YouTube rolls out new guidelines for channels that promote firearms or firearm accessories

[Polycount]

YouTube's attempts to crack down on content they deem violent or otherwise harmful seem to be continuing with their latest platform policy changes. According to Motherboard, the company is instituting some tough new rules for channels that create content surrounding the use or modification of firearms.

Specifically, the company will no longer allow content that "Intends to sell firearms or certain firearms accessories through direct sales...or links to sites that sell these items." As some firearm manufacturers and firearm accessory companies use YouTube as a way to advertise their products, this sudden rule change is likely going to upset quite a few channel owners.

Slingshot channel owner Jörg Sprave, on the other hand, appreciates YouTube's attempts to make their guidelines clear but also feels the way the rules are being instituted is unfair to creators. "Many gun channels must now be afraid, as they might get plenty of strikes in no time for older videos and then lose their channels," Sprave said in a statement. "They should at least get some time to clean up their videos so the new rules are kept. Again, not the way you treat 'partners.'"

Indeed, some channel owners may already be receiving strikes or even suspensions for hosting newly-banned content on their channels. One such channel is gun manufacturer Spike's Tactical, who reportedly received an email from YouTube stating their channel was suspended for "repeated or severe violations of our community guidelines."

If it was related to YouTube's new firearm content policies, Spike Tactical's suspension would seem to contradict statements YouTube reportedly gave to TubeFilter on Monday. At the time, the video platform claimed their new rules wouldn't be enforced until sometime in April. We've reached out to YouTube for clarification. For the time being, the following excerpt from YouTube's statement to TubeFilter explains the company's reasoning behind their new policies:

We routinely make updates and adjustments to our enforcement guidelines across all of our policies. While we’ve long prohibited the sale of firearms, we recently notified creators of updates we will be making around content promoting the sale or manufacture of firearms and their accessories, specifically, items like ammunition, gatling triggers, and drop-in auto sears. We will begin enforcing these new guidelines next month. We recommend creators take a look at our Help Center and review their own content during that time.

To reiterate, it does not sound like YouTube will be banning channels that simply discuss, test or otherwise display firearms. Rather, it seems the company is only cracking down on videos directly promoting firearms or firearm accessories by linking to such products, presumably through annotations or description links.

YouTube's policies on firearm-related instructional videos, however, are much more restrictive. According to YouTube's guidelines, the company will not allow content that "provides instructions on manufacturing a firearm, ammunition, high capacity magazine... or certain firearms accessories such as those listed above." This ban also applies to instructional content explaining how to convert firearms to "automatic or simulated automatic firing capabilities."

Permalink to story.

https://www.techspot.com/news/73820-youtube-rolls-out-new-guidelines-channels-promote-firearms.html

 

[davislane1]

People need to understand that YouTube is the single worst long term investment for your business, and borderline suicidal of you use it as a primary means of connecting with your market.

Never, under any circumstances, invest yourself in a platform that can kill your business model with a single edit of the ToS.*

*Edit: Unless you’re an amateur porn star. They seem pretty safe.

 

[Hexic]

I agree with your logic, davislane1. On the flip side, it's truly sad that companies are beginning to feed into the political machine for the sake of PR.

Very slowly I see a very famous piece of literature inserting less than factual subtleties into the public beliefs.

"...they had come to a time when no one dared speak his mind, when fierce, growling dogs roamed everywhere, and when you had to watch your comrades torn to pieces after confessing to shocking crimes."

 

[yRaz]

People need to understand that YouTube is the single worst long term investment for your business, and borderline suicidal of you use it as a primary means of connecting with your market.

Never, under any circumstances, invest yourself in a platform that can kill your business model with a single edit of the ToS.*

*Edit: Unless you’re an amateur porn star. They seem pretty safe.

Actually, this is a good change compared to what they have been doing. Previously they've just demonetized any channel that has to do with firearms. Atleast they're giving gun channels a chance to make money

 

[Evernessince]

TLDR

1. Don't attempt to use YouTube to sell your firearms directly
2. Don't attempt to demonstrate how to modify a fire-arm into a weapon that would violate federal law
3. Don't attempt to demonstrate how to make home made firearms

My opinion

1. I would be fine with allowing the sale of firearms directly if and only if they were to provide YouTube with their Gun Dealers License, form of identification, and Business Code. Otherwise, I agree with YouTube's action on this. Allowing anyone to sell firearms directly allows people to get around existing laws.

