Gun Store Running AR-15 Giveaways on Facebook Sees Page Shut Down ... Facebook Hasn’t ... Why

www.theBlaze.com ^ | Apr. 21, 2013 | Liz Klimas

[Yosemitest]

Gun Store Running AR-15 Giveaways on Facebook Sees Page Shut Down —
And Facebook Hasn’t Contacted Him to Say Why

When TheBlaze first spoke with Erik Lowry, he was running a contest on Facebook to give away an AR-15.
Now, a couple months later, the fan page for Pittsburgh Tactical Firearm, Lowry’s store, has been shut down, along with a secondary page he established to replace it a couple days ago.




“I still don’t know what’s going on,” Lowry told TheBlaze in a phone interview Sunday afternoon.

Lowry said three days ago he awoke to calls and emails from fans asking where his Facebook page had gone.
Lowry used the page to keep Pittsburgh Tactical Firearm’s more than 27,000 followers updated on store and stock information and Second Amendment news.

Without any notice from Facebook, Lowry said his page was shut down.
In the days following, he said he has sent more than 100 messages through appeals still without a response.

The only way Lowry has been able to figure out why his page — and those of other gun stores — might have been shut down a few days ago
is from the report of the media start-up Vocativ, which published a story about firearm giveaways being run by some gun stores on Facebook.
In its article, Vocativ spoke with Facebook, which was unaware of the pages content at first
and said they violated terms, which would result in them being shut down:


When Vocativ contacted Facebook, a company spokesman was unaware that the giveaways existed.
When alerted to the existing posts, he said the pages are considered ads and thereby do violate the social network’s terms.
“Our Ad Guidelines prohibit promotion of the sale of weapons and the Ad Guidelines apply to Pages with commercial content on them,” he said.
“Ads may not promote the sale or use of weapons, ammunition, or explosives.”
He said the company would review the posts.
“Most of these should be removed per our terms,” he added.
(Facebook has both ad guidelines and promotions guidelines.)

As for promotions, like a giveaway, Facebook in its guidelines states these
“must be administered within Apps on Facebook.com, either on a Canvas Page or a Page App.”

Facebook’s ad guidelines state,
“Ads may not promote the sale or use of weapons, ammunition, or explosives.”

But Lowry said no transactions of firearm or ammunition sales were ever conducted through the site.
He would alert fans to when ammunition might be in stock in the store or of other promotions occurring at Pittsburgh Tactical Firearm.
He also noted that the winner of the giveaways, which he were running, were legally vetted as being allowed to own a firearm before the weapon was ever given to them.

“There are no guidelines that says you can’t giveaway guns,” Lowry said.

Here’s a screenshot of one of the giveaways that occurred in February:

He noted their original giveaway was not done through an app and generated “likes,” but said he revised the contest to fit with Facebook’s “promotion” terms later.

As for issuing information on Facebook about firearms and ammunition in his store, Lowry said he didn’t see an issue with it.

Watch Lowry’s interview with the a local news station [1 minute 46 seconds] :



Other, larger firearm manufacturers and stores with Facebook pages remaining active, which according to Lowry shows the “hypocrisy of Facebook.”
Lowry and a few other pages that were shut down after being brought to Facebook’s attention by Vocativ, started secondary pages afterward.
All of them, except Lowry’s, remain active and he’s still not sure why.

Lowry said the page being shut down has resulted in his company losing 40 percent of his business.
He estimated not being able to update fans is resulting in a loss of $500 to $1,000 per day.
He also noted that he had spent about $10,000 in formal advertising through Facebook before.

If Facebook had contacted him and explained how his page was in violation, he said he would have at least had the opportunity to make changes to bring it into compliance.



“I am very adamant about following rules.
I’m not the type of person who will stick it to the man,” Lowry said.
“[It] at least should have been a courtesy for someone to contact us and say ‘this is why we did it.’

“The lack of communication is so, incredibly frustrating.”

Lowry said he will be contacting the NRA Monday for legal council and is considering seeking other legal advise.


“This kind of censorship is unconstitutional,” Lowry said.

For now, Lowry is using another page — Miss Pittsburgh Tactical — as a place to keep followers informed about the original, shutdown page.

TheBlaze has reached out to Facebook for comment and will update this post if and when more information becomes available.

[Yosemitest]

Liberals run amuck!
All liberals need to be lock up in an insane asylum.
They're a "Clear and Present Danger" to the United States of America !

[BCW]

Facebook = socialist network to gather personal information...which is the reason I no longer have one...not that I put personal info on there....it’s a distraction mechanism to funnel the masses to waste time...nothign more...

[PowderMonkey]

Memo to Pittsburgh Tactical: Mr. Zuckerberg is/was always has been a big time contributor to Obama. He ain’t your friend. Never was. Never will be. Don’t put money in his pockets by participating in Facebook. What were you thinking?

[Yosemitest]

Someone needs to give Facebook a “worm” that destroys their network !

