View Full Version : Sick and Tired of Gun Rags
So I picked up a few of the usual gun rags and I am reading an article by Charlie Cutshaw (Guns and Weapons for Law Enforcement) about the Bushmaster M4A3 carbine. One of the first things that catches my attention is his recommendation of purchasing a quality MILSPEC carbine from a reputable maker like Stag Arms, DPMS or Bushmaster. He even goes so far as to say that "other commercial manufacturers" may not be as good and cut corners or some crap like that. Ok, WTF over? Last time I checked none of these companies produce MILSPEC weapons or am I missing something? Do these guys even realize what they are writing and where exactly did they get their "superpowers"?
The next thing that catches my attention is when he states that one must remove the "buffer tube" in order to remove the selector lever. Again, WTF over? I am getting sick and tired of some of these magazines and these experts. In another magazine I read a snippet by Gary Paul Johnston stating that use of the .50 caliber round against personnel is prohibited so one has to engage their "equipment". Again, this is bullshit and use of the .50 is completely lawful under the Laws of Land Warfare.
Sorry about the rant I am just getting annoyed by some of these gun rag experts who apparently have more writing experience than anything else.
Truly sad when telling the truth about something is mistaken for a "rant".
I agree with you and find that I'm getting much more selective about where I get my info from.
Erick Gelhaus
09-26-08, 04:43
In another magazine I read a snippet by Gary Paul Johnston stating that use of the .50 caliber round against personnel is prohibited so one has to engage their "equipment". Again, this is bullshit and use of the .50 is completely lawful under the Laws of Land Warfare.
Iraq-
Any chance you have the source that being published?
Gunz, try writing the editor. Your right there is too much marketing of products inside articles and bad information given out.
Robb Jensen
09-26-08, 07:13
Just say NO to gunrags.....;)
Just say NO to gunrags.....;)
Exactly my reaction years ago. Now I rely on the knowledgeable folks here.
I haven't paid a bit of attention to gun rags since I discovered good gun forums.
But the same thing goes on at many gun forums "DPMS is just as good as Colt" type BS...
It's an unfortunate situation for people that are new to stuff and don't have a reference point to calibrate their BS meter...
If you think their writing is questionable, trying spending some time on the firing line with a random assortment of today's expert gun writers. About one in five, maybe, knows enough about shooting to be safe.
There are certainly some very squared away guys who write for gun magazines, but the amount of misinformation that finds its way between the covers is just way out of line. I've turned down interviews with some gun writers in the past simply because I didn't want my name in an article being written by a guy who was no doubt going to explain that the SIG P226 was striker-fired or that a Beretta 92G had a polymer frame.
MisterWilson
09-26-08, 08:31
I've got to agree. They sure don't make 'em like they used to.
ETA: I also think that most should have the comma key violently removed from their keyboard.
Some of them, write, like William Shatner, speaks.
Some of them, write, like William Shatner, speaks.
At least he's amusing, though. More than can be said for most of the gun rag articles.
We need to start up our own magazine:
CARBINE
In this issue:
BCLNS: BCM, Colt, LMT, Noveske, Sabre are the new "ABC's" of ARs
Carrier Key Staking - Why yours probably isn't right
Just say "NO" to Tapco-ing your M4
Metallurgy 101: 4140 vs 4150 for barrel steel
Special Supplement: The Chart!
Pictorial Centerfold: Good AK's make even Bulgarian Chicks Hot...ish.
twodollarbill
09-26-08, 10:00
Seems most of these guys were forced into writing these Consumer Reports type articles.
They would much rather write about "the breeze in their hair, sitting under the
tree with their best friend Pete, holding dad's Winchester Model 12".
Jay Cunningham
09-26-08, 10:08
At least he's amusing, though. More than can be said for most of the gun rag articles.
We need to start up our own magazine:
CARBINE
In this issue:
BCLNS: BCM, Colt, LMT, Noveske, Sabre are the new "ABC's" of ARs
Carrier Key Staking - Why yours probably isn't right
Just say "NO" to Tapco-ing your M4
Metallurgy 101: 4140 vs 4150 for barrel steel
Special Supplement: The Chart!
Pictorial Centerfold: Good AK's make even Bulgarian Chicks Hot...ish.
Pretty good - I'd thumb though it at the supermarket!
I only subscribe to SWAT magazine to read the articles written by Pat Rogers, Scotty Reitz, and Loius Awerbuck. I don't read any of the other articles as they nearly all seem to be just trying to sell me something. My subscription to the other gun rags is NOT going to be renewed. In fact the other magazines just go into a box to leave at work for my partners to peruse while "handling paperwork" in the crapper.
RAM Engineer
09-26-08, 10:26
So I picked up a few of the usual gun rags and I am reading an article by Charlie Cutshaw (Guns and Weapons for Law Enforcement) about the Bushmaster M4A3 carbine.
What's really scary is that Cutshaw is the JANES DEFENSE small arms editor (or was). Makes me wonder about the quality of ALL their info.
He's from my neck of the woods and I see him a gunshows sometimes. I try to avoid speaking to him, but my father seems to be unable to just shake his head and walk away from idiots spewing nonsense. An essential gunshow behavior.
Pretty good - I'd thumb though it at the supermarket!
Issue #2 will only have one article, "Why are you reading this instead of training?" and will include tear-out zeroing targets and a coupon for paper plates and staples.
:D
These types of issues are the reason why the only gun-related magazines I read anymore are The Small Arms Review and S.W.A.T. All of the others I occasionally just perused on the rack at Barnes & Noble to look at the pretty pictures.
