Apple and Google App Stores have removed Gunbroker's mobile app.

[Zaydok Allen]

Sorry to the mods and administrators if this isn't THR material. Feel free to lock/delete if I shouldn't have bothered with this.

Apparently this happened like three months ago, but I don't recall any discussion. If it was, the search function didn't bring it up for me.

Yesterday I had to buy a new cell phone. After getting it activated and updated, I was trying to make sure all the mobile apps I wanted were in place. I was baffled when trying to find the Gunbroker app, as I've been using it for years on my iPhone 5.

I did a quick search on Google and apparently Gunbroker was notified that their app violated policy of both companies because it promoted the sale of destructive and harmful devices.

That is a load of crap. "Destructive devices" are clearly defined by the BATFE, and if we are going to limit the Gunbroker app, then we should limit auto trader and car sales type apps since auto accidents account for a lot of deaths in this country. Also WebMD and other medical apps are promoting harmful items like opioids and painkillers. It's gun broker, not Grenadebroker.

Their house, their rules, I know, but suddenly I found myself wishing I'd bought a Samsung or some other phone type. It just ticks me off, and I guess I should have thought about how Apple got rid of their gun emoticon a few years ago.

You can still use their website of course on these devices, but the mobile app was far more user friendly.

 

[dh1633pm]

Google gives you a way to bypass the app store. Did this myself many times with various developer apps. But now I have an iphone. Miss the app.

 

[rpenmanparker]

So what happens if I replace an Apple with an Apple? Do I lose the GB app? If ai dletenmy other apps, they stay in the acloud and can be reloaded. Would I lose the FB app that way?

 

[TomJ]

It's another example of corporate gun control. What they can't accomplish legislatively, they try to accomplish this way.

 

[rpenmanparker]

It's another example of corporate gun control. What they can't accomplish legislatively, they try to accomplish this way.

Well, be honest. It is really very creative. Wouldn’t you do the same for your side if you could think of a way?

 

[TomJ]

Well, be honest. It is really very creative. Wouldn’t you do the same for your side if you could think of a way?

I own a business that is heavily influenced by politics. We keep our political beliefs out of our business dealings, so no I don't do the same. Suppressing someone's Constitutional rights is not okay, regardless of how you try to spin it.

 

[rpenmanparker]

I own a business that is heavily influenced by politics. We keep our political beliefs out of our business dealings, so no I don't do the same. Suppressing someone's Constitutional rights is not okay, regardless of how you try to spin it.

I’m not spinning anything. And it has nothing to do with what business you are in. In the most general sense we are talking about using indirect methods of accomplishing a goal that does not respond well to a direct assault. And they are not suppressing your constitutional rights. They are suppressing what YOU BELIEVE to be your constitutional rights. Big difference. Both sides think they are consistent with the Constitution. Both sides are trying to win that argument of which one is right about the Constitution. Despite what you say, I believe you would use such an indirect method of getting acceptance for your position if you could think of one. And this is key, the sooner you and others realize that your constitutional rights are what the courts say they are, not what you say they are, the more effectively you can fight for your cause.

 

[TomJ]

I’m not spinning anything. And it has nothing to do with what business you are in. In the most general sense we are talking about using indirect methods of accomplishing a goal that does not respond well to a direct assault. And they are not suppressing your constitutional rights. They are suppressing what YOU BELIEVE to be your constitutional rights. Big difference. Both sides think they are consistent with the Constitution. Both sides are trying to win that argument of which one is right about the Constitution. Despite what you say, I believe you would use such an indirect method of getting acceptance for your position if you could think of one.

Of course they're attempting to surpress our Constitutional rights. The anti's want to do away with the 2A altogether but can't. They therefore do what they can to make gun ownership as difficult and expensive as possible. In regards to what you believe I would do, you can believe what you want, but you'd be wrong.

 

[Gridley]

I’m not spinning anything. And it has nothing to do with what business you are in. In the most general sense we are talking about using indirect methods of accomplishing a goal that does not respond well to a direct assault. And they are not suppressing your constitutional rights. They are suppressing what YOU BELIEVE to be your constitutional rights. Big difference. Both sides think they are consistent with the Constitution. Both sides are trying to win that argument of which one is right about the Constitution. Despite what you say, I believe you would use such an indirect method of getting acceptance for your position if you could think of one. And this is key, the sooner you and others realize that your constitutional rights are what the courts say they are, not what you say they are, the more effectively you can fight for your cause.

The basis of an appeal to a higher court is, in many cases, that a lower court ruling was WRONG. Our system is one that permits a person to argue with the government and win (in theory), and in the process acknowledge that a court ruling on your rights was NOT correct.

Accepting that your rights are what the government tells you they are is a totalitarian system, not a republican one.

I also don't for one second believe that all the anti-gun "side" believe they're consistent with the Constitution. I've heard some of them admit as much - talk about "getting around" the second amendment. They acknowledge it, they just *don't care* that its the highest law of the land if it is in their way.

I can't speak for anyone else, but my political beliefs are about ensuring people have the right to make decisions - including the right to do stupid things and to make decisions I don't agree with. I find it hard to imagine how I'd use a financial lever like this to *force* someone to have a right, but I wouldn't even if I could.

 

[rpenmanparker]

The basis of an appeal to a higher court is, in many cases, that a lower court ruling was WRONG. Our system is one that permits a person to argue with the government and win (in theory), and in the process acknowledge that a court ruling on your rights was NOT correct.

Accepting that your rights are what the government tells you they are is a totalitarian system, not a republican one.

