Brown truck just said no more Brownells

Not a fan of this decision at all. I have ordered hundreds, if not thousands of things from Brownells. Early on I had a "no ship by FedEx" note put on my account after constantly getting packages lost or damaged by them. One time, I ordered caustic bluing chemicals from Brownells. Fedex lost the package for over 2 months until I filed a claim. When it finally showed up the chemicals were leaking. Damaging most of what was else in the box.

Old Dog said:

^ pretty much what I attempted to say in post #2, but explained much better

Click to expand...

Yes Frank said what we both did but better worded.

D.B. Cooper said:

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.)

Click to expand...

I doubt that Chicken Little will do anything like that. He loves to hype and sensationalize stories too much. He, and most other like him, are all about raising their ratings and view numbers.

12Bravo20 said:

...I doubt that Chicken Little will do anything like that. He loves to hype and sensationalize stories too much. ...

Click to expand...

It needs to be remembered that hype and sensationalization aren't the equivalent of lying. Chicken Little wasn't wrong about the existence of a threat; he was just wrong about the nature of the threat. It wasn't the sky that was falling, it was just an acorn that fell, but it fell from the tree that had a fox in a burrow under the tree, and if another acorn hadn't fallen from that same tree and bopped the fox on the head, Lucky Ducky and the other fat farm fowls that pooh-poohed Chicken Little about his "falling sky" would have been fox lunch when they went out to prove him wrong. Instead they were just plain lucky to get to live happily ever after. I don't think that depending on luck to neutralize an unknown or mischaracterized threat is a very good way to live a long life. Instead if there's something that's getting these guys all riled up I think we should pay attention and try to figure out what it is. I think that's what Braden attempts to do in his video, referenced above, and just discounting it out of hand simply because it's a YouTube video is being a Lucky Ducky.

N555 said:

If it's fake news brownells fell for it too?

Click to expand...

I think that's what we're all trying to figure out.

wiscoaster said:

I'm not on Facebook, so I couldn't check that link, however, I think we're all well aware of how reliable Facebook is as a repository of accurate posting history.

Click to expand...

I don't do facebook but my wife and son do. From some of the things they tell me they see there I consider it to be about like youtube, a little valuable information with a lot more BS and hot air.

So many potential "fail" points for this entire thing.

First, it all relies on a very pretty graphic image, which most persons with a computer aged >15 could make themselves.

Next, it comes out right on top of a national Holiday & long weekend. Which means the actual companies represented are unlikely to actually respond, officially, for near a week (forever in internet terms).

Further, it is a "perfect fit" to push all of "our" buttons, and provoke the huge backlash and over-response it has.

Dovetailing into that is the hysteria mill which is the 'net; I've already seen this inflated to "WH raiding UPS and seizing all gunz" and similar hyperbole.

"Common Carriers" are a legally defining thing. There are a pile of laws about what and how and when. A person cannot just stick a sign on their ride and start delivering things for cash. So, companies engaged in that business are constrained by law, and by their customers' expectations. You don't get to change the rules part way through. Certainly not with a single letter.

If this were legit, there would have been cautionary notes. "Be advised, in nnn days, [company will [take defined action]." You are required to tell your customers, all of your customers, about a change in business practice.

So, there should have been dozens of letters, and emails, and official Company Statements. Not one, random one, stating it's a done deal, and, oh yeah, we are arbitrarily destroying somebody else's property in our custody for Reasons.

But, it fits into "our" knee-jerk reaction that "they" would up and destroy "our stuff" with no warning nor recompense, even though the stuff is not "theirs" to do anything but deliver.

CoalCrackerAl said:

A lot of content on you tube is B.S. It's getting as bad as Facebook.

Click to expand...

Sounds like they are almost as bad as the “news” channels on TV.

The video in the OP has made every firearms forum in the country it seems. THR seems to be one of a minority of forums in which members aren't totally freaking out and calling for heads to roll. Thankfully, we can conduct reasoned discourse here and attempt to figure things out while cooler heads prevail.

Some here are looking at the timing of the release as a reason for it being bogus. I believe it’s more of a clue that it could be real. Big business learned a thing or two from the White House and MSM releasing embarrassing content late on a Friday. Could also mean UPS knows it’s bad for business so they want as many people to forget about it over the long weekend. Nothing will surprise me at this point.

Frank Ettin said:

But so what? That doesn’t in any way help decide the authenticity of the letter. And still, I haven’t yet seen anything substantively addressing the question of the authenticity of the letter.

Click to expand...

I find several things about this discussion interesting.

This entire discussion seems to be about the legitimacy of the UPS letter, yet no one has shown anything conclusive, with supporting evidence that said letter is either legitimate or a hoax.

I shared a video from Langley Firearms that, while it had good rationale as to why the letter may be legitimate, it offered no conclusive proof. That entire post was deleted because there was "no evidence that anything he's saying is true." (Which is a valid point.)

The video in the original post (post #1) also offered no evidence to prove that anything in the video was true, yet that video and that post was allowed to stand. So here we are, 3 pages and 66 posts later, and no one has submitted any evidence that any of this is true. (or, that any of this is false).

I'm kind of wondering how, if evidence of truth is required at THR, (and that's not a bad standard to uphold) this entire thread has not been locked.