ArtsAutosBooksBusinessEducationEntertainmentFamilyFashionFoodGamesGenderHealthHolidaysHomeHubPagesPersonal FinancePetsPoliticsReligionSportsTechnologyTravel

The TRUTH About Guns

Updated on January 1, 2013

What is a gun? Is it evil? Why are they so controversial? As a veteran of the US Military, I've had to train with them, but even before I joined I owned guns. Yes plural. My first gun was a .22LR rifle, the classic Ruger 10/22. The second a .44 magnum Winchester lever action 'cowboy reminiscent' hunting rifle. I've since acquired 4 more guns of a wide variety, and you might ask why, and I would respond why not? I purchased these for sporting purposes, mainly target shooting as I don't like to deal with the messy cleanup of hunting and have a greater respect for life than to shoot it for sport, but the underlying purpose of owning any gun is personal protection; protection from others, from dangerous animals, and protection from a government unwilling to protect my freedom and liberty. I joined the military to fight for my freedom and liberty, and sacrificed many of my own freedom's in that process, but one that I strongly believe should never be suppressed or unreasonably restricted is the 2nd amendment.

How many kids were afraid of the dark, the boogie man, or that monster in their closet when they were growing up? How many people have never been afraid of anything in their entire life? I don't think there are many, but I do know that those fears stem from one thing... a fear of the unknown; unknown possibilities, potentials, what if's... a fear of their nightmares becoming reality. This is what guns are becoming to Americans.

People hear about them (guns) being the source of violence on the news, but in reality the source isn't the gun. The source is the person. Terrible things happen to good people, and good things happen to bad people, and they happen every day. The solution to gun violence is not more restrictions on guns. It's our SECOND AMENDMENT RIGHT! We're FIRST free to speak how we want provided it doesn't provoke violence or riots, and we're SECONDLY free to bear arms (i.e. weapons) in protection of ourselves, our homes, and our loved ones. Gun owners/operators are who helped fight for our emancipation, for our independence, and it's guns that keep protecting those rights we fought for. Why are so many Americans afraid of the thing that gave us our rights, freedoms, and liberties? Why are so many Americans afraid of their duty to protect and defend their country with their lives? Owning a gun is a choice, but knowing how to use one is at the very heart of American duty, loyalty, and patriotism.

So, what is a gun? It's a piece of a metal forged, crafted, and shaped into mechanical working pieces capable of containing an explosion without harming its user. The explosion that takes place inside the gun propels a separate piece of metal through a barrel and into open air with the help of physics and user operation of the guns mechanical parts. The effectiveness of a gun, however, is only as good as the operator, but in a crowd of targets the likelihood of an unskilled operator utilizing a gun's effectiveness becomes statistically significant (in layman terms - like shooting fish in a barrel).

So are guns evil? If you think they are, then I'm afraid you're holding onto some misguided virtues/values. Guns are not evil. Guns are the tools that some evil people use. Is money evil? No. The love of money is evil. Greed is the root of all evil, for with greed there is jealousy, covetous behaviors, spite, anger, revenge... the list goes on. Guns are tools, just like money is a tool, but like all tools they can be used for evil purposes. Should we not further restrict the public's access to money because it can be used for evil purposes? No, because it can and is used for good purposes more so than it is evil. Are rocks evil because they were the first tool used to commit murder in the story of Cain and Abel? No, but Cain had evil in his heart when he used that tool to commit murder. Evil will continue to thrive in America as long as politicians continue to 'fix' the gun problem with more gun restrictions. The problem isn't guns; it's the people.

Why are guns so controversial? In my opinion it's because our society has become so enamored with rights, and the diversity of beliefs have become so wide, that tools that can be used for destructive purposes have become a topic of controversy. What place do they have in a peaceful society? My response is how can you call our society peaceful? Aside from guns and drugs in the general public, what about all the domestic violence, assaults, sexual assaults, and robberies that take place all around our country, and some not with guns but with knives or other tools that can be used destructively?

How do you combat fears of the unknown? You confront them (fears) with education and training.