Issue #2 will only have one article, "Why are you reading this instead of training?"
Issue #3:
Press check? Why are you wasting time doing such a moronic thing? by renegade
and
How to be condescending on internet forums! by Rob_s!
ETA: I'll write an article on KNS pins!
Along with:
"AR Essentials: KNS Anti-Rotation Pins" by MarkM/Demigod :p
No need to drag that drama over here, man. Lets's just be discontent with the gun rags, not each other :)
Edit:
ETA: I'll write an article on KNS pins!
LOL!
HolyRoller
09-26-08, 11:18
I spend $3.58 for coffee and brownie at Barnes & Noble and read a selection of the latest and not-so-greatest from the gay-for-pay gun press. I do think Mas Ayoob is a valuable read, and the gun pictures are pretty. Other than that, it's the same old Cutshawisms--every M4 variation is always the greatest M4 variation he's ever tested, until the next article, when the M4 is suddenly unreliable and underpowered according to this Special Forces officer he knows ...
American Rifleman shows up automatically with my NRA membership of course, and the historical articles are worthwhile reading. Then you read about whatever this year's wonder bullet is, which is going to kill deers much deader than rifle bullets did ten years ago, and for only $4 per round ...
Erick,
If memory serves me correctly it was in Soldier of Fortune. I have been reading that magazine since I was 12 years old so I have a hard time not buying it after all those years. I sent an email to the editors about that article but never heard back. Here is the exact email that I sent to them dated 3/09/06
Gentlemen,
In regards to the article on the .416 Barrett, Mr. Johnston states that the use of the .50 caliber against personnel is prohibited. This is absolutely false! In a Law of Warfare Workshop Deskbook, put out by the U.S Army's Judge Advocate General, International and Operational Law Dept., June 2000 it states; The ban on the use of .50 caliber rifles against personnel is mythology. Bottom line. They are lawful weapons although ROE (policy and tactics) may limit their use. I have read several versions of Laws of Land Warfare throughoutt he years and have yet to see anything in writing that states otherwise. Thank you.
v/r,
WKL
Iraq-
Any chance you have the source that being published?
RogerinTPA
09-26-08, 13:06
Unfortunately, there are no checks and balances where "freedom of the press" is concerned. Everything you read is the writer's opinion, whether factual or not. The only recourse you have as an informed/concerned citizen is to write the rag's editor with the facts and let the chips fall where they may. If they are fact based, they'll write a correction in the next issue or two, if not, they'll just "circular file" your letter.
Iraq-
Any chance you have the source that being published?
Start by looking at the Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907. NOT any of the Geneva Conventions, they deal pretty exclusively with EPWs and whatnot.
Then, check out Army FM 27-10. Last revision was in 1976, if memory serves, but it's still the foundation publication.
shooter521
09-26-08, 13:44
Other than that, it's the same old Cutshawisms--every M4 variation is always the greatest M4 variation he's ever tested, until the next article, when the M4 is suddenly unreliable and underpowered according to this Special Forces officer he knows ...
Don't forget including the phrase "breaks like the proverbial glass rod" at least once per article, and mounting a KAC Universal Night Sight and/or Horus scope on every damn long gun he reviews...
Riverine,
There is no ban or prohibition on the use of the .50 caliber against personnel. I have sourced documented info that specifically states that it is in fact lawful. Same goes with OTM rounds. I have read the Hague Convention restrictions on ammo and there is nothing there. There is also no prohibition in FM 21-76.
There are numerous documented cases of U.S and Allied snipers shooting personnel with precision .50's. If it was unlawful then all of them would have been subjected to prosecution.
Start by looking at the Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907. NOT any of the Geneva Conventions, they deal pretty exclusively with EPWs and whatnot.
Then, check out Army FM 27-10. Last revision was in 1976, if memory serves, but it's still the foundation publication.
So I picked up a few of the usual gun rags and I am reading an article by Charlie Cutshaw (Guns and Weapons for Law Enforcement) about the Bushmaster M4A3 carbine. One of the first things that catches my attention is his recommendation of purchasing a quality MILSPEC carbine from a reputable maker like Stag Arms, DPMS or Bushmaster. He even goes so far as to say that "other commercial manufacturers" may not be as good and cut corners or some crap like that. Ok, WTF over? Last time I checked none of these companies produce MILSPEC weapons or am I missing something? Do these guys even realize what they are writing and where exactly did they get their "superpowers"?
The next thing that catches my attention is when he states that one must remove the "buffer tube" in order to remove the selector lever. Again, WTF over? I am getting sick and tired of some of these magazines and these experts. In another magazine I read a snippet by Gary Paul Johnston stating that use of the .50 caliber round against personnel is prohibited so one has to engage their "equipment". Again, this is bullshit and use of the .50 is completely lawful under the Laws of Land Warfare.
Sorry about the rant I am just getting annoyed by some of these gun rag experts who apparently have more writing experience than anything else.
:D
MOST mag writers know less than the average poster on TOS.
C4
MOST mag writers know less than the average poster on TOS.
That's hitting below the belt! :eek::p
That's hitting below the belt! :eek::p
No really it is true. They at least know that there are different grades of barrel steel.
C4
VooDoo6Actual
09-26-08, 14:45
Couldn't agree more.
When you have COMMERCIAL interests and PROFIT/MONEY as the aphrodesiac you will LOSE OBJECTIVITY.
