Quantcast

Google Shopping Incites 2nd Amendment Row by Removing Guns from Search

Get the WebProNews Newsletter:


Google Shopping Incites 2nd Amendment Row by Removing Guns from Search
[ Search]

Google announced back in May that Google Product Search will be replaced by Google Shopping, meaning a number of changes would be on the horizon for Google’s dedicated corner for online merchants. However, Google recently sent a letter to merchants of firearms and weapons that have listings on Google Shopping telling them that the sale of weapons will not be permitted through Google. “We do not allow the promotion or sale of weapons and any related products such as ammunitions or accessory kits on Google Shopping,” the Google Shopping Team wrote. “In order to comply with our new policies, please remove any weapon-related products from your data feed and then re-submit your feed in the Merchant Center.”

Do you feel that Google is entitled to make these sorts of decisions and prohibit the sale of certain items on Google Shopping? Who should dictate what’s acceptable and unacceptable to sell on the site? Tell us what you think in the comments.

Naturally, proponents of the 2nd Amendment are up in arms (hah) about Google’s decision to limit or prohibit the sale of firearms through its Shopping site. A petition has been posted on change.com that implores Google to “not interfere with our 2nd amendment rights…” and so far has collected over 300 signatures.

In light of Google’s announcement, searching for weapon-related terms on Google Shopping reflects this policy as you will no longer get any results from most of those searches.

For example, a search for “bullets”:

Google Shopping Bullets

Or “ammo”:

Google Shopping Ammo

While specific terms related to firearms produce exactly zero results, strangely, a generic search of “guns” gave me millions of results (and these were pretty serious guns, too):

Google Shopping Guns

Additionally, I received some more shopping results when I searched for knives, arrows, crossbows, grenades (that do simulated explosions) (which actually included grenade launchers in the results, as well!), and uzi. Even searching for the plainly generic “weapons” gave me a few gun sights and at least one gun. So it doesn’t look like Google has exactly put a wholesale ban on the sale of firearms or firearm-related accessories (or other explosive stuff) – at least for now. Who knows if these results will get cleaned up so as to not offer any sorts of weaponry as the full implementation of Google Shopping takes place this fall, or if merchants’ weapon wares will be forcibly removed by Google should the sellers not comply.

As an aside, Google’s limitation on what kind of weapons you can buy isn’t limited to things you shoot. A search for non-lethal weapons like “stun gun” returned zero results, which makes this all the more confusing. To see the full list of what weapons are prohibited from promotion and which are acceptable, take a look at Google’s Advertising Policies, which are allegedly the guidelines being used for Google Shopping now.

While gun enthusiasts will, and perhaps logically so, take umbrage to Google’s removal of all weaponry listings on Google Shopping, Google isn’t really beholden to any consumer expectations. It’s a corporate business that makes whatever decisions it wants and we the consumers are simply using it by choice. Google is no more required to allow a space for merchants of bullets or shotguns to sell their products on Google Shopping than is a flea market required to allow anybody to set up a table and sell baseball cards if those flea market owners (for whatever reason) don’t agree with the values of baseball. If the private market you’re trying to use to promote your business doesn’t like you, you have little choice but go somewhere else.

More, Google isn’t prohibiting the search listings of weapons; this only (so far as I know) applies to Google Shopping. It’s still just as easy to go to google.com and search for “9mm ammo” and – presto – find many listings of websites that are selling this particular ammunition.

However, I anticipate that not being able to search and purchase weapons on Google Search will affect merchants more than consumers. This will relegate sellers to compete among general Google search rankings instead of being able to minimize the field of competition at Google Shopping. As Google says itself on the Google Shopping (nĂ©e Product Search) page, “Product Search connects your products to the shoppers searching for them, helping you drive traffic and sales to your store.” If anything, especially if you’re an exclusively online vendor of guns or other weapons, I’d imagine that the diminished site traffic to a business’ page would be more immediately incendiary than Google Search simply no longer allowing the commercial sale of weapons. If anybody wanted to make some kind of legal case about this issue, I tend to think that a more convincing argument could be made that Google Shopping’s new policy harms small businesses than it diminishes citizens’ right to bear arms.

