Brown truck just said no more Brownells

Status
Not open for further replies.
This is what I got when I clicked on the link for Brownells Facebook page listed in the SAF story posted above.

Screen Shot 2022-07-03 at 10.21.52 AM.png
 
Hopefully, it may be that UPS has already reversed their cancellation of Brownell's account based on public outcry and bad publicity. And that's why the post was removed. That doesn't mean it never happened. I really don't think SAF is going to publish a lie.
 
Hopefully, it may be that UPS has already reversed their cancellation of Brownell's account based on public outcry and bad publicity. And that's why the post was removed. That doesn't mean it never happened. I really don't think SAF is going to publish a lie.

I don't think they would either. But the only other links I could find using several different search engines were YouTube videos and links to firearm forums. I could not find any links to reputable news sources nor could I find anything on the company websites that were supposedly cancelled by UPS.
 
Neither did I, but it takes time to change website content, so that doesn't necessarily mean anything.

I'm not arguing that point and yes you are correct. But I have learned to take most of these YouTubers with a grain of salt since they love to hype and over-sensationalize any and all news stories. Chicken Little is one of the worse ones about this.
 
....But I have learned to take most of these YouTubers with a grain of salt since they love to hype and over-sensationalize any and all news stories. Chicken Little is one of the worse ones about this.
Except there have been plenty of other sources that aren't on YouTube saying the same things. So you could completely discount all YouTube content and still end up with the same "where there's smoke....." I really don't think they're all just echoing Chicken Little.
 
Yeah, why would UPS want a piece of the $70 billion or so in firearms industry business annually? https://www.nssf.org/government-relations/impact/

You must be new here. Major corporations have been alienating customers/forgoing business in an effort to virtue signal for years now.

A "piece" of a 70m dollar industry? I wonder how big that piece really is for UPS, as compared to every other industry on the planet. I don't know what they hope to accomplish with this, but I'm sure they've already gamed it out and deemed it worth the cost.
 
I have not seen any statement on the vendor/retailer websites nor have I seen anything on the UPS website or any actual news websites.

I looked on the NRA and NRA-ILA website, GOA website and SAF website. The only website I could find anything on was SAF and I had to do a search to find it.
 
You'll know it's real when it lands on the front pages of the notoriously anti-gun MSM. They've taken a string of successive losses recently and would love to have something like that to hang out and gloat over.
 
The gist of it is that they're not going to help you break the law.
Have you read 27 CFR § 478.12?

Again, from UPS's new policy, pertinent language bolded:
Any item that meets the definition of a firearm (including firearm mufflers or silencers) or a “frame” or “receiver” under federal law (including any partially complete, disassembled, or nonfunctional frame or receiver as defined by 27 CFR § 478.12) must be identified and bear a serial number in satisfaction of the requirements for identifying such items under federal law, including 27 CFR § 478.92 and/or 27 CFR § 479.102, regardless of whether any such items are otherwise exempt from or not subject to identification requirements under applicable law. This prohibition applies even before the effective date of 27 CFR § 478.12.

UPS has taken it upon themselves to refuse acceptance of perfectly legal 80% receivers by ignoring any exemptions to serial number requirements.
 
Have you read 27 CFR § 478.12?

Again, from UPS's new policy, pertinent language bolded:

Any item that meets the definition of a firearm (including firearm mufflers or silencers) or a “frame” or “receiver” under federal law (including any partially complete, disassembled, or nonfunctional frame or receiver as defined by 27 CFR § 478.12) must be identified and bear a serial number in satisfaction of the requirements for identifying such items under federal law, including 27 CFR § 478.92 and/or 27 CFR § 479.102, regardless of whether any such items are otherwise exempt from or not subject to identification requirements under applicable law. This prohibition applies even before the effective date of 27 CFR § 478.12.

UPS has taken it upon themselves to refuse acceptance of perfectly legal 80% receivers by ignoring any exemptions to serial number requirements.

If that is the case, it will effect more than just 80% frames and receivers. It will also effect any firearm made before the GCA of 1968 went into effect that never had serial numbers.
 
That's a Federal Crime as NO Company has the authority to circumvent the interstate commerce law .
How would UPS or any other carrier know for certain WHAT was being shipped ,a general box carton gives some clue but only a detailed bill of lading would specifically specify actual contents .
 
Is the Second Amendment Foundation a reliable-enough source for you doubting thomases?
https://www.saf.org/breaking-ups-cancelling-gun-dealers-accounts-destroying-packages-in-transit/

But while the SAF is generally credible, I see nothing in their release that addresses the authenticity of the letter. Furthermore, a quick Google search turned up a bunch of pro-gun sites repeating all the same stuff -- but nothing addressing the authenticity of the letter.

And I still doubt that the letter is authentic.

  1. The letterhead in the copy I've seen posted on-line could easily be created by anyone on any one of a bunch of word processing programs.

  2. In my experience, a major business terminating a contract (an account is a contractual relationship) for what amounts to cause, especially with a commercial client, would write a more focused and formal letter. Typically the provisions of the account (contract) supporting the unilateral termination for cause would be cited or at least referred to.

  3. UPS' "threat" to seize parcels shipped by the terminated shipper and destroy them doesn't pass the smell test. I'd need some convincing to believe that there is any legal way for a common carrier to, on its own initiative and without further notice, decide that something shipped is contraband and seize that property, which belongs to another, and destroy it.

  4. UPS has been in the common carried business for a very long time and is certainly a major player, but the letter is really very amateurish.

True the foregoing aren't conclusive, and there's always the possibility that the letter is genuine. But the foregoing concerns, especially when taken together, should alert one to require some good evidence of authenticity before taking the letter seriously. And that's why I closed this thread which had been opened in Legal.

And now this thread has become an excellent example of confirmation bias:
... Confirmation bias is the idea that we tend to accept information unquestionably when it reinforces some predisposition we have or some existing belief or attitude....
 
...And I still doubt that the letter is authentic...
What I'd like to know is how you got a copy of the letter (to make such a judgment about it) when the Brownell's post about the letter has been deleted from Facebook?
 
Last edited:
It seems to me that if UPS is seizing and destroying packages from a customer who is not violating the law they're opening themselves up to a lawsuit. They can refuse to do business with someone but not commit what amounts to theft. Call me skeptical that this is legitimate for now.
 
I'm in the "it's fake news" camp, but what I wonder is, if it turns out to be a hoax, is Jerrod at Guns N Gadgets going to publish a retraction and a mea culpa, or is he just going to move on and not mention it? (The same applies to every other gun channel that carried it.)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top