SWAT MAG has some issues w/ some of it's writers getting caught for endorsing phonies, FRAUDS etc.
If you endorse a FRAUD would you steal from me ? I think so...
NOT Scott Reitz or Louis Awerback BTW.
Most people in the know won't talk about it BUT nonetheless it is TRUE and all out there in the body of evidence on the net.
Caveat Emptor...
I VERIFY first then TRUST, been lied to too many times at this point.
Gunz, try writing the editor. Your right there is too much marketing of products inside articles and bad information given out.
+1 Even if they won't print your letter, it may help his colleagues at the magazine may realize that he's a doofus.
MisterWilson
09-26-08, 17:23
+1 Even if they won't print your letter, it may help his colleagues at the magazine may realize that he's a doofus.
Yeah, because they've cared about the journalistic integrity of their articles so far.
Yeah, because they've cared about the journalistic integrity of their articles so far.
I said it "may help." Maybe it won't.
Don't jump to be cynical or paranoid. I'm guessing that the problem is typically ignorance, not malice. Journalists face deadlines. Left hands don't know what right hands are doing. People make mistakes.
In any case, writing directly to the editor of the magazine is way more likely to get something done than just talking about it on the internet...
Ben
VooDoo6Actual
09-26-08, 17:52
They (GUN RAGS) do not do DUE DELIGENCE on people's calims or backgrounds.
FRAUDS are everywhere these days SERIOUSLY.
Situational awareness is a bitch...
If they can sell it and get away with it they will. Think ENRON, AIG, FNMAE, FRDMAC etc...
Caveat emptor...
They (GUN RAGS) do not do DUE DELIGENCE on people's calims or backgrounds.
Of course not. Gun rags aren't doing investigative journalism. They're accepting what they're told by the manufacturers' PR people. If it doesn't seem too outlandish, then they're publishing it.
Again, I doubt that this is collusion as much as it is sloppiness.
If you don't like it, then write a letter to the editor,
Ben
PS: At least the gun rags proofread what they write a bit better than you do.
"Again, this is bullshit and use of the .50 is completely lawful under the Laws of Land Warfare. "
_____________________________________________________
Man, you would not believe how many folks in the Army actually believe this crap, that the .50 is only for equipment and is against the Laws of Land Warfare to use on personnel.:confused:
I argued with a E-6 one day during a class on the rules of Warfare. I finally proved him wrong with an Army Correspondance course booklet on the Laws Of Land Warfare. Go figure.
I never could understand how people could think a .50 was bad to use on personnel, but a claymore was o.k. LOL!
Carbean---
Must have gear: The M Plate(reviewed):D
Riverine,
There is no ban or prohibition on the use of the .50 caliber against personnel. I have sourced documented info that specifically states that it is in fact lawful. Same goes with OTM rounds. I have read the Hague Convention restrictions on ammo and there is nothing there. There is also no prohibition in FM 21-76.
There are numerous documented cases of U.S and Allied snipers shooting personnel with precision .50's. If it was unlawful then all of them would have been subjected to prosecution.
Maybe you should completely read the post from which you are quoting me, ffs.
Were you to do do, you might discover I was answering a question asked earlier by another member. Don't ping me for your lamentable lack of attention to detail.
I've been a Marine for a long time, done my multiple tours, and I KNOW that .50 rounds are perfectly legal for anti-personnel use, and have known so since before the 1990s even pulled their first breath.
So, to respond directly to your above post: Bite it.
Robb Jensen
09-26-08, 20:15
Stay on topic gentlemen.....this post is about gun rags, not .50s used in combat.
If it continues to stay off topic I'll lock it.
If you think their writing is questionable, trying spending some time on the firing line with a random assortment of today's expert gun writers. About one in five, maybe, knows enough about shooting to be safe.
There are certainly some very squared away guys who write for gun magazines, but the amount of misinformation that finds its way between the covers is just way out of line. I've turned down interviews with some gun writers in the past simply because I didn't want my name in an article being written by a guy who was no doubt going to explain that the SIG P226 was striker-fired or that a Beretta 92G had a polymer frame.
I've been on a firing line at a training class when I suddenly realize who the pencil-necked geek is to the right of me. Then I get that old queasy feeling inside & start looking for another position on the line, before a loud noise turns into a hole in my leg - or worse.
Gunrags are the for pictures :D
I misunderstood what you were conveying. My bad.
Maybe you should completely read the post from which you are quoting me, ffs.
Were you to do do, you might discover I was answering a question asked earlier by another member. Don't ping me for your lamentable lack of attention to detail.
I've been a Marine for a long time, done my multiple tours, and I KNOW that .50 rounds are perfectly legal for anti-personnel use, and have known so since before the 1990s even pulled their first breath.
So, to respond directly to your above post: Bite it.
The only gun rag I read is the NRA American Rifleman. It's free and it is politically centered to the pro-gun crowd of which I associate myself.
Issue #3:
Press check? Why are you wasting time doing such a moronic thing? by renegade
and
How to be condescending on internet forums! by Rob_s!
ETA: I'll write an article on KNS pins!
Issue #4
Ill cut your bitch heart out if i catch you putting loctite on the castle nut. by ARin
Put down the crayons and step away from the receiver. by All of us
I have to agree with what yall have said on the current options. I havent bought a gun magazine in a pretty long while because they simply dont have anything to offer atleast to me. Like others have said its simply marketing now. I find the articles less and less informative and more misinformative as time passes.