In the end, though, the plausibility of taking this charge to court doesn’t seem favorable because, as mentioned, this is Google’s world and we just live in it. Google was asked for comment regarding the policy change to Google Shopping and the subsequent petition of the decision but it has yet to reply as of this time.

For what it’s worth, Bing Shopping returned beaucoup results for “ammo” (and “9mm ammo”), “bullets,” and “shotgun.” Maybe Bing and Microsoft should start touting their gun-friendly search results among the NRA so as to gain a little more on Google’s lead in search?

Is this more of a free market issue or a 2nd Amendment issue? If you’re an online merchant that will be affected by Google Shopping’s policy change, do you plan to try selling your products elsewhere (like Bing or eBay)? Do you think this is a bad sign for business owners who use Google Shopping? Please share your reactions below.

[HT Outdoor Hub.]

Google Shopping Incites 2nd Amendment Row by Removing Guns from Search


Top Rated White Papers and Resources
  • http://www.riflegear.com David Christian

    I think they are in a transitional period, there are millions of feeds/products they have to review. I think they have tried to make some blanket filters, such as a search for “9mm” comes up with absolutely nothing, as does a search for “holsters”. The later is really odd, because holsters are one of the few firearms related items their policy actually allows to be advertised, along with scopes and some other items that are not actually part of the firearm. Personally, I think this moves sucks as the product feed and internet presence, along with hundreds of 5 star reviews, are now going to disappear because Google dislikes what my store sales. Oh well, they have no problem showing listings for “butt plugs” and “Vodka”, cause those are so “family friendly”, eh?

  • Brad K

    the second amendment states:

    “A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”

    Nowhere does it say that citizens should not be denied the right to research and/or purchase arms and arms related materials through any and all means necessary.

    This bold move by Google puts us one step closer to a safer society as a whole.

    • Matt G

      Yes a “safer society” where criminals are better armed than its regular law-abiding citizens. Thanks for reminding me.. I had forgotten how frequently our local thugs and alien gang bangers search Google Shopping to legitimately purchase firearms and accessories.

      Google is effectively turning the internet into trash with not only destroying search results recently with the biased promotion of themselves and their partners, but now they are limiting what products can even be searched for.

      At some point, regardless of your anti-gun viewpoints you’ll have to realize Google’s actions are also infringing on freedom of speech as well. LOL – that should hit a nerve with all you ACLU-cronies!

      • Thom

        You’re f$&king kidding, right? Illegal aliens, AIDS, car crashes kill more people than law abiding citizens with guns.

      • http://www.dbugking.com/ Donald V Dunham

        KISS MY ASS YOU BOOT LICKER.

    • http://infowars.com JimM

      Do a little research. The Founders and subsequent Supreme Court decisions show that Citizens are the Militia.

      They are however a private company and can limit whatever they like. We have the ability to not use their service.

  • Mark

    Nope. They are actively discriminating against anything gun related. I received a notice from them that my Google shopping items were in violation…and my site doesn’t carry anything closely resembling fire arms or ammunition.

    Before you know it, the liberal influence at Google will start censoring other conservative products they feel they need to “shield us from”. Thank you Google for your concern, but we live in the USA where we value the freedom to make our own decisions and choices.

    Please bring back the good old days where I could perform a Google search and get the results I was looking for…not the biased and politically influenced results that the growing liberal influence at Google has been slowly pushing on us.

    We respect your right to drive your Chevy Volt, eat organic food, power your tent with wind and even recycle your toenail clippings. Please show us the same respect when we drive our F350 pickups, kill our own food, keep our Texas houses at 72 degrees in July and even disagree with you from time to time.

  • Al Haffar

    To Google Management and Board of Directors, you are now playing with 2nd amendment, that means you are censoring what we can and can not do as for the commerce, it appears that you have been influenced by people that would like to see the 2nd amendment go away, and next we will see 1st amendment in order to silence the people from voicing our opinions, the people will speak on this.

