Gun control advocates launch campaign to ban gun emoji from iPhones

“An anti-gun organization in New York on Thursday debuted a social media campaign to convince Apple to remove the ideogram depicting a gun from their iPhones,” Chris Eger reports for Guns.com. “New Yorkers Against Gun Violence kicked off their ‘Disarm the iPhone’ drive this week with a website, video and press release targeting the popular mobile devices. The group cautions that the emoji, one of hundreds on the product that come preloaded from the factory, reflects the ready access to guns in the country. ‘We realized that many Americans unknowingly carry a gun with them every day. The one that was given to them without a background check: the gun emoji,’ reads an open letter to Apple CEO Tim Cook.”

“On the site set up for the Disarm the iPhone initiative, NYAGV goes on to repeat the oft-quote statistic that 40 percent of gun sales in America are made without a background check,” Eger reports. “This stale figure often pops up in rhetoric on gun violence in the country and has been widely debunked [as it is ] based on a 1994 telephone survey of 251 people conducted just as implementation of the FBIs NICS system and requirements for background checks for sales through Federal Firearms License holders was coming into effect.”

Read more in the full article here.

MacDailyNews Note: The Unicode Consortium coordinates the development of the Unicode standard which includes Emoji, not Apple.

68 Comments

    1. The upper case letter “L” when turned 90º to the right forms a gun shape. . . let’s campaign with the publishers of the Oxford Dictionary of the English Language to ban the letter “L”. Also, why should we stop there, the lower case letter “t” is, to all appearances, similar to an Arabic scimitar. Oh, my god, it’s a terrorist weapon! Ban that while we are at it. Did they also notice there is a emoji Bomb among the images? How in hell did they miss that????

      1. His point is that criminals and crazy bastards can go into these place and kill indiscriminately because the law abiding people with concealed carry permits are disarmed and can’t fight back. These delusional businesses are making themselves and their customers helpless targets with these policies of no guns allowed.

          1. All true. But its disingenuous to predict that gun-toting domestic terrorists would stop their insanity if more citizens had concealed weapons.

            The average poorly trained citizen has demonstrated poor ability to use computers and cars, let alone carry deadly firepower in their pockets. And if your mom was wandering around with a pistol in her purse, it won’t stop a-holes from using violence, it would make her the first target of the criminals.

            Terrorists and criminals don’t pick soft targets now. Where was Chris Kyle killed? Two shootings in the last few years were on a military base and at a recruitment office. If these guys were victims, what makes anyone think that the streets would be safer in the wild west where dumb kids think they can shoot in the real world like they shoot on their damn video games.

            I do believe people have the right to own firearms, but with that right comes great responsibility that the average public has proven again and again that most can’t handle. That’s why we live in a world where licenses are required to practice medicine, to sell controlled prescriptions, to operate all kinds of machinery, you name it. Credentials and training are what keeps the public from reckless endangerment. Making public gun carrying any easier or loosening training requirements (and psychological testing, i would argue) is just asking to make it easier for the next nut case to start a spree.

            Also, statistics don’t lie. Every law enforcement officer in th world will tell you that vigilantes who think they can take the law into their own hands are just as dangerous to the public as the mob. The mod today uses other methods to maintain their silent power. Guns are last century’s technology and are really ineffective at accomplishing the power grabs that gangs and mobs want. It is so much easier to just buy off congressmen instead.

  1. ROTFL!

    These people do a great job of showing off how dumb they truly are with every campaign.

    The fact this is real just adds to the comedy.

    hahahahaha… this made my weekend, thank you MDN!

  2. ‘We realized that many Americans unknowingly carry a gun with them every day. The one that was given to them without a background check: the gun emoji’
    LMFAO

    Cause them emoji guns kill.
    Wait.. there’s bacon and eggs emoji’s.. cake emoji’s.. hamburgers.. pizza.. fries.. donuts.. candy.. all sorts of junk food.
    More people die due to obesity that firearms.. Need to ban the junk food emoji!
    Wait there are car emoji’s.. deaths in automobiles exceed firearm deaths.. Ban the car emoji!

    These guys are crazy.
    And yes that 40% BS was debunked many many years ago.

    Don’t like the gun emoji? (or any other emoji) don’t use it.. simple.

  3. You can have all of the gun laws you want, but the fact remains: Guns don’t kill people, people kill people. Law-abiding gun owners don’t kill people (except in self-defense), murderers kill people.

    Why are the gun-grabbers hell-bent on keeping a pool of unarmed victims available for the predations of the criminal class?

    1. Tell that to all the people killed by accidental discharges, or killed by lawful people who are mad enough, and/or drink enough to grab that “protection-only” gun and settle an argument once and for all.

      1. I’d tell ’em, but since they’re fscking dead, I doubt they’d hear me, you illogical cretin.

        Once more, why are the gun-grabbers hell-bent on keeping a pool of unarmed victims available for the predations of the criminal class?