A real magazine with good drills, reviews and more importantly up to date information would be well recieved. I think :). Then again a rifle or pistol or even open up to weapons in general dont mean the same to me as it may the average person. Im sure most people on this forum feel the same way.
I think one thing that kills the magazines is for one they are writing it months before its released so by the time its out. Also who knows what some of the writers get as perks for the article so who knows where the biases are. Its like the (wisper) Future Weapons show. It doesnt matter if the m4 is the best weapon out next epsiode. The one this episode will beast it hands down in every biased test. Oh on a side note please shoot the pepper popper a little lower with the "bad" weapon. Im sure the other has more hitting power but come on atleast hit the target close to the same spot.
What do yall think about a M4Carbine.net Online Magazine. Even if it did require a small fee or a step up buying a subscription to the forums i think it would be worth it for a formatted set of information. Even a special page on the site with a list of organized topic PDF's, targets, reviews would be nice. It should :) cause less repete questions are asked on the forums too. One thing that would be somewhat useful is a list of parts that anyone could add to. Then have it like a poll where people can select only yes for that item to get a review. A no would be counter productive so just leave it out as you wouldnt go to add your count if you didnt want it. Then the items with people wanting reviews could be easily picked out and addressed.
What about the (mostly)worthwhile gun magazines:
Swat
Shooting times
Guns(free)
most articles by David Fortier
Which ones will you buy without even opening it?
Fortier? To me he seems like a walking advertisement for any gun he happens to be testing.
MBR
VooDoo6Actual
09-28-08, 19:31
SWAT=SQUAT
A few writers are legit, some are VENAL as can be.
ANYTHING is SUSPECT period.
Facts are facts...
bigthunder223
09-29-08, 01:50
I know a writer who contributes monthly to several popular mags.He has no real-world experience.He's a good guy,loves guns,and likes to shoot.Does'nt do it well though. He has a very nice collection of firearms, optics, suppressors, and accessories;all gifts from the manufacturers.He gets paid for the articles he writes and keeps everything he writes about.
"Greatest gig in the world!"
VooDoo6Actual
09-29-08, 14:26
Indeed the PERKS and BENES are there for the MAGS and WRITERS and that is where the Objectiveness is lost.
If your on the inside it is similar to Wall Street.
Which isn't so funny these days...
Look @ Kimber Pistols now.
Endorsed by ALL the MAGAZINE/GUN RAGS folks.
Caveat Emptor...
Littlelebowski
09-30-08, 07:20
I have an article I saved where all the guy did was blather on about Sako. He wore two different Sako hats while "testing" the rifles and then even had the audacity to write about the hunting trip Sako took him on. Pissed me off.
Ridge_Runner_5
09-30-08, 09:29
Gunrags are the for pictures :D
Pretty much the only reason I buy em is for the gun porn...
VooDoo6Actual
09-30-08, 10:57
Funny,
got a PM from a SWAT writer who thinks the public is so dumb we did not get the memo on WHOM is VENAL/CORRUPT and has been spreading his disinformation for years....
I guess he did not get the MEMO either...
It is NO MYSTERY that writers/publishers et alia get FREE (Au Gratis) products/sub discounts/favors etc.
Another words another example of the "WALL STREET SYNDROME"
Good Ol Boys Club...
GOTTA love the guys who think they ONLY know the REAL DEAL...
LOL !
Funny,
got a PM from a SWAT writer who thinks the public is so dumb we did not get the memo on WHOM is VENAL/CORRUPT and has been spreading his disinformation for years....
I guess he did not get the MEMO either...
It is NO MYSTERY that writers/publishers et alia get FREE (Au Gratis) products/sub discounts/favors etc.
Another words another example of the "WALL STREET SYNDROME"
Good Ol Boys Club...
GOTTA love the guys who think they ONLY know the REAL DEAL...
LOL !
I would hope that everyone was aware of how the system is setup. Heck, there are even entire forums out there that were setup for the SOLE purpose to get free gear out of manufacturers! Think you will ever see a REAL review on a piece of kit on that forum??? :rolleyes:
C4
I only subscribe to SWAT magazine to read the articles written by Pat Rogers, Scotty Reitz, and Loius Awerbuck. I don't read any of the other articles as they nearly all seem to be just trying to sell me something. My subscription to the other gun rags is NOT going to be renewed. In fact the other magazines just go into a box to leave at work for my partners to peruse while "handling paperwork" in the crapper.
Keep an eye on the January issue. Hopefully you'll find at least one other article that's worth reading....
;)
I would hope that everyone was aware of how the system is setup. Heck, there are even entire forums out there that were setup for the SOLE purpose to get free gear out of manufacturers! Think you will ever see a REAL review on a piece of kit on that forum??? :rolleyes:
C4
Hey, I don't have a forum on my site.... oh, wait.
:p
VooDoo6Actual
09-30-08, 11:28
Grant C4 writes:
"I would hope that everyone was aware of how the system is setup. Heck, there are even entire forums out there that were setup for the SOLE purpose to get free gear out of manufacturers! Think you will ever see a REAL review on a piece of kit on that forum???
C4
I hear ya. I appreciate your ability to process that objectively.
NO, I don't think you will ever see a REAL review on that forum which is why I do not participate on that forum and others.
The PROBLEM is, just like my Wall Street analogy is that NOT everyone is AWARE of that.
What I LOVE is how they try to intimidate by their stature, name, LEO status etc.
The problem is that they don't realize they have ZERO credibilty when you back a PHONIE/FRAUD.
While cross vetting phonies as if they have the ONLY HOLY GRAIL or JEDI Powers that others don't and that real deal guys don't know either.