  • http://hdfirearms.com Taos Gun Guy

    While more and more of this country goes over to the dark side as regards being “safer” by only allowing criminals to have guns, I can’t really get too excited about this.

    Gun shops, just as many other retailers, bemoan competing on large shopping sites as hurting their ability to showcase their customer service and expertise and get a minimal profit from their sales. I for one am quite OK with Google funneling more business to my site because the consumer can’t shop massive results at Google Shopping. I just have to use the other Web marketing avenues open to me and most are better for my business anyway.

    All Internet exposure is not good exposure.

  • chris

    None of this “infringes” anything on any consumer. We go to Google voluntarily to use their services, they can promote and not promote what they like as a private company. I certainly won’t sign a petition like this. I’ll go to a different company, though. That’s the point of Capitalism. That’s your vote.

    Having said that, it is a dumb move. It in no way has a positive outcome and inconveniences Google’s users and those trying to advertise. I’ll not understand that logic while more provocative things can still be purchased. Besides, they didn’t promote firearms before. We were already looking for them…. Just search for your guns under the regular search bar.

  • chris

    This doesn’t “infringe” on any consumer. We go to them voluntarily for their services. I’m not signing a petition like this.. it’s silly. I love my guns but the complaint makes no sense. Go to a different company. That’s a point of capitalism. That’s your vote.

    Having said that the decision by google makes no sense either. You can still search for much more provocative things to buy. Nothing good comes from it. Besides, you can type your gun searches in the regular search bar… Same thing. Just doesn’t let companies advertise their product there (I don’t like that but that’s the closest I can think of for some kind of legal infringement)

  • http://www.lotusmarketing.ca Marketing Internet Sherbrooke

    That would be a problem if we are getting invaded by zombies.

  • John Murphy

    Of course they are right to not allow guns or ammo to be sold or advertized. The Second Amendment is an anachronism and should have been repealed a century or more ago, as the product of a bygone age which has no place in the modern world. The rest of the developed world looks down on the United States as barbaric to have a so called “right” to bear arms. The US will not be respected in the world until the Second Amendment and armed citizens are gone.

    • http://infowars.com JimM

      John, when you crawl out of your Mom’s basement, please leave the country.

    • http://www.infowars.com Banatu

      Yeah. No one has needed to defend themselves for at least a century. No crime at all in the ‘modern world’. No conceivable scenario in which you may need to shoot an animal in order to eat. Independent people are universally despised the world over, especially America and Switzerland. Gotcha.

  • http://www.TheCigarStore.com Robert Capielo

    I don’t agree at all with Google being the police of the Internet as they almost have a monopoly on search engines.

    I own a cigar store and assume we will be next which sucks and is not fair. We are in business just like Google and all other businesses who are trying to make a living.

    Their reasoning is because of advocates who must also advertize with Google and frankly should mind their own business.

  • http://www.race-mart.com Paul Fink

    We emphatically applaud and support Google’s decision. Google is a corporation not a government agency or a democracy. It’s their product that we use and if they choose not to contribute to the vast proliferation of firearms, it’s their choice to make. If you don’t like it, use Yahoo or Bing.

  • http://E-Reachcomm.com Jody Mahaffey

    I think that Google has become so pervasive in our everyday lives that people forget Google is a business. It’s not a community service. As a business they have every right to determine what they will and will not support. Just as we have the right to bear arms, Google has the right to run their business as they see fit.

    • http://infowars.com JimM

      Jody gets it.

  • http://www.faerynicethings.com Patricia Delnay

    Paypal already limits the items we can sell, throwing knives, batons, and will shut down our paypal account if they scan our site and find anything even remotely related to these items.

    Our Web Store is not affiliated with Ebay though we do sell on Ebay.

    We had a sword and the hand guard was shaped like brass knuckles and that was in violation.

    Though I do agree that there needs to be some standards for the internet, I do not think this is the way it should be done.

