Discussion in 'General Gun Discussions' started by Blue Brick, Nov 30, 2019.
Did anyone fully see it? I only had time for part 1 of 3, and it was removed.
I watched the end of it.... the parts about mass shootings.
I agreed with everything he said in it, and have argued all those things myself when on that topic.
Didn't know it was removed... maybe Google don't like people presenting facts that are in evidence.
Someone please explain for the class what you're discussing.
Really disappointed that I didn’t get to see it. Really sad that it got taken down. That’s what the loss of 1A looks like.
Why did it get taken down. Want to expand a lil on the removed content?
I was enjoying the cooking part like the other stuff to, but did not show the food at the end.
I don't know... It was just gone. Hoping maybe someone read the comments before it was removed. Trolls do harass him a lot.
In a nutshell.... in part 3 he illustrated and explained that mass shootings are not caused by access to modern high capacity firearms.
This is true because we've had high capacity semi automatic weapons for about 100 years now.... he illustrated this with a 1911, which had 15 round mags even way back when.... and with an M1 carbine, nearly 100 years old now, and a formidable firearm.
He explained that up until 1968 you could buy firearms from hardware stores and mail order catalogs cash and carry out the store or delivered right to your door from a mail order catalog.
Honestly, I half expected him to produce a Thompson from under the table to use for the illustration.... but he had the M1, which made sense, its an older design.
I thought he covered it quite well... access to guns, any type of gun, isn't whats behind the increase in mass shootings.
From here on....its just my thoughts.... nothing from the video.
It's not a gun problem....its a people problem. Our problem is societal and removing guns won't fix it, may well even make it worse.
I played the whole thing Thursday, but have to admit it was AFTER our feast so I missed some content in the middle.
I did see the entire discussion about mass shootings, though.
It was mostly a discussion about common ground (mass murders do exist, nobody wants them to occur). However, Paul made two points that are contrary to the Google-approved gun control narrative: 1) guns are MORE difficult to obtain today than when mass murders were fewer (1940-1970 timeframe), and 2) there were lots of semiauto handguns and rifles in circulation back then that had large magazines (his examples were 1911s with 15-round magazines and M1 carbines), just like there are today. As a result, he said, neither the presence of "large cap magazines" or semiauto rifles or handguns can be the cause of increased mass murders today.
Makes sense if you are capable of thinking logically.
I can certainly see, however, why Youtube and their Google/Alphabet overlords wouldn't want those two arguments to see the light of day.
On the other hand, maybe someone reacted negatively to his ham-n-yams dutch oven recipie....
While your statement is correct, and I fully agree, it disturbs me how few people either don't know how the Constitution works, or just don't care. The Bill of Rights only binds the government; it doesn't bind youtube.
The lesson to be learned here is that, anytime you see gun related content you may wish to refer to later, don't add it to your "Watch Later" or other playlist, download it to your hard drive.
PS: I hope you all realize that, in a few weeks (Dec. 10 I believe) they're changing terms of service and, to hear Step One Survival talk about it, they're going to be deleting all content that is not advertiser friendly. They're already doing something about forcing channels to declare themselves "child friendly" or not (anything gun related or prepping is not "child friendly") with pretty serious fines (no idea how they would collect) for violations.
We are persona non grada at youtube, and they want us gone.
Weird! I watched the whole thing Thursday. The mass shootings portion was the shortest segment in the video. He spent about 45 minutes (out of 2 hours) on the cooking; since he had to do a lot of that real-time, then somewhere around 50 to 55 minutes on outfitting three day survival packs (which devolved into a long bit about finding as fool-proof a method as you can for starting fires). The mass shootings portion was only around 20 minutes and as others have said he really only debunked a couple of myths and did a bit of shooting with his M1 carbine and M1911.
ETA: Interesting! Found an embed link on another site
Clicking on play gives the message: "This video has been removed by the user". Dunno if he pulled it for some reason or not.
So his video was removed because he was discussing mass shootings being unrelated to standard capacity guns and/or mags? Does anybody know how he specifically violated the terms of service. I know the Botkin brothers on the T.Rex arms channel covered this topic at great length in one of their videos, I'm pretty sure it's still up.