Really quite funny and entertaining.
SWAT=SQUAT and they have their corrupt writers as well.
Have seen the evidence first hand.
FACTS are FACTS.
SWAT=SQUAT and they have their corrupt writers as well.
Have seen the evidence first hand.
I'd be interested to hear the details of this if you could email me directly.
VooDoo6Actual
09-30-08, 11:38
SURE, you bet.
email sent.
Please for the love of Jesus do not bring up Charlie Cutshaw. The greatest benefit of his writings for any gun mag is that whatever he reviews and glosses about I know to automatically regard with suspicion and stay away from. I honestly believe that he thinks he's Jeff Cooper and tries (and fails) to emulate his writing style.
My co-worker has a copy of the 2009 annual sitting on his desk. The cover is of an Armalite AR-10A4 with the caption "Ultimate AR-10A4 w/U.S. Optics 1.8-10X. The first article is by Charlie Cutshaw and states "Super-versatile autorifle boasts CQB and 1000 meter accuracy!"
The entire article is full of statements like "breaks like a glass rod". Mr. Cutshaw then proudly trumpets the installation of a Knights M5 RAS on said rifle. WTF a 1000 meter rifle without a free floating barrel? I guess the Knight's name alone adds accuracy. Finally of course we come to the accuracy test. Hey I'm glad that he tested for accuracy at 100 yds. Too bad that he couldn't break MOA with the loads he was using, but hey. I'm sure that the rifle and ammo are perefectly capable out to 1000yds for Charlie Cutshaw has spoken and tested.
I now have to go and curl into a fetal position to get my blood pressure down.
Regards.
I had a rant on this issue typed up a few weeks ago and decided not to post.
What really got my goat, was a 1911 special, in it where several "experts" talking about 1911's (a pistol near and dear to my heart). In it one expert (former LAPD, and Guard Civil Affairs - who has been an issue here before with his expertise in print called into question) - talking about the 1911 in combat :rolleyes:, and carrying a 1911 hammer down on a loaded chamber...
I tend to despise gun writters -- the ones I like, are not really gun writers, but people with a real day job inking the occassional article for peoples information.
Littlelebowski
09-30-08, 13:10
I had a rant on this issue typed up a few weeks ago and decided not to post.
What really got my goat, was a 1911 special, in it where several "experts" talking about 1911's (a pistol near and dear to my heart). In it one expert (former LAPD, and Guard Civil Affairs - who has been an issue here before with his expertise in print called into question) - talking about the 1911 in combat :rolleyes:, and carrying a 1911 hammer down on a loaded chamber...
I tend to despise gun writters -- the ones I like, are not really gun writers, but people with a real day job inking the occassional article for peoples information.
Man, that article pissed me off too. Did you notice he was carrying some ridiculously old and probably expensive Singer or something like that 1911? Obviously not issued. The impression that I got is that he's been in the military reserves forever and obviously did not shoot that antique (not bashing 1911s here!) i ncombat but wanted to brag about carrying it in Iraq.
What really got my goat, was a 1911 special, in it where several "experts" talking about 1911's (a pistol near and dear to my heart). In it one expert (former LAPD, and Guard Civil Affairs - who has been an issue here before with his expertise in print called into question) - talking about the 1911 in combat :rolleyes:, and carrying a 1911 hammer down on a loaded chamber...
I tend to despise gun writters -- the ones I like, are not really gun writers, but people with a real day job inking the occassional article for peoples information.
I am a little slow on the up take today. Do you mean NYPD, instead of LAPD?
Your second paragraph is very true.
Feel free to hit me with email.
Littlelebowski
09-30-08, 14:01
I am a little slow on the up take today. Do you mean NYPD, instead of LAPD?
I'm pretty sure the writer in question was LAPD.
At least he's amusing, though. More than can be said for most of the gun rag articles.
We need to start up our own magazine:
CARBINE
In this issue:
BCLNS: BCM, Colt, LMT, Noveske, Sabre are the new "ABC's" of ARs
Carrier Key Staking - Why yours probably isn't right
Just say "NO" to Tapco-ing your M4
Metallurgy 101: 4140 vs 4150 for barrel steel
Special Supplement: The Chart!
Pictorial Centerfold: Good AK's make even Bulgarian Chicks Hot...ish.
Remember the fake magazine covers at the end of the movie Stripes?
Zysky rates the Russians: "They're pussies!"
I'm immensely underwhelmed by most gun writers, but the tirade about them receiving "free kit" is silly. How do you expect them to review stuff if it's not sent to them for free?
Just how much do you think someone makes for a 3-page review of a pistol? Not enough to buy the pistol, that's for sure.
Some gun writers are masters of scamming free stuff. Others just have it thrust upon them. It happens. The best ones simply decline to write about the stuff they try and dislike. The reality is that an article reading, "I tried the new Glock 39 and it sucks!" would never get printed. Sometimes, when you see a black hole of information about a certain product, that's a clue in itself.
Assuming that gun writers have to pay for the things they review is as silly as assuming sports announcers have to pay for their seats at a ball game.
Several companies will send out samples to review -- a loan, sometimes a long term loan (if they want endurance testing).
One of the issues most gun writers have is with sample size of one (and cherry picked for them) they fire 100rds thru the weapon and give their pronouncement.
Worse yet you get -cough Leroy Thompson cough- people with no experience or idea of PSD writing article about it, or others talking about Nigh Fighting aids with no experience.