The NRA recently called for an armed police officer in every school, and I completely agree, but I would also suggest something else: arm and educate every citizen, and legalize unloaded open carry of firearms in all places except for schools, banks, hospitals, and places of religious practice nationwide. These places should be weapon free zones, but not because guns/weapons are dangerous, but because guns/weapons have no place there unless they are being carried by law officers for the specific purpose of escorting or protecting the inhabitants of those facilities.

The TRUTH about guns is that there are more evil people willing to wield them to commit crimes, than there are every day citizens willing to carry them to deter crime from happening. How many people would think twice about committing a crime if they knew every able body (and mind) in America were carrying a gun and knew how to use them? Just something to think about. For those of you that are terrified of another mindless public massacre happening: Pursue your rights, and arm up! Apply for a concealed carry weapons permit, and know how to use it!

The government was created to serve its people, not so the government can rule us and tell us how to live our lives. Its time to get back to the mindset of our founding fathers and EMPOWER THE PEOPLE!

As a side note: Why are politicians so bent on restricting guns? Because how can the people stop them if the people are so heavily outgunned by the government? Is the 99% of the population really willing to confide in the 1% of government workers (being bossed around by politicians) to stand up for their rights, or would they rather be able to defend themselves from a corrupt government? I'd rather defend myself than be enslaved by a book burning government like the one in Ray Bradbury's Fahrenheit 451, because in the end what does freedom matter if you can't use it? If you want to topple a nation, start by taking guns from the people. The Weimar Republic did it to deter Communism and the Nazi's from gaining power in Germany, but in the end those gun restrictions helped the Nazi's maintain their power when they took over. The Nazi's used their weapons for evil purposes. Let's make sure Americans use them for good. Learn about guns, own a gun, train with a gun to proficiency. Protect yourselves, protect your loved ones, and help protect your country. Tell congress you want open-carry laws nationwide, and tell them how pissed you are at them for trying to take away our constitutional rights!

Written by Pageantgirl31413's husband


    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    • DIYmommy profile image


      5 years ago

      As a U.S. military veteran, as well, my husband's 13+ years of service has greeted him with 2 combat tours in which he'd likely not still be here had it not been for his 'gun'. We are big fans of the second amendment, and, recently, we have really been contemplating purchasing a gun. Call it justified paranoid or whatever you like, my husband--and, I'm starting to feel the same--that our government is beginning to leverage EVENTS as political fodder to systematically take away our guns, and subsequently, our rights. Whenever he returns from his training, my husband tells me that the big talk is about purchasing a gun before it's too late. I think our society consistently wants to continually place blame on something. Instead of calling it what it is, and addressing the underlying problem (people, morals, character, etc), it's just oh so much easier to blame the gun. Thanks for the great hub!

    • AlexDrinkH2O profile image


      5 years ago from Southern New England, USA

      Good hub - voted up and shared. I've also written on the use of firearms -

    • pageantgirl31413 profile imageAUTHOR

      Heather Nickless 

      5 years ago from England

      I think even with a limited number of rifles and ammunition a judicious person could hold their own in such a situation. A good plan, a broad knowledge of survival techniques, and training with a variety of self defense measures can do wonders even in the worst situation. There's always hope. Sometimes you just have to look for it.

    • pageantgirl31413 profile imageAUTHOR

      Heather Nickless 

      5 years ago from England

      I have to agree with you that fully automatic machine guns have no purpose for anything other than war or violence, which is why I advocate semi-automatic assault rifles. I believe knowledge of and attained proficiency with such a tool is an important aspect of gun education, and that people should know how to use them and the consequences of using them inappropriately. The AR-15 assault rifle has a perfectly legitimate platform for use in hunting, and if you consider the interchangeability of upper receivers with them, then you would understand why it's the perfect hunting rifle; because you may go hunting for deer or rabbits, but come across a bear or moose for which you have tags for, be able to quickly convert your rifle to caliber capable of humanely taking down the animal, and still be able to convert back to continue your hunt for the intended game (though you could arguably be in the opposite situation, and decide to stop hunting large game in favor of smaller game). Are assault rifles scary in the hands of the 'wrong' people? Yes, but if everyone were allowed to conceal carry a pistol, then the opportunity for a rifle to gain the advantage is only significant in distance shooting. Anything close range and the pistol has the faster target acquisition, mobility, and capability to remove the threat. Let people keep their choices of what guns to buy, but let everyone enjoy the right to bear arms to protect themselves for unlawful aggressors.

