r/InRangeTV • u/Past_Entry_5452 • Aug 26 '26
Nick Young, CEO and owner of Desert Tech, saw 8 children removed from his home by Utah Department of Child and Family Services
https://kutv.com/news/local/eight-children-removed-from-home-of-purported-polygamous-coupleI'm posting this here because InRange reviewed Young's WLVRN rifle and its predecessors (MDR and MDRX), and Karl claimed to have worked with Desert Tech to provide feedback on how they could improve the MDRX. IRTV gave the WLVRN glowing reviews with no mention of Young's involvement with a polygamous cult, which was surprising considering InRange's very well-known pro-civil rights bona fides and its presenters' willingness to get down in the mud in the comments and on web forums over much smaller squabbles.
None of Young's, the Kingstons', or Desert Tech's association with polygamy, child grooming, or arranged marriage are what you'd call hidden lore: they are very publicly known and are a major reason why Desert Tech can't score any big government contracts. And there were comments on the IRTV youtube review of the WLVRN trying to highlight this that went unacknowledged by the channel.
I fully expect some response to the tune of "there's no ethical consumption under capitalism," which I'm tired of entertaining; any anarchist that believes in the principle of direct action should balk at that idea. Please add a disclaimer to the WLVRN review acknowledging Young and Desert Tech's involvement with the Kingston cult.
46
u/140in Aug 26 '26
Fork found in kitchen, unfortunately. This industry is full of & attracts weirdos, especially the religious kind (see, Kahr).
25
u/testprimate Aug 26 '26
I don't know anything about their personal lives, but the article suggests that all the children have two parents, and it doesn't directly accuse them of practicing polygamy. They follow the religion of their parents and grandparents, just like many other people who may or may not be fully on board with everything their church preaches.
They are being persecuted, rightly or not, by a state firmly in control of a larger cult that their sect broke away from. The mainstream LDS church only stopped their polygamous practices due to intense political pressure, and they continue to preach that a man can be married for eternity to multiple wives, as long as it's one living wife at a time. Women cannot be eternally married to multiple men.
The societal and political pressure on the church to distance themselves from their earnestly held beliefs have motivated them to crush the breakaway groups that formed from the schism caused by the church caving to outside influence on the issue.
My point is that there might not be any fire under this smoke, despite how unlikely that might seem. Unless there's more condemning information available I don't think it's inappropriate to reserve judgment.
6
u/Past_Entry_5452 Aug 26 '26
Nothing you said is unreasonable, but what stood out to me was that the removal of the children was upheld and that a woman who got out of the Kingston cult who has been fighting to dismantle it praised the action. At the risk of being a "wokescold", I'm going to defer to the woman who is sounding the alarm over the group for heavily pressuring (forcing?) girls into incestuous arranged marriages, something which has been reported as happening by her and by others inside the Kingston cult.
3
u/testprimate Aug 26 '26
I'm just seeing the kids being taken and the action being supported by people who have extreme bias. If this were happening in California I'd be much more inclined to agree with you. As it stands I'd need to see some real evidence to be convinced. Something like text messages or emails detailing the plans, or one of the kids actually sent to another Kingston household.
2
u/Past_Entry_5452 Aug 27 '26
When you mention "people who have extreme bias", are you referring to the survivor that got out and praised the action?
1
u/testprimate Aug 27 '26
Yeah. I wouldn't assume that she has any first hand knowledge of what was going on with Young's family.
2
u/MCXL Aug 26 '26
This is all pretty early on from what I can tell. And yes, you're essentially correct.
35
u/SinclairSniffer Aug 26 '26
The domain in this post is owned or operated by Sinclair Broadcast Group. Sinclair controls nearly two hundred local stations and requires them to broadcast scripted propaganda segments.
For more detailed reporting on Sinclair's practices, see The New York Times, which documents how the company enforces ideological alignment across its outlets, or John Oliver's segment, which shows how these mandated scripts spread identical political messaging nationwide.
Do not treat Sinclair outlets as independent journalism. Verify with other sources.
I am a bot. Message me for more information or suggestions.
6
2
24
u/Sure_Sh0t Aug 26 '26
Sounds concern-trolling tbh.
Karl has a long track record of sticking to his guns and ended relationships because of it.
DT was a responsive manufacturer that made a good product, and that seems to be the long and short of why Karl reviewed them. How hard does he need to virtue signal for your satisfaction?
You're gonna talk about ethical consumption of firearms? Firearms. In the US. Lmk when a vegan anarchist company makes a 5.56 carbine using recycled materials and renewable energy. Meanwhile, we're all buying guns from Trump voters 95% of the time.
14
u/Past_Entry_5452 Aug 26 '26
How hard does he need to virtue signal for your satisfaction?