    When the company we pay, for advertising or money processing can tell us what we can sell, I am not referring to anything deemed to be illegal, then there is a problem.

    Sure we can go to another company, but the bottom line says we have to be with the company most used by our customers and this is what gives these companies the power they have.

  • David

    Google can do whatever it wants to do….right? Just like the government can limit our freedom without adhering to our constitution, and doing whatever it wants to do regardless of whether its right or not. So, since our socialist government is turning into a communist, muslim regime, why should Google do the right thing??

  • L.A. Ansoms

    The world is bigger than the USA. Google seems to know. A lot of you don’t. The largest part of the civilized world is not as gun crazy as the USA, yet 10 times safer.

    • http://gardengrovefindhomes.com John

      The city with the highest murder rate per capita in the world is not in the US. Care to guess where? Here is a hint. They produce a ton of oil and they speak Spanish.

  • http://SurvivalPrepStore Sean Morelli

    That’s wrong! If they want to legislate morality or politically correct terms, then they should censor all kinds of things. Who am I kidding, they already do. None-the-less its very limiting on business who fit particularly niches and is censoring of American constitutional rights to purchase and defend themselves, and the freedom of speech.

  • Rickey Morris

    This is one of the reasons I no longer support Google, and any of it’s products, nor care about their search results. I learned that my traffic is about the same without worrying about the games they play. Google is not a necessary part of life, although a lot of people, “including Google,” believe they are. The worst part of it is, as long as we are talking about them on blogs, and sites, they get exactly what they want.

    Bing is efficient, and so are many other search engines folks, let Google run people off with their edicts, it will happen sooner or later.

  • http://store.creative-wholesale.com Ken Fallaw

    The sale of weapons and ammo in interstate commerce is prohibited unless you are a registered agent to sell weapons. If the sellers are legal, I do not see why Google has decided to stop listing them.
    Googles recent decision to do away with the Google Base, and change it to Google Shopping, will hurt thousands of small businesses which list their products for sale on the internet. It will make a lot of businesses look for listing on Bing and Yahoo, instead of Google. Now with the Google Shopping, it will be the store that pays the most for the ad words that will get the better listings, and the customers will only see the companies with the higher sales price because they are willing to pay a higher price for the ad words. Our customers will suffer the most.

  • Dell D.

    “Naturally, proponents of the 2nd Amendment are up in arms (hah) about Google’s decision to limit or prohibit the sale of firearms through its Shopping site.” Why would you say (hah)?

    You miss the issue completely. It has nothing to do with the 2nd amendment. Google certainly has a right to do what ever dumb, progressive, social engineering crap they want too. The problem is they are a defacto monopoly.

    If BING (Microsoft) were smart they would jump at the opportunity and embrace those users that are sick and tired of a small group of elitists trying to legislate our daily lives.

    Sure we need safeguards for children and weak brained, bleeding heart tree huggers. But buying Sex, Drugs, Rock and Roll and M16s should be my decision.

    • http://www.webpronews.com/author/drew-bowling Drew Bowling

      I said “hah” because I was very pleased with my pun. :)

  • http://domsoutdoor.com Jeff Saccullo

    Google’s political postion on how to change the world just creates new opportunities for other seach engines. Google is a private company and can filter content, which it does, the public must not be ignorant of that fact. We the people do have choices, speak by changing your default search engine.

  • Jeannine Kay

    Of course Google is entitled to stop the sale of offensive and dangerous items. There are too many ways in which terrible things including terrible thoughts and websites are peddled on the internet in the name of freedom and free speech. Yes, we all have rights, but everyone seems to forget that with rights one has OBLIGATIONS! So yes, Google must be more ethical than the rest and ban, block etc whatever is unethical and immoral. I for one and I know of many many others who will cheer them on with this type of ethical decision. AT LAST!

    • http://www.infowars.com Banatu

      Problem with this is, who decides what is offensive? I assure you there are at least 150 million Americans out there who see firearms as security and freedom, not offensive.

