Case Study (Weapon Advertising Ban)
America happens to be one of the few countries where citizens have rights to own weapons like guns. However, there is intense debate on whether advertising of these weapons should be stopped. I think advertising should be stopped because adverts create the wrong impression that the weapons are not harmful. In the recent past, several incidences involving gun use have led to deaths.
The second amendment gives provides legal precedence for Americans to bear and own arms. Google does not prohibit the rights of citizens to own guns. Google is entirely within its rights to choose what can be advertised in its search engine or what cannot appear on its engines based on its values. This decision can only be contested in court but in so far as Google terms and conditions apply, this is the case.
There is a valid argument behind the decision by the federal trade commission to ban gun advertising than claims that guns offer defensive protection. This is misleading because it does not make a home safe but more dangerous. In 2012, for example, there were 1.2 million cases of crimes involving the use of firearms alone for self defense. These statistics have played a critical role in the decision by the FTC to ban the advertising of guns as defensive weapons (Webster and Vernick 2013).
Guns advertisements should carry warning labels because of the dangers associated with the guns. In as much as guns are used for several purposes like sports and self-defense, they are most likely misused than not.
Google is a dominant search engine and most people use Google. However, the impact of on gun advertising by Google is likely to make people use different search engines.
Webster, D. W., & Vernick, J. S. (2013). Reducing gun violence in America: Informing policy with evidence and analysis. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.