Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Facebook Has Been Showing Military Gear Ads Next to “Insurrection” Posts

buzzfeednews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 258 posts

Re: Facebook Has Been Showing Military Gear Ads Next to “Insurrection” Posts

#191

Post by libertine »

cptnapalm wrote: post #169
libertine wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thank you for correcting me.

I will say that for a law abiding citizen, there's really no real road block to getting a Class III. However, only very few people bother to do it. In so far as to how dangerous it is, there are 630,000 legal full-auto/select-fire weapons in the US. They do require a Class III license to purchase and own and there have been no new ones since 1986. As I recall, of those 630,000, only 3 have been used illegally since 1…

>As I recall, of those 630,000, only 3 have been used illegally since 1934 and 2 of those were, ironically, by cops.

Still, as shown by the media at least, weapons became an accessory in protests and public manifestations over the past... 4 years? Even though they're not used, people have demonstrations of power by presenting their weapons.

But again, my culture is very different from USA, so it's hard for me to grasp such thing.

Re: Facebook Has Been Showing Military Gear Ads Next to “Insurrection” Posts

#192

Post by [deleted] »

manigandham wrote: post #183
ytwySXpMbS wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is someone supporting and fostering a bad act not also to blame? I see from your profile you work in adtech, perhaps rights shouldn't be decided by people who seek to avoid blame because they profit from it.

You have no idea about my background so let's stick to the actual argument. Selling items and running ads is not the same as supporting or fostering a bad act. People can similarly buy knives or many other potential and actual weapons, it's still the user that's ultimately at fault.

[deleted]

Re: Facebook Has Been Showing Military Gear Ads Next to “Insurrection” Posts

#193

Post by emilfihlman »

libertine wrote: post #149
Daniel_sk wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Body armor, helmets and any sort of protective gear is legal in most parts of world, and I would bet any EU state (and in case of my EU country I can buy an AR-15 or any sort of semi-automatic weapon).

Such protective equipment might be legal in most parts of the world, but they have a small market - the ad in the article is selling it like any regular product... literally they say "The survival gear that you are missing!", like it's some pillow being sold for a good night sleep. It's just odd. >I would bet any EU state (and in case of my EU country I can buy an AR-15 or any sort of semi-automatic weapon) Well in t…

Could you say what country?

Because I might even bet that yes, you most definitely can buy an AR15 or any semiautomatic rifle just fine.

Re: Facebook Has Been Showing Military Gear Ads Next to “Insurrection” Posts

#194

Post by dragonwriter »

colpabar wrote: post #157
dragonwriter wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Probably not, but insurrection is. If Facebook is distributing illegal messages inciting, or that constitute part of a conspiracy aimed at, insurrection, that is obviously a problem. What legal ads it shows next to such messages is, if a legitimate concern at all, orders of magnitude less important. If the content is not illegal, and the ads are not illegal, I’m not sure what the issue is at all.

> If the content is not illegal, and the ads are not illegal, I’m not sure what the issue is at all. Have you ever considered that what is illegal can be changed, and that the commenters you are replying to may feel that some part of this industry should be made illegal? It used to be legal to advertise cigarettes to children, and now it's not. If you want to argue that it will be difficult to write and pass legislat…

> Have you ever considered that what is illegal can be changed, and that the commenters you are replying to may feel that some part of this industry should be made illegal?

Sure, and I’ve seen plenty of decent arguments for moving the line of legality on the main content (less so on the content of the ads at issue, though there might be some.) Feel free to replace “should be illegal” for “is illegal” in the grandparent post.

Doesn’t really change the basic point, which is that I fail to see much argument for why the juxtaposition should be of concern that doesn’t depend on one of the items (most likely the main content rather than the ads) being of much greater concern to start with.

Re: Facebook Has Been Showing Military Gear Ads Next to “Insurrection” Posts

#195

Post by dillondoyle »

Repeal Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act and additionally add weapons of any type and in this case add military style gear - e.g. the storm trooper stuff. Add more advertising regulations like alcohol/tobacco.

FB already prohibits weapons, alcohol, tobacco ads etc..

Gun manufacturers would have to KYC like banks, probably have to add big insurance costs and ultimately charge (significantly) higher prices which should hopefully reduce the amount of weapons in the US which is already ridiculously high. The tobacco playbook I'm talking European increasing costs.