[I want the USA back]

But they don’t shut down terrorist death cult sites.

[Bigh4u2]

“This kind of censorship is unconstitutional,” Lowry said.”

Although I sympathize with them, what Facebook is doing by shutting down their page is not ‘unconstitutional’.

If may be an unfair business practice,but Facebook is a privately owned company and has the right to decide who they do or do not want as a ‘customer’.

[wita]

“Facebook = socialist network to gather personal information...which is the reason I no longer have one...not that I put personal info on there....it’s a distraction mechanism to funnel the masses to waste time...nothign more...”

Could and should easily apply to all social media.

Of interest in the same vein, is the cyberbully BEE ESS now in the mainstream that would essentially disappear if kids were able to disengage from this social pox. I consider social media in the same light as the drive through. A disease designed to cut off interpersonal relationships and face to face interaction. Good golly if your first face to face is your first job interview, you are in for a rude awakening.

Of further interest is the attempt by young people to stay three steps ahead of their parents in the texting/sexsting world by continual change in the active media of the moment. IOW facebook out, IM, and others, in.

[Yosemitest]

If this issue was about HOMOSEXUALS instead of GUN RIGHTS, you wouldn't be able to say that?
What's the difference?
Liberals' "cause of the day" is what.
I look forward to watching the backlash against liberals, when we start dropping them like flies !

[Trailerpark Badass]

Facebook is a privately owned company and has the right to decide who they do or do not want as a ‘customer’.

Unless that customer they don't want happens to be a protected minority, like blacks and homos.

See what "rights" Facebook has then.

[Bigh4u2]

But we are talking about a ‘business’.

Not a ‘cause’. and definitely not a presumed ‘Civil Right’, which homosexuality is not. It’s nothing more than a ‘life style’.

And your interjection of Gun Rights makes no sense to the conversation.

Facebook is NOT the government.

There is no Unconstitutional ‘taking’ of rights.

It’s a BUSINESS..

They have the right to decide who they want as customers.

Just like any other business...

[tomkat]

Farcebook is Evil

(read the EULA)

[CTGOPPER]

I have a number of FB pages and groups. Facebook has pretty clear guidelines when it comes to promotions. “Promotions on Facebook must be administered within Apps on Facebook.com” It doesn’t appear they followed the rules.

[Yosemitest]

"... a privately owned company ... has the right to decide who they do or do not want as a ‘customer’."

You know, on second thought, that a great though.
Let's all decide that we don't want HOMOSEXUALS as customers, and shut their pages down!
Let's refuse them entry into our businesses, and deny them into our rental establishments!
After all, "... a privately owned company ... has the right to decide who they do or do not want as a ‘customer’."

[Bigh4u2]

Maybe so, but you are making a rather useless point.

Your example would apply to any business whom the left or so called ‘underprivileged’ class would want to sue.

It’s still a private business and by definition it would not be unconstitutional for them to terminate any account.

[Resolute Conservative]

While I despise FB and everything about it, it is their right to control what and who posts. All I can saw is I don’t have one and never have and never will so all attempts to market to me are a loss.

If conservatives don’t like it, then some conservative needs to go into direct competition with them. The problem is I hear conservatives whine and moan about FB but continue posting on it and whatever else one does on it. “It is the way I keep in touch with my family, kids etc..” is always the rationale. Geez, what did we do before FB and computers? My tolerance level for this instant need for gratification and notification was reached several years ago.

[Bigh4u2]

“Let’s all decide that we don’t want HOMOSEXUALS as customers, and shut their pages down!”

And, if you owned Facebook, you would have the right to do exactly that.

Of course, you’d probably wind up in court in endless litigation and be forced out of business.

But at least you would have stood up for your PRINCIPALS!

[Yosemitest]

"But we are talking about a ‘business’.

Not a ‘cause’. and definitely not a presumed ‘Civil Right’, which homosexuality is not. It’s nothing more than a ‘life style’.

You know, with that statement, I agree.
Let's deny LIBERALS into our business establishments, and on our web sites.
Let's deny Democrats and other evil people such as Muslims into our bnusiness establishments and on our web sites.
After all,

"There is no Unconstitutional ‘taking’ of rights.

It’s a BUSINESS..

They have the right to decide who they want as customers.

Just like any other business..."

Yes, I agree that "... a privately owned company ... has the right to decide who they do or do not want as a ‘customer’."

[bolobaby]

“...,but Facebook is a privately owned company and has the right to decide who they do or do not want as a ‘customer’.”

Unless you are a baker, photographer, wedding planner, et al and don’t want to do gay weddings. Then you have NO RIGHT to decide who you want as a customer.

[Yosemitest]

"(read the EULA)"

Okay, I just drew a mental blank.
Can you explain or do you have a link?

[Bigh4u2]

Not true.

They can decide who they want as customers, and often do.

The problem is the litigation that follows the denials.

They do have the ‘right’, but may not have the ‘funds’ to defend that right.