Finally Colt gets its head of out its ass and gets a decent roll mark on a gun. I like this lower and would be good for custom builds or clones.
Discuss...
http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/Vie...Item=255000517
Printable View
Finally Colt gets its head of out its ass and gets a decent roll mark on a gun. I like this lower and would be good for custom builds or clones.
Discuss...
http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/Vie...Item=255000517
Is the MOE furniture factory installed or did the seller put it on?
Factory installed. It has its own model number (6920MP).
We sell them for $1099: http://www.gandrtactical.com/cgi-bin...ion&key=6920MP
C4
Great set up & price. The roll mark will help with sales too.
Welcome to 2007 Colt!
:lol:
Edit: Just kidding. I know those good guys are really trying to put a pretty dress on a GI.
looks liek a descent weapon
I think Scott's intention here was to talk about the rollmark itself, not the specific MOE model. There's another thread to talk about the MOE.
It's my understanding that the Colt commercial line is undergoing a few changes. This rollmark may also change slightly going forward, but will hopefully meet with the desires of the collector market that cares about such things, as well as those that get worked up over things like "LE Only" and "Sporter".
Colt knows that almost nobody cares about such things, but that those who do care run like a stuck needle about it and the fact that they are willing to make changes to satisfy the vocal minority indicates that they are making strides in the right direction.
Yeah, that was going to my question rob, as in exactly how much better does the "M4" roll mark perform?
What with all of the deer, snakes, bears, eagles, spiders, etc. on lowers out there, I think that rollmark is a step in the right direction for Colt commercial sales and I bought one because I think highly of Colt rifles and I shied away from the LEO marking.
This rifle won't be used for HD; there are better choices for that purpose IMO. But, if I do need to use a firearm for self-defense, I would prefer that it say something like "Sporter" (or nothing at all) instead of "Restricted", "Tactical", "Zombie Killer", etc.
Consider that, in the civil suit that would surely follow, the lawyers would have a field day with trying to prove to the jury your state of mind and intent and I will not give them anything to work with that could be twisted for, or misunderstood by, a jury. It might seem like a silly thing, but I have seen many strange and silly things. Of course, this is all just my humble opinion.
I do agree. I like the roll mark.
I'm still looking for a case where the writing on the lower played a part.
we all know about the Ruger 556 incident with bikers, the HK employee, etc. so let's skip that one and at the very least acknowledge that it's old. and Harry Beckwith shot a man with an M16 and held down the rest of his posse with a S&W 9mm subgun so at the very least type of arm has caselaw in both directions.
I was not aware of this incident. Tried to search and came up with nothing. Do you have a link? Thanks.
Also I love the new roll marks, personally I've never been fond of the LE markings because I am not LE, and don't pretend to be such.
Edit: can you PM me as to not derail the OPs thread, thanks.
Josh
I understand his concern. While there may not be a ton of cases out there to reference, many people don't want to BE that case. Being the test case is never good. Personally, I don't care what my roll mark says.
I like the new roll mark. If only that it's "normal". For lack of a better vocabulary.
I think we'd all agree that lawyers are going to hammer any angle that will further their case. This is why I won't buy any "zombie killer", "Punisher", or that kind of crap for a weapon that might be used for self defense.
Another example is my wife gave me a sign that stated something like "This house protected by 15 rounds of 9mm" as a gag gift for Christmas. It now resides in my dads shop. I passed on the opportunity to have "gun stuff" up in our house because as I told her, if I ever did have to shoot someone, wouldn't that sign make me look like a gun nut with an itchy trigger finger?
Overkill is underrated, especially when lawyers are involved.
Nuts? WTF? You are certainly free to dress up your guns with Punisher graphics or whatever you like. If you have access to the database of the entire history of civil lawsuits that involved defensive shootings and are certain that there were no jury decisions based on the defendant's choice of equipment, please say so and share with us. Otherwise, keep your diagnoses to yourself. Thanks.
Thanks for posting the Beckwith story. I'd not read that one before. A lot to study in that one. I'd love to read the official report instead of Ayoob's usual over-dramatic account.
I have mixed feelings about this subject. It comes up a lot here, and I appreciate the reality based arguments folks make. Those that say you will be in trouble over such things are clearly wrong. It's correct to say that over-stressing about it is unnecessary. But I don't think preferring a gun without "restricted" LE markings is "nuts".
Put a piece of tape over the restriction if it scares you. :confused:
Or a picture of Chris Costa or something that makes you feel warm and safe. :rolleyes:
And I disagree with that. In my experience, LE and prosecutors often used relatively benign things to infer to the jury, a defendant was bad or questionable. Defense attorneys did the same thing. I was questioned about lots of stupid and immaterial shit by them.
I'm not arguing this example is a problem. I appreciate your arguing against FUD. But to think nothing can be an issue, without prior case law, is perhaps a little naive. How many civilian shootings involving LE "restricted" marked guns do you think there have been?
I don't know if there's case law on "I don't call 911" or "Forget the Dog, Beware of Owner" signs either, but I would advise against them. I don't think it's "nuts" to imagine how that could be perceived, if the ski masked burglar you shoot at 2 AM turns out to be the 13 year old from down the street.
"...if the ski masked burglar you shoot at 2 AM turns out to be the 13 year old from down the street."
I think this a great example of what some of us are trying to say. I'm not as worried about defending my use of lethal force in self defense against a career criminal, as I am against the same UoF on a poor misguided youth.
And as usual, the truth is in the middle. Crazy FUD about you will be arrested, sued, etc., if you use handloads, customized gun, an EBR, whatever, is just that, FUD. But to say that trying to avoid possible negative distractions is being "nuts", is a bit too far as well.
Absolutely true. I feel exactly the same way. That said, if you happen to live in the wrong state and lawfully use deadly force there is still a chance you will be sued in civil court. If that ever happens to me the first thing I hope to do is be sure I'm the only eye witness in the courtroom. The second thing I'm going to do is be sure I don't have to explain why I have a "hair trigger" in my self defense weapons. I have no idea if a roll mark saying LE only will hurt but it might give the lawyers something to jabber about. One saying "sporter" sounds better to me. Plain old M4 Carbine sounds good too.
Both Colts I own now are LE models but I have an M4 Carbine on the way (thanks Grant!)
S/F
What is a FUD?
The answer is, possibly both. Even in a righteous shooting that the DA chooses not to prosecute, the bereaved loved-ones of the maggot you wasted at night in your house will file a civil action for the loss of their meth-head wonder child. I used to be LEO and am now a lawyer. My view of the legal profession is that 99% of the lawyers give the rest a bad name. Enough said on that subject?
The markings on the gun can be important - but the facts of the shooting are what determine the importance of stuff like that. Where the tarantulas and zombie-killer markings can be relevant is in a close-call shooting situation. The markings can be used to assert motive. If you waste a baseball bat wielding doper in daylight hours when you had the theoretical ability to disengage and escape, the zombie-killer script on the lower can be made relevant by a prosecutor or plaintiff's lawyer.
Having said that, one could argue that keeping a black rifle at home for self-defense purposes (instead of a pistol or shotgun) is a stand-alone fact that could be spun the wrong way. I know this is pure, unadulterated BS, but, unless you spend some time in the courtroom, it is hard to believe how wrong things can go. Better to be careful - even though it is unreasonable.
It does matter where you live. Not all states have adopted the Castle doctrine or its equivalent. No reason you can't call the county district attorney's office where you live and talk to a prosecutor about how that county would view specialized markings on a weapon used in self-defense. Certainly not binding, but could be informative.