If I was looking for advice from something - I'd like a guy who's put 20-30k of rounds thru something THIS training year, and his squadron mates has done the same.
My 'favorite' writer is indeed LAPD ret.
MisterWilson
09-30-08, 14:53
I love reading back to back articles that go from praising the AR/M16 action on one page to slamming them on the back of that literal same page.
I'm pretty sure the writer in question was LAPD.
Definitely an L.A. cop, it states in the article. I read the article and was unimpressed, and I believe it lacked a quality frame of reference. Article was NOT a SWAT magazine article.
Leroy "****ing" Thompson gets on my last nerve. What I really want to know is exactly what real world experience does he have? I have done a Google search and was unable to find anything on him. He writes articles on sniping, PSD, and a plethora of other shit, yet I see no bio or creds on him. As far as i can tell he gained from by being in someones fan club.
Several companies will send out samples to review -- a loan, sometimes a long term loan (if they want endurance testing).
One of the issues most gun writers have is with sample size of one (and cherry picked for them) they fire 100rds thru the weapon and give their pronouncement.
Worse yet you get -cough Leroy Thompson cough- people with no experience or idea of PSD writing article about it, or others talking about Nigh Fighting aids with no experience.
If I was looking for advice from something - I'd like a guy who's put 20-30k of rounds thru something THIS training year, and his squadron mates has done the same.
My 'favorite' writer is indeed LAPD ret.
VooDoo6Actual
09-30-08, 16:38
"but the tirade about them receiving "free kit" is silly. How do you expect them to review stuff if it's not sent to them for free?"
That is NOT the point.
That's a NO BRAINER. It should be returned to the manufacture and recyled etc.
The POINT is, if it was like a CONSUMER REPORT format it would have more OBJECTIVITY instead of SUBJECTIVITY.
http://www.hyperdictionary.com/search.aspx?define=objectivity
judgment based on observable phenomena and uninfluenced by emotions or personal prejudices
http://www.hyperdictionary.com/search.aspx?define=subjectivity
judgment based on individual personal impressions and feelings and opinions rather than external facts
Whenever you receive FREE product you LOSE OBJECTIVITY.
It IS a GOOD OL BOYS CLUB that is VENAL and CORRUPT. Similar of considerably lesser magnitude to our current financial crisis obviously but nonetheless same in principle and context.
Just return it instead of being a WHORRIOR...
Very interesting thread Gentlemen.
As GG Liddy often says, you have to be able to separate signal from noise.
My all time favorite Magazine is Soldier of Fortune.
SOF however hasn't been the same since the passing of David Hackworth. COL Hackworth's column was gold. He stood up for the guys on the ground and for the most part had his fist inserted into the anus of the upper Military echelon.
Consumer Reports motto is something like we accept no advertising nor free product and pay for everything we test.
Some unscrupulous company's would send in a modified or superior version of their product so that it would do even better on the test. This would of course mislead the consumer. I.E. writing an article about how great a Kimber Desert Warrior (Which has been worked before testing) was, as if every one ran like a raped ape like the one they tested.:eek:
I beleive S.W.A.T. magazine's motto is something like if it is free, it is for us....:D
Hop -- Respectfully, I believe you misunderstand the difference between objectivity and subjectivity.
If I review something and say it "feels great" or "seems faster" that's subjective. If I review something and say it "has 1/4" shorter trigger reach" or "gets 0.05 faster splits" that's objective.
To lie and make something sound good, one can lie in a subjective way "best shooting gun ever" or lie in an objective way "fastest measured time on the IDPA Classifier ever recorded by a human."
You're confusing subjectivity with honor and personal integrity. The lack of the latter, rather than an overabundance of the former, is what leads to ridiculous gun rag reviews.
Everything I review for my site is either bought by me, or loaned to me by the company with the understanding that I'll be sending it back.
VooDoo6Actual
09-30-08, 17:47
KUDOS to you.
Good practice !
If I receive something for FREE I now have an emotional investment. That most likely will influence and compromise my subjectively.
All I can say is that it's not true. I've received plenty of things to review that have either received a less than perfect report, or haven't met with great success in my hands.
The issue isn't emotional investment. It's financial investment. If someone is relying on lots of free stuff from companies to stay in business (as a gun writer, for example) then he may compromise his integrity. Others certainly don't. I know quite a few gun writers. Some of them, contrary to what you're suggesting, are perfectly capable of maintaining their personal honor when evaluating and assessing products.
I've received more free flashlights from Surefire and Insight than I can keep track of. The light I carry every day is a Novatac 120P (which was also sent to me for review). I don't carry it because it was free, I carry it because it's the best little flashlight for my purposes that I've seen. Now if I wrote that the Surefire was the best, then next month I wrote that the Insight was the best, then the next month I said it was the Novatac ... yeah, that would be pretty pathetic.
Again, I'm not disagreeing that many gun writers are influenced by their suppliers. If you want to read reviews without such influence, read Gun Tests where people who often know less about guns than the average internet commando tells you how the Taurus PT-92 is vastly superior to a Glock 17 because he liked the thumb safety. :rolleyes:
I subscribe to a few, o.k. more than a few gun magazines. I rarely come across any product review that does not receive a glowing review. If anything negative is mentioned in the article, it is immediately followed up by an excuse for the short fall.
It is cheap advertising for the manufacturer to supply a free product and receive a positive review in the publication. That is why it happens so commonly.
