YouTube began starving many gun-related publishers this summer. All gun-related content was initially restricted, requiring each publisher to request a review of each video after seven days. Following the resultant hue and cry, some of the more prominent content creators were excluded from the new censorship regimen.
But YouTube’s community censorship guidelines are as clear as tar. Publishers who run afoul of them, are given “strikes” which supposedly expire after three months. The problem: YouTube’s censors can’t or won’t reveal what it is about an individual video that earned the publisher the black mark. Which makes it hard to avoid running afoul of the alleged standards again.
If you manage to accumulate three strikes within a three-month period, you’re done. Banned. Permanently exiled. As James Yeager found out earlier this month.
A couple of YouTube’s most popular gun content creators — the Military Arms Channel and Sootch00 — have recently been issued strikes by YouTube’s star chamber of community standards umpires. We emailed MAC’s Tim Harmsen for more information and he sent the following:
Yes, both myself and Sootch00 have been hit again. I’ve attached a screen shot of the warning we receive when we log into our accounts after a strike has been given. We must “acknowledge” the strike before we can use the site. I assume that means we’re admit wrongdoing in order to regain access to our channel. Crafty!
The video that was targeted this time was about a police trade-in Yugo SKS I bought on the surplus market. This video is no different in content than any of the other 714 videos I currently host on YouTube. If this innocuous video is in violation of their community guidelines, then all of my videos are. So it’s only a matter of time before they kick me completely off the site like they recently did with James Yeager.
Yeager’s offense? He posted a podcast of himself chatting with Ben Mookie. Yeah, pretty objectionable stuff right there.
Here’s the video I received a strike for, but this one is hosted on Vimeo who doesn’t seem to care what you upload.
Brand New SKS Rifle from Tim Harmsen on Vimeo.
Let me know what you think. Is that “objectionable”? Did I do or say something offensive? Did I break any laws? Did I cuss? Did I suggest people do something illegal with the rifle? Or was this an educational video about a classic military rifle?
Now, watch this next video on YouTube for a comparison. Ironically, this video, and countless others like it, aren’t considered “questionable” and YouTube claims it’s protected speech. Huh. Penises and condoms = freedom of expression and is creative expression. They even call it “educational”. I call it porn.
Click image above to view video. Warning: NSFW
If I post a video about a historic military rifle being discussed in detail and fired, it isn’t “educational” to the YouTube censors. It’s somehow “objectionable” and potentially dangerous content. No matter how many times I ask what part of my content is specifically objectionable, I get no answer.
I’ve had a total of three strikes given in the last few months, and I’ve successfully lobbied to have them removed. Sometimes you win, sometimes you don’t.
I’m also hearing they’re on the attack with other channels too. Through the grapevine I’m hearing that even knife channels are being hit now. I don’t watching those channels, but it might be worth looking into for a story.
You might want to look into the PragerU lawsuit. They’re suing on the grounds that YouTube protects and supports leftist viewpoints, but heavily censors and even punishes right leaning viewpoints when discussing the same subject. I think a lot of that suit applies to what’s happening in the firearms community.
Having fire extinguishers does not guarantee that nothing will catch fire either, but it sure does improve the chances of survival if a fire does break out somewhere on campus.
That county has firemen, why do they need fire extinguishers? Shouldn’t they leave that to the professionals?
What? They need the fire extinguishers to respond to the immediate threat until the firemen can get there? It saves lives?
Yeah, the exact same argument goes for guns too!
In terms of fighting back against this as an individual channel the problem is that YouTube is too big. They’ll simply ignore the owner of a channel or a dozen channels because there are a zillion channels and, quite frankly, most people don’t give a fuck.
The same thing is true of Twitter. Getting kicked off Twitter means you’ll probably never get a satisfactory explanation as to why. In fact, they’ll probably just ignore you until you go away. They’ve done it a bunch of times and they continue to do it.
Until these companies really fuck up and screw with something massively popular, like cat videos or something, they’re going to get away with it. Just accept that as a fact because it is.
I don’t much care what your argument against the company’s behavior is and I don’t much care if you’re 100% right with that argument. Your argument is going nowhere because the company is huge and no one cares about your argument.
