- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Texas bill: under 18 banned from social media
Posted on 5/1/25 at 10:13 am to jizzle6609
Posted on 5/1/25 at 10:13 am to jizzle6609
quote:
Control seems to be lost nationwide.
You want the Fed to have more control over states, yank?
Posted on 5/1/25 at 10:14 am to ATrillionaire
quote:
What does that say about the non-believers who flock to social media? FYI, you're actively on social media right now.
I'm an adult and believe it's toxic, especially for/to devoping brain of children
This post was edited on 5/1/25 at 10:25 am
Posted on 5/1/25 at 10:15 am to Dragula
quote:
I'm an adult and believe it's toxic, especially forto devoping brain of children
Then keep your kids off of it. Extremely simple concept
Posted on 5/1/25 at 10:21 am to Dragula
quote:
I'm an adult and believe it's toxic, especially forto devoping brain of children
I agree with you. Next step is to parent.
Posted on 5/1/25 at 10:21 am to Dragula
quote:
I'm an adult and believe it's toxic, especially forto devoping brain of children
I do to, which is why I plan on keeping my kids off of it. I don't want the government getting into every aspect of parenting. I prefer personal responsibility over regulatory solutions.
Posted on 5/1/25 at 10:27 am to BabyTac
But I thought Europeans were the thought police and censors while conservative Americans were about freedom?


This post was edited on 5/1/25 at 10:28 am
Posted on 5/1/25 at 10:28 am to Loup
I'm not for large government control, but parents cannot be everywhere all the time. Sometimes goods parents doing everything right can have good children who make bad decisions.
Posted on 5/1/25 at 10:32 am to Dragula
quote:Well said. These idealistic, impractical fricktards don't have the capacity for reasoned thought to arrive at such a conclusion.
I'm not for large government control, but parents cannot be everywhere all the time. Sometimes goods parents doing everything right can have good children who make bad decisions.
This post was edited on 5/1/25 at 10:33 am
Posted on 5/1/25 at 10:32 am to Dragula
quote:
Sometimes goods parents doing everything right can have good children who make bad decisions.
This must be a new thing because that has never happened before in history. Thank you for shedding light on this being a recent problem that the Government must step in to assist with.
Thanks for changing my mind!
Posted on 5/1/25 at 10:34 am to Dragula
quote:
I'm not for large government control, but parents cannot be everywhere all the time.
Just check the phone and computer man, it ain’t that hard. This isn’t a kid stealing shite at macys when the parent isn’t around.
Lots of RHINO’s around here. SAD!
Posted on 5/1/25 at 10:38 am to DownshiftAndFloorIt
quote:
I absolutely do not want any government having any say whatsoever in how I raise my kids and I dont give a shite who's in government doing it.
I agree mostly, but there are appropriate things that government should play a role in. Children cannot protect themselves from abuse, and that includes giving kids puberty blockers, gender reassignment surgeries, etc.
As for social media, not sure how I feel about this one. I understand the argument and both sides have good points.
This post was edited on 5/1/25 at 10:40 am
Posted on 5/1/25 at 10:53 am to BabyTac
Cut off the social media and see how much happier everyone is. It’s great.
Posted on 5/1/25 at 10:55 am to BabyTac
I don’t think a study can tell you that there is any benefit to letting kids have social media.
I’d be willing to bet it’s 99% detrimental.
I’d be willing to bet it’s 99% detrimental.
Posted on 5/1/25 at 10:55 am to chalmetteowl
quote:
First they came for porn, and I didn’t speak up, because I dont watch porn
More like: First they came for porn, and I didn’t speak up, because I dont want people to know what kind of weird porn I watch.
Posted on 5/1/25 at 10:59 am to turnpiketiger
quote:
Cut off the social media and see how much happier everyone is. It’s great.
The word for today: Irony
Posted on 5/1/25 at 11:03 am to lockthevaught
quote:
but it should be a safe space separated from adults.
You think the adults are the fricking problem on social media with kids?
Posted on 5/1/25 at 11:06 am to DownshiftAndFloorIt
quote:
I absolutely do not want any government having any say whatsoever in how I raise my kids and I dont give a shite who's in government doing it.
Why have any laws distinguishing actions, privileges, obligations, or punishments based on being below age of 18 or being 18 & above?? Or adding any protective help on criminalizing the acts of others based only on the other person being below age of 18??
Regardless this is telling social media companies the required age for allowing the creation of an account. It does not appear to criminalize the actions of the kid or parent but the actions of the company (going solely by linked report and not reading thru entire bill). Accounts created must be created by someone the companies have to verify as being 18 years or older. It doesn’t force using real name, so in theory a parent can still create a profile and then hand it over to their kid.
quote:
Under House Bill 186, ]social media companies[/u] would be banned from allowing people in Texas under 18-years-old to create accounts. The platforms would also have to implement measures to verify the ages of users. Social media companies can use a commercially reasonable method that relies on public or private transactional data to verify age, so potentially uploading a photo ID.
Accounts could still be publicly anonymous, and there is nothing in the bill that requires people to use their name or photo on their profile, so long as the social media company verifies that they are above the age of 18.
Outside of any words in bill not focused on in the OP’s article one could make the argument that this is empowering parents more than current laws on social media by requiring the parents to create any social media account they want their kid to use.
This post was edited on 5/1/25 at 11:14 am
Posted on 5/1/25 at 11:19 am to dallastigers
quote:
Regardless this is telling social media companies the required age for allowing the creation of an account.
Read the terms of service. Have you noticed that nearly everything asks you if you're at least 13 before signing up?
quote:
COPPA imposes certain requirements on operators of websites or online services directed to children under 13 years of age, and on operators of other websites or online services that have actual knowledge that they are collecting personal information online from a child under 13 years of age.
One of the big issues is that social media sites put up an unverified warning screen in/near the ToS saying you can't sign up if you're under 13 without a parent's permission, which is ignored by the 11 year old. Of course, the parents should have blocked their ability to install Snapchat, etc., from their kids without their explicit permission, but for all the Life360 bullshite anxious women impose on their families, they can't possibly be bothered to deny their hellspawn access to Snapchat. Cause all their friends have it, ya know!
Posted on 5/1/25 at 11:28 am to stout
quote:
Yes and I can think you are dumb for thinking its OK for the state to tell you how to raise your kids even more so than they already do.
I'm not totally sure how I feel about a bill like this. I think social media is incredibly detrimental to minors (and shite, adults too) and would hope parents would shield their children from it. I'm largely against more laws and govt interference in our lives. That said, we have all sorts of laws governing what children can and cannot do (get into an R-rated movie, get a tattoo, drive, etc) which exist for largely the same reason this one would.
This post was edited on 5/1/25 at 11:29 am
Popular
Back to top



1