        1. Wow, kaplanmike, better hope he’s not somewhere in your neighborhood, with his beloved gun.

          Re
          “You can have all of the gun laws you want, but the fact remains: Guns don’t kill people, people kill people.”

          That only makes sense if you are proposing that the US population is enormously more murderous than any other western nation.

          Just maybe there is a reason why mass killings are weekly news here and are incredibly uncommon, for example, in England, Denmark, Switzerland, Germany, etc. etc. By your reasoning, it should certainly be no more, and should really be a lot less, since huge numbers of people do have guns. I wonder other factor there could be.

            1. I think the point is they occur much more frequently in the U.S. Do you have any statistical evidence showing the prevalence of weaponry has decreased the amount of mass-murders occurring? Certainly, anecdotal evidence shows a correlation between quantity of firearms and mass-shootings.

            2. Yes, they do occur more frequently in the US, as do many other things. Our country and society is different in many tangible ways that extend well beyond the availability of firearms.

              Yes, anecdotal evidence shows a correlation between firearms availability and mass shootings. But, did you realize the frequency of mass shootings have been relatively constant over the last forty years? You wouldn’t know it listening to the media or politicians, but if you look at the FBI statistics, mass shootings have been relatively static through the decades.

              Speaking of correlation, there’s also a correlation between drugs and violent crime, illegal immigration and violent crime, and several other sociodemographic elements, but for some reason nobody wants to talk about those things like they want to talk about incremental infringement on constitutional rights.

            3. Lets be honest. Mass killings get talked about because they’re big news, scary, and completely unpredictable. They are tangible enough of an incident that we feel that it could have been us killed. It’s frightening.

              However, getting down to numbers shows us just how silly it is to legislate and worry about to a normal person in the US. Mind, I’m not saying it isn’t terrible, it is, but there are bigger fish to fry so to speak.

              US People killed in mass killings since 1975: approximately 1000 – Kinda scary
              US People violent gun deaths in 2013: 11,208
              US People killed in automobiles in 2013 (latest numbers I had access to): 32,719 – Wow, 32x in just one year.
              US People killed by guns in 2013 (Any cause): 33,636 – about the same as cars
              US People killed by heart disease in 2013: approximately 610,000

              Compared to the couple dozen that died in 2013 due to mass killings, as a way to die, it isn’t even worth worrying about. You’re more likely to die on your next plane flight. It’s absolutely horrible, but it’s insignificant. One of my best friends son was in the classroom and saw his classmates die at New Town. I live a few miles from there. I know the impact, but legally and statistically it doesn’t deserve a hundredth of the focus that it receives.

              What I find somewhat absurd in the US is the level of legislation put into trying to prevent mass gun killings and not into things like reducing the causes of heart disease.

          1. How about the fact that those other countries have universal health care, including mental health care? How about they lock up their loonies instead of sending them out on the streets with a handful of pills? Every recent mass murderer had serious mental health issues that went untreated because we, as a nation, simply don’t care and would rather blame guns.

      2. People who kill themselves by accidental discharges are idiots. same a people who kill themselves drinking and driving and texting and driving. People who own firearms need to teach their children the safe use of firearms and keep the firearms away from unattended children.

        “Lawful” people don’t kill on a whim or because they’re mad. Killing another person except in self defense is a crime.

        I suppose that if you have a penis you are a potential rapist. Therefore, using your logic, I’ll forego my firearm if you will amputate your penis.

      3. kaplanmike brings up the most common strawman arguments, since reality isn’t nearly as cooperative.

        1. Accidental gun-related deaths have been declining, both in rate (incidents per 100,000 population) and raw number since statistics have been recorded back in the 1930s. Swimming accidents, among other things, are more of an actual risk to the population.

        2. Someone killing because they’re angry, or exhibiting impaired judgement due to drinking are not “lawful people”. In point of fact, people who commit murder tend very much to do so as the end point to a history of increasingly-violent behavior, usually over a period of years.

        Instead of relaxing gun control laws resulting in “the streets running in blood”, the actual result over the past couple of decades has been, at *worst* no change in violent crime rates, and more often reductions in violent crime rates have followed.

        In clear point of fact, every state that has implemented “shall issue” concealed carry laws has found that CCW holders tend to be less likely to do anything that might bring them to the attention of law enforcement that the rest of the state’s *law abiding* population.

        kaplanmike and his pals really need to find something else to keep them up of nights.

  4. Come on everyone. Let’s get behind this, I mean if we can rid ourselves of gun violence just by deleting the gun emoji lets do it.