Want to change this? Build a YouTube killer website and start cutting into YouTube’s revenue stream in a deep way. That will get their attention. Bitching won’t.
im just waiting for someone to start up another “youtube” just like what happened to myspace and flickr, etc.
RAPAFHFLG,
Your arguments are unassailable. You’ve convinced me.
Since you’ve worked out new definitions for “essential” and “temporary” (and maybe “moron”), how about sharing your new definitions for “shall”, not”, “be”, and “infringed”.
And if you haven’t noticed, if you ask members of the recent immigrant community in the EU to please stop raping the local females or to please stop molesting grade-schoolers , you’ll be blacklisted, too:
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/9771/germany-censorship-propaganda
It’s not all fun and games in the Netherlands either:
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/4129/islamization-belgium-netherlands
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2009/aug/18/loverboy-child-prostitution-netherlands
http://www.wnd.com/2016/04/disturbing-reality-muslim-sex-grooming-gangs/
Oh, while you’re there , avoid the Kolenkit district in Amsterdam, especially after dark:
http://freewestmedia.com/2017/04/14/as-no-go-zones-riot-the-next-dutch-government-could-be-more-leftist/
You’ll probably be fine. Have a safe trip
They left Chicago off that list – how fair is that?
The fact that the cops haven’t completed their report means something happened that is embarrassing for them.
Furthermore, we already know that Sandyhook could have been prevented – the police were warned a couple of years before the incident that Adam Lanza had said he wanted to shoot kids at Sandyhook (surprised the article didn’t mention that fact). We already know that Adam Lanza was a nutcase and was getting weirder and weirder while his mom was apparently in denial.
Here’s the problem though… Youtube has become Kleenex. Think about it, do you ever say hand me facial tissue or Puffs facial tissue, HELL NO you say gimme a Kleenex and it doesn’t matter what brand is handed to you. It doesn’t matter what’s written on the box it’s still Kleenex. The same can be said for Qtip as well, no one says hand me a cotton swab unless they’re a doctor no most say get me a Qtip. You Tube has become that for internet videos nobody knows Full30, Vimeo, or Patreon but everybody and their grandma knows You Tube and Google. The only way to really beat them is to come up with something that’s exactly the same but different enough to avoid copyright suits and even then it’ll be viewed as a second rate knock off even if it’s really a better product.
Bought some Altamont boot grips for my M36. An improvement over the factory panels, but they lacked purchase for my little finger.
So here’s what I did:
Using a half-round file, I formed a scallop on the bottom edge of each grip to accommodate my little finger where it wraps under the butt. This provides support and comfort without the added bulk of a Compac or Bantam grip.
Private company’s cant discriminate duh …………….. Stupid has taken over the world!
If your going to ban a Natural Human Right then ban all of them….ban all channels from freedom of speech!
You can’t pick and choose…. like ban all the black channels and allow all others…….
Yeah and the condom video is not suitable for young kids…….. like kids are not smart enuff to lie about their age if they have 1/10 of 1% of a brain cell…….
So, this city and police department is okay with these unreliable guns (that are no good for them anymore) being resold. I call bull on the whole story. They just wanted the Sig, from the beginning that’s all. Yes, a new toy, lol!
I love dark beer, when we move to the country I’m going to make home brew and bottle for personal consumption. My dad brewed a really yummy beer.
Will need get with my younger brother to see if he has daddy’s recipe. Home brew is so much better tasting than large batch commercial beer.
I’m shocked that the US is at the low end of the spectrum in this graph. Relatively speaking, the US has next to no gun-control relative to the other countries.
What information-value might be taken from this graphic? (I don’t think it really informs what gun-controllers might hope to achieve.) I think we need a breakdown of data on suicides and homicides.
First, suicides is where the big numbers are. Who commits suicides; with what gun-type and acquisition scenario? Not young black males (curious why not). Suppose we were to find that OFWGs use handguns to kill themselves; and, that these suicides also have a rifle or shotgun they have owned for years. What would that tell us about how we might cut-down on suicides if we had more control over handguns?
Second, homicides is where the only other significant numbers are. We know most of these are black-on-black. What accounts for the other black-on-black homicides? Clubs? Cutlery? OK, let’s grant that a handgun is a much more effective tool for a homicide than a club or knife. However, to the extent that these are substitutable, a reduction of gun black-on-black homicide is apt to be offset by an increase in clubs or cutlery.