      Should Google also ban anything to do with ‘gay pride’ or any religion or any product that includes animal parts? I know a lot more people offended by those things than by guns.

      • Ivan Yank

        Unless your name is Jerry Falwell, gays aren’t used to kill people.

  • http://speedoflightenterprsises.com Max Keele

    See, here’s the thing. On the one hand, you have folks screaming about “free markets” and how we can never regulate the free exercise of business. Then on the other, you have folks screaming about “defacto monopolies” and “Google’s social engineering policies.” Weird thing to me is how often those two hands attach to the same person. Cognitive dissonance, anyone? Either Google is a business in a free market and they can do whatever they choose to manage that business, OR, Google should be forced to facilitate gun corporations and “well-armed militias” need to sell and buy firearms through the search engine feed. Pick one.

  • Gary Tucker

    As a private company, Google can do what it wants, as long as it’s lawful. The right to bear arms is no more, or less, important than the right to make one’s, or a private company’s, own decisions, which is part of free speech (oh well, Obamacare shot that down).

  • Richard Beasley

    Google probably has the law on their side on this one but what we need is a gun and arms site that bars any listings or sales that co-list on this new site and Google at the same time regardless of what they have to sell or list with Google. That way those of us who support guns, etc., will be allowed to have our own site for conducting business between those of like interest without affiliating ourselves with Google and the far left anti-gun lobby as we have been forced to do in the past. The gun rights group need their own highly specific website and system of commerce to reassure us that Google and the likes there of do not further suppress any more of our Constitutional rights than they have already destroyed.

  • https://twitter.com/#!/top10traffic Jesse Fisher

    Google is not a government agency, they have the right to sell or not sell anything they choose. Gun sellers can sell on a dozen other places, including Craigslist.

  • Jerry

    Google has gotten pretty scary. Please READ the new requirements from Google for their new shopping solution and you will notice that GOOGLE makes decisions for the merchant in terms of RMAs and Credits. If Google decides to give someone’s money back the merchant must do so within 2 business days! This agreement give Google WAY too much power over the merchant.
    In addition the merchant much give Google access to all their shipping records such as UPS. That’s the equivalent of giving Google their customer base. It’s required as part of this new agreement.
    Google is really abusing their power here. It’s not a matter of “can they”. This is America. They can. But should they use their extreme power to abuse businesses? I dare say Google has long ago forgotten their motto of “Do no evil.” This is wrong. This is evil.

  • http://www.infowars.com Banatu

    I agree with so many others here — I wholly support gun rights and think there’s too many laws attempting to restrict them, but Google can do whatever they want with their search engine. If they want to drive traffic away by presenting only selective products, that’s their choice.

    Actually, given the complicated laws and ludicrous fines and lawsuits gun sellers/owners/buyers are constantly harassed with (especially when shipping is involved), I hardly blame them.

  • http://webdesignjustforyou.com Eileen Forte

    I think it’s outrageous. As long as the sale is a legal transaction, why should Google be discriminating against those who like and sell or buy guns? I myself am not a gun person, but I believe in everybody’s right to sell legal products. It appears to be discrimination based on some person at Google’s personal and/or political beliefs (or who knows, it might be a ploy to entice the gun companies to pay them big bucks!?!)

  • http://www.ssrichardmontgomery.com ron

    Google are “shooting themselves in the foot” business wise with this one. Unless all search engines unilaterally agree on what to allow searches for then it will be simple enough to use Bing or another search engine to do the search for guns instead. People that advertise on Google that own gun related businesses will probably no longer do so and lose them even more business. Like the news search and service providers and payment companies should remain neutral or risk losing customers,and rightly so.

  • Freeman Hall

    The merchant: ie Google has every right to decide what products they sell or NOT sell. This does not infringe on the 2nd Amendment and it’s time the gunslingers get a grip on reality. This is not the 1700s or 1800s and this antiquated amendment should be struck down. Maybe when this is done, more parents will see their children reach maturity.