Nobody knows why it was taken down. Paul may have taken it down for some reason.
EDIT: Just saw this in the comments on his previous weeks video.
Capture by Outlaw75 posted Nov 30, 2019 at 5:39 PM
I see... Odd tho, I wouldnt imagine too many people following Paul Harrell videos unless they were people like us. He's kind of a fuddy duddy, not in a bad way but just wouldnt think the woke masses of libnozzles would be targeting his channel....
I don't think they do. Most of his hate mail seems to be people like us nitpicking what he says.
Seriously? They are nixing all gun content on youtube. That's a blow. I cant imagine how many hours I've spent enjoying gun vids on youtube. IV8888, Miculek, hickok45, garand thumb and probably dozens more.
Alot of it is what I would consider adult content and mildly inappropriate language and themes. If youtube is really going to go down this road they will lose 10's of millions of users and it will be prime pickins for another new video/media platform to step in.
Of course, I don't have all the information as I have not read the new terms because I'm not a "creator." What I know comes from "creators" ranting about it.
I don't think they are nixing all gun content; I think they are nixing anything unfavorable to advertisers, which includes gun content.
To be honest, youtube has sucked for the better part of the past year anyway. None of my subscribed to channels (almost all gun or prepping related) appear in my "recommended" feed, neither does any new gun related content. They've essentially shadow banned all of that stuff anyway.
My other thought on this, is that I'm not too tore up about it. Remember two years ago, when they started demonetizing gun channels, and people like Ian McCollum, Yankee Marshall, IV8888 et al were all up in arms about it? My take then, and this is still my position, is that youtube shouldn't be your job; it's a hobby. If you need to earn money (as we all do), then go get a real job. "Youtuber" and/or "content creator" should not be job titles.
You're not kidding, and Yankee Marshall is the worst, at least among gun channels. I've listened in as my son has watched some gaming channels, and they're pretty bad, too. I wonder if they'll get nixed as well for not being "kid friendly." (I sure hope so.)
I guess I agree in spirit, it's not a salt of the earth, "job" job but times are changing and I think it's a great way to get other less mainstream opinions and or content out to alot of people... Also from what I understand the people with serious subs who make a living at it are working non stop to get the content out and it's not hard to imagine how much work can be involved in shooting, editing, creating, etc...
I've found youtube frustrating at times but it has been a great resource of information and/or entertainment for me. Mostly in terms of finding like minded content creators with similiar hobbies. It has brought me alot of "vicarious joy" for lack of better term, but I will say once the gun videos gets nix'd so will my viewership. Will delete the app and never return.....
I don't think you are appreciating what it takes to develop some of the content these guys are putting out. Especially since, surprise, you enjoy it for free. Creating videos can easily turn into a full time job with a lot of expenses. Conditions were favorable until evil Google bought YouTube. Let me dock your income by half or more and then tell you it's time for a new job and that your current gig is just a hobby now. I'd call saying as much kinda rude.
You hope they are made to go away because they are not kid friendly?
How about telling parents to control what their kids are doing and watching rather than control what everyone else does on the off chance their kid sees it.
Yeah, and the real bottom line is that no matter what we do for a living, our jobs are the same, to make our company/corporation/boss money. We are paid because we generate income in some way for our company (unless you have a government job, I know there are some exceptions).
When people are making enough money on Youtube to have that as their primary income source, they're making somebody money. It's about selling advertising.
Not everyone likes it, but it's the world we live in now.
Not gonna lie, I wish I could film gun videos all day and have that as my job. But alas, I don't have the personality or skillset to do so.
You do realize that some of the most popular youtubers make millions of dollars a year?
Certainly a heck of a lot more than I make with a job.
The guy at T.Rex arms, Louis Botkin I think his name is. The kid is a beast at 3gun drills and just shooting fast. He basically said it takes him a weeks time of working round the clock basically to get a 15 minute video uploaded.... so yeah I'd say it's a job, just not a typical job...
Separate names with a comma.