2. Really YouTube was never the place to be showing people how to turn your semi/single shot rifle into an auto. Many of these modifications are either grey or illegal. Many of them can also be dangerous to the user.

3. A majority of homemade guns are illegal unless approved by the US ATF. Of course, YouTube should not be hosting videos with illegal content.

 

[Kotters]

TLR

1. Don't attempt to use YouTube to sell your firearms directly
2. Don't attempt to demonstrate how to modify a fire-arm into a weapon that would violate federal law
3. Don't attempt to demonstrate how to make home made firearms

My opinion

1. I would be fine with allowing the sale of firearms directly if and only if they were to provide YouTube with their Gun Dealers License, form of identification, and Business Code. Otherwise, I agree with YouTube's action on this. Allowing anyone to sell firearms directly allows people to get around existing laws.

2. Really YouTube was never the place to be showing people how to turn your semi/single shot rifle into an auto. Many of these modifications are either grey or illegal. Many of them can also be dangerous to the user.

3. A majority of homemade guns are illegal unless approved by the US ATF. Of course, YouTube should not be hosting videos with illegal content.

You didn't read the TOS. The wording basically bans the entirety of Forgotten Weapons, a ton of content on InrangeTV, and a ton of content on Demolition Ranch, to name a few.

Intends to sell firearms or certain firearms accessories through direct sales (e.g., private sales by individuals) or links to sites that sell these items. These accessories include but may not be limited to accessories that enable a firearm to simulate automatic fire or convert a firearm to automatic fire (e.g., bump stocks, gatling triggers, drop-in auto sears, conversion kits), and high capacity magazines (I.e., magazines or belts carrying more than 30 rounds).
Provides instructions on manufacturing a firearm, ammunition, high capacity magazine, homemade silencers/suppressors, or certain firearms accessories such as those listed above. This also includes instructions on how to convert a firearm to automatic or simulated automatic firing capabilities.
Shows users how to install the above-mentioned accessories or modifications.

Inserting a Magpul PMAG-40 or D60, for instance, qualifies as showing the installation of a "high capacity magazine" and would result in you being banned. These items are regularly used in competition, and therefore any recording of a shooting match would potentially be against the TOS. Any video that mentioned a manufacturer and talked about a part is banned. Any video on handloading is banned. Discussions about 80% lowers, AR-15 assembly videos, etc. are all banned.

(And no, the vast majority of home-made firearms are not illegal, and they do not require the approval of the ATF to create. Nor would such a thing even be enforceable.)

 

[Evernessince]

You didn't read the TOS. The wording basically bans the entirety of Forgotten Weapons, a ton of content on InrangeTV, and a ton of content on Demolition Ranch, to name a few.

Intends to sell firearms or certain firearms accessories through direct sales (e.g., private sales by individuals) or links to sites that sell these items. These accessories include but may not be limited to accessories that enable a firearm to simulate automatic fire or convert a firearm to automatic fire (e.g., bump stocks, gatling triggers, drop-in auto sears, conversion kits), and high capacity magazines (I.e., magazines or belts carrying more than 30 rounds).
Provides instructions on manufacturing a firearm, ammunition, high capacity magazine, homemade silencers/suppressors, or certain firearms accessories such as those listed above. This also includes instructions on how to convert a firearm to automatic or simulated automatic firing capabilities.
Shows users how to install the above-mentioned accessories or modifications.

Inserting a Magpul PMAG-40 or D60, for instance, qualifies as showing the installation of a "high capacity magazine" and would result in you being banned. These items are regularly used in competition, and therefore any recording of a shooting match would potentially be against the TOS. Any video that mentioned a manufacturer and talked about a part is banned. Any video on handloading is banned. Discussions about 80% lowers, AR-15 assembly videos, etc. are all banned.

(And no, the vast majority of home-made firearms are not illegal, and they do not require the approval of the ATF to create. Nor would such a thing even be enforceable.)

https://www.atf.gov/firearms/qa/does-individual-need-license-make-firearm-personal-use

"the making of an NFA firearm requires a tax payment and advance approval by ATF."

https://www.atf.gov/firearms/qa/which-firearms-are-regulated-under-nfa

"
Which firearms are regulated under the NFA?
(1) a shotgun having a barrel or barrels of less than 18 inches in length;

(2) a weapon made from a shotgun if such weapon as modified has an overall length of less than 26 inches or a barrel or barrels of less than 18 inches in length;

(3) a rifle having a barrel or barrels of less than 16 inches in length;

(4) a weapon made from a rifle if such weapon as modified has an overall length of less than 26 inches or a barrel or barrels of less than 16 inches in length;

(5) any other weapon, as defined in subsection (e);

(6) a machinegun;

(7) any silencer (as defined in section 921 of title 18, United States Code); and

(8) a destructive device."