  • http://streemit.net Dan M

    Google is certainly entitled to ban sales of firearms and related items through Google Shopping, just like I’m entitled to boycott Google Shopping because of their stupid-ass policy.

  • Peter Hutchison

    Google own the service and surely can make such rules as they think fit.

    • Joons

      Good grief a post at last that spells it out.
      If the gun lobby want to set up a site to sell guns – go ahead – there actually a few so you’re probably not adding anything to the gun mayhem out there.
      Why beat on Google SHOPPING (most on this board have not figured out this is not Google SEARCH) – you just ran out and tweeted Charlton Heston in his mausoleum for guidance – read the fricking article before running for the flag and the minutemen

  • John

    Google has a right to provide its services and their delivery that it sees fit according to its high ethical and moral standards. People in society can continue to behave and operate according their own conscious. I fully support Googles ethical behavior. Society on this war ridden planet could do with more pro-survival decisions and not more ways to destroy one another. Freedom of speech is in the constitution too – but hate sites, porn sites and other degraded things people do seem to be blocked and we are all very happy they are.

    • http://www.infowars.com Banatu

      Those sites aren’t blocked. You can find an endless amount of porn, hate sites, etc on Google (assuming you don’t have ‘safe search’ type software enabled), but it has to be clearly requesting it. For example, searching for ‘toys’ is not clearly asking for porn and you won’t get porn results on Google. But you can search for ‘sex toys’ and get millions of porn results.

      This isn’t quite censoring, it’s just common decency/courtesy.

      I hardly think guns fall into the same category, but whatever. You can still find gun shops on Google. Personally I’ve never used Google shopping for anything at all and couldn’t care less what they do or don’t list.

    • Mike O’Lary

      “All” please define that. You most certainly are not welcome to include me in that. This planet is so obese with human population now it is killing the planet. Blaming the spoon for being fat is just plain . . inappropriate. That is ~exactly~ what one does when they blame guns for gun deaths. For a fact; there are well over 9 million guns in the US today that killed no one. I have been a gun owner and collector for over 30 years. If guns are killers, every one of mine have been malfunctioning constantly and consistently.

      THINK. Please.

  • Glenn Marriott

    Creating a safer society for corrupt politicians.

    - State manufactured terrorist threats to instil public fear – Done
    - provide “protection” from manufactured threats – Done
    - Inhibit free speech – Done
    - Tap all communications – Done
    - Censorship of the web – Done

    These are but a few of the many liberties and freedoms that have already been removed from the peoples by our new and very dangerous “Privatised Government”.

  • Mike O’Lary

    Google can make whatever rules they want – they are free to do so. Just like I am free to use and recommend other search services to my clients, as I have begun doing.

    I’m finished with Google.

    In fact even my Android phone is going away. VERY soon.

  • http://welchindustries.com Lamar Welch

    2nd Amendment stands, Google Falls!

  • http://www.johnbrassfield.com John Brassfield

    This is silly, what a bunch of bozos. I switching to Yahoo. JB

    • http://www.jandcsales.com Cathy Gilronan

      Yahoo won’t let you advertise or be a part of their market place either
      So what’s the next one?

  • http://www.adwh.com Dawn

    Seriously? Free Market Issue – Private companies have every right to make whatever business policies or rules they like. As an individual, I have every right to stop using their services, if I don’t like those rules and/or policies.

    JMHO
    Dawn

  • http://www.blockercreek.com Darrel Dunson

    Personally, I feel that Google or any other entity has the right to decide what they will or will not allow to be marketed on their site. That being said, were I a manufacturer or broker of items in question, not only would I remove the merchandise I was asked to, I would promptly take all my other business elsewhere as well. As merchants and consumers, we have rights as well. For instance; I hold a concealed firearm permit. Some businesses post signs banning the practice of concealed carry on their premises. I promptly inform the owners that I consider that an infringement upon my rights and the rights of other customers to be protected while on their premises and that I, in protest, will no longer be trading at their business because of their stand on the issue and I encourage all of my associates to do the same. In most cases the businesses have retracted their ban, and most others have gone out of business.

