 1.0,” which allows voluntary scanning of photos and videos, the new draft would open the door to text and metadata analysis. Algorithms and artificial intelligence could be deployed to monitor conversations and flag “suspicious” content.

Keep reading

Texas Sheriff arrests vet for political meme, then sets up a ‘hotline’ to report more…

Texas is supposed to be the last place on earth where someone gets hauled off in handcuffs over a meme, right? Yet here we are… a military veteran in Hood County was just arrested for posting a satirical meme online, and the entire thing feels like a really scary, anti-American déjà vu after what happened to Douglass Mackey. The Biden regime slapped a felony on him for posting a hilarious anti-Hillary meme. Thankfully, a unanimous appeals court tossed out the conviction, but the message was clear: political humor is now a criminal offense if the wrong people get embarrassed.

And now it’s happening again. Only this time not in New York or D.C., but in deep-red Texas.

And to make this whole thing even more ridiculous, Hood County has now launched something straight out of a bad dystopian comedy: a “meme hotline” where residents can call the sheriff’s office to report each other for posting jokes online. Yes, a hotline… for memes.

Seriously, Texas, what the hell are you doing?

What’s happening in Hood County isn’t law enforcement. This is left-wing-style weaponization of political speech, and now, it’s being criminalized at the local level, and the fact that it’s happening in a conservative state should terrify everyone even more than the Mackey case did.

Keep reading

Why We Have a Surveillance State

It is the inevitable consequence of our prevailing governing philosophy.

“Gentlemen do not read each other’s mail.” Henry Stimson, Secretary of State, 1929

I was upbraided recently by a dear friend for my frequent praise of outcast investor Peter Thiel over Thiel’s involvement with big data company Palantir. He forwarded me a Bloomberg article titled “Peter Thiel’s data-mining company is using War on Terror tools to track American citizens” adding: “Really scary. Not good for democracy; a better version of the Stasi’s filing system and way cheaper and more efficient.”

Increasingly, we live under the kind of comprehensive surveillance predicted by science fiction writers. But Palantir is just an arms merchant, not the architect of our brave new world. Like gun manufacturers, its products can be used for good or evil.  I have always believed that moral responsibility lies with the wielder of weapons, not the manufacturers. (This is often expressed as “Guns don’t kill people, people kill people.”)

Peter Thiel’s choice to become an arms merchant rather than invest his considerable talents and fortune elsewhere is a fair question given his libertarian leanings. I have no insight into the answer. I would guess that he founded Palantir as an act of patriotism after 9/11, and it metastasized following the money, cash being the mother’s milk of the state, something the celebrated Alexander Hamilton deeply understood.

Surveillance Is Not the Problem, but It Is a Symptom

The real threat to the republic, however, lies not in the weapons available but in the unlimited and unaccountable bureaucracy in Washington that deploys them, both at home and abroad. Having broken free of constitutional constraints, America’s political class now directs an all-powerful state that naturally adopts every tool technology has to offer.

Because our prevailing governing philosophy acknowledges no limits to the doing of good or the thwarting of evil, any means necessary may be employed as long as worthy ends can be plausibly asserted. Evil must be discouraged, taxed, or outlawed; good must be encouraged, subsidized, or made mandatory. This progressive government mission must be implemented in the public square, in the marketplace, in our educational institutions, around the world, and in our homes until all forms of social injustice are eliminated.

Keep reading