Make sure your aim isn't to justify your own beliefs. Seems like this is calling for what your are opposed to an it isn't censored.

https://twitter.com/hashtag/killcops?lang=en

It sure looks censored to me. I see only three tweets at that link, one calling for NOT shooting cops and the other two are just textless retweets of non-violent content that happens to include the hashtag.

If Twitter is allowing a #killcops hashtag to proliferate containing actual threats, then they should absolutely be blocking it. Seriously?

> But fuck right off with your demands to do it on MY platform,

Who is making such demands?

> because AKSHOOALLY

Do you intend this as respectful discussion?

> the first amendment constrains only the government and not my right to publish what I want on my hardware.

Sure, but it not clear how that is relevant to the comment you are replying to.

If you missed it, the point under discussion is Apple having removed Parler's access to the app store (and by extension similar action taken against Parler by other providers like Amazon). Apple, Parler and Amazon are all private entities not directly constrained by the first amendment.

Why does that technicality matter? Because it eludidates the hypocrisy of trying to claim that Lin Wood's call for Pence's execution was "technically" a call for a legal trial and execution and not for the mob violence that actually resulted. Which was a ridiculous argument.

> Because it eludidates the hypocrisy of trying to claim that Lin Wood's call for Pence's execution was "technically" a call for a legal trial and execution and not for the mob violence that actually resulted.

Who do you think is trying to claim that?

Um... you, upthread: "Given that the US has the death penalty at all, how can we declare that it is not ok for people to call for it when they believe a crime has been committed?"

Why do you think that is a claim about Lin Wood?