      -Author of The TRUTH About Guns and husband to pageantgirl31413 aka quickshot.

    • pageantgirl31413 profile imageAUTHOR

      Heather Nickless 

      5 years ago from England

      The target practice is both for the fun of the sport, to improve personal skill and ability, and to know that IF I needed to make a tough shot that would save the life of someone I care about, then yes I could make it. The drive for improving self defense falls under Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs. One of those needs is to feel secure. We all have that need, and not everyone shares the same way of fulfilling that need. I have many ways of fulfilling that need, and a wide variety of weapons training is one of them. Not just because of the eventuality of having to take out a bad guy, but because preparation and training helps prevent helplessness, hesitation, and indecisiveness.

      Also, terrorists DO use firearms. Have you not heard of the most recent "Insider Attacks?" Our own troops and coalition forces are being gunned down by local national military service members of the host nation by firearms. Terrorists can and will use whatever tool they deem necessary to further their cause in ways that they see fit. They can be unpredictable, and sometimes are very unexpected. The collective sacrifices we make as a people to ensure the safety of one another are necessary at airports, or would you rather have to explain to the victims of the next skyscraper terrorist attack that it all could've been prevented if we'd stuck with our preventive measures? I don't.

      At the same time, do you really want to disarm the American people and open up the civilian population to potential abuse in the event America was ever invaded? I don't know if you've noticed, but Americans aren't all that popular in other parts of the world. Guns aren't just to protect us from the government, or bad guys, but from foreign invaders, dangerous animals, and dangerous felons walking the public streets. The right to bear arms is there so we may protect and defend our lives. What purpose is there in restricting that right if it's not to disarm the people and make them less of a threat? The government will never wage war on its people World War II style, because the government knows they have to be much subtler than that if they want to keep getting paid by the people. What the government fears is a battle on the home front that may come from any direction, not just from terrorists or foreign invaders, but from its own people that are tired of being trampled on and abused by a broken system.

      The justice system has been a farce since at least the 90's when they failed to convict a now self-admitted murderer of the crimes he committed (OJ Simpson killed his wife, and got away with it). Now the media makes a public mockery of trials involving mothers that killed their children, and somehow these people are getting away, literally, with murder in a country that's supposed to stand for Truth, Justice, and the American Way. The 2nd Amendment wasn't just written at a time when infantry and muskets settled wars, it was written as a fundamental right that would be necessary at any point of time, and was not exclusive to guns. The right to bear arms means the right to bear weapons. To be at arms does not mean to be toting a gun. The Profession of Arms refers to weapons in general, but is commonly mistaken for modern military weapons in general. What accouterment do you see the marines commonly wear with their service dress uniform? A sword! Before guns were the tool of choice it was the sword, and the sword was used both artistically and strategically. The same can be said of guns, though the art form is dramatically different and not nearly as eloquent. Again, I must ask that you open your mind to the possibility that educating people on a dangerous subject is better than 'trying' to remove the threat of danger in a world where it's nearly impossible to remove that danger.

      -Author of The TRUTH About Guns and husband to pageantgirl31413 aka quickshot.

    • pageantgirl31413 profile imageAUTHOR

      Heather Nickless 

      5 years ago from England

      Naivety in its purest form. I agree with your message, or rather the intent of your message, but it is, statistically, very unlikely for those beliefs to become a reality unless the prophet M or Jesus (which could arguably be the same person in a variety of contexts) descend upon us and begin their 1000 year rule of the 'golden age.' Cultural differences and differences in beliefs are too diverse, and often come into too much conflict (even within their own belief system(s)) for this peace to become reality. Our leaders are too weak and cynical and/or power hungry to let this happen. In reality we are all slaves to the economic political power system in some way or another, which is why it's important to speak up and get politically active so that the voice of peace may be heard.

