Is book censorship ever ok?

Are you saying we should censor who said it as irrelevant context?

Technically, I ought to rape your asshole.

>implying you'd have to force yourself

I'm convinced you don't know what the words "ideology" or "empiricism" mean, so instead of going into it I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. If you have a problem with me stating my opinions as fact, well, that's what everyone who has an opinion does. If it makes you feel better, just know that I intentionally abbreviated "I believe" or "I think" from my statement because I felt they were superfluous; it's easy to tell that I think and believe what I wrote, so I don't need to say it. If you disagree with what I said, I'd be interested to hear why.

>Everything is everything.

Hi, Lauryn Hill.

Yes, pseudoscience and other bullshit should be banned.

She was referencing an earlier album by Brand Nubian, numbnutz.

>referencing excludes meaning

nice dodge.

>implying implications that weren't even there

Well-memed, my friend. Well-memed.

Not only is it not ok, it's also counterproductive.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect

No

Censorship is never ok, but it's gonna happen anyway.

When you're just average Joe, it's hard to actually stop the monopoly of violence from censoring something you know.

tell me about this paladin press what they got to do with this

Censorship works, it's just that inevitably you don't hear about it when it works.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hit_Man:_A_Technical_Manual_for_Independent_Contractors

They got sued for publishing a 'murder manual' that some people used when commiting murders and wanted to fight it on first amendment grounds but got cucked by their insurance company.

They also publish a lot of technical survivalist type books

Look at all the pro-child porn pedos coming out.

>"In November 1997, a U.S. appeals court ruled 3–0 that Hit Man was not protected by the free speech/free press clause of the First Amendment and thus Paladin Enterprises could be held liable for a triple murder committed by one of its readers.[2][3]"

Really proves that America's 1st Amendment really is just ink on paper.

By what standard?
Moral? If so morality is subjective and My personal opinion is that it isn't becuase in a society that information is censored there will be the risk that my views and information I desire to spread shall be curtailed.

Retired of all these right/wrong questions...

are they good? because im interested in that

They're alright. Hit man (from what I remember from an old .pdf copy) is pretty cheesey.

Honestly you'll do better waiting for somebody to dump this kinda stuff on /k/ and less likely to end up on another watchlist.

Not really. I've been into survivalist stuff since I was a teenager and most of their stuff is public domain texts (military/historic/medical) collated and republished to take advantage of people with survivalist/mercenary fantasies. For military stuff you'd be better served with the actual training/doctrine or shooting skills manuals, for survivalist stuff you'd be better off reading books about homesteading and bushcraft and edible plants and so on.

so how about mors kochanski and richard graves?

hmm...really makes you think

Most people aren't dumb enough to publish stuff that will get them sued in the first place. Plus, it wasn't even a good guide:

>Paladin Press owner Peder Lund claimed, in an interview with 60 Minutes, that the book started life as a detailed crime novel written by a Florida housewife, and that the format was later changed to appeal to Paladin's reader base accustomed to the publisher's non-fiction books on military, survivalist, weapons and similar topics.

But should they get sued for it?

Why does the responsibilty fall on them for writing it?

>>you need to be able to find a job to be free

Das retarted mane

Yes, I think they should get sued. At the very least they should have plastered it with warning labels saying it was a fictional story and not a real guide, and that nobody should actually try anything in the book.

If a publisher today put out a guide to how to play "the knock out game" and some dindu tried it and got caught nobody would think twice about suing the publisher. They published a guidebook on how to kill people, then someone followed the instructions and killed people. It wasn't as if he had just been "inspired by it" it was explicitly a manual for prospective hit men. They should have thought a lot more clearly about what they were doing, what a bunch of idiots.

This post is cancer and is definitely written by an American.

This.

Dear Lord I hope you're joking.

Do you think "freedom" is an outdated value or what is going on here?

But convincing people through other forms of media to kill people is ok?

No

that's not what he said you fucking table flipper

Depends on the situation and who you are.

So, yes.

If you remove the names from political quotes I won't know if I agree or not.

"Better sorry than safe." - Thomas Jefferson

You will never remove those who would flip the table. This is because they don't exist. People don't want the table to be flipped. However, by (for whatever reason) ending up at the bottom of the table, they are forced (or encouraged) to flip it, so they don't fall off (and so they can get towards the head). Better to stop the need to flip tables.

But this will never happen. Ever. People have developed theories, which is encouraging, but not enough, and people simply do not have the capacity to fix the problem because it's like trying to open a box from the inside -- we're stuck in this situation where people need to flip the table, so we will never have the situation where everyone's all sitting nicely.

The only thing to do is leapfrog your way as far towards the head of the table as you can.

*tips fedora*
*turns on heel*

>believing in absolutes.

>thought police.

At least you don't think memes should be censored.

>pure thoughts

Your true Gods.

I'm not an American. Nobody ever had perfect freedom in the United States, don't be naive. If you publish something egregious enough, it will get banned. For the record, they could have won the appeal, but their insurance company didn't think it was worth it. That's essentially how the first amendment works in the US, the most objectionable books are never published in the first place, because responsible businessmen don't want to bring that kind of trouble down on their heads. Paladin Press was some kind of mickey mouse operation but even they should have known better.

That's not the same thing.

I have perfect freedom.

Ask me how!

>censorship is ok in practice as long as it's theoretically not allowed
>just practice self censorship

2/10 got me to reply