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."

Comments

Re:Gun nuts

[Major Blud]

They think their peashooters are going to protect them from a "rogue Federal government".

Funny these guys didn't get that memo.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

Re:Gun nuts

[drinkypoo]

Gun nuts are funny people.

Anti-gun nuts are children, lost in a world of confusing realities and apparent contradictions.

They think their peashooters are going to protect them from a "rogue Federal government".

Yeah, what a dumb idea! That's never had the slightest effect on US policy, except in Afghanistan, Iraq, Viet Nam...

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).

The authors of the second amendment stated in no uncertain terms that the purpose of the 2a was to avoid the need for a standing militia because they knew such an instrument was harmful to freedom both foreign and domestic. George Washington, who the natives knew as "Town Killer" for his massacres, decided we needed a standing military and the rest is the history of American imperialism. If you look in a dictionary of the day, you will not find "rules and regulations" as a meaning for regulated, which came later. What it meant was "working correctly" or "working on time" — a regulator is a device for making an machine run at a given speed, and this is the contemporary sense.

Gun violence is actually falling as more guns are sold, and percentage of gun ownership remains roughly constant. But you're being sold a lie about it in order to support taking guns away from as many people as possible. That few guns are grabbed is due only to effective resistance. The ACLU doesn't give one shit about self-defense, which is the only reason the NRA even exists. If I had a dollar for every gun owner who's said "the NRA is crap but I need range insurance if I want to shoot" or "I don't agree with everything they say but nobody else is looking out for my rights" I could start my own goddamned NRA, with blackjack and hookers. By refusing to support the second amendment, the ACLU effectively created the NRA. Yes, the NRA predates the ACLU, but it wasn't always this kind of political powerhouse.

History

[gDLL]

In my country the last free men that fought the communists/NKVD were the armed ones. And they lasted for years in the forrests. Some of us look up to them and would do the same, and some of us are little spineless dogfemales that have no problem living in chains and should tilt their eyes down when the adults are talking.

Re:They're just nerds

[brennz]

my favorite technique when someone takes a contrary position is to come out with a group of ad hominem attacks, and claim they have personality defects. /Sarcasm. It isn't like we in the US have a sizeable number of active duty & veterans across all the 7 uniformed services, and gun bearing professionals in Law enforcement & security, and just regular citizens with interests. We don't number in the millions, we are just a figment of your imagination....

Re:Gun advocates heads explode

[Kernel Kurtz]

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.

Pretty much how I feel in here Canada. I own guns, and accept we have strict controls on them. I don't live for my guns so I don't obsess over it.

If I lived somewhere that I felt I needed to carry a gun to be safe, I would move.

But to each their own.

Actually that's not too far from the truth

[rsilvergun]

even with mountains of training cops accidentally shoot people all the time. Throw somebody with little or no training outside of weekly target practice in an active shooter situation and they're probably going to screw up. I remember when Gabriel Giffords got shot. There was a 'good guy with a gun' on site but he didn't draw. When asked why he said he couldn't figure out who the shooter was and was afraid he'd shoot the wrong person or get shot himself by another "good guy with a gun".

One of the late night comedy hosts did a skit once (Colbert or Oliver, can't remember which) where they staged an active shooter scenario with regular people and pain bullets. The people in question knew what was going to happen and they still couldn't stop the shooter.

Re:How to get robbed 101

[Solandri]

Texas is #1 only because it has a large population. If you combine the data in your first link with a list of state populations and rates of gun ownership, and calculate the number of guns stolen per owner ( (# of guns stolen) / (state population * % who are owners) ), Texas is 17th, and is statistically almost exactly at the national average (35.9% of Texans own guns vs 32.1% for the U.S., and 0.18% have a gun stolen or 1.03x the national rate). The District of Columbia ends up topping the list with a theft rate a staggering 162 times the U.S. national average.

The huge deviation of DC from the national average (29.3% of DC gun owners have a gun stolen vs 0.18% for the nation) makes me think gun theft is primarily a problem in urban areas, not rural. Further supporting this hypothesis is that Alaska, Montana, Idaho, and North and South Dakota all have gun ownership rates over 50%, but their rate of guns stolen is below the national average.