I especially like it when I turn the page at the end of the article and there is the obligatory 1/2 to full page ad for the same company.:rolleyes:
It is cheap advertising for the manufacturer to supply a free product and receive a positive review in the publication. That is why it happens so commonly.
That's another very important distinction. The publisher edits articles submitted by writers, not to mention choosing which articles will get published.
A friend of mine, who wrote a few articles now and then while a full-time cop, used to write articles about things he used successfully in his work. He was issued the same gun for almost two decades. He was proficient with it. He liked it. He used to include it in a lot of his articles. The publishers finally told him he had to write something positive about another brand of pistol or they wouldn't publish his articles anymore. :eek:
Additionally, If I sell it or trade it, again I have profited and now I'm really emotionally happy ! I profited twice in reality. Once for obtaining the asset and once for by selling/trading it.
Another good point and distinction. I never sell things I received for free, nor do the honorable gun writers I mentioned previously.
Integrity/Ethics would be NOT to accept it for free.
We'll simply have to agree to disagree. I don't feel I've compromised my integrity by getting free stuff. Quite a bit of what I do wouldn't happen otherwise.
NO, I don't think you will ever see a REAL review on that forum which is why I do not participate on that forum and others.
The PROBLEM is, just like my Wall Street analogy is that NOT everyone is AWARE of that.
What I LOVE is how they try to intimidate by their stature, name, LEO status etc.
The problem is that they don't realize they have ZERO credibilty when you back a PHONIE/FRAUD.
While cross vetting phonies as if they have the ONLY HOLY GRAIL or JEDI Powers that others don't and that real deal guys don't know either.
Really quite funny and entertaining.
SWAT=SQUAT and they have their corrupt writers as well.
Have seen the evidence first hand.
FACTS are FACTS.
No offense, but most of us don't know you from Adam.
The targets of your SWAT magazine rant are unnamed, and thus you paint the whole organization (including all its writers) with the same broad, negative brush.
The target of your forum rant is unnamed as well.
I don't know, maybe you're just stirring the pot a little. Again, no offense, but I think at m4carbine we can do better than broad-brush allegations that may damage the reputation of those that don't deserve it.
VooDoo6Actual
09-30-08, 18:24
DrMark,
FWIW,
It was conveyed and appreciated "by the powers that be" thanking me for NOT being specific and naming names.
As they are frustrated, concurred with and understood my spirit as well.
FWIW and In all fairness, I know several of the writers who are not involved in the mess as well and are good people.
A few have tainted it and I'm going to leave it at that.
Think of it this way: Which are you more "emotionally invested" in, something you paid $1,000 of your own hard earned money for, or something given to you for free?
It's why most people love their cars. They paid so much money for them.
Same with all the people who buy an Oly Arms or Bushy and spend hours arguing that it's as good as a Colt/LMT/whatever. Who wants to say, "Man, I totally wasted my money!" after that?
I will have to agree that many magazines credibility has been damaged lately by a rash of amateurish “How To” articles, unsound “Tactics” articles written by guys with no more experience than you or I, and the really hard to miss infomercial “reviews”. It’s rather obvious that these “reviews” are nothing more than an advertisement written by someone who has a vested interest in making the product look good, whether they be an employee, “friend”, investor, ETC. Some of them are very cartoonist in there over the top drama and claims. For the most part it seems the days of unbiased actual “tests/reviews” by knowledgeable/trained authors are long gone. Greed, corruption, and poor editorial management seems to be the order of the day. Most magazines seem more interest in just filling a specified number of pages per issue rather than the quality.
This is why I have stopped buying firearms related magazines.
dialM4murder
09-30-08, 19:44
At least he's amusing, though. More than can be said for most of the gun rag articles.
We need to start up our own magazine:
CARBINE
In this issue:
BCLNS: BCM, Colt, LMT, Noveske, Sabre are the new "ABC's" of ARs
Carrier Key Staking - Why yours probably isn't right
Just say "NO" to Tapco-ing your M4
Metallurgy 101: 4140 vs 4150 for barrel steel
Special Supplement: The Chart!
Pictorial Centerfold: Good AK's make even Bulgarian Chicks Hot...ish.
Hehe.. You'd get mad hate mail.
The bottom line can be sumed up in one word. INTEGRITY! Anyone who knows me knows that if I buy something and it later turns out to be a piece of shit I will be the first to admit it.
It matters not if it is free or something I buy. If someone were to give me product XYZ for an eval I would do so honestly. If they said they wanted it back when I was done no problem. If they said keep it, that would be fine too.
Rest assured that when my ADC piston upper arrives I will tear it down, go over it and then provide a review after I shoot. The same goes with the anything else.
Recently a manufacturer here on this board offered me a part for my carbine with the condition that I do a review after having used it. I said no problem. Well that item never arrived, nor did I hear back from him (been about 3 weeks). I bought the item instead and installed it on my Noveske. After I have used it more than just practicing here in the hacienda I will post a review.
Some of these writers need to eat some humble pie, sit back and re-examine their roles and responsibilites to the gun public.
I WOULD LOVE TO SEE THE ONLINE EDITION OF M4CARBINE.NET MAG. THAT WOULD BE GREAT.
John_Wayne777
09-30-08, 20:21
Some of the gunwriters have TV shows now. On the last episode of Guns and Ammo television I saw an in depth debate on the shotgun vs. the carbine for home defense.
Of course, you should use birdshot in the shotgun...and you have to watch out with a carbine like the Mini-14, because a bad guy might think it's a .22 and try to chance it. Of course, you can make it look more intimidating by putting lights and lasers on it.