These effects are apt to be negligible in Puerto Rico; but, significant in the US. We need CDC or FBI detailed data to do a useful analysis of this question.
We PotG are pretty clear that gun-control will be ineffective in reducing the number of gun suicides, homicides or accidents. But it’s hard to get this message across to our fellow voters. The message we need to package is the one of “substitutability”. I.e., even if draconian-enough measures were taken to reduce the civilian gun inventory, what might that do to the total number of deaths? Sure, theoretically, it might reduce MASS-killings; but, how could it reduce the number of suicides and 1-on-1 homicides where other means are nearly as popular and just about as effective?
Its simply a politically expedient target. I’m sure there are some true believers out among the base. Those too naive or dense to wield the tools of logic and reason. The priest class up top like Watts and Feinstein know damn well gun control is a red herring but they don’t care. I listened to Watts on 1A yesterday and that woman has absolutely no shame. She’s clearly intelligent enough to know she’s spouting nonsense but like a true professional she knows her audience and speaks to it.
Anyway, the base will never disconnect “gun violence” and violence. That’s not their place in life. Useful idiots through and through.
Replace “gun” with literally any other object and all else will remain equal. The UK has demonstrated my his nicely. Eventually “hug violence” will be singled out as the politically expedient target to keep the base in line and maintain the power and control of the priest class.
I’m convinced most people really want a dictator to rule over them and any popular effort to overthrow a dictatorship is simply a vehicle to install a different dictator. One who better hits the politically expedient targets of the day.
YouTube is a private business, and if it wants to favor one viewpoint over another that’s their right.
However, YouTube and ISP’s enjoy various legal “safe harbors,” such as that they’re not liable for republishing infringing materials as long as they follow the DMCA takedown routine. (Copyright infringement is usually a matter of strict liability.). The rationale for creating these “safe harbors” was to encourage and further the growth of the internet and associated public discourse.
My modest proposal: revise the DMCA to essentially make YouTube, Twitter, et al. choose one or the other. If they want the DMCA safe harbor, they can’t engage in viewpoint discrimination. If they want to assert their right to engage in viewpoint discrimination in their business, then they should not expect or get legal immunities that were intended to promote public discourse.
Anyone have a blessed idea when the M&P 9 Shield 2.0 will get Maryland state roster approval?
“BY THE STATE OF MARYLAND.
ANNAPOLIS, January 15, 1790.
SIR: I have the honor to enclose a copy of an Act of the Legislature of Maryland, to ratify certain articles in addition to, and amendment of, the Constitution of the United States of America, proposed by Congress to the Legislatures of the several States.”
Y’all seem to have encountered a snag or two since then… 🤠
Compare the anti-gun attitude of the condescending, the fearful, and the envious with their attitude toward individual transportation, for example, toward SUVs. Some people don’t want certain others to be free because they will not trust or empathize. They have a need to elevate themselves above the great unwashed.
I am surprised political correctness hasn’t yet infected the Bismark PD and they insist on the S&Ws being destroyed to keep them out of the hands of mere commoners who many believe have no Right whatsoever to own “weapons of mass destruction”.
Or will they be sold as former Cop Guns at artificially inflated CMP prices for those willing idiots that will pay extra for the cool factor?
I just came here for the flames.
I understand that it’s chilly, Nine, but please get your frosty butt cheeks off the screen.
Won’t be a 1911 but I’d like to see Walther produce a 10MM
Ooh! A PPQ in 10mm? That would be sweet.
I’m not sure why – I’ve tried to understand but their thought process is so convoluted I can’t follow the logic. This is about the best I can come up with as a summary of what those I talk to seem to think.
They start off with a premise: Guns are used to kill an awful lot of people. (This depends entirely on what you define ‘an awful lot’ to be.)
They expand on this premise thusly: It would be a lot harder to kill those people without guns. (again, lots of assumptions here)
They add a dash of: Guns aren’t really necessary for anyone to own and I don’t like them so …
Lets just get rid of them all and then all the bad things will go away or at least be substantially reduced.
This is about as deep a train of thought as I can find in most of the people I discuss it with IRL.