Re: Facebook Has Been Showing Military Gear Ads Next to “Insurrection” Posts

#196

Post by libertine »

emilfihlman wrote: post #193
libertine wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Such protective equipment might be legal in most parts of the world, but they have a small market - the ad in the article is selling it like any regular product... literally they say "The survival gear that you are missing!", like it's some pillow being sold for a good night sleep. It's just odd. >I would bet any EU state (and in case of my EU country I can buy an AR-15 or any sort of semi-automatic weapon) Well in t…

Could you say what country? Because I might even bet that yes, you most definitely can buy an AR15 or any semiautomatic rifle just fine.

Ah yes, I'm from Portugal!

Re: Facebook Has Been Showing Military Gear Ads Next to “Insurrection” Posts

#197

Post by thereddaikon »

mywittyname wrote: post #107
DIVx0 wrote: post #59

I'll pile on an anecdote. I still have a facebook account but its not something I use very often except the past week given the situation in the USA. My facebook account is very old, when i was more of an active user I did all the usual posts/photos that a lot of liberal urban types contribute. Anyway, after posting some anti-insurrection posts I start noticing all sort of "tacti-cool" gear ads or targeted T-shirt s…

> so my guess is that someone out there is spending a lot of money on a huge ad target I think this is really it. The profit margins on this stuff is insane. And the volumes of money typical people spend on this stuff is also insane. (speculation here) The insurrection is probably opening the door for new customers. I would not be surprised to hear a people in zero-gun households are now seeking to acquire their firs…

I've seen a lot of reports published lately that indicate that 2020 saw massive purchases of guns by people who weren't already owners. Its been a rough year with a lot of uncertainty and plenty of motivating examples for people of most political leanings to justify buying one, or two or some level 4 plates and Nods.

Ammunition has been difficult to get since April and its going to stay that way for some time I think. Lots of popular models of firearm have been non stop sold out. The tactical gear industry has seen a huge boom in sales. What used to be very small and niche is now massive. Before 2020 most people already in the hobby didn't own plate carriers, battle belts, helmets etc. Now that stuff is just as scarce as anything else.

Re: Facebook Has Been Showing Military Gear Ads Next to “Insurrection” Posts

#198

Post by scotty79 »

That's what I'm complaining about...

Facebook is allowed to show adverts and related links next to conpiracy theory content that just dends the readers deeper into their rabit holes.

They should be mandated to advertise educational and mental health support services next to such content.

What is happening now is like advertising best shotguns, gas ovens and sleep pills next to suicide apologetics, but on societal level.

Re: Facebook Has Been Showing Military Gear Ads Next to “Insurrection” Posts

#199

Post by mywittyname »

chmod600 wrote: post #111
fasteddie31003 wrote: post #91

Worked on me. I just bought some AR500 plate armor. Better safe than sorry in today's world. I don't see any downside to buying body armor.

The main downside of pretty much any purchase like that is that it distracts your attention/time/money from other safety gear. For instance, an extra fire extinguisher on the other side of the house is probably a better purchase for most people in terms of safety. But someone might spend their "safety" budget (time, money, attention) on the armor and then be left without the basics. Also, unless you have a gun alread…

> Also, unless you have a gun already or you are physically strong, armor doesn't seem likely to be effective.

Exactly, body armor only helps prevent bullet penetration. Your body is still absorbing a shitload of energy. It's like being hit with a baseball bat. You have to be a large, strong person to maintain physical capabilities after being hit.

Also body armor is extremely fickle; it must be worn and fitted correctly. It is akin to a well-tailored Italian suit. If you gain a few pounds, it won't fit right. Bad fit = bad protection. Also, they don't protect the lower abdomen and groin areas -- which is a serious risk when a shooter is aiming for center mass, bullets fall as they travel.

Re: Facebook Has Been Showing Military Gear Ads Next to “Insurrection” Posts

#200

Post by thereddaikon »

JeremyNT wrote: post #182
skrowl wrote: post #114

Calling body armor "Military Gear" as in "only the military should be able to buy body armor" is pretty sad, even by Buzzfeed extreme-left standards. Body armor can't kill anyone.

Can you describe a typical scenario where a civilian might want to use body armor? I understand that shooting high powered rifles is a lot of fun, so recreation makes sense with respect to weaponry, but I'm legitimately confused about why a civilian would ever want to own body armor. I can't imagine it's terribly comfortable to wear, and it doesn't seem very fun to me.

Do you live in a cave? This past year has given a lot of people reason to want body armor.

Its also a free country, or at least is supposed to be. If someone wants to wear armor why not?

Post reply on HN