I find it strange how they weren't banned before. They already caused a few people to suicide.
https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/internet/cloudflare-kiwi-farms-...
Free speech purists think that bullying people into suicide is categorically different to direct incitement to violence, despite that both of these cause the same outcome. This false dichotomy allows them to cling to their ideology.
I don't know why you've decided that we don't.
in my city a school was closed entirely due to administrators failure to act on reported abuse
You'd have to ban mainstream news outlets for the exact same reason.
They are categorically different when it comes to the practical question of law regarding how we can come up with a system that doesn't pose undue unintended risks to free expression.
In arguing the latter, free speech purists are often incapable of communicating an understanding of the former.
The same is not true for anything internet. When I was growing up as a teen the internet was just about to grow into the first e-commerce bubble around y2k. Not linking your real identity to online accounts was common sense and thought to people everywhere.
People seem to have forgotten this. The internet is not a real place. You enable yourself to be cyberbullied by sharing your identity. It can be entirely avoided, easily.
How do I do it? By not giving out any personal information. It really is that simple.
Are you sure that you actually want a world where mens rea plays no role in criminal determination? You're not just making a free speech critique here.