Silicon Valley Targets A Gun Manufacturer

Canada: Up to Five Years in Prison For a Social Media Post?
Silicon Valley Targets A Gun Manufacturer

Ohio/Social Media – -( If loyal Ammoland readers want to know why NYSRPA v. Bruen is not going to be a silver bullet to end the battle for our rights, they just need to look at Instagram’s actions towards an Ohio-based firearms manufacturer.

Hi-Point Firearms doesn’t have the name recognition of Springfield Armory, Glock, Colt, or Smith and Wesson. In fact, it is, in some ways, the flip side of SIG-Sauer, Beretta, or Heckler and Koch. It makes affordable semi-automatic carbines and pistols. It follows federal, state, and local laws.

So, when Instagram goes after a post that is five years old, one has to understand that Silicon Valley censorship is taking a worrisome turn. It was always going to be with us, even if we secured victories that prevent gun bans in court. But what can the Supreme Court do about a private company (Meta) telling another private company (Hi-Point) that it’s not welcome on its digital premises?

Barring social media companies becoming a public utility or common carrier like phone companies, there’s not much that can be done. These companies will assert they have the right to boot those who don’t follow their terms of service, and courts are already tossing some of the steps being taken to combat Silicon Valley’s censorship.

Here’s the thing – Second Amendment supporters don’t have to like Hi-Point to recognize the threat posed by Instagram’s actions, just as they don’t have to like the NRA or Wayne LaPierre to recognize the threat posed by the politically-motivated persecution Letitia James is inflicting. They have to be honest with themselves about the situation we face today.

When one looks at the situation in the United States, the threats are no longer solely in the political, legal, and legislative arenas. It’s far more likely these days that a local FFL will face a bank suddenly closing its accounts than it is to face action from the government. The social stigmatization of a Second Amendment supporter – either through boycotts or other adverse action from private actors (employers, etc.) – will do more to chill Second Amendment activism than campaign finance “reform” schemes. The decisions in a corporate suite may do more to infringe our rights than those in a governor’s office.

Second Amendment supporters have a lot of thinking to do. The tensions between personal liberty and the application of a form of non-discrimination law are hard to ignore. The best option could be to send companies a message that there is a lot of popular support for the Second Amendment. That can be done by defeating anti-Second Amendment extremists at all levels of government – federal, state, and local – via the ballot box as soon as possible.

About Harold Hutchison

Writer Harold Hutchison has more than a dozen years of experience covering military affairs, international events, U.S. politics and Second Amendment issues. Harold was consulting senior editor at Soldier of Fortune magazine and is the author of the novel Strike Group Reagan. He has also written for the Daily Caller, National Review, Patriot Post,, and other national websites.Harold Hutchison

Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

You write “what can the Supreme Court do about a private company (Meta) telling another private company (Hi-Point) that it’s not welcome on its digital premises?” They can file federal civil rights lawsuits following the example of private motels and renters denying blacks a right to rent a room based on race. Civil rights isn’t just about race it’s also about violations of your rights. Those gun stores who are gratuitously damaged have standing to go after the banks for their losses.


Yep. Real Rs like DeSantis know the ‘Libertarian’ dogma of letting ‘private’ firms do whatever they want is national suicide.

Is it wrong to prohibit restaurants from serving rat poo & rancid grease? Nope.

Last edited 10 months ago by Russn8r

Fellow gun enthusiasts have a lot of thinking to do, you say? Come on, man! This is time for action. The Left is certainly acting, by attacking our civil rights with every means at their disposal, to cancel, silence, bankrupt, and imprison us, just for exercising our rights.

It is time to act.


What do you suggest?


please stop being a schill for the nra and wayne. they got what they are getting because they couldn’t or wouldn’t do what was right. sadly, they got me for a life membership, which i now regret. the nra isn’t doing anything beneficial for second amendment supporters, they are trying to save their own skin.
leftist gonna do what leftists do, that is attempt to control people in any way shape or form necessary to achieve their goals. social media is just one way. it is our duty to educate people, and that is all we can do


He did no “schilling” in this article.


How did they target Hi Point? What was the 5-yr old tweet? Has Hi Piint been kicked off the site?

It seems that these few companies are like a utility. Their sites are needed by so many and there is no effective alternative.

Hence their legal protection needs to be removed, and a commission, subject to the needs of all groups, included!


the “spcial media” ARE a utility in that they prpvide a means for one person t send “something” (ideas words, thoughts, values) accross their service to another person or group. The media NEVER have any responsibility for the CONTENT of that “something”. The fight is, theyb want to. WHen I type out a letter or an email, and send it via USPS or the email system, no one working on, ownin,g repairing maintain, operating, etc, that system shuold even know what I’m sending, let alone have one whit to say about the content inside that enveloope or email. The problem… Read more »


As in so much else in life – social media companies must be careful what they wish for. They have legal protection for information published in their media – however that protection is contingent upon NOT controlling the content. Any time they block anything, they are risking losing that protection and being sued into oblivion.

They may chose to accept losing the legal protections, but will also clamp down on and censor ALL content on their sites. Anyone else think that would go over well with teenagers who drive much of the business on these ‘services’?


Newflash: New Left Progressives target individual liberty and the means to defend same. Enough said.


If SCOTUS rules that states must honor constitutional carry, states will do so – but simultaneously attach so many restrictions and legal hazards that few will actually be able to carry.

Wouldn’t be surprised if antis are drooling over this ruling. Expand “no-gun” zones and turn violation into a felony. Practically instant expansion of ‘prohibited’ persons population, focused on those support gun rights.


Gun free victim zones are unconstitutional infringements that should be ignored by all. Does the government guarantee they will protect you while you are disarmed by threat of imprisonment? No. Biden should be charged with accessory to murder for every gun free zone shooting, since he pushed the damn bill.


Do you advise civilians to ignore all ‘gun free’ zones? The risk to a civilian’s & his family’s life-liberty-property by Enforcers is far worse than by conventional criminals. Do you tell civilians to carry through metal detectors at a court or airport? Say an armed civilian con carries into one of TEXAS‘s patchwork quilt of ‘gun free’ zones decreed by ‘private’ firms open to the public, some Karen sees it, calls cops.

$100 says Arizona has a massive patchwork quilt of ‘gun free’ zones and AZCDL says gvt has no right to ‘dictate’ to private firms by banning them.

Last edited 10 months ago by Russn8r

The answer to all of this shit is apparent.