    So glad there’s such smart people out there to help us through life…😒

  5. “Hey everybody, lets jump on the free publicity ride that is apple. Just mention apple on your stupid declarations or so called news and everyone will check to see what is going on with apple”
    I am terrible sorry for all the victims of guns and other fire weapons, but do you want to ban or control knives? cars? arms? poison? acid? stupid politician sending good people to stupid wars? those are being use to kill people a lot.
    Get a life so called advocates and better start planning on how to CONTROL PEOPLE to not kill other people.

  6. The whole gun control scene is pathetic at best. I work with a guy who is big into this stuff.
    Talk about a holier than thou douche nozzle. This guy takes the cake.

    His standard response with any gun law idea is “If it saves one life its worth it”

    One day he clipped a pillar in the parking garage cause he was texting and apparently parking at the same time. I told him he should call for a ban on cell phones and toss his in the garbage. You know cause if it can save one life.. its worth it.

    Mental Midgets , the whole lot of em’.

  7. You know what? F PC. This has gotten out of hand. First the stupid flag, now guns. If we could just deport every liberal suck ass, that would be a win for the country. And F Apple for bending over backwards and taking it right up the ass once again. Ball less.

  8. I’m a huge proponent of gun regulations — I think guns should be licensed and insured just like automobiles — but even I think this is just silly. Most likely, it’s just designed to generate publicly for that organization.

    1. I don’t know man, from my experiences with the gun control crowd I’m inclined to believe these people are truly this out to lunch. Its serious lol

        1. LOL
          If you blindly follow the left or the right I think you are a grade A Moron. I could care less for party views and make my own decisions on issues themselves.

          The fringe is all the gun control movement has – its what they advertise. Look at the story we are commenting about!?

          1. No, the fringe is the only thing that gets on the national media’s radar. National surveys show MOST people want some reasonable regulations in place. Like it says in the first four words of the 2nd Amendment: “A well-regulated militia…”

            1. A well regulated militia? Really? You’re still trying to use that debunked and discredited argument that even the Supreme Court ruled was invalid? First of all it doesn’t mean what you think it means. “Regulated”, as used here is an archaic form meaning experienced or trained. And the militia constitutionally includes every able bodied citizen. Even so, as Justice Scalia pointed out in a recent decision, the predatory clause in no way modified or limits the main clause of the 2nd Amendment. But thanks for playing.

    2. The most regulations imposed, the easier it is for the government to locate and round ’em all up when they feel the need.

      The reason for the 2nd amendment is to protect against oppressive government. The ability to shoot criminals in the face is just a side benefit.

      The sooner you illogical gun control nuts figure that out, the better.

        1. I have no plans on ever taking up guns against our government. Should be no need.

          I like to keep mine around just in case we have to shoot a couple bankers one day.

        2. That’s what the British thought, too.

          US Armed Forces total: 2.2 million.

          Total who will follow fascist orders to go house to house to disarm citizens in clear violation of the 2nd Amendment: Under 200,000. If it was a Lib like Obama giving the order, with clear disdain for the military and vice versa, under 100,000.

          Total # of armed U.S. citizens is currently roughly 80 million.

          So, yes, we’re very easily and overwhelmingly going to be able to resist if “the government” sends what’s left of their troops – especially with most of them ON OUR SIDE.

          1. How does Obama have a “clear disdain” for the military? Oh yeah, by NOT getting us into a totally unnecessary and preventable war!

            I’m sure that pissed off a lot of arms dealers. Probably made a lot of soldiers very happy, though.

          2. We have direct data to show what America’s firepower can do, thanks to recent offensive wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, etc.

            All the small arms those people had were ineffective at stopping the USA from doing whatever it wanted to do. And the USA was fighting with one hand behind its back. Instead of just letting St. Peter sort out the dead, US forces have painstakingly tried to minimize innocent civilian casualties (not that it was perfect, but pretty impressive when you see the detailed data).

            Don’t get the idea that if you rebelled against the US Government with your guns that you could live another day. A drone would be all over your ass in a matter of hours.

            What if we all rise up together, you say? Well, fine. You estimate a 40:1 ratio of rebellious small arms owners to military personnel. What was the ratio of US military in Iraq? What was the US kill ratio there?

            It will take longer, but domestic terrorists (or self-proclaimed patriotic freedom fighters and patriots) are still dead men. A missile with your name on it is only one button push, my friend. Any gun you own would be no more effective in your defense than a 1776 blackpowder musket, relatively speaking.

        3. You miss the point. The point is that even if the government “won” such a confrontation the fallout and messiness would be intolerable. Think Afghanistan multiplied by 100, with maybe 20M armed insurgents. It would make the civil war look like acSunday picnic. The government can’t afford that kind of mess. So the 2nd Amendment has been working all these years without a shot being fired.

    3. I agree with you.

      We have a lot of serious problems in this county. The gun emoji isn’t one of them.

      If these people have so much energy, they should direct it in manner more likely to produce a positive outcome.

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.