Obviously, this line of argument is not compelling and can easily be shot full of holes but, the typical response I get from antis is to stick their fingers in their ears and chant, “I don’t like guns, guns are made to kill, get rid of the guns, I don’t like guns, guns are made …”
I go on and on about actual homicide rates and how they are distributed both geographically and demographically and I point out that only a tiny fraction of a percent of guns and gun owners are ever involved in any kind of crime and I talk about all the positive uses for guns and the logistical near impossibility and lack of utility of further regulating and/or removing them and the philosophical issues of freedom and rights and defense of self and so on and then I get the finger-in-the ear chanting.
My favorite anti line is, “I don’t believe in guns!”
To which I reply, “Oh, I assure you, they exist. Want to go shoot one?”
How much of that ~$1800 goes towards next year’s gun control bills?
After they make things illegal, so the skillful will do for themselves, they’ll have to continue their crackdown on skills and the skillful.
It’s like that’s not a bug, but a feature.
Currently I have a back forth trespasser who bends and drops fences, leaves gates open and tears down no trespassing signs. If only he would find one of these back there LOL
F Springfield Armory.
A registration list will never be used for confiscation. This must be true, because we’ve been told that. And there is no mass internet surveillance, monitoring foreign actors for counter-espionage will never be used as a backdoor way to criminal charges against citizens, and …
The one thing we know for certain is any authority we permit these knuckleheads will be abused as much as we tolerate. Just as certain, they’ll find ways to abuse so insane we’d never have thought of them.
– Yes, the border extends 100 miles inland from the border. (They wanted 200).
– The info on your phone isn’t your info. Nor is looking at it a search. Nor is compelling you to unlock the gizmo so they can look at it any kind of coercion.
– They don’t want an magic, admin backdoor into every electronic device, which is why they keep reintroducing that on ever dozen years or so. Not to worry, Intel built a back door into the last three revs of their uP chipsets; operates underneath and before any software you are aware of it learning and can watch & relay literally anything it wants at the hardware level. (Pay no attention to both Samsung and Chinese component manufacturers having done something like this with phones already.) BTW, with UEFI, it won’t load any software not signed by someone it recognizes, so roll your own OS without the holes that much harder to load. (Yes, you can work around this stuff … mostly. At what point does “makes it harder” becomes “restricts” or “eliminates?”
– BTW what’s the legality of modifying e-stuff to work around any of that “All your hardware are belong to us?” Pinky-swear, they’ll never come after anyone for this with the DRM laws, except they never bothered to pinky-swear.
– It’s the property that’s being accused, not the person, so it has no rights and we can just take it, without probable cause, charges & etc. (And BTW, *you* have to prove that your stuff was not involved in a crime, via their procedures not subject to judicial review … because it’s the stuff, not you, being penalized.) They’ll literally try to “charge” and confiscate an entire ferry, for a whack-weed seed found embedded in a crack in a railing. Happened in Seattle.
– Of course on guns, they’re not banning ammo, just anything made of lead, which totally doesn’t infringe anybody’s right to keep and bear arms, which they totally respect.
– Also, automatics are already effectively banned, so we need to ban all the things because those evil bump fire stocks create automatics. Also, the proposed legislation doesn’t say “automatic” or “bump fire stock” anywhere, could have been used to ban lever actions, bolt actions, flint locks, literally any firearm technology since muzzle-loaded match locks. And, look, now the ATF says they think they maybe, kinda, sorta had the authority to ban bump fire stocks all along.
You can’t keep the peace in here, we’e the police.
You can’t consider people’s rights in here, we’re a republic.
Really, is it time to put them all on a rocket to some planet far away, along with the telephone handset sanitizers, and similar? They don’t appear to be trainable, let alone well-intentioned.
“because it would force each state to accept the concealed carry standards of every other state — even states that have weaker standards, or worse, no standards at all. And it would not establish a national standard for who is allowed to carry a hidden, loaded gun in public.”
OK, how about throwing them a bone on this?
Universal training standards in return for universal carry.
Discuss…
“…national standard for who is allowed to carry a hidden, loaded gun in public.””
As for who is allowed to carry concealed, it’s simple, are you a person legally prohibited from owning a gun? No gun carry for you.
Are you law-abiding? You can carry.
