Facebook going the route of Google

[williamc]

It would appear that facebook is now going the route Google took in disallowing all ads pertaining to any sort of weapon, not just guns, as well as ammunition. They have not specified that they will be closing any dealers facebook pages down as yet, but people are getting warnings when trying to run ads that they have always run on the social media giant. Thus far it appears that the lockdown only pertains to facebook ads and promoted stories as shown by the warning screens wording.

[morestar]

Interesting. In a way I can agree but when it comes to freedom of speech I don't. Sure there are freaks out there that may be compelled after seeing an ad for guns or ammo to go on a shooting spree but that should never take away from our rights. I had the same problem creating ads with them for my signature site - I could only do so if I had a Facebook application related to the service. Maybe things have changed but...

Who in the world compelled Facebook to take such a hard stance on guns and ammo?

[jhannawin]

As a Brit, my opinions on gun law are somewhat skewed. However, looking from a business perspective, both companies are owned by their shareholders not the state, neither company has a monopoly ( ) and so their users have a choice to use other services. So I'd say they were pretty much free to do whatever they like. That's the free market.

[antihero13]

Whether you agree or not Facebook has the right to take this stance on the issue. They can accept or reject any ads they please for whatever reason (or no reason) they please.

However, if they feel this strongly about guns the next step has to be to shut down any accounts where the user talks about guns or selling guns, and to shut down accounts of gun vendors. Facebook users--whether intentionally or unintentionally--help advertise products, services and causes through word of mouth. Therefore, Facebook can't have people talking about guns on their site if they don't want guns advertised. Again, Facebook has the right to take down an account at any instance since it's their site.

[LD]

...and, installing a semantically functional filter to differentiate between "having big guns" (weapons) and "having big guns" (arms).

[mikmik]

Interesting. In a way I can agree but when it comes to freedom of speech I don't. Sure there are freaks out there that may be compelled after seeing an ad for guns or ammo to go on a shooting spree but that should never take away from our rights. I had the same problem creating ads with them for my signature site - I could only do so if I had a Facebook application related to the service. Maybe things have changed but...

Who in the world compelled Facebook to take such a hard stance on guns and ammo?

They have a right to put anything they want, or don't want to be , on their site. What does your freedom of speech have to do with it?
People are getting fed up with libertarians and their insistence that people's should be the same as they were 250 years ago. I'm from Canada, and I can read statistics and studies, and if something is harmful to others, then you are violating their rights.
This puts it bluntly:

In "Guys and Guns Amok: Domestic Terrorism and School Shootings from the Oklahoma City Bombing to the Virginia Tech Massacre" (Paradigm, 200, UCLA professor of education and cultural critic Douglas Kellner argues that school shootings and other acts of mass violence embody a crisis of out-of-control gun culture and male rage, heightened by a glorification of hypermasculinity and violence in the media.

"The school shooters and domestic terrorists examined in this book all exhibit male rage, attempt to resolve a crisis of masculinity through violent behavior, demonstrate a fetish for guns or weapons, and represent, in general, a situation of guys and guns amok," Kellner says.

There is something very wrong with your politics and society, and almost everyone else in the world realizes this:Study Examines Risk Factors of a Mass Shooting

Pruse this for moire insight into the colateral damage thaT 'THE RIGHT TO OWN GUNS' CAUSES EVERYONE: Harvard Injury Control Research Center
Firearms Research
I don't see anything about the right to own weapons in this document: The Universal Declaration of Human Rights - PREAMBLE

Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world, Whereas disregard and contempt for human rights have resulted in barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of mankind, and the advent of a world in which human beings shall enjoy freedom of speech and belief and freedom from fear and want has been proclaimed as the highest aspiration of the common people,

Whereas it is essential, if man is not to be compelled to have recourse, as a last resort, to rebellion against tyranny and oppression, that human rights should be protected by the rule of law,

Whereas it is essential to promote the development of friendly relations between nations,

Whereas the peoples of the United Nations have in the Charter reaffirmed their faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person and in the equal rights of men and women and have determined to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom,

Whereas Member States have pledged themselves to achieve, in co-operation with the United Nations, the promotion of universal respect for and observance of human rights and fundamental freedoms,

Whereas a common understanding of these rights and freedoms is of the greatest importance for the full realization of this pledge,

Now, Therefore THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY proclaims THIS UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS as a common standard of achievement for all peoples and all nations, to the end that every individual and every organ of society, keeping this Declaration constantly in mind, shall strive by teaching and education to promote respect for these rights and freedoms and by progressive measures, national and international, to secure their universal and effective recognition and observance, both among the peoples of Member States themselves and among the peoples of territories under their jurisdiction.

What was that you said about your rights?

How can anybody possibly feel upset about Facebooks policy? I mean, WTF? ANY site can censor or deny content that they want. I know this is kind of off topic because I don't advertise this kind of thing, let alone on Facebook, but I do get concerned about some of the attitudes towards ethical approaches, and 'rights' when it comes to marketing. We've got to accept conditions and rules, and go with it and make positive decisions with whatever the situation or parameters are in place.

[morestar]

ANY site can censor or deny content that they want.

Well when you put it in that perspective and being a website owner myself, I must agree they can do what they want and unless it's a right/left wing agenda (which I have no proof that it is) they have a right to do so.

[chrisJumbo]

Well when you put it in that perspective and being a website owner myself, I must agree they can do what they want and unless it's a right/left wing agenda (which I have no proof that it is) they have a right to do so.

Even if it is a right/left wing agenda, they still have the right to post,approve,delete,disapprove whatever they want (within the confounds of the law). You have the right to create your own social site selling guns and ammo. They have the right not to.

For myself, I support gun rights, but I also support Facebook's right to take a stance against them.