Slashdot Mirror
Man Starts 'Gunbook' Social Media Site After His Gun-Loving Friends Were Kicked Off Facebook (buzzfeed.com)
CaptainDork shares a report from BuzzFeed: A British gun enthusiast whose friends were banned from Facebook for posting pictures of firearms has started his own version of the site for gun lovers. Called Gunbook, it was set up by David Scott, a 57-year-old shooting instructor who lives in Kilsyth, 20 miles from Dunblane. It went live three weeks ago and he says it already has more than 1,000 members, around 60 of whom are from the U.S. Scott admitted that part of the attraction of the site for members was that they could post about their love of deadly weapons without being judged by family and friends. "Quite a lot want to talk about guns and shooting and target shooting and their families can see and often people comment. Gunbook is the place where people can talk about guns without their families seeing because a lot of people have got anti-shooting and anti-hunting friends on these sites."
Many of the profile pictures on the site show people standing in striking poses with guns -- or are simply a picture of their arsenal. And just like any other social media platform, much of the content that has quickly populated the Facebook clone ends up being videos and memes. In contrast, his site is loosely controlled and encourages a community around gun ownership. It has two admins but reassures users in a Q&A on the site that "they will generally just leave you all to get on with things." It adds later that "they will never interfere [in a group] unless a post gets reported and even then only racist and really dodgy ones will get looked at if reported. Please do NOT upload porn videos to our servers though ;0."
Many of the profile pictures on the site show people standing in striking poses with guns -- or are simply a picture of their arsenal. And just like any other social media platform, much of the content that has quickly populated the Facebook clone ends up being videos and memes. In contrast, his site is loosely controlled and encourages a community around gun ownership. It has two admins but reassures users in a Q&A on the site that "they will generally just leave you all to get on with things." It adds later that "they will never interfere [in a group] unless a post gets reported and even then only racist and really dodgy ones will get looked at if reported. Please do NOT upload porn videos to our servers though ;0."
1) Post a geo-cached photo of where you keep your guns. 2) There is no step 2.
1) Post a geo-cached photo of where you keep your guns.
2) Visit lat-long in posted photo with intent to rob someone with guns.
3) Demonstrate to the world how we make the green grass grow.
FTFY
YouTube has been shuttering or demonetizing channels that feature firearm content. Seems like your channel can get suspended on one single complaint from a rabid anti-gunner, even if you haven't violated any rules. And then you have to fight to get it back up again.
And reddit just recently included firearms along with drugs, stolen goods, sexual services in a list of things that can't be bought, sold or traded. One of those things is perfectly legal.
Many firearms video channels have moved to Full30.com, a new site set up just for that purpose. And many shuttered sub-reddits have reopened on MeWe.com.
Gun nuts are funny people. They think their peashooters are going to protect them from a "rogue Federal government". Tell me guys, when are you going to start doing that? I would love to hear the plan for your well regulated militia you are going to form (soon).
Just Capitalism at work. YouTube sees a threat to its income as other companies don't want their brands associated with that kind of content so they pull their ads, and therefore their dollars.
Just like how Capitalism will kill the moronic idea of arming teachers. Liability Insurance companies already killed that one before it got off the ground by either jacking the rates up or by simply saying "You arm, we cancel"
Requiring burdensome licensing and handling requirements, being restricted to a small pool of low caliber/low capacity long guns, virtually no handguns, and having no right of self defense with a firearm. Yes, I'm sure gun advocates heads are exploding about just how great gun rights are in the UK. /s
As they find out that guns aren't in fact banned in the UK.
Just imagine what will happen when they find out guns aren't necessary for self defence here in the UK because we haven't armed criminals to the teeth.
The biggest criminal risk at the moment are people on mopeds stealing phoned out of the hands of those not paying attention.
Guns are owned in the UK for mostly recreational purposes, which is fine with the overwhelming majority of Britons. You need a license, safe place to store it and a place to use it... and Volia... you can have a gun.
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
Youtube is demonitizing them because advertisers don't want to be associated with it.
The risk here that people who support gun-rights should fear most is exactly what is happening with their extreme stance on guns: public support will evaporate, and they WILL be taken away. Once taken away, it's gone forever, we all know that. I have no problems with gun or gun ownership for mentally stable adults with no criminal record, who have been trained on how to handle and care for guns, and who are willing to take responsibility for them and own the consequences. I share their distrust of government, and particularly the people who buy our government and set its laws and policies. We absolutely should be armed. But not all of us.
The complete abdication of responsibility in favor of total devotion to the second amendment is going to result in them being removed, one way or another. It doesn't seem like it right now, the NRA is still strong and the currently installed government is favorable, but what may not be seen clearly is how tenuous that position is, that much of this government was installed with the bare minimum of popular support, and that on this particular issue, one of many, may not actually be that popular even amongst their own.
