[phpisthebest]

>>Posting video of the Christchurch massacre is illegal.

Not in the US it is not.

>>if you don't think the London police department didn't put out a fact based narrative about three swatting,

Nothing in the London story has any comments from the police dept at all, it is all third party accounts by the target of the swatting who they claim with out evidence that it was a member of Kiwi Farms.

Even if that is true i bet that same person has a Twitter account, Facebook account, Reddit account, Amazon Account, and probably accounts at several other sites. Are we going to ban every site that a person commits a swatting has a membership at? or just the site that are small and do not align with your personal politics?

>appealing purely to your emotional attachments to your ideals

There is a lot of appeals to emotions when it comes to this story, I am not one of them, I have a firm principle stand in support for Free Speech to include speech that people find offensive or even "harmful" or "hateful".

[killyourcar]

The reason you aren't finding police comments is because you aren't looking.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/london/sorrenti-keffals-swatt...

The police confirm the swatting and confirm it was a mistake.

[phpisthebest]

First I am using your links alone, I am not "looking into things" you make the claims it is up to you to provide the sources to back them. in addition to free speech I am big proponent of another concept I bet you oppose, innocent until proven guilty, if you are going to make the claim a site should be scrubbed from the planet it is upon you to convince others of that, not just make the statement. I am #ShowMetheEvidence not #BelieveAllClaims

Second I am not disputing a swatting occurred, I am disputing that the swatting was a direct result of the ownership of Kiwi Farms or supported by the Ownership (or even the majority of the members) of the site.

Nowhere in any of your sources to the Police attribute the swatting to Kiwi Farms