    • Joons

      why do you carry a concealed weapon?
      Are you in fear of your life? Are you being targeted?
      Maybe you’re just objectionable and looking for some justifiable homicide to make your day?
      Are you just a testosterone junkie who likes feeling that cool gun metal on your thigh?
      Bet that’s it?

  • http://www.lakesidepottery.com Morty and Patty

    Thank you Google – you just saved a lot of lives! Arms belong in the ARMy and the arm of the law.

    • http://www.blockercreek.com Darrel Dunson

      The law fills out reports after you become a victim of a crime. Gun toters that walk the streets by your side deter and prevent crime, proven fact. Check the stats. A police report never prevented a crime from being prevented, yet the fear of consequences should the intended victim or the next person over be armed prevents many crimes.

    • Simon

      You are completely brainwashed…Think about this scenario… All guns are illegal as Crack and Heroin are. Yet, Crack and Heroin is, and ALWAYS be around.
      In ‘your dream’ scenario all these guns are illegal, who do you think will have them? Now that you realize that law abiding citizens would be unarmed who do you think will have them and if they have them don’t you think the scenario would go something like this.

      Bad guy #1 says to bad guy #2 “Lets follow that B&^tch in her Benz to her home & invade her when she get there” Bad guy #2 replies,”Yeah it is not like they have any guns like we do. LOL!”
      “I bet she thinks a call to 911 is going stop the 2 minutes it will take to rob them at gunpoint, or even rape the bi)*tch..Yuk Yuk yuk!!!!”

      Or in today’s scenario, Bad guy #1 says “I bet that Bi^*&tch is packing… Just look at her smug A22″ Did you see the NRA sticker? Bad guy #2 replies Yeah, lets go look for an easier target. Bad guy #1 says, “I cannot wait till only bad guys have the guns” Bad guy#2 “I heard that”
      Think about it…..

    • Joons

      Thanks Morty & Patty
      A bit of reason in contrast to the redneck right, 2nd amendment, gun toting, right to kill (Zimmerman and many more) fanatics
      Why is the US so absolutely opposite to the rest of the western world. Why does the US have the gun murder rate it does, why does the US population live with the mayhem on its streets? Why does the US live in fear?
      It’s a gun culture – everyone has guns – so kids playing in Mommy & Daddy’s bedroom open a closet and get to play cowboys and Indians with an S&W 38 – result – dead child.
      Very sad, very dumb

  • http://www.thedigitalcig.com Tim Acevedo

    Not only did they take off fire arms but they also removed my whole line of electronic cigarettes. I don’t think they should be able to do this. I get some items but fire arms and e cigs.

    Google really knows how to upset online businesses. I got a lot of traffic from the shopping feed. For them to be in control of what is allowed to be placed on the feed is not cool.

  • http://www.blockercreek.com Darrel Dunson

    Just read posts, including my own. Appears Google and supporters of their ill thought out policies are clearly in the minority. I predict that when the cash register bell grows quiet that Google will rethink their policy. Statistics show, world wide that the presence of guns in the hands of responsible citizens deter crime and removal of them creates an instant increase in crime.

  • http://cass-hacks.com Craig

    How could Google ensure that a given vendor can legally sell firearms or related products?

    I don’t like their limiting the types of products one can sell via Google Shopping but Google Shopping puts them in a whole different role and responsibility than Product Search did.

    Does E-Bay or Amazon allow firearms to be sold via their sites? Some parts and accessories, yes, complete firearms or dependent parts and ammunition, no.

  • http://www.daltonphoto.com rick

    Moral argument – Google needs to be more tolerant of people who aren’t like them. Who is google to impose their morality on the rest of the world? What gives them the right? On what moral ground do they stand? What is their moral compass, and who says it is the correct one? Aren’t morals relative? Aren’t we told to not impose our morality on others? Is google “God”?