The NRA is failing everyone right now, and Facebook is one of a multitude of examples of that. The NRA should be acting as a steward, being the voice of reason that champions gun rights by making sure they're well and properly used. That the people most likely to misuse and abuse their rights are restricted from gun ownership. They ought to be researching and offering solutions to help ensure that gun owners are going to be the best and safest examples of what an armed populace could be. Taking a hard-line, extreme, no tolerance stance on gun control is ultimately going to be self-defeating. And we are watching it happen in slow motion.
I share their distrust of government, and particularly the people who buy our government and set its laws and policies.
I've yet to see anyone make a decent case of how guns would be a useful and/or effective means of remedying that. If poop hits the wall, it's not the guns that tear the state down, it's the millions of people storming the gates, guns or no guns. A far more plausible scenario for the states, *if* a large enough group of armed citizens took over the government would be an equally shitty junta - and if they couldn't take over but were sizable enough, I doubt they'd be any less shitty than the dozens of other 'people's army' rebel groups that mar the history books and countries of today.
Your best weapon against a shitty government is education, birth control, and a well informed and intentioned populace.
"Old man yells at systemd"
Actually, it is. Think of the implication: As Facebook (and other social media sites) are "banning" certain topics, these topics will migrate to other platforms or, like in this example, a new platform for this topic will emerge.
The established social media platforms will have to decide between losing customers to "special interest" platforms, and in turn lose influence and money, or they will have to stop caving in every time someone whines about a huwt widdle feeling because someone was allowed to talk about something.
Capitalism dictates how they'll have to decide. This could become quite interesting quite soon.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Who thought this was newsworthy?
Buzzfeed, apparently. I love how they have to stick this dig in: "part of the attraction of the site for members was that they could post about their love of deadly weapons ". Niice. They can't write a single article without interjecting their snark or bias into it.
Lots of things are "deadly". Far more people have been killed in car accidents, and yet there are millions of car enthusiasts. The argument is always, "because we need cars and their main purpose isn't to kill but to transport", but I'd counter, the main purpose of a gun, technically, isn't to kill, but to eject a projectile out at high velocity. How one chooses to use that tool is up to them. (Military guns are meant to wound, not kill, anyway). Technically, a Hilti gun is a gun (.22 caliber), I own one and have used that to nail the sole plates and studs to the concrete while framing out a room in my basement.
I'd prefer not to aim and fire any gun at a living being, (I'm not even sure I could personally shoot Bambi's mom for food, to be perfectly honest) but shooting targets as pure sport is pretty fun and a good challenge of coordination.
Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
No one stormed the white house or rose up in rebellion using their second amendment right provided guns
It just proves most gun owners are in severe need of viagara and they are using guns as a poor substitute. All that talk of being the last stop against tyranny is just self delusion.
But they do show up in elections, and vote, and enable unlimited and unfettered access to guns for every deranged mass murdering psychopath. That is the situation.
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
Enforcing training requirements, "licensing", ever increasing levels of background checks, are all part of a slippery slope fallacy on a path towards removal of gun rights.
There, FTFY.
This is *EXACTLY* how the internet we all want should work.
Don't like the commercial forum? Quit whining and set up your own with likeminded people. .... Wow, check it out, I'm a continental Eurohippster actually siding with a working-class gun-enthusiast on this one. ... *mindflash*
This guys actually deserves some credit for not whining around but actually doing something.
This is what was so cool about the iNet back in 2001 and why we all love slashdot.
We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
Car are made for transportation , knife mostly to cut material invented and perfected as a hunting tool before even being for hunting warfare. Gun were invented for a sole reason : killing. Your technicality "he main purpose of a gun, technically, isn't to kill, but to eject a projectile out at high velocity" is the most stupid thing I heard. There may be a *limited* sport & hunting usage we have now, but the majority of the usage , gun birth & evolution, and cartridge evolution was to maim and kill, why do you think 5.56 nato was made ? Or semi automatic/full auto ? or even the first guns ? Hint : it was not sport or fun. It was all warfare.
As for the stupid NRA "pool and car also kill" yes they kill and in absolute number car even kill more, but that is ignoring how pervasive car are in cities, street and how much part of our life they take - and we increase security and lower the number of death per year. Gun by comparison are not so pervasive, take little part of our life and yet kill nearly as many people as car, and murder take a significant slice of it. And gun are perfected every year to be better more reliant killing machine. The comparison is so stupid to many level, you are either from the NRA, or a "useful idiot" to them. You may as well compare orange and jug of methanol (not even orange to apple). When I worked in research we had a name for such comparison : "it isn't right, but it ain't even wrong - it is just plain stupid".
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org