Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2026 Poal.co

215

Poal has a ban on “calls to violence”.

If a revolution were to occur, certainly a number of people would need to be arrested. To enforce such lawful arrests, a show (and perhaps use) of force might be required.

But if the arrests would be performed under what people would consider lawful circumstances, would calling for such arrests - even planning for them - be “calls to violence”?

Poal has a ban on “calls to violence”. If a revolution were to occur, certainly a number of people would need to be arrested. To enforce such lawful arrests, a show (and perhaps use) of force might be required. But if the arrests would be performed under what people would consider lawful circumstances, would calling for such arrests - even planning for them - be “calls to violence”?

(post is archived)

You are currently inside a comment thread.
Click here to see all the comments (10).
[–] • 5 pts

"Calls for violence" restrictions aren't about logic or lawful arrests of tyrants who violate the law or Constitution. They're about the fact that the current tyrants do violate the law, dont give a shit about logic or the Constitution, and will kick dowm AOU's door and seize the site if someone goes around shouting about enforcing the law or Constitution vis-a-vis the current tyrants. It's simple self-protection from the current Caesar and his legions.