How Twitter is Discriminating Against the Gun Industry

GunsAmerica has a small but loyal following on social media. The reason our footprint on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram isn’t bigger than what it is is because it wasn’t until recently that we started to engage our followers and friends on a regular basis. To some extent, we were late to the social media party (the primary reason for this is we put the majority of our time and attention into crafting our weekly Digest, which you can subscribe to on our homepage). But now that we’re here, we want to grow our audience, just like everybody else.

The problem with trying to grow our audience on Twitter is that they don’t allow gun-friendly businesses to promote their page to find new users who might be interested in following their feed.

Twitter does not allow the promotion of "weapons."

Twitter does not allow the promotion of “weapons.”

In other words, GunsAmerica is precluded from participating in the Twitter Ads program because we are associated with “weapons.”

To quote the policy directly, “Twitter prohibits the promotion of weapons and weapon accessories globally.”

Perhaps it’s just me, but I find it strange that an American company would discriminate against organizations and companies that value and embrace one’s Constitutionally-protected right to keep and bear arms.

Maybe it’s a bit ironic too in that Twitter has created a space where users can freely exercise their First Amendment rights, particularly as it relates to speech. Yet, Twitter frowns on companies like GunsAmerica that have created a platform and community where users can not only get the tools to exercise their Second Amendment rights, but also gain the knowledge on how to do so safely and responsibly.

Why does the gun industry always get a raw deal?

Why does the gun industry always get a raw deal with the corporate world?

Humbly, I’d ask the Twitter executives why they are actively discriminating against those who promote the Second Amendment? Why are you inhibiting gun-friendly businesses from reaching users who would value and appreciate our content and identify with our community?

I’d also politely remind them that the Second Amendment is the only safeguard there is to protect the First Amendment and the rest of the Constitution from tyranny. And those who undervalue the right to keep and bear arms do so at their own peril.

{ 27 comments… add one }
  • Switchblade January 9, 2016, 9:12 pm

    I had aTwitter account in the first year it started up, but it seemed like such a useless and bogus site that I cancelled my account. I have NEVER been sorry.

  • Tank April 29, 2015, 12:22 pm

    As someone who just has never felt like I needed to have people “Follow” ME on Twitter, I have never bothered to go on when invited. I do see the benefit this tool can be for any business. That said, I don’t know much about the lingo used etc. but I do believe “#SCREWTHEM” is appropriate.

  • Lee April 28, 2015, 10:42 am

    I have one more thought. I am in the eCommerce world and I have been toying with the idea of a gun-friendly search engine. Does anyone here think this is worth pursuing or just a quixotic thought?

    • Kalashnikov Dude April 28, 2015, 2:41 pm

      I would certainly make use of it if it worked and made finding the items for my hobby which entails manufacturing AK rifles and handguns from flat receiver stampings up. Sometimes finding and connecting with retailers of items I use online can be hard to do. Every time I look for gun parts it seems like there should be way more out there than actually show up in search results. If it turns out this is because of discrimination and agenda based ignorance of the search engines I use………….

  • Lee April 28, 2015, 10:40 am

    I think it is time for a lawsuit. There is something called equal protection. We are not allowed to discriminate against people of all ideas, thoughts, lifestyles, etc. Now before you jump on me for private vs. public and who gets to decide what, consider for a moment that these companies, Google, Twitter, FaceBook, etc., have effective monopolies in place. They control at least 80% or in the case of Twitter, 100% of mainstream social outlets, and use our Internet structure to do so. I think some legislation is in order. If we have grounds to legislate against private banks, i.e., Operation Chokepoint, we certainly have the power to move our gun-friendly legislators to this cause as well…oh NRA? How about using some of my Life Member money for this cause?

  • Carl April 27, 2015, 9:10 pm

    I don’t use Twitter, and this is one more reason I probably never will.

  • Xavier April 27, 2015, 2:09 pm

    Google does exactly the same thing. Went the rounds with them concerning our Google Search Ads and you can not only not promote guns. scopes, parts, “tactical’ or large knives, but you can’t even have them on your web site–that is unless you’re Cabela’s or some of the big guys who spend tons of money with them. Even then, they have to have a separate “landing” page that doesn’t show the product but allows one to click on through. Yahoo and Bing have no such restrictions so we’ve now moved our promotional budget to them. For now at least. And Google doesn’t care.

  • TCNY April 27, 2015, 1:07 pm

    No “weapon” promotion, just militant Islamic group recruiting. Makes sense to me! L O L

    • praharin April 28, 2015, 3:53 pm

      You’re talking about 2 different things. You can post about guns or whatever on Twitter. You just can’t be promoted. The promotion feature is used to gain popularity by increasing the likelihood of your account showing up. Also, Twitter shuts down most of the radicalist accounts as far as I know.