Easy-peasy… 🙂
No. The standard is we have a right, its not a drivers license, to own and shoot firearms.
I might accept standards if we impose standards and licensing on writing honestly for journalists or voting rights.
Its a pretty big deal when you give up your rights because its forever…
I don’t think of it so much as they want to control us – I think that they want us dependent upon the Government. If we posses firearms, then we may not be dependent upon the Government for everything because we can, to a greater extent than others, take care of ourselves.
Confidence is key after all.
“So maybe the vast majority of gun owners are right to be confident in their ability to end a threat by force of arms. If so, is that confidence based on experience?”
Judging by the amout of incompetence I see at the range, either all the competent people are practicing elsewhere or people tend to ave an overinflated of perception oftheir own skill. Persoanlly, I always think I need more training–you can really never get enough.
Those are the police you’re seeing.
“There is no place for compromise.”
Except on your morals, values, ethical standards, general decency, etc…
Hate to say it but we all agreed to a moratorium on SA, pending further notice.
Unless someone walks up to you without warning and shoots you you should be aware enough to be able to defend yourself. Most bad guys can’t shoot and from the vids I’ve seen I might stand still and just shoot back instead of getting off the X. Probably depends on the distance involved. Light bulb moment! That’s what we need! A training vid using gang bangers vs regular folks with paint marker guns. And street based scenarios. What do you think?
I put it in the same category as drivers. The majority of whom consider themselves better drivers than most others are, which is mathematically impossible, of course.
Still, one’s assessment of your chances are your own. You still have the right to keep and bear arms and decide for yourself. I don’t want the government to decide for you.
Same with your right to free speech. Walk right up and ask out that Israeli supermodel. It isn’t government’s place to keep you from going down in flames there, either. Take the shot.
Yeah, well, all those Israeli supermodels are just full of themselves and the reason they don’t go out with me is because they are all closet lesbians and they are not really interested in dating a REAL man and they are all actually not even Israeli and they are just claiming to be because the new WonderWoman is and she is hot and I DM’d her but she won’t respond because she is stuck up and afraid of real men.
…um, what?
This is unsurprising. Most everybody start out in the state of Unconscious Incompetence. You don’t know what you don’t know.
I wonder if there is correlation between the categories and training / competition. E.g. 81% of people have never shot against a timer.
See Dunning-Krueger effect.
That’s because 81% have Rambo fantasies. A gunfight is 50/50 and bad guys are likely to have an edge because of the element of surprise.
I smoke Camels or nothing at all
You can have my Radio Flyer when you pull it from my cold dead hands!!
Be the first kid on your block to form a Militia Unit !
A better question would be
How sure are you that you would prevail in a case brought against you for a DGU? Civil or criminal?
In many locales you get the shit end of the stick .
Although Youtube its a private company, there’s a potential for a restraint of trade lawsuit if the posters haven’t violated Youtube’s terms of service and are being punished, or if they can show unequal treatment. At the very least, discovery would make the Star Chamber critetia public. Youtube isn’t a public bulletin board at the grocery store. They have revenue sharing agreements in place with the commercial channels, and they are required to live up to their obligations. For users and channels that aren’t trying to get paid, Youtube can tell them to pound sand for no reason without repercussion.
Banding together an creating a competing video service like Liveleak or similar to Youtube that has no censorship as a matter of policy would be the way to go. It would take away a significant number of “eyeballs” from Youtube (which is owned by Google). Other than that you have to place your bets on any lawsuit against the Youtube monopoly (which an anti-trust lawsuit would probably be another interesting avenue).
One of these items is not the same. Can you spot the difference?
“Mama makes me wear this helmet on account of me bein’ dull, HYUK HYUK.”
So smoking DOES stunt your growth.
The Little Rascals took security very seriously during the McCarthy Era.
Come any closer and we’ll spit these straws at you.
And where’s the NRA? Oh wait they’re too busy pushing gun control.
Actually according to all the e-mail traffic I’ve been getting from the NRA, they are busy pushing their Auto buying program, their wine club, their (insert thing here that has NOTHING to do with guns).
Makes me almost sad that I joined the NRA.
You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass.
