Jordan Derrick, known to early GunTube as Dugan Ashley of CarniK Con, is not a Second Amendment defendant. He is a speech defendant. That distinction matters, because the federal case against him treats publicly posted videos as if they were a commercial explosives factory and then tries to hang a New Orleans terrorist’s failed devices on a list of saved files.
As AmmoLand first reported in May, Derrick, 40, of Sweet Springs, Missouri, was charged in the Western District of Missouri with engaging in the business of manufacturing explosive materials without a license, unlawful possession of an unregistered destructive device, and distributing information relating to the manufacture of explosives. Derrick is an Army veteran and one of the original gun-channel personalities.
CarniK Con was among the first firearms comedy-and-hardware channels on YouTube. He stepped away from that project years ago, later returned under the Dugan Ashley name, and posted chemistry-heavy videos about energetic materials. Those later videos are what the government targeted.
The charges were framed around the New Year’s Day 2025 attack in New Orleans. In the early morning hours of January 1, Shamsud-Din Jabbar rammed a pickup truck into a crowd of revelers on Bourbon Street, killing 14 people and injuring dozens. Police shot and killed him. Before the ramming, Jabbar planted two improvised devices that did not detonate. He was acting in sympathy with ISIS.
Prosecutors claim a connection between Derrick and Jabbar. They say Jabbar used Derrick’s videos.
AmmoLand has learned that the evidence of a personal link between the two men is thin. Sources familiar with the investigation say the tie is a folder on the terrorist’s phone labeled “party time.” Inside was a text list of YouTube videos by Derrick. There is no other link between the two men—no messages, no meeting, and no sign that Derrick knew who Jabbar was.
Jabbar had been looking for information on RDX. Derrick had posted a video on that subject. If Jabbar followed the content as published, it would not have worked. The proportions were not correct. That fact undercuts the government’s clean story that the New Orleans devices were Derrick’s designs put to use. Saved links are not a conspiracy. A video that would not have produced a viable result is a weak foundation for the claim that Derrick armed a terrorist.
The “engaged in the business” count may also fall short. Derrick did not sell explosive devices. He did not charge viewers to watch the videos. They were posted on YouTube, where anyone could open them for free. The Department of Justice says he was in business because he had a Patreon, as many other creators do. None of that content had to be treated as a storefront. No product changed hands. A tip jar is not a factory.
Even if some material had sat behind a paywall, the government would still have a First Amendment problem. Books that discuss the same subject have been sold in ordinary retail channels for decades.
The Anarchist Cookbook is available on Amazon. The company does not hold an explosives manufacturing license. If posting a video and accepting support payments is enough to call someone a manufacturer, then the statute is being used as a speech permit, not as a ban on selling bombs.
Prosecutors have also pointed to a May 2026 blast at a residence in Odessa, Missouri, where an occupant told investigators he had watched online tutorials associated with Derrick. That is a separate incident. It does not turn a list of saved YouTube links into proof that Derrick and Jabbar planned anything together.
Derrick was an early figure in GunTube, an Army veteran, and later a technical presenter. The charging papers still lean on the old CarniK Con persona because it makes a better headline. This case is not about a rifle, a magazine, or a carry permit. It is about whether the United States can treat public technical speech as a felony because a terrorist later saved the files.
The distribution statute is written around knowledge or intent that the information will be used in a federal crime of violence. Inferring that intent from a folder of links is a shortcut. It makes the speaker responsible for the worst person who ever hit download. Derrick’s videos were framed as process and chemistry, not as a call to attack a crowd. Intent belongs to a jury. A press release is not a jury.
The charges against Derrick look like the work of an overzealous prosecutor after a high-profile attack. The statutes on unlicensed manufacturing and unregistered destructive devices are real.
So is the First Amendment.
On the facts AmmoLand has been able to establish, the government’s bridge from Derrick to Jabbar is a text list of public videos and a theory about designs that would not have worked as posted. That is a speech case dressed up as a bomb case. If that theory holds, the next creator who posts a technical explainer is one saved file away from the same indictment.
Trump Pardons Patrick ‘Tate’ Adamiak, George Peterson After ATF Prosecutions
About John Crump
Mr. Crump is an NRA instructor and a constitutional activist. John has written about firearms, interviewed people from all walks of life, and on the Constitution. John lives in Northern Virginia with his wife and sons, follow him on X at @right2bear, or at crumpy.com.