  • Kalashnikov Dude April 27, 2015, 1:00 pm

    I was recently locked out of my account on Facebook ostensibly for using a fake name. You won’t find me on Twitter. Yes, freedom of speech, is important. The right to communicate and gather with others of like mind through various media is worth fighting for. But how? The facts of the matter tell us these online entities are private companies and they have rights as well. This includes exclusionary policies. I will not force this issue with them while at the same time condemning these gay rights groups for forcing a baker to cater a gay social function. We all have the right to refuse service. I’d rather spend my political capitol pushing the right to refuse instead of appearing hypocritical about my Facebook account. They don’t like me? They don’t get my information, and they don’t get my commentary, respectively. Is it right? Not really. But it’s not actually a fair world in spite of all the BS idiotic websites and social media pretend to stand for. Hell, it’s hardly a “free country” anymore these days. In the mean time praise the Lord and pass the ammunition! We’ll have our own social media, like right here. Just be sure to exercise GunsAmerica’s right to exclude as eagerly. When one of these anti 2nd Amendment trolls comes along, shut em down post haste! Without apology. Do this for “social justice”, do this for our right to come here and discuss things without the nasty hate and vitriol that so often comes with posting commentary on most other websites. Do it to keep these threads a nice place to come and share thoughts with like minded individuals. Do it keep good people from walking away from GunsAmerica in disgust.

  • Mac April 27, 2015, 12:13 pm

    I say play the game with them. Another article in this blog talks about how Austin Police Chief Art Acevedo explained, on twitter, his stance against open carry in Texas. So instead of boycotting twitter, tens of thousands of us should complain to twitter that “that horrible cop was talking about GUNS!” Horrors! We don’t want to hear about GUNS! Horrors! That violates twitter’s policies! So do the Shannon posts. She talks about GUNS! Horrors! Make them stop!.

    I mean really, if there was a ground swell of those kinds of complaints, maybe it would force twitter to play fair.

  • exordtech April 27, 2015, 10:45 am

    Probably miss guided attempts at preventing the use of social media by violent extremists. Just like other forms of regulation, the collateral damage of these policies is the restriction of legitimate use.

  • Rev. Bill Blake April 27, 2015, 10:18 am

    So everybody stop using Twitter, Boycott them till they allow suck items as free speech and our other rights.

    • Chief April 27, 2015, 1:45 pm

      Im with Bill

  • L Cavendish April 27, 2015, 9:40 am

    Jonathan noted EXACTLY what I was looking at…knives…ALL of which can be used to do harm…
    Not to mention gasoline…cleaning fluids…yard implements…sporting equipment…backyard pools…boats…
    hands and feet…wow…the list is endless…..
    Hoplophobes….and hypocrites…

    • Jeff April 27, 2015, 11:50 pm

      You forgot tweezers and assault pickles.

  • Jonathan April 27, 2015, 8:59 am

    Also note the ban on “knives that could be used to inflict harm”… so ALL OF THEM, right? Libtards. *eyeroll*

  • DNS April 27, 2015, 8:37 am

    We were using google AdSense up to a couple of years ago when they decided to ban us forever for rules violations. What horrible product were we advertising? Why firearms of course. After the first warning we switched over to indirect ads that just promoted our website, however since the website and business name has the word guns it was in violation. We should have just advertised porn as it would have been accepted.

  • Flatlander22 April 27, 2015, 8:32 am

    Catch new news on the web or TV referring to “social media firestorm” type of stories. Twitter bans firearms “promotion” but allows Shannon Watts to say whatever she wants. Watts and groups like hers will ban posters that dare to correct their misrepresentations and lies. Same on FB. Do not underestimate the power of these mediums as tools. Once the “firestorm” hits, it is “the truth.” (Hands Up. Don’t Shoot?) How do you think issues like I594 get passed? Media and “social media” will not report the truth or allow it to be reported.

  • Joe April 27, 2015, 7:20 am

    I don’t tweet, nor do I face book, so I haven’t got a clue as to the mindset of those that do.
    Call me what you like but just don’t call me late for supper.

    • Dennis April 27, 2015, 7:18 pm

      What Joe said.

  • James McLaughlin April 27, 2015, 5:55 am

    What ever happened to free speech. AT&T, Verizon, etc the internet carriers are restricted from limiting free speech I find it inconceivable that some of the social media programs and support systems(i.e. PayPal) within the internet are allowed to play by a different set of rules. The NRA and users need to hit these institutions as hard as Bloomberg’s bogus anti-gun organizations. Any restriction to our message while supporting gun control is a violation of free speech irregardless of the corporate mission statement of the Twitter’s and PayPals of the world!

  • norm April 27, 2015, 5:41 am

    Twitter is the social home of liberal land dba gun haters! Facebook is much more conservative (at least its users are ) and a more efficient venue for gun ads, if permitted.

    • Crazy Gun Dealer April 28, 2015, 9:08 am

      We are blocked from promotion on Facebook also and have about 2000 followers (likes) but many of our posts are only shown to about 100 people. It is OK to discriminate as long as it is against something THEY don’t like.

    • dink winkerson April 28, 2015, 12:29 pm

      Imagine the shit storm these sites would face if they banned anything about same sex relationships.

  • Tom McHale April 21, 2015, 8:58 pm

    Yep. I ran into this about a year ago. They banned me (@mygunculture) from the promotion programs also… All sorts of other socially unacceptable things seem to be just fine with them, except of course, constitutional rights. I’m just happy that they have a more mature sense of morality than our founding fathers. What would we do without them? I’m just eternally thankful they’re so vigilant about saving us from ourselves!

Leave a Comment

Send this to a friend