Both of of my professions revolve around life in the digital world – a place we can communicate, transact, and express ourselves at face-melting speeds. And just like the real world, our virtual lives are both blessed or cursed depending on the prevailing winds. When it comes to firearms, gun owners have pulled together using social media while simultaneously being ostracized by social media companies for representing one side of a polarizing social/political debate. One of the most satisfying aspects of TFB is being able to rise above unproductive partisan discourse in favor of fact-based news, editorials, and reviews that don’t rely on emotional triggers for gaining readers and viewers. However, we are unable to avoid social media altogether because, obviously, we are social media.

Lex Fridman, the host of one of my favorite podcasts, recently featured Harvey Silverglate, an Ivy League educated defense attorney and co-founder of the Foundation for Individual Rights in Expression (FIRE). Silverglate is a free speech maximalist and is against the cancel culture that is proliferating through modern society, It was a refreshing conversation that gave me hope that individual liberties in the United States are still important. It was also a reminder that gun owners and gun companies are often victims of cancel culture and regularly have their freedom of speech repressed.

Cancel culture in the gun world is particularly frustrating because the overwhelming majority of us just want to be free to enjoy the shooting sports and have the ability to defend ourselves from evil with the best tools available. We are often cancelled using skewed statistics, stereotypes, and the criminal actions of people who do not represent the vast majority of our community. We are victims of an involuntary political war and are punished with unfair laws and regulations. And when that doesn’t work, we are punished with cancel culture tactics enforced by billion dollar social media companies that can ostracize us from our digital lives.

Credit: H&K (Twitter)

All of this is made even more painful by the fact that gun owners, and gun companies, have a tendency to eat their own when times get tough. Most recently, a non-employee marketer handling the Heckler & Koch social media accounts took it upon herself to tweet her personal views about a recent Miller Lite advertising campaign. The conversation was not authorized by H&K and should not have taken place on the H&K twitter account, and this person’s relationship with H&K was swiftly terminated as a result.

Even so, the response from consumers was outrage, sparking heated debates on Twitter, and was picked up by mainstream media outlets. In my opinion, this is a heathy response to a company’s mistake – voice your opinion and ask for change.

Unfortunately, part of the gun community has crossed line by targeting someone who they think is the H&K employee responsible for the post, simply because she is a woman who was identifiable on the internet as working for H&K marketing. She has been personally insulted, attacked, and threatened. But, this employee had nothing whatsoever to do with the tweets in question or the social media content for H&K.

I am sure I will be accused of simping or shilling, (or both) for H&K. Which is fine. Just know that I would feel the same way no matter which company or company employee was under fire for the same statements. Yes, even Hi-Point and KelTec. We should be able to voice our displeasure as much as we want, just leave out the personal attacks.

We all have our lines in the sand. It’s up to us to decide whether the recent H&K tweet is enough to write off an entire company. But consider this, if a civilian model of the MP7 dropped on Monday, how quickly would the outrage fade into the sunset? My guess is about 4.6 seconds.

All joking aside, maybe this one Twitter mistake didn’t deserve all the attention it deserved? I know the H&K employee certainly didn’t deserve it.

Thanks for reading TFB.