Then of course, the number of victims in any mass-killings, both here and abroad, committed by the occasional lone lunatic, absolutely pales in comparison to the mass-killings perpetrated by such persons as Stalin, Hitler, Mao and Pol-Pot, after their citizens had been disarmed!
Happy Motoring, Mark
Still looks like Idi Amin!
Original Homeland Security
If these were made so you could really take pictures, I know a few guys who would want one!
Didn’t James Bond already use one of these?
I’m for gun control myself. Without it your just shooting.
In my little town, the officers have to buy their own weapons, so they’re free to pick what they want. Most carry Sig P226s, but I have seen an M&P or two. I don’t recall any carrying Glocks, but I haven’t interacted with the two newest officers yet. Or the Chief for that matter, at least not while he was in uniform.
I’m all for good training! Take as much of it as your pocketbook and calendar allow. But I am absolutely against it being required or mandated. We are talking about a natural (God given) universal inalienable right. It is the responsibility of the gun owner to pursue training. The industry and sport, and peer pressure from fellow gun enthusiasts can and will go a long way toward getting people trained.
I traded the Springfield for a motorcycle.
I think the forward grip on the first gun is on backwards. I can’t view it as art until that is corrected. Now how about some art where steel and walnut is sculpted into beautiful, fully functioning guns? Now that requires real talent.
All certified CCW licensees have firearms training. Criminals, not so much. Advantage, certified CCW licensees.
Sliding a well made handgun into a Kydex holster is like fingernails on chalkboard. Just say NO.
I have a custom made leather OWB that cost about $20 less than the one reviewed here and I can assure even after a year of daily use, it doesn’t feel like “a bottle of whiskey in a wet cardboard box”.
Looks to me like it’s not a compromise then! If you are truly anti-gun you won’t own one right! Guess the gun is not such a bad think then is it?
Nope. Springfield is on my boycott list until they make serious amends, like S&W and Ruger did.
I have no interest in a full sized 10mm 1911, anyway.
Now, if someone comes out with a subcompact single stack 10mm auto, I’m there.
It can’t be worse than the Airlite .357s, and Smith sells a TON of those things.
The Ghettoblaster is made by Noveske, not Q.
Little Tomi says “society” is violent towards women. Does little Tomi need:
A) a dictionary?
B) some serious medication?
C) more than a third grade education?
D) all of the above?
The tips for ladies are almost the same as the tips for guys. Pretty much, be safe, train, have fun, carry.
I have a theory that the reason people “don’t have the grip strength” to shoot is because of the same reason they lean backwards, have a low grip, flinch, etc. They gun is controlling them, which makes them back off more, which makes it worse. The issue is an aggressive mentality to the gun and solid training problem, not a physical problem.
Police shooting unarmed citizens should be a cause for concern.
Just to clear things up…. Cops shoot everyone, regardless of color. However, they vastly shoot more unarmed Blacks then can be accounted for as a percentage of the population. IE… If Blacks make up 7% of the population of one of the major cities, let’s say Los Angeles, yet 48% of all police shootings of unarmed citizens in Los Angeles is Black, that is a DISCREPANCY to be investigated as to the cause.
If Whites are 55% of the population of Los Angeles, but unarmed shootings of Whites by cops only account for 2% of the shootings, then when you compare the Black unarmed shootings and White unarmed shootings, the numbers don’t follow a logical pattern.
You would assume logically that a higher population would result in higher unarmed shooting rates by cops, even without accounting for racial breakdowns of who commits crimes. If your population is 90% White, even in a safe city, you have a much higher chance of being a White victim of terrorism, accidents, deaths, disease, etc. simply because of the numbers. Oh, your herd of 1,000,000 gazelle had 450 deaths due to predation? Sad, but expected. But, what about the herd of 100,000 antelope right next to that herd of gazelle that had 600 deaths due to predation? Now you have a mystery to solve. What was the cause of this strange result?
Getting back to humanity’s problems and specifically unarmed citizens shot by police.
