People are responsible for their own actions. If I take what you just posted to heart and went and killed one of the "nationwide network of conspiracy theorists" to save the gays, are you responsible? If we start working on the basis that no one is smart enough to hear anything at all that may be controversial then who gets to decide what that is? Who do we give the power to be the decider of absolute truth too? What about when a new administration takes over that you don't like? Or are we no longer having elections either? We either assume that people have their own agency or we assume that humanity must grant the government control over all of our decisions. I'll go the free speech route every time. Physical actions like throwing stones are very different than words.
We don't need an perfect and absolute arbiter of truth to identify malicious hateful lies the same way we don't need one for defamation laws. We have high standards high bars and a legal system.
The biggest difference between what they are doing and my statement is that my statement is carefully and actually researched truth, spoken with intent to inform, and furthermore although it pointed out how dangerous those lies were it called for a legislative solution to the problem not self help. If you took it upon yourself to take action it would be solely your action.
By contrast they pass on lies they either know are false or with reckless disregard for the truth of the matter often with vague implication of threats and calls to action.
I say the clear distinction in circumstances is sufficient for a court of law to address. I suggest that we don't need to wait until someone gets murdered we can just throw the folks promoting lies and hate in jail first. This is no more problematic than defamation as an exception to the first amendment.
