GoFundMe Cancels Fundraiser to Defend South Bend Cop, Calls Shooting a 'Hate Crime'

PJ Media ^ | July 2, 2019 | Tyler O'Neil

[C19fan]

The crowdfunding website GoFundMe canceled a fundraiser supporting the defense of South Bend Police Sgt. Ryan O'Neill, the white police officer who shot and killed Erick Logan, a 54-year-old black man. O'Neill alleged that Logan was breaking into cars with an 8-inch knife and threatened him before the officer had to shoot in self-defense. O'Neill was wearing his body camera but did not turn it on. Black Lives Matter activists have called for O'Neill to be fired.

The police union accused Mayor Pete Buttigieg, who is running for president, of accusing the police of racism for political gain. They have demanded Buttigieg recuse himself from any decisions regarding the investigation into the shooting. In turn, Buttigieg has asked the Department of Justice to intervene in the case.

[C19fan]

All the Cuck conservatives will say businesses like GoFuneMe and Facebook are private businesses and can do whatever they want. That is wrong. Due to network effects, people go to Facebook because there are a lot of people on Facebook, these cyber companies are natural monopolies. People would not tolerate the phone company or electrical utility denying service to households and businesses because the company does not like the other party. These cyber monopolies need to be treated like common carriers and be forced to serve all.

[GOPJ]

Why aren’t we organized enough to create a conservative ‘go fund me’ page?

[House Atreides]

Good post ... I agree 100% with it.

[Jane Long]

Agree100%.

Thanks for posting. I saw a report on this, on Tucker’s show, last night. Unreal what these lefty businesses are getting away with.

Luckily, they set up the fund, to help this policeman, elsewhere.

[DIRTYSECRET]

We are not organized like the left. We get on with our lives.

[PapaBear3625]

Why aren’t we organized enough to create a conservative ‘go fund me’ page?

Because such a site would need to be able to accept payments from places like PayPal and credit card companies.

Financial Blacklisting: Chase Bank Withdraws Service from Independent and Conservative Figures

Consumers Beware: PayPal has weaponized financial system with its ties to SPLC

[eyeamok]

The crowdfundingPUBLISHER'S website GoFundMe canceled a fundraiser

[kempster]

Sources like GoFundMe lose all credibility when they pick and choose who they will allow to create a page. The determination should be made by the donors. They are smart enough to decide who they want to support and who they don’t. I for one will never use GoFundMe again now that I know who they are.

[McGavin999]

A couple of discrimination lawsuits should clarify the real position of these companies. They apply the position that benefits them at the time.

[cdcdawg]

All of these “woke” tech companies rose to their level of power by being neutral as to political content and by supporting free speech; by being not woke. Now that they have formed a nice oligopoly, they tighten the reins and flex their leftist muscles.

[I want the USA back]

Is there any internet giant that is NOT in the willing service of the radical, America-hating left?

[Pollard]

We don’t know how to code as good as them. I’ve been on forums that programmers are on and they’re all left leaning.

[Jarhead9297]

We are not forced to utilize these sites as we are forced to utilize utilities. You either choose the utility carrier or you do not get power or water. These services are utilized voluntarily and to utilize them you must agree to their terms of use. Don’t like it? Choose another service offering like benefits.

[DiogenesLamp]

Ping to Semimojo. Here is some more of what you want to protect.

[DiogenesLamp]

No. I absolutely reject your premise. These sites are now defacto "commons", and as such, they must be forced to accommodate all of the public without discrimination as to content.

My position is that either they do this, or we do everything necessary to destroy them, including using destructive force to wipe out their infrastructure.

We either destroy them, or they destroy us. If we do not stop this, we will be Jews in Cattle cars.

I'd rather see them burn than me and my family burn, and I don't want to hear any sophistry about their "rights" to violate constitutional freedom of speech.

[Jarhead9297]

The right to Constitutional free speech is to protect you against Government retaliation or retribution not a private company. I don’t like what they are doing either but I’ll also side with them against using the force of Government to compel a company to allow something it does not allow. Especially when the service is not required or Government sponsored.

It’s funny, we are for a baker to turn away a gay couple for his right to associate (which I agree with the baker) but are against a company wishing to operate as it chooses.

[semimojo]

We either destroy them, or they destroy us. If we do not stop this, we will be Jews in Cattle cars.

Silly hysteria aside, why do you think they've let Andy Ngo use their platform to collect $188K so far?

[DiogenesLamp]

The right to Constitutional free speech is to protect you against Government retaliation or retribution not a private company.

I disagree. The intent of the founders was that speech not be censored, and in their time period they could only imagine the government having the power to accomplish this.

The fundamental natural law concept is that public speech would prevent despotism, and censorship will create dictatorship. This remains true regardless of how speech is censored.

Especially when the service is not required or Government sponsored.

It is now required. These communications companies have created a public commons where the public now gathers. It is little different from the public moving out of the town square, and flocking to some man's land. The fact that they are now on his land does not give him the right to censor what they have to say.

It’s funny, we are for a baker to turn away a gay couple for his right to associate (which I agree with the baker) but are against a company wishing to operate as it chooses.

Not at all. Communications companies are a special case, because communications is a public need and necessity, and these companies have taken advantage of communications chokepoints which have been formed by natural occurring monopolies of being the first to stake out territory in the previously new internet communications system.

This fellow "JK Brown" aptly described what is happening here.

" Commenting on another blog today, I came up with this description of what Facebook and Google have become

Seems to me it is a property rights problem. People enter into the Facebook or Google plantations and start to sharecrop advertising. Google owns the land and the user doesn't even have rights to finish the growing season. If the user displeases the lords of the manor, they can be thrown off the land and all their improvements either confiscated, burned or thrown off with them.

Sharecropping is a crappy way of life, but if it is all you got, you make the best of it. But people seem to have lost sight of the fact they have no enforceable property rights. They live by the leave and the whim of the landowners. And the landowners or the personal guard and retainers have decided they don't want certain people, who think differently, on their land.

For survival, you may have to work sharecropping on the internet. But you should not lose sight of the fact that your life is tenuous and take precautions. Perhaps we'll move into a republican period and the feudal system will be overthrown even if we have to take the heads of a few kings and nobles.

[DiogenesLamp]

Silly hysteria aside,

You may think it's silly, and so did the Jews when Hitler was coming to power, but it ceased being silly quickly enough.

why do you think they've let Andy Ngo use their platform to collect $188K so far?

Gay Asian? Member of one of their virtue signalling classes?

[Jarhead9297]

I’m going to digest this more fully when off work