...and in the interest of full disclosure, I should mention that I received a free M4Carbine hat from Grant. It's a pretty good hat....stays on your head and everything. In my reliability testing it's proven capable of covering up any bad hair day I could throw at it.
Spurholder
10-01-08, 08:44
Some of the gunwriters have TV shows now. On the last episode of Guns and Ammo television I saw an in depth debate on the shotgun vs. the carbine for home defense.
Of course, you should use birdshot in the shotgun...and you have to watch out with a carbine like the Mini-14, because a bad guy might think it's a .22 and try to chance it. Of course, you can make it look more intimidating by putting lights and lasers on it.
Coffee. Computer screen. Laughter. Mess. Thanks.
:D
Think of it this way: Which are you more "emotionally invested" in, something you paid $1,000 of your own hard earned money for, or something given to you for free?
It's why most people love their cars. They paid so much money for them.
Same with all the people who buy an Oly Arms or Bushy and spend hours arguing that it's as good as a Colt/LMT/whatever. Who wants to say, "Man, I totally wasted my money!" after that?
I agree.
And I haven't been "given" anything for free yet. Just loaned things.
Where do I sign up for the free shit?
:D
Some of the gunwriters have TV shows now. On the last episode of Guns and Ammo television I saw an in depth debate on the shotgun vs. the carbine for home defense.
Of course, you should use birdshot in the shotgun...and you have to watch out with a carbine like the Mini-14, because a bad guy might think it's a .22 and try to chance it. Of course, you can make it look more intimidating by putting lights and lasers on it.
You've got to be shitting me. The good thing about the bird shot RETARDs is that it keeps them from being lethal. Cuz if you're dumb enough to select a bird gun for defense, you're probably dumb enough to shoot someone you shouldn't. :rolleyes:
The sad part is that criminals are even dumber than bird gun for defense proponents. I've read L.E. accounts where a bad guy gives up at the sight of a shot gun.... It's a whole dumb ass circle of dumbassery!
Where do I sign up for the free shit?
:D
I am sure SWAT magazine will be able to tell you all about that.
Think of it this way: Which are you more "emotionally invested" in, something you paid $1,000 of your own hard earned money for, or something given to you for free?
I'm the opposite. I've been offered items to test (for free). But I've passed on the offer in favor of buying the product myself so If I thought the item sucked, I could say so without any bias.
I've been offered items to test (for free). But I've passed on the offer in favor of buying the product myself so If I thought the item sucked, I could say so without any bias.
Wow. Now there is a maverick concept. Reeks of integrity. Too bad more of the gun rags don't make that their policy. I beleive this is the point some of us have been trying to make. Good on you.:eek:
Don't forget including the phrase "breaks like the proverbial glass rod" at least once per article, and mounting a KAC Universal Night Sight and/or Horus scope on every damn long gun he reviews...
nono, the most irritating and overused phrase, bar none, is "this gun will shoot into 'X' inches if I do my part"
please. somebody. stop the insanity. I think this phrase stopped being amusing/quaint/relevant sometime shortly after Karamojo Bell killed his last elephant with a 7x57MM. right now, it's simply a gunwriter's equivalent of the word "uhhh"...
If we're going to get into banned words and phrases, I want "flawless" stricken. Most forum software has way to automatically replace words, and I vote that "flawless" be swapped for "completely and utterly unused" such that "my rifle has been flawless" will turn into "my rifle has been completely and utterly unused".
John_Wayne777
10-01-08, 09:51
You've got to be shitting me. The good thing about the bird shot RETARDs is that it keeps them from being lethal. Cuz if you're dumb enough to select a bird gun for defense, you're probably dumb enough to shoot someone you shouldn't. :rolleyes:
The sad part is that criminals are even dumber than bird gun for defense proponents. I've read L.E. accounts where a bad guy gives up at the sight of a shot gun.... It's a whole dumb ass circle of dumbassery!
Personally I thought the choicest moment was warning against using a carbine that looks like a ".22" because somebody might "chance it." :confused:
Leaving aside the issue of using a Mini-14 as a home defense weapon, if I'm pointing a Mini 14 at some silly bastard's face and he decides that it's "just" a .22 and wants to try something...well....I hope his granny bought him one of those 10,000 dollar Gerber life insurance policies. Now if he decides that it's "just" a mini 14 and is likely to not work when I pull the trigger....
Somebody in one of the gun-rags did a writeup on using cowboy action guns for home defense....including a treatise on using a Surefire in concert with a double barrel. From what I understand this was not merely a "if you don't have anything else, here's how you use it" article...it was a "Awww, you don't need all that 'tactical' shit to stop a bad guy!" article.
...because we all know that if Wyatt Earp was around today, he'd still be using a peacemaker and a double barrel.
If we're going to get into banned words and phrases, I want "flawless" stricken. Most forum software has way to automatically replace words, and I vote that "flawless" be swapped for "completely and utterly unused" such that "my rifle has been flawless" will turn into "my rifle has been completely and utterly unused".
ROFLOL!
Beat Trash
10-01-08, 17:17
Just say NO to gunrags.....;)
A few years ago, I did just that, saved up the money I spent on subscriptions and bought a gun with it instead.
tango-papa
10-02-08, 01:21
It's a whole dumb ass circle of dumbassery!
Too funny - this is officially my new favorite quote. :D
tp
Frankly, even the gun porn is getting ridiculous. If I never see another green laser Photoshopped onto a pic of a 16lb AR, it'll be too soon.
This thread has run its course.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.