    • pageantgirl31413 profile imageAUTHOR

      Heather Nickless 

      5 years ago from England

      I hear and understand your points, and why you think them, but I have to disagree. The theater shooting in Colorado had over 30 injured and/or fatally wounded. In a more recent theater shooting an off-duty cop stopped a shooter with her concealed pistol, and the there were only 3 people injured (no deaths). It only takes ONE sane person trained to use a gun to stop one crazy person using a gun for their own selfish purposes. Also, my point in writing this is not to say that guns should be restricted from criminals or restricted in any manner from the honest citizen, because in the end if a lawless member of society chooses to get a gun they will find one.

      We live in a society filled with well-wishers, do-gooders, and peace-be-with-you proselytizers, but they are the same people preaching open-mindedness that fail to keep their own minds open to the possibility that peace CANNOT exist without violence. It becomes a philosophical argument of which came first: good or evil, the chicken or the egg, if God exists then why does he allow evil things to happen to good people? Philosophically and logically you can argue these questions until the end of time without ever producing an answer that addresses the simplicity of the issue or defines why or which. Peace is the answer. But if Gandhi were in that Colorado theater protesting the shooter's actions, would the shooter have spared him or even recognized him for who he was? I don't think so. The fact of the matter is there will always be a situation where insanity and violence escapes the constraints the 'system' tries to put on them, and unarmed innocents will always be the ones that pay the price. The fact of the matter is that lethal force is the LAST option for honest citizens with able minds, and is only used to stop situations where unnecessary loss of life becomes a real possibility (please don't nit-pick my choice of words in unnecessary loss of life, as there is no necessary loss of life when God isn't the one taking it).

      Let's just both be honest with each other and admit that the Civil War was not won with words, as that statement is an utter farce, and acknowledge the lives that were lost on both sides of that battle. I'd also like to point out that I never once mentioned anything about going after the government with an AR-15 (that's just the picture at the top of the article), and seeing how I'm well-versed in the Airman's Creed, I'd appreciate it if you tried to refrain from using the organization that employs me as an arguing point. You don't even know what the US Air Force is truly capable of until you've worked for them and been part of the team. My argument asked citizens to pursue knowledge of guns, become familiar with them, and obtain CCW permits to protect themselves and their loved ones from the insane and sometimes criminal minds that run lawlessly through our society.

      I'm not saying that if guns didn't exist the world wouldn't be a better place, but the fact is that you don't know how lucky you are to be an American or a citizen of a wealthy country until you've been to and seen the poverty and corruption of places like Afghanistan. The world is far from perfect, and violence is never the answer to disputes, but it sometimes must be the solution to dangerous situations in which you are the victim. One of the reasons the Nazi's came to power was because of a fearful government that placed weapon restrictions on its people.

      If what you truly want is a "society where the notion of lethal force to get what you want is no longer moral," then you should reexamine your argument and consider how much people would reconsider using lethal force if they were properly educated in its use. People fear lethal force, and that fear becomes an answer and calling for the insecure and fragile of mind in some situations. Guns are not a solution to violence, but they are a means to protect yourself from being a victim of violence.

      Where there is good you will also find evil biding its time in good's shadow, waiting for the perfect moment to strike at the heart of good and allow evil to grow and gain strength. The Assault Weapons Ban first was instituted around the same time as the Columbine shooting, and now with another school shooting comes the call to reinstate it. For what purpose might I ask? There were still school shootings and gun violence during the time of the Ban's implementation. It didn't work. The answer is not take something away. The answer is give something back that can't be taken away: education. Educate the people and treat the illness not the symptoms. The Assault Weapons Ban is what you should be comparing chemotherapy to, because they're not really treating the illness they're killing the people too. (I've had multiple family members undergo chemo, so please don't think i'm being insensitive to victims and survivors of cancer; I personally think it's an awful thing to put both the person and their family through, even if it does extend their life for a short time).

      Thank you for the response, but I'd appreciate it if you open your mind to more options than one.

      -Author of "The TRUTH About Guns" and husband to pageantgirl31413 aka quickshot.