Is it Institutional Racism? Possibly. Is it badly trained police officers? Possibly. Is it the quality of officers picked from the candidates? Possibly. Is it a failure of leadership to acknowledge the issues, provide strong guidance and offer remedial training? Possibly. Could it be all of these or more issues working together? Possibly. The idea is to get all the reasons, target them individually, take corrective or remedial action after an after-action-report or assessment has been done, then exam the results a year later, 2 years later, 3 years later to see if the numbers improve. You could also target just 1 factor, exam the results, go to the next factor, exam results to try to identify the exact causes. However, this takes a lot of time, resources, effort and money and results may not be immediate and most police departments will want to eliminate the problem quicker.
I don’t think people here are Racists. I have faith in humanity and what we can accomplish if we are together. I just think any crude remarks come from ignorance rather than racism.
Don’t simply ignore the other sides, try to understand why they are saying what they are. Do they not have a grasp of basic mathematics, statistics, etc.? Are they just ignorant of issues with other races? Are they caught in a belief system that is pervasive where they grew up and hard to budge? Perhaps, they are just stubborn?
Some food for thought.
Support your Local Law Enforcement. Thank an officer today. The BATFE is overburdened with the tax money they are making on those products already, let’s not flood them with revenue from legalizing Marijuana too.
I wasn’t sure where you would put a PCC or pistol-caliber-should-be-carbine-but-sold-as-pistol-so-either-add-brace-or-sbr guns, eg b&t GHM9… Doesn’t seem right to put it in the pistol category next to more conventional pistols. Same as those NFA skirting shotguns that aren’t shotguns or pistols, I guess there should be an other firearm category.
Veteran
What would happen if the residents who own the homes did not like the noise from power lines Would they call enstar to have power lines removed I think not I listened to the last 3 hearings the majority of the ZBA members agreed with the clubs position Good for them One resident complained that a bullet fired from a rifle 100YDs would hit the backstop then completely reverse direction and travel back 100 yds then travel 500 to the edge of the developement not in the physics that I studied
The main problem with the Anti’s argument is that they think it justifies all manner of extreme gun control laws. Yes, of course the right to keep and bear arms is not absolute, nor is the right to free speech or the right to privacy. BUT, the major difference is that infringements on those rights are only allowed under very narrow circumstances, whereas gun control proponents think that saying the right is not absolute therefore allows them to pass any and all manner of gun control that they want. That is wrong. The RKBA not being absolute does not justify the absurd laws such as assault weapons bans, or magazine capacity limitations, and so forth.
Can’t we sue youtube/google for violating the 1st amendment?
I’m glad this story was posted, if nothing else but to highlight the hypocrisy and self-importance of some members of the community. I find it highly ironic that certain people, including pwserge, subscribe to the “admittedly I don’t much about this subject but we should ban it anyway because I think its bad for some arbitrary”-school of thought. Funny, that’s where a bunch of gun-grabbing politicians went to school to get their degrees!
Gun with the camera? so nice! https://www.hinterlandoutfitters.com/
When will people stop mouthing the false trope about falsely shouting “Fire!” in a crowded theater? It is in fact entirely Constitutional as per Brandenburg v. Ohio.
One of the nicest gun! https://www.hinterlandoutfitters.com/
In Sacramento County, the best way to get a Concealed Carry Permit is to show cause:
You show it by donating $1,000+ to the Sheriffs’ re-election fund.
No.. Not kidding
The vast majority of anti-gun folks have no interest in anything but themselves.
It’s their world and we’re just in it.
Beat feet? What? Where you gonna go? Stampeding out the door with the rest of the horde where you’ll get shot, blown up (kill zone) or trampled? Some situations you have to stand and fight to survive. This is one of them.
It’s time to contact Youtube advertisers, Youtube programs and their hosts. They must be reminded that unless they are proactive in preserving the 2nd amendment, gun rights, and disapprove of Youtube’s liberal anti-constitutional agenda, pro gun viewers and subscribers will be forced to discontinue further support of individual specific Youtubes and lines of product. Millions of ‘Youtuber’s’ are affected by this, monetarily, educationally, and constitutionally. It’s not a matter of the convenience Youtube may have provided any longer. This entity, the liberal machine, extrapolates and infers unknown growth potential using popular vehicles without resistance. IMHO, Youtube was designed to come to fruition, working in concert, to engage it’s liberal socialist agenda, at the desired time when liberal media, entertainment and politicians orchestrated specific issues to a crescendo, in this case, gun law issues. Just saying, I hope I’m wrong. Peace.