chipcom
member
I have had similar experiences here. Semper fi, pal, watch your back.
Hickok45 Removed From Youtube
- Thread starter pvq
- Start date
- Status
Which is why I am surprised that Hickok isn't there. He has voiced his worry that Youtube may shut down gun related channels in the future, and I know he is on friendly terms with several of those who are big proponents of full30.
Nothing precludes a person from posting videos on both Youtube and full30. Many of the people who have channels at full30 post there first. Just like some other big time Youtubers post their content on Vessel first.
I bet Hickok ends up seeing a big spike in subscriptions and video views because of this.
LiveLife
Member
Glad to see Hickok45 back. I am sure we'll hear why his account got terminated in due time.
Another fan of Hickok45 who has an uncanny ability to shoot various pistols well.
Another fan of Hickok45 who has an uncanny ability to shoot various pistols well.
Ohio Gun Guy
Member
Again, I have said that I believe the Federal Government Indirectly influences the Private Sector's Policies. I gave prior examples from the ATF, EPA, and IRS. Here is an example from the FEC, involving Youtube. This is not a conspiracy theory, this is what they say.
In an article: (Link Below). James Porter wrote an article, hosted on the NRA website.
https://www.nraila.org/articles/20150101/free-speech-is-essential-to-protecting-the-bill-of-rights
“…Ann M. Ravel, FEC vice chairman, recently threatened that the federal government cannot “turn a blind eye to the Internet’s force in the political arena.” She announced a major push in the coming year to bring about total regulation of political speech on the Web. In her world, advocacy on the Internet would be subject to inspection, fines and criminal referral under what would essentially be a free speech star-chamber.
The challenge arose when the commission deadlocked on a complaint brought by an entity partially funded by billionaire gun-banner George Soros. At issue were YouTube videos exposing and opposing Obama policies.
With a 3-3 commission split, the demand for Internet censorship was voted moot. But a change in one vote could open the way for an oppressive move by the agency to further regulate First Amendment rights..."
In an article: (Link Below). James Porter wrote an article, hosted on the NRA website.
https://www.nraila.org/articles/20150101/free-speech-is-essential-to-protecting-the-bill-of-rights
“…Ann M. Ravel, FEC vice chairman, recently threatened that the federal government cannot “turn a blind eye to the Internet’s force in the political arena.” She announced a major push in the coming year to bring about total regulation of political speech on the Web. In her world, advocacy on the Internet would be subject to inspection, fines and criminal referral under what would essentially be a free speech star-chamber.
The challenge arose when the commission deadlocked on a complaint brought by an entity partially funded by billionaire gun-banner George Soros. At issue were YouTube videos exposing and opposing Obama policies.
With a 3-3 commission split, the demand for Internet censorship was voted moot. But a change in one vote could open the way for an oppressive move by the agency to further regulate First Amendment rights..."
Last edited:
Ohio Gun Guy
Member
Here are my prior posts, so new readers can read them in context, as a whole.
Folks, This demonstrates the amount of control the government is increasingly getting over media and social media!
This is not what Freedom loving governments do!
What's embarrassing is the apologists on our side.
When obama was running for president, many here said he cant / wont do anything with guns...
We'll here we are. He's making very dubious executive actions (Not just in regards to 2A), and "We" just keep taking it. Why.... Because they havent outright banned them YET. One more step, just one more, then another....
YES the federal government exerts pressure on groups to influence their policies. Is there a memo telling them to take down Hickok45.... NO, but they use the Agencies of this government to make it clear that you need to care what they think and what you do or you'll run the risk of a costly run in with one of the many agencies... EPA, ATF, IRS....
Some specific examples:
IRS, Targeting of Conservative Groups
EPA – Closure of Lead Smelting, Closure Coal Generators
ATF – Redefinition of “In the Business”, Stag Arms, Fast & Furious,
I didn't directly link this to youtube. I was making the examples of Indirect (No memo) pressure from the federal government that does influence policies in the private sector/s. I specifically went through the trouble to say (Not all 2A)
I find it ironic that as a moderator you chose to engage in this way. I made a statement of my opinion (I will say fact, but you can argue that). You responded with calling me, and others Embarrassing. Every statement you've made has been a false restatement of my position and followed by criticism of that false position (Straw man).
Folks, This demonstrates the amount of control the government is increasingly getting over media and social media!
This is not what Freedom loving governments do!
What's embarrassing is the apologists on our side.
When obama was running for president, many here said he cant / wont do anything with guns...
We'll here we are. He's making very dubious executive actions (Not just in regards to 2A), and "We" just keep taking it. Why.... Because they havent outright banned them YET. One more step, just one more, then another....
YES the federal government exerts pressure on groups to influence their policies. Is there a memo telling them to take down Hickok45.... NO, but they use the Agencies of this government to make it clear that you need to care what they think and what you do or you'll run the risk of a costly run in with one of the many agencies... EPA, ATF, IRS....
Some specific examples:
IRS, Targeting of Conservative Groups
EPA – Closure of Lead Smelting, Closure Coal Generators
ATF – Redefinition of “In the Business”, Stag Arms, Fast & Furious,
I didn't directly link this to youtube. I was making the examples of Indirect (No memo) pressure from the federal government that does influence policies in the private sector/s. I specifically went through the trouble to say (Not all 2A)
I find it ironic that as a moderator you chose to engage in this way. I made a statement of my opinion (I will say fact, but you can argue that). You responded with calling me, and others Embarrassing. Every statement you've made has been a false restatement of my position and followed by criticism of that false position (Straw man).
Well he is back up so this one is done. Fear not, I am sure there will be another Obama USPS, USFS, BLM cabal attempting to take down Forgotten Weapons tomorrow...
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked