https://support.google.com/youtube/...4, certain,accessories will be age restricted.
It looks like this would mean no more reloading videos? What a crock
It looks like this would mean no more reloading videos? What a crock
You Tube policy change
- Thread starter Danb6177
- Start date
Don’t post content on YouTube if the purpose is to do one or more of the following:
Provide instructions on manufacturing any of the following:
Ammunition,
since they included this, specifically I'd say a video showing how to handload ammo would be prohibited.
Always remember that the Constitutionally enumerated right of free speech only applies between you, and the government, NOT between you and any private parties. And that what all these social media sites are, private companies, who are free to deny any content they do not approve of.
Provide instructions on manufacturing any of the following:
Ammunition,
since they included this, specifically I'd say a video showing how to handload ammo would be prohibited.
Always remember that the Constitutionally enumerated right of free speech only applies between you, and the government, NOT between you and any private parties. And that what all these social media sites are, private companies, who are free to deny any content they do not approve of.
FoghornLeghorn
New member
Hickok45 posted a vid on utube about it. He says it's going to hurt him because his channel has firearms' companies supporting his efforts. Utube is going to delete channels and individual vids that have such sponsors.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-KWxaOmVNBE&t=1s&ab_channel=hickok45
As an aside, this from another forum:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-KWxaOmVNBE&t=1s&ab_channel=hickok45
As an aside, this from another forum:
Don't just go somewhere else, go elsewhere and LET U TUBE KNOW WHY.
Boycotts don't work unless the outfit being boycotted knows they are being boycotted, and WHY.
They may not work anyway, "virtue signaling" may make them more money and so they will go with it, but if they don't know why they lost your business, a boycott cannot work.
Boycotts don't work unless the outfit being boycotted knows they are being boycotted, and WHY.
They may not work anyway, "virtue signaling" may make them more money and so they will go with it, but if they don't know why they lost your business, a boycott cannot work.
FrankenMauser
New member
They haven't allowed "ammunition manufacturing" since, like, 2012.
What rock have you been under?
If you want a platform designed to allow such, check out Playeur.
I’m not sure this is the proper forum for it, but this is the old public accommodation vs private property rights. I get the value of private property rights, but when you can place a ban on someone based on their exercise of speech or carry rights, it seems like things have gone too far. We are not talking hate speech here, we are talking reloading videos after all. I get that federal law is not on my side necessarily.
I think I get concerned when someone sets up a public forum for speech/video, then they are allowed to ban people exercising free speech on topics not generally banned from free speech. It seems excessive.
50 shooter
New member
I can't believe there's still gun people on Boobtube!
Now they're crying about ANOTHER policy change?!
Should've got off of their platform years ago! They censor everything, not just gun videos.
Just like any website, someone owns it and can run it however they see fit. If you don't like it, as others have said, leave and let them know why.
Now they're crying about ANOTHER policy change?!
Should've got off of their platform years ago! They censor everything, not just gun videos.
Just like any website, someone owns it and can run it however they see fit. If you don't like it, as others have said, leave and let them know why.
Based on what you said here, you really don't get the value of private property rights.
While there are some specific legal limits, generally speaking, you don't get to say, or do anything you want if the property owner objects to it. Does not matter if it is a commonly done thing, other places if the property owner does not approve of it, they can boot you out, and they have the right to do so.
Your right to free speech and being armed ENDS at my property line. Just as my right to do so ends at yours. This is not a matter of civil rights between you and the govt, this is a matter between the property owner and you (or I) and no matter what you or I feel they ought to allow, or what we allow on our property, our opinions do not (and should not) prevail on property we do not own.
Double Naught Spy
New member
GUN People are still on YouTube because it is profitable, plain and simple.
Many of us have tried other platforms, but you know what, just like the democrats that said they were leaving the country if Trump got elected, these folks were leaving YouTube if things didn't change, and they all went to Rumble and other platforms and then never shut down their YouTube accounts. In fact, many have returned to YouTube with modified content because they aren't making diddly on other platforms, or in some cases, are doing okay on the new platform, but can still make money off of YouTube. They have their principles and will speak loudly about them, but they all come back to the $$.
So FM has a point. They haven't allowed it for years. However, the new policy change is only that part that is in the highlighted start of the YouTube link...
The other stuff that followed is just the rules as they are now and have been for some time.
Many of us have tried other platforms, but you know what, just like the democrats that said they were leaving the country if Trump got elected, these folks were leaving YouTube if things didn't change, and they all went to Rumble and other platforms and then never shut down their YouTube accounts. In fact, many have returned to YouTube with modified content because they aren't making diddly on other platforms, or in some cases, are doing okay on the new platform, but can still make money off of YouTube. They have their principles and will speak loudly about them, but they all come back to the $$.