    • POWERS1205 profile image


      5 years ago

      I do agree that I have no use for assault weapons. I think if there were a collapse in society that would require me to protect my family, I don't think I could stockpile enough anyway.

    • Bumpsysmum profile image


      5 years ago from Cambridgeshire

      I don't believe that it's necessary for the man in the street to be able to acquire weapons such as machine guns. Owning a shotgun or similar for hunting etc. is fine if it's used correctly, under license and kept locked away when not in use. I don't think there are enough checks done on who owns weapons and why. We are heading that way in UK, the gun culture is rising and is, quite frankly, terrifying.

      I don't know where it will end but I hopefully legislation will stop it before it gets out of hand.

      Just my view you understand?

      Interesting piece.

    • POWERS1205 profile image


      5 years ago

      Sad truth is that sick people find a way to kill regardless of the laws. I think the closest truth anyone has gotten to is trying to treat the mental illness before it becomes a problem. I have seen first hand how the mental health system fails. My father was schizophrenic. He was heavily medicated most of the time and he found it hard to function. He finally hung himself as a solution. If rope had been illegal, perhaps he would be alive today.

      Think of all the ways sick people have killed. Bathtubs, knives, chemicals, cars, fertilizer, the list goes on. The concept that it's easy to kill with a gun is ridiculous to the sane mind. I've hunted and killed to supplement meat in my freezer for the winter to save money on food to pay for the high cost of utilities. But I don't like killing. It's a conscious choice that knows full well what comes of it. Ask a soldier.

    • peoplepower73 profile image

      Mike Russo 

      5 years ago from Placentia California

      AntonOfTheNorth: Bravo, bravo, bravo! You have stated it eloquently. These are many of the thoughts I have, but you articulated what I have been trying to say.

      pageantgirl31413: Why do you target practice? I think it's for the eventuality of having to take out the bad guys. It's not for the sport. Their is a culture about not trusting our government and law enforcement to protect us and it has become a mania about our government turning against us. If they wanted to take us out, do you think they would do it World War II style where you would have a chance to fight back? Terrorists don't use firearms, they use force multipliers with bombs. Where one person can take away people's freedoms by having a shoe bomb, a crotch bomb. It doesn't even have to work. Just go through a line in the airport and see how many of your freedoms have already been taken away.

    • Jack Burton profile image

      Jack Burton 

      5 years ago from The Midwest

      Yogi just believes in letting other people do violence for him. That's why he calls the police, with their firearms, when he hears his bedroom window glass shatter at 3 in the morning.

      And as a 26 year military vet I can assure you that what anton is posting about not being able to stand up to the military is pure unadulterated amateur nonsense. He's read it from other people and therefore it's the truth to him. But he is just repeating the same fundamental mistake the other folk are making.

    • MG Singh profile image

      MG Singh 

      5 years ago from Singapore

      Guns are wonderful, I own 3 myself. Its the evil in man that comes out and the gun has nothing to do with it

    • yoginijoy profile image


      5 years ago from Mid-Atlantic, USA

      I do not believe in any form of violence. We are all one. When we hurt another, we are hurting ourselves. Violence is not who we are. We are peace, love and joy in human form. We are here on the planet to remember this. Seize every moment and celebrate each one of us.

      May you be free from suffering and the causes of suffering. Peace.

    • profile image


      5 years ago


      First thanks for writing. The discussion has to survive the media window longer than the standard couple of weeks and everyone's opinion should be heard in a democratic society.

      Second, I don't agree with your position. Here's why:

      "People hear about them (guns) being the source of violence on the news, but in reality the source isn't the gun. The source is the person."

      I don't refute that it is the person doing the damage. But I must ask: Which is easier?

      A tool that requires me to walk up to my intended victim, catch them if they are running, out muscle them and forcefully shove something hard/sharp into them, have them bleed and plead and otherwise messely die in my hands?

      Or something which I just point and press a trigger and have a reasonable chance of being lethal, without having to contend with lack of physical strength, or lack of anatomical knowledge? (or even any significant laundry?)