I also don't for one second believe that all the anti-gun "side" believe they're consistent with the Constitution. I've heard some of them admit as much - talk about "getting around" the second amendment. They acknowledge it, they just *don't care* that its the highest law of the land if it is in their way.

I can't speak for anyone else, but my political beliefs are about ensuring people have the right to make decisions - including the right to do stupid things and to make decisions I don't agree with. I find it hard to imagine how I'd use a financial lever like this to *force* someone to have a right, but I wouldn't even if I could.

You are ignoring the fact that the same folks who wrote the 2A and the rest of the Bill of Rights also provided for the courts. You can think it is all clear cut and neat, but the framers knew that it wasn't right from the get-go. All writings, be they religious, legal or what have you are always interpreted by each and every reader even or especially the ones who maintain the writings are divinely given. There is no absolutely true meaning of anything written or said. And I say that while completely hating that fact. I am an absolute truth kind of guy. Yet I know when it just isn't that way/

 

[Zaydok Allen]

So what happens if I replace an Apple with an Apple? Do I lose the GB app? If ai dletenmy other apps, they stay in the acloud and can be reloaded. Would I lose the FB app that way?

That’s what happened to me. There was an interruption in my cloud backup download and my new phone froze up. So I figured stop the backup and just redownload them manually. So when I did that I lost the app.

I try not to support companies that believe limiting my rights is ok. So I guess I just wanted to make folks aware in case they feel similar. If I’d done more research I may have chosen a different phone as I don't agree with their policy.

It’s my fault. Their house their rules. Just sharing reality is all.

I do like the phone though.

 

[Jim Watson]

What are Google and Apple's market share?
Sounds close to monopolistic restraint of trade to me.

 

[danez71]

I’m not spinning anything. And it has nothing to do with what business you are in. In the most general sense we are talking about using indirect methods of accomplishing a goal that does not respond well to a direct assault.

It doesn't help your case to generalize in order to attempt to make a point about something very specific.

And they are not suppressing your constitutional rights. They are suppressing what YOU BELIEVE to be your constitutional rights. Big difference. Both sides think they are consistent with the Constitution. Both sides are trying to win that argument of which one is right about the Constitution.

Nope.
There are quite a few that have said they think the 2A should be repealed, is misinterpreted by the courts, and the CA politician that said ' We're CA, we don't care about the Constitution, we do what we want (its on youtube).

Despite what you say, I believe you would use such an indirect method of getting acceptance for your position if you could think of one.

If you're going to dismiss out of hand what he says, why did you even ask him?

And this is key, the sooner you and others realize that your constitutional rights are what the courts say they are, not what you say they are, the more effectively you can fight for your cause.

Sounds like you think you have it all figured out.

 

[Pat Riot]

Rights or not it is manipulation. Period.

 

[psyopspec]

Not trying to be a Pollyanna, but this is borderline "Old Man Yells at Sky" news IMO. An app that was only one of several ways to access a marketplace that mostly sells things at inflated prices was removed. It sucks and is inconvenient if you were a user. I'm sorry that happened. But far from a blow to 2A IMO.

 

[crestoncowboy]

I always just used the browser. Didn't know they had an app

 

[tarosean]

So what happens if I replace an Apple with an Apple? Do I lose the GB app? If ai dletenmy other apps, they stay in the acloud and can be reloaded. Would I lose the FB app that way?

Assuming u have a backup.. It will re-download the gunbroker app.
My iPhone, just a backup, is the only phone I still have it installed on.

I think it's s been approximately a year since both platforms banned it.

 

[kheeka]

Surprised that there are so many iPhone users here. It is always a good idea to throw your money to those that despise you.

 

[rpenmanparker]

Surprised that there are so many iPhone users here. It is always a good idea to throw your money to those that despise you.

It is a lot better than cutting off your nose to spite your face.

 

[Zaydok Allen]

But far from a blow to 2A IMO.

I do agree. I don’t think it’s really an attack on the 2A. I view it as if a restaurant or store has a no guns sign on the door, I tend to eat or shop elsewhere.

That’s all.

Now if they blocked the use of the GB website on my device, that’s a different scenario I think. That would be directly trying to block law abiding citizens from exercising their rights.

But that’s not what it is.

 

[berettaprofessor]

Something mildly strange here; if you search the app store for "gun sales", it will turn up a number of apps, including Wikiarms, Gun Auctions USA, Gun Deals, and APEX Gun parts. Either they're inconsistent or there's another reason the gunbroker app is gone.

 

[Labguy47]

Amazon app is the same way, you must use your data for everything that isn’t connected to apple platforms. I just went through it with them over buying a kindle book

 

[theotherwaldo]

Destructive or harmful devices?!
Which causes more deaths or injuries, the misuse of guns or the misuse of phones?

 

[Lycidas Janwor]

You are ignoring the fact that the same folks who wrote the 2A and the rest of the Bill of Rights also provided for the courts. You can think it is all clear cut and neat, but the framers knew that it wasn't right from the get-go. All writings, be they religious, legal or what have you are always interpreted by each and every reader even or especially the ones who maintain the writings are divinely given. There is no absolutely true meaning of anything written or said. And I say that while completely hating that fact. I am an absolute truth kind of guy. Yet I know when it just isn't that way/

By your definition, this statement you made "There is no absolutely true meaning of anything written or said" is subject to your rules. In other words, is this statement true or false? If you claim it to be true, you just broke your own rule.

Congrats.

 

[rpenmanparker]

By your definition, this statement you made "There is no absolutely true meaning of anything written or said" is subject to your rules. In other words, is this statement true or false? If you claim it to be true, you just broke your own rule.

Congrats.

Take it however you want.