Online petition to force FB/Instagram to prohibit firearms transaction facilitation

[ezkl2230]

Moms Demand Action, which merged with Bloomberg's MAIG last year, is running an online petition to try to force Mark Zuckerberg to prohibit the use of FaceBook and Instagram for the facilitation of private party firearms transactions. They are accusing Zuckerberg of allowing members to run "online gun shows." So far, Facebook has told MDA that they do not run or sponsor ads for any kind of weapon, nor do they have electronic commerce software running that would allow a member to actually complete a sale. However, the social networking platform does facilitate swap groups, and many people with items to sell, including firearms, host their photos on Instagram. Still, MDA is insisting that Zuckerberg prohibit any activity that could be related to firearms transactions.

I have no doubt that, if they are successful in getting Zuckerberg to cave on this, the next step will be to try to get him to prohibit any firearms related group (USA Carry, Guns.com, NRA, etc.) from using either of these two platforms.

As of the time of this posting, the MDA petition has 3,397 of a desired 4,000 signatures.

Moms Demand Action demands Facebook end gun sales, social network argues they don?t sell guns

TELL FACEBOOK & INSTAGRAM TO END THE SOCIAL MEDIA GUN SHOW | CREDO Mobilize

 

[NavyLCDR]

Then they also need to prohibit the anti-gun groups from spreading their propaganda on the same websites.

 

[Eidolon]

Then they also need to prohibit the anti-gun groups from spreading their propaganda on the same websites.

But it's for the chiiiiiilllllllllllllllllllldrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrren

 

[JCliff]

Good post, thanks.
.
Being the dinosaur that I am, I don't use facebook or instagram. Hopefully Zuckerberg won't cave, just on the principle of the thing, but I wouldn't be surprised if he did. For those who do use these media, perhaps a soundoff or counter petition is in order?

 

[ezkl2230]

Then they also need to prohibit the anti-gun groups from spreading their propaganda on the same websites.

The fairness doctrine is dead. The operator of a media outlet is free to skew what they allow in any direction they desire; there is no mandate to provide equal time to opposing views.

 

[r1derbike]

I also don't use social networks. Can't see the benefit or advantage in my daily computer(s) routine. Have 7 computers and one of those my wife uses for social media. Just not a priority for me.

 

[BluesStringer]

The fairness doctrine is dead. The operator of a media outlet is free to skew what they allow in any direction they desire; there is no mandate to provide equal time to opposing views.

Kind of off-topic, but I have to ask - Are you under the impression that the Fairness Doctrine imposed on radio and TV political commentary shows (but not on print-media) between 1949 and 1987 prevented the skewing of political speech by media outlets?

 

[ezkl2230]

Kind of off-topic, but I have to ask - Are you under the impression that the Fairness Doctrine imposed on radio and TV political commentary shows (but not on print-media) between 1949 and 1987 prevented the skewing of political speech by media outlets?

Nope, not that naive. I was simply addressing BC1's assertion that if conservative groups are kicked off these sites, then in the interest of fairness, liberal groups shouldalso be kicked off.

 

[Kramer1113]

You have to look at the driving forces behind many "Movements" such as these.
Emotional heart string tugging actions come and go. Clear thinking generally prevails.
I continue to hear of gun grabbing, civil war in the United States (On this site we were promised Civil War in September of 2013...hmmm).
We will not see any further Federal action taken as far as gun laws *IMHO*. States may be different but that's up to us voters to keep the candidates and elected officials honest and informed.
No Fear, Calmer heads prevail.