Exactly how he responded to my post seemed satisfactory: he acknowledged that this was a uniquely troubling development whereas prior there was no credible evidence that Young had participated in anything illegal or unethical, and that IRTV would adjust course going forward.
28
u/Orbital_Vagabond Aug 26 '26
Fuck Utah. I've seen too much to believe the state, the LDS, and all their subsidiaries are anything other than an organized crime syndicate with funny underpants.
6
u/3_quarterling_rogue Aug 26 '26
Please please please do not think that this guy represents all of us. The Kingstons are an exceptionally bad offshoot, most Utahns (of any religious or non-religious persuasion) are friendly, helpful, and just trying to do their best.
11
u/Orbital_Vagabond Aug 26 '26
Oh I thought this long before I ever heard of this douche nozzle.
If the current government, business, and law enforcement is y'all "trying your best", that's fucking sad.
Those elders are laughing at you from their giant piles of cash you gave them.
6
u/arethius Aug 26 '26
Emotionally, I want to agree with you but logically I can only ask, how many bad apples make a bad bunch?
5
u/Orbital_Vagabond Aug 26 '26 edited Aug 26 '26
The question I've learned to ask isn't how many "bad ones" there are, but how few "good ones" there are to the point where they're irrelevant.
It's like Evangelicals crying when they get lumped into the white nationalist shit (that they tolerated and sheltered for decades). There's either too few "good ones" to make a difference, or the "good ones" are too timid and meek to make a difference.
At the end of the day, idgaf which one it is. The outcome is the same, so I say again: fuck Utah.
0
u/3_quarterling_rogue Aug 26 '26
Do you live here, or have you spent significant time here?
0
u/arethius Aug 26 '26 edited Aug 26 '26
Damn, I thought the goal post was just right here! How did it get so far away?
Edit: still no answer on how many bad apples you allow in your bunches of apples.
1
u/3_quarterling_rogue Aug 26 '26
It’s because I genuinely didn’t know how to answer a question like that. What I wanted to know if their vitriol was coming from a place of more familiarity, or if they’re parroting what they’ve heard online. There’s a lot more nuance to Utah than what is commonly afforded in online discourse. Some people live here and hate it, and I can understand that, but I live here and love it, even if I may differ religiously or politically from the other people that live here, and that kind of experience will always go unnoticed if someone’s perception of Utah is polygamy and low alcohol content in beer. It amounts to slobbering idiots moaning about how awful California is, but it’s more complicated than that.
-1
u/arethius Aug 26 '26
You don't know how to figure out how many bad cops are too many?
That's not a Utah problem; that's a you problem.
8
u/MCXL Aug 26 '26 edited Aug 26 '26
a polygamous cult
If you believe that polyamory can't be ethical, there's not really a conversation to be had. Polygamy itself isn't wrong. The cult you're referring to has some serious allegations against it, but also, has managed to you know, not go to jail.
they are very publicly known and are a major reason why Desert Tech can't score any big government contracts
This shit is just stuff you have made up, essentially to stir the pot. The government has never balked at them because of their religious affiliations, and if they had they would be losing a 1st amendment lawsuit so fucking fast. Desert tech has not made rifles that compete in a way that the military looks for.
Yes, there's some serious allegations here, but they are only allegations at this point.
I fully expect some response to the tune of "there's no ethical consumption under capitalism,"
While that can be a cop out, it's really not when talking about weapons manufacturers. There are no good guys here. Maybe there's more and less ethical consumption, we are talking about how deep in hell are you.
Edit: Fixed some formatting
7
u/Past_Entry_5452 Aug 26 '26
Polygamy itself isn't wrong.
This is valid insofar as we're just talking about "man takes multiple wives", but generally (and specifically with the Kingstons) that often comes along with more, namely child grooming, incest, and (unsurprisingly) an extremely sexist and controlling environment. All of which are things that members of the Kingstons have done or have been credibly accused of doing.
The government has never balked at them because of their religious affiliations
They balked at them because of their criminal affiliations. The DT headquarters was almost seized due to Young's brother being involved in tax fraud. Their religion also, according to survivors, also causes them to groom their own cousins for arranged marriages. It's totally reasonable for the government to balk at doing business with a company so small and so ensconced in that kind of activity.
we are talking about how deep in hell are you
This is a fair point and honestly I don't yet have a good answer for it. I suspect that companies that focus on firearms from a sporting or hobbyist perspective are the least likely to do harm with the dollars given to them (JP, KE Arms, JMAC Customs, Krebs, etc). Those involved in military procurement are on a lower rung, those that openly cater to reactionaries even lower yet, and IWI is at the very bottom in the 9th layer of hell.