    Business perspective- Google will miss out on a lot of money. I wouldn’t want to own their stock about now. Since the US has twice as many guns as it has citizens… There is clearly a market for this type of personal protection, and people are okay with it. Are they prepared for a boycott? Could this be an opportunity for a rival to gain market share?

    Common sense/Slippery slope – More people are killed by car accidents, motorcycle accidents, drownings in pools than in accidental gun deaths. Is google going to cut off auto, motorcycle and pool companies as well? What is next? Will Google insist motorcycle and bicycle dealers include a helmet with each purchase? Will religion be next? If your religion doesn’t pass the Google sniff test, no more listing?

    • http://www.blockercreek.com Darrel Dunson

      Don’t forget Rick, more people die in bed than in front of a gun. Will beds be next? Who wants their bed outlawed?
      Good post, Rick!

    • Craig Barmore

      Bravo again! Well said… :)

  • Simon

    I immediately removed Google from my home page at start up and look for other search engines instead. Un American Google is not for me

    • Craig Barmore

      YES! Luv it! Me too… :)

  • Jerry

    I have to tell you… I thought twice about signing. Three times even. Why? Because I own a business and Google has already said that they’re going to penalize businesses in their search engine results that don’t sign up for their new shopper program. Do they have that right? Yes they do. Is that a type of extortion? It sure is.

    I’m afraid that be signing your petition I may be jeopardizing my livelihood as my business depends heavily on the Internet search results. If Google decides they don’t like me signing… it could destroy my business.

    • S Young

      What a freakin wuss you are – when they come for you, there won’t be anyone left to stand up for you !!! People like you make me sick ….

    • Joons

      HuH – Huh – Huh – oh again – Huh
      You have options – guess capitalism is dead in your neighborhood – not in mine.
      Why are Americans so in fear?
      I just don’t get it.
      I see a ton of these posts on boards on US sites.

      The US folk used to be out there and now you’e mice.

      Get on your hindlegs!

  • Peter Lusby

    The Constitution For The United States Of America controls ONLY the behavior of the Federal government. There is no “second amendment right” when dealing with any other entity in the world. Google can do as they please, as long as they don’t break any statute that applies to them. And if they choose to exclude a lucrative source of advertizing revenue, who cares? There are plenty of other advertising outlets who will gladly pick up the dollars that Google drops, and nothing will really change for the buyers or sellers of the products that Google bans.

  • http://www.daltonphoto.com rick

    By the way, I support Google’s right to do as they please. I don’t want to purchase a rifle, shotgun, or the like. However, I will use a search engine that doesn’t track my web traffic, and allows me to find a weapon of my choosing, should I decide to purchase one.

    https://www.startpage.com/

  • S Young

    And that, folks, is WHY I don’t use any Google products… Google=Government … Google TELLS you that they are spying on you and collecting your information and emails etc, yet you continue to use them? Are you really that stupid? Apparently so … Good luck with that morons.

    • Craig Barmore

      Ditto on that.. :)

    • Joons

      OMG get the whoo-hoo police here immediately! My tin hat is in place.

      So if you sell product “A” and someone else sells product “B” and your local newspaper that promotes grocery stores does not carry your ads you’re going to have a caniption – get a reality check.
      Free enterprise is the right and ability to sell what you want.
      Google in this case is providing a marketplace for products that they wish to provide a marketplace for.
      Hey I want to sell an A1 Abrams tank and you own a gas station I insist it’s on the forecourt of your gas station – i’ll crush any windshield washer/oil racks in my way.

      Conspiracy theorist at it again??

  • Bill

    I agree with their decision to ban sales of firearms on Google. I am a member of NRA and supporter of the legal use and sale of guns, ammo, etc. But it is not good to have easy access to these via Google. There are plenty of sources of purchasing them personally and not over the internet. Good character and legal users won’t have a problem with this I think, and can keep sales from those who are otherwise motivated. Thanks.

  • Join for Access to Our Exclusive Web Tools
  • Sidebar Top
  • Sidebar Middle
  • Sign Up For The Free Newsletter
  • Sidebar Bottom