      With just a little training AND a gun I can do it again, and again with a reasonable chance that my victims won't even know who is attacking them or what to do to defend it. Someone willing to harm me is so much more likely to succeed with a gun. That is a real consideration in this issue. If the boy had gone into the school with a knife, or a sword or even a cross bow, the outcome would have been a great deal different.

      Also, one can't have it both ways. One cannot argue that the gun isn't the problem in the criminals hands, but insist that it is the only solution in the law-abiding citizen's hands. If the criminals didn't have guns, you would still want one in case they had a knife, or were just stronger or faster than you. You want a gun for the same reason a criminal does: To give you a tactical advantage in a situation.

      More guns plus less control does not equal more peace. I'm sorry but it doesn't. This society doesn't have guns because a bunch of criminals wanted them. It has them because of the 2nd Amendment.

      Because this culture believes that there are circumstances where lethal force is the moral choice. So much so that being armed appears in the constitution BEFORE women's right to vote and the abolishment of slavery.

      Because this culture wants to be able to defend against its government in case it turns on them and it wants that MORE than it wants safety in its schools for its children.

      "Is money evil? No. The love of money is evil. "

      Are guns evil? No, the love of guns is evil.

      By standing on the 2nd amendment, we have prized a right to gun ownership above many other more valuable rights. That IS a reflection of the culture.

      Incidently, none of the weapons you own will stand up to the current American Military. If you gathered every Law abiding citizen with all the guns and ammo they could legally muster and put them against what the American military could unleash against you in a heartbeat, all that would happen after the smoke cleared is there would be fewer armed citizens for this hypothetical corrupt government to shoot at.

      The guns you can legally acquire aren't protecting you from that at all.

      2nd amendment was written at a time when wars were decided principally by infantry with rifled muskets or less than mobile artillery. An armed, well regulated militia was therefore a creditable deterent for an oppressive government.

      Now, the guns that can be acquired by a law abiding civilian endanger governments not at all. Even in cases where the American government subjected its population to weapons, it wasn't armed revolt that made for change (the South Lost) it was dialogue (cf Civil Rights Movement). The notion that the way to keep a government from oppressing you is to go after a modern air force with an AR-15 is misguided at best.

      I'm not advocating for a removal of guns. I don't think that bell can be unrung. (though I believe the number of gun related deaths would have to be zero if there were no guns. . .)

      What I am after is a change to society where the notion of lethal force to get what you want is no longer moral and right and good,(whether or not WHAT you want is moral or legal is almost a secondary concern.)

      The ability or neccesity of an average citizen to wield lethal force is at best a situation that we do whatever is in our power to avoid.

      Guns are at best the same solution to violence as chemotherapy is to curing cancer. Yes it might make it more possible for an indiviual to survive an altercation, but the cancer may still kill you eventually.

      And the chemo will rip you to shreads in the process.

      I appreciate your tolerance.



    This website uses cookies

    As a user in the EEA, your approval is needed on a few things. To provide a better website experience, uses cookies (and other similar technologies) and may collect, process, and share personal data. Please choose which areas of our service you consent to our doing so.

    For more information on managing or withdrawing consents and how we handle data, visit our Privacy Policy at:

    Show Details
    HubPages Device IDThis is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
    LoginThis is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
    Google RecaptchaThis is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
    AkismetThis is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
    HubPages Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
    HubPages Traffic PixelThis is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
    Amazon Web ServicesThis is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
    CloudflareThis is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
    Google Hosted LibrariesJavascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the or domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)
    Google Custom SearchThis is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
    Google MapsSome articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
    Google ChartsThis is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
    Google AdSense Host APIThis service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
    Google YouTubeSome articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
    VimeoSome articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
    PaypalThis is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
    Facebook LoginYou can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
    MavenThis supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)
    Google AdSenseThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Google DoubleClickGoogle provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Index ExchangeThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    SovrnThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Facebook AdsThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Amazon Unified Ad MarketplaceThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    AppNexusThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    OpenxThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Rubicon ProjectThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    TripleLiftThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Say MediaWe partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
    Remarketing PixelsWe may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
    Conversion Tracking PixelsWe may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.
    Author Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
    ComscoreComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
    Amazon Tracking PixelSome articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)