Also, the low rate for gun theft nationwide (0.18% per owner per year, vs 0.47% burglaries and 1.75% larceny) makes me think outside of certain cities, gun theft is not really a serious issue, and is more incidental property theft rather than targeted, and for the most part gun owners do a pretty good job keeping their guns safe from theft.

Rank State Guns_stolen Poplation %_owners Owner_pop Rate_stolen Times_national_average
1 DC 7,324 693,972 3.6% 24,983 29.32% 161.79
2 Georgia 12,906 10,429,379 40.3% 4,203,040 0.31% 1.69
3 New Mexico 2,198 2,088,070 34.8% 726,648 0.30% 1.67
4 Oklahoma 4,695 3,930,864 42.9% 1,686,341 0.28% 1.54
5 South Carolina 5,839 5,024,369 42.3% 2,125,308 0.27% 1.52
6 Louisiana 5,163 4,684,333 44.1% 2,065,791 0.25% 1.38
7 Arizona 5,431 7,016,270 31.1% 2,182,060 0.25% 1.37
8 Arkansas 4,091 3,004,279 55.3% 1,661,366 0.25% 1.36
9 Florida 12,571 20,984,400 24.5% 5,141,178 0.24% 1.35
10 Alabama 6,084 4,874,747 51.7% 2,520,244 0.24% 1.33
11 Nevada 2,288 2,998,039 33.8% 1,013,337 0.23% 1.25
12 North Carolina 9,320 10,273,419 41.3% 4,242,922 0.22% 1.21
13 Mississippi 3,439 2,984,100 55.3% 1,650,207 0.21% 1.15
14 Tennessee 6,101 6,715,984 43.9% 2,948,317 0.21% 1.14
15 Washington 5,053 7,405,743 33.1% 2,451,301 0.21% 1.14
16 West Virginia 1,966 1,815,857 55.4% 1,005,985 0.20% 1.08
17 Texas 18,874 28,304,596 35.9% 10,161,350 0.19% 1.03
18 Indiana 4,774 6,666,818 39.1% 2,606,726 0.18% 1.01
19 Missouri 4,662 6,113,532 41.7% 2,549,343 0.18% 1.01
20 Ohio 6,860 11,658,609 32.4% 3,777,389 0.18% 1.00
21 Kentucky 3,719 4,454,189 47.7% 2,124,648 0.18% 0.97
22 Alaska 717 739,795 57.8% 427,602 0.17% 0.93
23 Rhode Island 226 1,059,639 12.8% 135,634 0.17% 0.92
24 Connecticut 974 3,588,184 16.7% 599,227 0.16% 0.90
25 Hawaii 148 1,427,538 6.7% 95,645 0.15% 0.85
26 Maryland 1,964 6,052,177 21.3% 1,289,114 0.15% 0.84
27 Oregon 2491 4,142,776 39.8% 1,648,825 0.15% 0.83
28 Montana 911 1,050,493 57.7% 606,134 0.15% 0.83
29 Pennsylvania 6,566 12,805,537 34.7% 4,443,521 0.15% 0.82
30 Kansas 1,788 2,913,123 42.1% 1,226,425 0.15% 0.80
31 New Jersey 1,604 9,005,644 12.3% 1,107,694 0.14% 0.80
32 Delaware 344 961,939 25.5% 245,294 0.14% 0.77
33 Virginia 4,062 8,470,020 35.1% 2,972,977 0.14% 0.75
34 Colorado 2,609 5,607,154 34.7% 1,945,682 0.13% 0.74
35 Michigan 4,962 9,962,311 38.4% 3,825,527 0.13% 0.72
36 Illinois 3,302 12,802,023 20.2% 2,586,009 0.13% 0.70
37 California 10,639 39,536,653 21.3% 8,421,307 0.13% 0.70
38 Idaho 1,087 1,716,943 55.3% 949,469 0.11% 0.63
39 Vermont 298 623,657 42.0% 261,936 0.11% 0.63
40 New Hampshire 435 1,342,795 30.0% 402,839 0.11% 0.60