Any weapon that is covered by the above list is considered Title 2 and not only requires registering but also requires you to have a license to operate said weapon. These are only the federal laws, any state firearm laws will also apply. I live in NY, both the Magpul PMAG-40 and D60 are illegal in my state unless you are law enforcement. You are limited to 10 rounds at best.

In addition, any weapon that may be concealed or is not in a conventional firearm shape is considered AOW and is illegal under the undetectable firearm act.

Here is an explanation on a majority of this

I'll re-iterate my point, many of the home-made weapon videos I've see have most certainly display the making of illegal firearms.

 

[NightAntilli]

The downfall of YouTube has begun.

 

[Kotters]

https://www.atf.gov/firearms/qa/does-individual-need-license-make-firearm-personal-use

"the making of an NFA firearm requires a tax payment and advance approval by ATF."

https://www.atf.gov/firearms/qa/which-firearms-are-regulated-under-nfa

"
Which firearms are regulated under the NFA?
(1) a shotgun having a barrel or barrels of less than 18 inches in length;

(2) a weapon made from a shotgun if such weapon as modified has an overall length of less than 26 inches or a barrel or barrels of less than 18 inches in length;

(3) a rifle having a barrel or barrels of less than 16 inches in length;

(4) a weapon made from a rifle if such weapon as modified has an overall length of less than 26 inches or a barrel or barrels of less than 16 inches in length;

(5) any other weapon, as defined in subsection (e);

(6) a machinegun;

(7) any silencer (as defined in section 921 of title 18, United States Code); and

(8) a destructive device."

Any weapon that is covered by the above list is considered Title 2 and not only requires registering but also requires you to have a license to operate said weapon. These are only the federal laws, any state firearm laws will also apply. I live in NY, both the Magpul PMAG-40 and D60 are illegal in my state unless you are law enforcement. You are limited to 10 rounds at best.

In addition, any weapon that may be concealed or is not in a conventional firearm shape is considered AOW and is illegal under the undetectable firearm act.

Here is an explanation on a majority of this

I'll re-iterate my point, many of the home-made weapon videos I've see have most certainly display the making of illegal firearms.

...What? The vast majority of home-made firearms aren't regulated by the NFA, dude. 80% Glocks and 80% ARs are the vast majority of the market. You're spouting bullshit.

Besides, manufacturing an NFA item isn't illegal, either. Form 1 SBRs are super common as far as SBRs go. Probably several times more common than Form 4.

 

[IAMTHESTIG]

This is mainly just YT's attempt to prevent the pro second amendment entities from expressing their opinions. Their guidelines are pretty crap though as that pretty much bans a lot of History channel content as well. Really far reaching and essentially a violation of freedom of speed. But it is a private organization so there isn't much you can do.

YT is clearly aligned with the political left. Their goal is to silence the political right. The left is the side committing violence and spreading hate. The left will end civilization eventually.

 

[Evernessince]

...What? The vast majority of home-made firearms aren't regulated by the NFA, dude. 80% Glocks and 80% ARs are the vast majority of the market. You're spouting bullshit.

Besides, manufacturing an NFA item isn't illegal, either. Form 1 SBRs are super common as far as SBRs go. Probably several times more common than Form 4.

I provided a link with proof on the subject. If all you are going to do is call names, you've already given up and I see no need to converse with such a person.

This is mainly just YT's attempt to prevent the pro second amendment entities from expressing their opinions. Their guidelines are pretty crap though as that pretty much bans a lot of History channel content as well. Really far reaching and essentially a violation of freedom of speed. But it is a private organization so there isn't much you can do.

YT is clearly aligned with the political left. Their goal is to silence the political right. The left is the side committing violence and spreading hate. The left will end civilization eventually.

First, Freedom of Speech only applies to the government. Private entities do not have to respect freedom of speech.

Second, these people can still talk about guns all they want, they simply cannot show them in certain potentially illegal scenarios.

 

[Hexic]

I provided a link with proof on the subject. If all you are going to do is call names, you've already given up and I see no need to converse with such a person.



First, Freedom of Speech only applies to the government. Private entities do not have to respect freedom of speech.

