Taking "stress inoculation" to a new level LOL
- Thread starter Animal357
- Start date
IIRC he gave weed to his girlfriend, and that turned him into el chappo. And the feds went after him like he was Escobar.
It wasn't even weed. It was Butane Honey Oil. Supposedly above the range of allowable THC.
Former YouTuber FPSRussia Opens Up About His Time In Prison
The YouTuber was sentenced to two months in prison back in 2019
"But in August 2017, Myers' residence was raided agents from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) and Georgia Bureau of Investigation (GBI) following allegations that Myers had been sent 25 grams of butane honey oil through the mail.
Butane honey oil is a marijuana concentrate that is high in THC."
So pretty much what’s already been said. They were looking for an excuse to shut him down and sending it by mail made it a federal offense. Perfect for their purposes.It wasn't even weed. It was Butane Honey Oil. Supposedly above the range of allowable THC.
Former YouTuber FPSRussia Opens Up About His Time In Prison
The YouTuber was sentenced to two months in prison back in 2019www.ladbible.com
"But in August 2017, Myers' residence was raided agents from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) and Georgia Bureau of Investigation (GBI) following allegations that Myers had been sent 25 grams of butane honey oil through the mail.
Butane honey oil is a marijuana concentrate that is high in THC."
It wasn't even weed. It was Butane Honey Oil. Supposedly above the range of allowable THC.
Former YouTuber FPSRussia Opens Up About His Time In Prison
The YouTuber was sentenced to two months in prison back in 2019
"But in August 2017, Myers' residence was raided agents from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) and Georgia Bureau of Investigation (GBI) following allegations that Myers had been sent 25 grams of butane honey oil through the mail.
Butane honey oil is a marijuana concentrate that is high in THC."
IIRC there are a few other things with him that raised questions, like his "business" partner and supplier of most of the toys shown on his videos being found at his desk with a single 22 round to the back of the head.
Something fishy was going on no doubt, I think this was just an easy way to remove him from view.
And to tie that into this thread the same thing was going on with Vickers, something not quite right.
If you are going to paint that big bullseye on your forehead you better be sure you are doing everything "right". Not that means much as we all know, if they want you gone they will find a way.
That's usually the point of hash oil - it's a concentrate (sometimes north of 80% THC). I'd normally suggest that a federally licensed firearms dealer sending the concentrated form of a Schedule I drug via USPS would be about the dumbest thing someone could do, but then I remember his YouTube content and this probably doesn't make his personal top-10 list.
You guys ever see a guy in a fancy sports car putzing away on the freeway in the right lane at exactly the speed limit? That's life as a small FFL, particularly an SOT. All eyes are on you, and so you best behave. Now, if you're a big enough FFL, that's a different story altogether...
He was hilarious! Hear the interview where he said he got the accent from? He worked with a Russian at a car lot and learned how to copy his accent.
Then in character in videos he literally got into it and said he has to play the part and not be shocked or scared by anything. Funny guy! Probably was a hoot at the holiday get together.
This falls into my category of "When is it enough?"
Successful career in SFOD-D?
Not enough.
Successful YouTube firearms presence?
Not enough.
Successful advisor to multiple firearms companies?
Not enough.
On a long enough timeline these "Not enough" assessments derail people.
The scary part is, many people who fall victim to "Not enough," never even thought to ask themselves that question or do a risk vs gain analysis prior to pursuing the next thing.
Ambition Autopilot is a thing, and it's dangerous.
-Stan
Successful career in SFOD-D?
Not enough.
Successful YouTube firearms presence?
Not enough.
Successful advisor to multiple firearms companies?
Not enough.
On a long enough timeline these "Not enough" assessments derail people.
The scary part is, many people who fall victim to "Not enough," never even thought to ask themselves that question or do a risk vs gain analysis prior to pursuing the next thing.
Ambition Autopilot is a thing, and it's dangerous.
-Stan
I don’t think the NRA wants Hughes challenged or the nfa because like you said it doesn’t help their donations. And I’m sure a lot of owners of fa are huge contributors to the nra and don’t want to see their investments lose value.I think the striking down of the Hughes Amendment, or especially the entire NFA, would moot the entire issue of pistol braces, bump stocks, trigger resets, etc., and it would secure significant gun rights for a generation, and sort of put some of the organizations "on ice" so to speak, unable to raise tens of millions of dollars from donors.