Somebody mentioned above that it's easier to work with what you know vs what you don't; we know that IWI and Zenitco et al outfit genocide-doers, so maybe don't give them any money. As full disclosure: I purchased a DT WLVRN despite the then-rumors (now news) about Young, but I made it a point to buy the chassis and barrel piecemeal on sale from distributors rather than give DT the full MSRP, feeling that that would offset the amount of harm they could do, if they were doing any, with my dollars because they already go their money when the parts were bought wholesale. I took a similar approach with nylon gear: I only purchased any Hayley Strategic equipment second-hand because Travis is a freak.
So my current M.O. is: if there's no evidence of sketch, buy it. If there's rumors, buy from dealers. If there's evidence, buy used.
Obviously that's not a particularly purist approach and hopefully that absolves me of being a concern troll. I think there needs to be a certain level of muster passed before adjusting course, and this news involving Young clears the bar for me personally. Best case scenario for DT consumers is they have to sell the company or IP to someone with less baggage, but to your point who the hell would that be?
8
u/jimbobalinsky Aug 26 '26
I find polygamy inherently destructive to any society that practices it because it turns women into a commodity. On top of that you end up with a few old men who essentially "own" a majority of women while young men who have not the capital to support a needlessly large family end up with no partners. The last thing any society needs is a growing population of poor young men who are economically barred from starting their own families, let alone a population of women who are nothing more than chattle to their husbands, to be collected and counted like property.
3
u/Past_Entry_5452 Aug 27 '26
I am astounded that you are, so far, the only person in this thread to call a spade a spade. Equating polygamy, which in basically every instance it's practiced is a patriarchal project designed to commoditize women, with ethical non-monogamy is...certainly a choice, and one that I am surprised to see so many people in the IRTV community making.
Sure, you can concoct a scenario wherein multiple adult women give their informed consent to be in a relationship with the same man. I just have literally not heard of that happening anywhere outside of porn.
Seeing the majority of commenters trying to do the "well, you're the real bigot for thinking polyamory is icky" routine when we are talking about polygamy brings into question how well women are regarded in this community and if they are truly safe, or if this isn't just a club for swingers (which that WIRED hit piece already heavily insinuated).
-6
u/MCXL Aug 26 '26
That seems extremely reductive and sexist of you. Do you think that a man that could support having two wives or a wife that could support two husbands is not a basic exchange between willing adults?
The last thing any society needs is a growing population of poor young men who are economically barred from starting their own families
Your language here easily reads as incel nonsense, 'we can't allow polygamy because every man deserves a relationship' sorry, no one is entitled to a relationship or companionship. This is the language that sounds like women being treated as chattel, not anything about allowing any sort of polygamy. 'You're not free to choose the relationship you want, instead we mandate that if you want to start a family it must be in the manner we prescribe for you.'
You seem to think that polygamy is the same thing as not allowing women to participate in society. Do you sincerely think that you can't have multi partner relationships where all are voting, working members of society?
0
u/jimbobalinsky Aug 26 '26
Good reply. I don't think I've ever been aware of polygamy outside of religious fundamentalism and sex cults.
1
u/MCXL Aug 26 '26
I mean you can just look to the many poly people out there in our society that are atheist/agnostic. You only need to go onto a dating site like okcupid or whatever and look for open/poly as a relationship type, it's supported on many major dating platforms at this time. I know open and poly people who have kids, I know people who are in a 4 parent household (in this case it's MMFF) as well as several that have a sort of 3 parent thing going on. I know more poly people where it's multiple men and less women than the opposite. Communal relationship and childrearing goes way back, pre colonial tribes. etc.
Projecting everything onto 'owned wives' is essentially broadcasting a specific fundamentalist view onto human relationship in the same way that 'marriage is between a man and a woman' is. Get with the times, as they say.
2
u/jimbobalinsky Aug 27 '26
It seems obvious now that this isn't a topic I'm well versed on, I just don't equate polygamy with a progressive polyamorous relationship between consenting adults. Marriage as an institution is not something that fundamentalists have a monopoly on, but polygamy always felt like a fetish that natalists liked to fantasize about or practice in seclusion.
155
u/Karl-InRangeTV Aug 26 '26 edited Aug 26 '26
First off, this post was being flagged by someone/reddit as targeted harassment. I want you to know that I specifically approved it so I could address it.
A number of things lead to the continuing reviews on InRange of DT products:
This situation is of course unique in its nature, I will not be making the argument that there's "no ethical consumption". In fact, I normally do not make that argument - I believe we should do our best to be as ethical as is possible, but that in most industries, the firearm industry being associated heavily with the military industrial complex (and other elements), makes it particularly difficult (if not often impossible) to do so.
At this point, given whatever is going on with *this\* investigation, I will not be doing any further work with Desert Tech or their products. I suppose I could remove the reviews from the channel entirely, but I am not certain that would have much merit? The best action going forward is to reply to your concerns here, hopefully in a way that makes sense to you and anyone reading it, and to no longer work with DT or any produce any future content with DT products.