Daily Timewaster put up this image yesterday:
If you were in any doubt whether or not that meme is based on fact, this news confirms it.
YouTube Terminates Channel of Firearms Parts Retailer
“Brownells’ YouTube channel has been terminated without warning or notice,” Brownells’ Twitter account stated.
Brownells’ YouTube channel has been terminated w/out warning or notice.
If you’re opposed to the attacks on our communitys 1st & 2nd Amendment rights, please contact GOOGLE : 650-253-0000 OPTION 5 FOR YOUTUBE, MESSAGE YT & GOOGLE: https://t.co/csetulvAck https://t.co/9oLz6TGWZx pic.twitter.com/T85z9Py2l0
— Brownells, Inc. (@BrownellsInc) June 9, 2018
Comments on social media were mostly critical of the move, many users saying Brownells is the wrong entity to go after to prevent gun violence.
Powerful advertising platforms like Google, Facebook, and Twitter have come under fire recently from Second Amendment advocates for apparent censorship of gun-related content. Even products meant to increase gun safety, such as ZORE’s highly-rated gun safety lock, have seen their advertisements censored, the internet platforms citing policies restricting ads for firearms sales.
There’s more at the link.
I’ve been a customer of Brownells for many years. It’s anything but an “evil black rifle” vendor – it supplies parts, components and accessories for almost every firearm imaginable, from antique to modern, from hunting to target shooting, and almost everything in between. A less “offensive” firearms vendor would be hard to imagine. If you haven’t shopped there yourself, I recommend them from personal experience.
Taken with anti-gun measures adopted by Quicken, which we discussed a couple of weeks ago, it’s clear that any pro-firearm, pro-Second Amendment business or resource is now at risk from the politically correct and from Social Justice
Warriors Worrywarts. I suggest firearms owners and users should respond by voting with our consumer dollars. If a business welcomes our trade, we’ll use it; if it doesn’t, it can look for customers somewhere else. The same applies to the parts of the US Constitution a business supports. Since YouTube and the Second Amendment are clearly at odds, that makes it easier to choose which site should not host our videos and derive revenue from them, doesn’t it?