Respectfully: I do not agree. This would serve as an intimidation-tactic, cooling or denying of the First Amendment. Speak forcefully and without reservation..... although it wasn't me that spoke, so screw you, bureaucrats and your denials. Lawsuit time.
I appreciate your perspective. I agree they the freedom is speech is never infringed. I guess what i am honestly questioning is should there me judgment on what one places on the internet? Can a Facebook page be used to evaluate employment fitness for a private company. When something is voluntarily placed in the public domain is it fair game. The law provides for provisions against some privacies. What is the correct balance?
It is without question the government will overreach. But if I threaten someone on the web can that not be used to determine intent should I follow through? What is allowed to be discovered should I commit a crime? A civil tort?
I tend to think that social media is an awful thing. Firstly, I don’t think anyone particularly cares what I had for dinner last night nor. We’d they the thousand pictures of how it was presented. Secondly, if I am dumb enough to broadcast I am taking a 14 day trip, I just exposed my home to people who know I won’t be there. Thirdly, it is a bit narcissistic to assume that people want to know what I am doing every moment. I rather enjoy my privacy so I am not inclined to post things and why I don’t have internet.
I see social media as willingly sacrificing my privacy.
The founders always promote rights come with responsibilities. You have an absolute right to free speech comes the responsibility to govern yourself so you don’t run afoul of the law. The whole notion of rugged individualism is that the constitution and bill of rights limit what the government can do to the people. It also placed the responsibility of the exercise of the rights of the people on the people. It’s a brilliant system.