Anti-gun groups lobby Facebook and Instagram to change policies

ive long since quit getting irritated with Facebook and the like, their house their rules, i use it to keep in touch with some friends and family i dont get to see.
I dont like it but i put up with it for now
Gene

Ok so you can't list a gun that is illegal in your state, you can't advertise no background checks, and people under 18 (very easy to get around) can't view posts advertising gun sales.

*yawn* barely newsworthy

All the Facebook gun groups I'm involved in have an age minimum of 18 (our state minimum age for anything gun related). These groups are all self policing and anything suspected of being illegal swiftly gets brought to a moderator's attention and it is dealt with post haste. The ONLY thing that seems to get by and that is simply because the vast majority doesn't know the law is possibly 18 US sec.922(r) violations. I see otherwise original SKSs with 30 round duckbills prominently displayed for sale or trade.

jimmyraythomason said:

All the Facebook gun groups I'm involved in have an age minimum of 18 (our state minimum age for anything gun related). These groups are all self policing and anything suspected of being illegal swiftly gets brought to a moderator's attention and it is dealt with post haste. The ONLY thing that seems to get by and that is simply because the vast majority doesn't know the law is possibly 18 US sec.922(r) violations. I see otherwise original SKSs with 30 round duckbills prominently displayed for sale or trade.

Click to expand...

So restriction of speech is ok?

So restriction of speech is ok?

Click to expand...

What are you talking about Queen of Thunder?

MErl said:

Sam, under 18 are not allowed to read for sale ads any more?

Click to expand...

Just like Armslist.
http://www.armslist.com/

Not having a policy in place makes Facebook more open to the possibility of litigation I would think.

If you read FB's actual statement and compare it to what Mothers and Mayors are claiming, you'll see that FB is giving them lip service. The FB statement never specifically mentions firearms, but is a general statement about illegal activity.

Essentially, nothing has changed; they promised to try a little harder to police it and to send an email to the offending party if someone reports it.

Queen_of_Thunder said:

So restriction of speech is ok?

Click to expand...

Yes.

Facebook is a private entity and they are free to place whatever restrictions they want on the voluntary users of their services.


We restrict speech here at THR, far more strictly than Facebook does.

Anyone of any age can browse armslist without agreeing to the TOS (never click I agree in #12). FB has the ability to enforce that rule, to be seen if they well.

There is no harm in just looking, don't see why it should be blocked.

Wow... You do realize facebook and instagram are private companies, not gov't agencies? Nothing they choose to do or not do will ever lead to a "police state."

Click to expand...

Originally posted by Pizzapinochle

Of course I realize they are a private company. My statement was kind of a joke. However, it seems we have more and more of this backdoor action everyday which makes it seem like we live as such at times. See this is where law gets kind of grey to me. This kind of violates the right to free speech IMO. You could argue that yes, it is a private company, but it is also on the internet which is considered public domain. I guess they can get around that though by saying you can just not use their service. Whatever, I don't care.

Oh FB . . . . the company whose founder said that those who trusted him with their private information were 'dumb <deleted>'. They datamine everything about you including your network of personal relationships.

Naw . . . . I don't use FB. And maybe Zuckerberg was right about what he said regarding those who continue to do so.

I guess I'm the last person in the world who has taken this stance but I don't have a Facebook account, I never have and I never will. The negative aspects (personally and societally) of FB far outweigh anything positive it offers humanity.

You can go to your children to ask persmission to post things if you like, I won't play that game.

I almost wish the anti-gun groups had gotten their way and gotten themselves banned from Facebook for being organizations almost 100% exclusive to discussion regarding firearms...

you know, like the law enforcement gun buybacks that are now banned in Colorado under the new gun control laws.

Sam Cade said:

Yes.

Facebook is a private entity and they are free to place whatever restrictions they want on the voluntary users of their services.


We restrict speech here at THR, far more strictly than Facebook does.

Click to expand...

And here is where we disagree. Facebook is a publicly traded company. It's business is transacted on government owned property aka public easements (local,state and federal). These easements are government property and therefore Facebook has no right to censor.

Queen_of_Thunder said:

These easements are government property and therefore Facebook has no right to censor.

Click to expand...

That has got to be the strangest, least logical legal arguments I've ever heard.

Queen_of_Thunder said:

And here is where we disagree. Facebook is a publicly traded company. It's business is transacted on government owned property aka public easements (local,state and federal). These easements are government property and therefore Facebook has no right to censor.

Click to expand...

This may be your opinion, but it has no basis in reality. At all. It shows a fundamental lack of understanding of just about every concept upon which you claim to base your opinion.

Folks, there is really not much to see here.

Anti-gunners put pressure on Facebook. Facebook essentially responded with "we are not going to restrict users from expressing themselves, but we will make efforts to improve our policing of activity to help ensure that we are not facilitating anything illegal." Bravo on them.

There is a WaPo article with some Brady lackey lamenting that FB "fell short" in its response.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...ook-fell-short-of-competitors-on-gun-control/

My facebook is very progun. I get more gun news, information, and pictures from facebook than anywhere else. It is silly to think they are anti-gun. They are not progun, but they ain't anti-gun