So FM has a point. They haven't allowed it for years. However, the new policy change is only that part that is in the highlighted start of the YouTube link...
The other stuff that followed is just the rules as they are now and have been for some time.
I agree with the way you are saying, but try this on…..let’s say you make some virtual property. You create it as wide open come one, come all place. That creates its value from nothing. Let’s say you leverage my activity on your property to grow its value. You paid me nothing…..I guess my point is that this is not private personal use property. Your example or even most brick and mortar examples the value is in the business and the assets….and in your counter example, if you open up to public access, it does limit your rights. Not only that, but if you operate it recklessly, you can be found liable for your reckless actions. I would argue that there is a reckless nature to the way social media is run today.
Would you agree that social media is on or across the boundary of reckless operation today?
No different from a printer in the 18th century who advertises for "come one, come all" to submit letters to the editor for print. The printer chooses which ones he wants to print. The rest were invited just the same, but can pound sand if the printer doesn't want to print their stuff.
This policy change is a big nothing-burger. It's hype intended to inflame you, just like the idiotic garbage (on youtube) claiming a particular credit union in Idaho was going to prevent (and get rid of?) customers from buying or selling guns. That was all nonsense. The CU wrote up a policy change poorly, and put out a correction shortly. However, youtube and all kinds of brainless internet users were up in arms about nothing. All just trying to get you to lose confidence and trust. In everything. Exactly what Russia and China have been trying to achieve here for decades.
I find the notions currently circulating about "censorship" mostly bogus. Lying is the problem, from my point of view, and free speech has NEVER, EVER been considered by any society on the planet that I know of to include deliberate lies. Fraud, libel, slander... all these are proof that we do NOT consider lying to fall under 'freedom of speech.'
The problem is that telling the truth is boring. You don't get all riled up; inflamed; maybe outright angry; when you're presented with nothing but un-stilted, complete truth, devoid of any desire to guide you to conclusions favorable to the tale-teller. If you're not angry, you make better, clearer decisions. No one who wants either your money or your vote wants that. It's easier to manipulate you if your judgment is clouded.
This policy change is a big nothing-burger. It's hype intended to inflame you, just like the idiotic garbage (on youtube) claiming a particular credit union in Idaho was going to prevent (and get rid of?) customers from buying or selling guns. That was all nonsense. The CU wrote up a policy change poorly, and put out a correction shortly. However, youtube and all kinds of brainless internet users were up in arms about nothing. All just trying to get you to lose confidence and trust. In everything. Exactly what Russia and China have been trying to achieve here for decades.
I find the notions currently circulating about "censorship" mostly bogus. Lying is the problem, from my point of view, and free speech has NEVER, EVER been considered by any society on the planet that I know of to include deliberate lies. Fraud, libel, slander... all these are proof that we do NOT consider lying to fall under 'freedom of speech.'
The problem is that telling the truth is boring. You don't get all riled up; inflamed; maybe outright angry; when you're presented with nothing but un-stilted, complete truth, devoid of any desire to guide you to conclusions favorable to the tale-teller. If you're not angry, you make better, clearer decisions. No one who wants either your money or your vote wants that. It's easier to manipulate you if your judgment is clouded.
Funny, I see dangerous stuff on all social media platforms, the same goes for scams, lies false advertising, fake science and so on. They focus on banning topics that relate to certain civil rights and those that may sway political opinions or those opinions that may indicate official and elite misconduct.
Quote:
Starting June 18, 2024, certain content showing how to remove safety devices will be prohibited. Content showing the use of homemade firearms, automatic firearms, and certain firearm accessories will be age restricted.
This is where You Tube gets me madder than hell. One of the sites I go to shows acts of crime being prevented by citizens, Leos etc. All now age restricted. There's quite a bit of other stuff too but the point is, every time I open up an "age restricted" item regardless of content I'm denied, have to put in a new password which they ignore the next time around. For the record, I will be 86 come the 19th of next month. I guess I must still be too young to see any of that age restricted stuff. I'll bet the 12 year old kid can get that stuff easier than I can. Too bad as there was some good gun related stuff that I enjoyed watching when I had time.
Paul B.
Starting June 18, 2024, certain content showing how to remove safety devices will be prohibited. Content showing the use of homemade firearms, automatic firearms, and certain firearm accessories will be age restricted.
This is where You Tube gets me madder than hell. One of the sites I go to shows acts of crime being prevented by citizens, Leos etc. All now age restricted. There's quite a bit of other stuff too but the point is, every time I open up an "age restricted" item regardless of content I'm denied, have to put in a new password which they ignore the next time around. For the record, I will be 86 come the 19th of next month. I guess I must still be too young to see any of that age restricted stuff. I'll bet the 12 year old kid can get that stuff easier than I can. Too bad as there was some good gun related stuff that I enjoyed watching when I had time.
Paul B.