Second, these people can still talk about guns all they want, they simply cannot show them in certain potentially illegal scenarios.

An illegal scenario in one state, is legal in another. One regulation that applies to a private owner, may not apply to a dealer. The very fact that YouTube is attempting to split hairs here, solely for the sake of political PR, is sad.

Using that logic, YouTube could ban certain videos from being viewed in California, and enable them to be viewed in the majority of the other states. Doesn't that sound ridiculous? The very concept of this facade of regulation for the sake of legality is ridiculous.

The better start taking down all those videos in the Middle East of people getting blown up, of women being abused, any satirical content containing the above, because it may offend somebody. Or be illegal in just about every first world country.

How far down the rabbit hole should we go? Common sense goes a very long way. The internet is the internet, people are going to have to get used to that and be able to make intelligent decisions for themselves without worry about being manipulated because they fired up YouTube.

The fact that this needs to be explained is embarrassing.

 

[Evernessince]

An illegal scenario in one state, is legal in another. One regulation that applies to a private owner, may not apply to a dealer. The very fact that YouTube is attempting to split hairs here, solely for the sake of political PR, is sad.

Using that logic, YouTube could ban certain videos from being viewed in California, and enable them to be viewed in the majority of the other states. Doesn't that sound ridiculous? The very concept of this facade of regulation for the sake of legality is ridiculous.

The better start taking down all those videos in the Middle East of people getting blown up, of women being abused, any satirical content containing the above, because it may offend somebody. Or be illegal in just about every first world country.

How far down the rabbit hole should we go? Common sense goes a very long way. The internet is the internet, people are going to have to get used to that and be able to make intelligent decisions for themselves without worry about being manipulated because they fired up YouTube.

The fact that this needs to be explained is embarrassing.

You are right, there are so many different regulations in different states for firearms it's extremely had to keep tabs on them all.

I'm honestly all for clearing up the mess of not just gun laws, but laws in general we have. Many of the older gun laws need to either gotten rid of or updated for modern times.

 

[IAMTHESTIG]

First, Freedom of Speech only applies to the government. Private entities do not have to respect freedom of speech.

Second, these people can still talk about guns all they want, they simply cannot show them in certain potentially illegal scenarios.

what sort of "potentially illegal scenarios" are you thinking of? I used to watch tons of "gun videos" on YT, and I never saw anything that was illegal. You know just as well as I do YT has a political goal here, it has nothing to do with stopping the spread of hate.

YT, and any other business entity should stay the hell out of politics. Now every stupid company has to have a "political stance". It is ridiculous and in the end only facilitates the spread of hate and separation.

 

[Evernessince]

what sort of "potentially illegal scenarios" are you thinking of? I used to watch tons of "gun videos" on YT, and I never saw anything that was illegal. You know just as well as I do YT has a political goal here, it has nothing to do with stopping the spread of hate.

YT, and any other business entity should stay the hell out of politics. Now every stupid company has to have a "political stance". It is ridiculous and in the end only facilitates the spread of hate and separation.

I think YouTube is trying to cover their buts here to avoid potential lawsuits. Companies act when their money is in danger. I doubt it's politically related, they know gun enthusiasts and republicans use YouTube all the time. Not a good idea to cut off a portion of their income. Lebron James once commented on business and politics saying "Republicans buy shoes too". It's never a good idea for a business to take a political stance unless their customers all share that same view.

 

[Impudicus]

Youtube needs to add a "I'm Offended" button. If anyone if offended by a video it is removed. Then we can all enjoy nothing but wholesome entertainment. If there's anything left at all.

 

[mailpup]

Youtube needs to add a "I'm Offended" button. If anyone if offended by a video it is removed. Then we can all enjoy nothing but wholesome entertainment. If there's anything left at all.

They already have a Dislike button. There are hardly any YouTube videos that don't have at least one dislike. If the same people who hit the Dislike button hit an Offended button, you're right, there won't be left at all.

 

[IAMTHESTIG]

I think YouTube is trying to cover their buts here to avoid potential lawsuits. Companies act when their money is in danger. I doubt it's politically related, they know gun enthusiasts and republicans use YouTube all the time. Not a good idea to cut off a portion of their income. Lebron James once commented on business and politics saying "Republicans buy shoes too". It's never a good idea for a business to take a political stance unless their customers all share that same view.

Considering the actions of YT against some very popular pro-gun channels, I must wholeheartedly disagree with you. But that's ok, we don't have to agree to have a civil discussion.