I don't believe any of them have any real intention of mounting a direct challenge to the NFA or even just the Hughes Amendment to get the registry open to new full-auto.
They trim and prune the branches but won't swing the axe at the trunk. I just don't see any serious determination to drive hard against the NFA in a direct facial challenge.
Bump stocks and pistol braces are frankly trivial and are not something I would expend significant amounts of resources litigating over. I would rather litigate over the very NFA itself and moot the issues on simulated full auto toys and pistol braces making rifles SBR, by simply eliminating regulations/classification of the SBR.
Many of these organizations need ongoing crisis situations to justify raising money from donors.
A fire department that never has a fire to put out, will quickly find its budget slashed. There has to be some fire, somewhere, at some point, or else people will grow complacent and won't pay up.
The NRA needs ongoing threats to gun rights and ongoing litigation over trivial gun rights issues.
Don't forget, the NRA did not support Heller in the Heller v DC case and they tried to derail his progress to getting before the US Supreme Court.
He Won the Biggest Gun Rights Case in U.S. History. But Dick Heller Is a Hard Man to Please.
The monumental case bearing his name changed the gun debate forever, but his crusade to get rid of all gun regulation was just getting started.www.thetrace.org
Four years into the litigation, Parker and four other original plaintiffs were dropped from the case because they lacked legal standing, meaning they hadn’t suffered enough of an “injury,” in technical terms, to file suit. Heller, meanwhile, still held the trump card that vonBreichenrucharft had engineered: the denied gun permit. That was enough to sue. Parker v. D.C. was renamed Heller v. D.C., with Dick Heller as the sole plaintiff.
The case still faced other hurdles. Early on, lawyers for the NRA — fearing pro-gun forces lacked enough votes to convince a Supreme Court majority that the Second Amendment protects an individual’s right to bear arms — tried to talk Levy out of pursuing the case. They then attempted to dissuade him from using as his lead lawyer an untested sole practitioner, Alan Gura. Doubting Heller’s prospects, the NRA filed a competing suit, Seegars v. Ashcroft, helmed by a leading Second Amendment advocate, Stephen Halbrook.
The NRA’s concerns were strategic, but Levy says now that something else was going on. “I think the real concern was that three lawyers from outside the NRA started stepping on some toes, and the NRA wasn’t appreciative,” he says.
During the Supreme Court oral arguments in Heller, Gura claimed the court could secure gun rights for individuals while still allowing for certain restrictions, such as a machine gun ban. Gura’s concession — followed by language in Scalia’s majority opinion that “nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt” on longstanding regulations such as restrictions on felons “or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms” — realigned the spectrum of gun-rights advocates. Gura had spent the previous five years racing past the NRA, fueled by a belief that they could upend centuries of law. But even that brash position paled in comparison with the radicalism of absolutists, and now Gura and his associates found themselves to the left of hard-line advocates.
On a side note the nra has always seemed that they thought we only need trap guns anyways. That they really only care about certain types of firearms and actually getting anything accomplished is out of reach.
Of the many problems with the NRA, i don't think Full Auto guys derailing anti-NFA is a thing. But that's a whole other subject. I'll just leave it as I've stopped donating.
If I could take the NRA's rep among the anti-s and give it to GOA I would.
DOJ on Enforcement of Gun Control Laws...
Now that things have simmered down in this thread. Here is a link to what the Department of Justice has to say about gun control and victimless crimes. It's a good read. BTW, the DOJ doesn't even factor in the constitutionality of gun control.
Now that things have simmered down in this thread. Here is a link to what the Department of Justice has to say about gun control and victimless crimes. It's a good read. BTW, the DOJ doesn't even factor in the constitutionality of gun control.
"WITH PROHIBITION OF GUNS WILL UNDOUBTEDLY SPROUT UP AN ILLEGAL FIREARMS BUSINESS AND RELATED ILLEGITIMATE BUSINESSES."
Huh, well if that's not the dangest thing.
There's an essay in the middle of John Ross's book Unintended Consequences that is tangential to this hypothesis.
Similar threads
