Recoil Magazine Editor's ANTI-RKBA Commentary/Opinion.. WOW...

M

MikeG

New member
This is a purpose-built weapon with no sporting applications to speak of. It is made to put down scumbags, and that’s it.
Click to expand...

Just a bit of hyperbole in that quote. I've read where the Gatling gun was supposed to make warfare so horrible that mankind would stop making war entirely.
They greatly underestimated man's inhumanity to man.

And who's to say we couldn't think up a sporting application, or that we lowly serfs... um civilians don't have a need to put down scumbags if it arises (God forbid)?
 
A

Any .45

New member
Just my opinion so take it as that. I from the very beginning didn't take recoil magazine as a serious gun magazine with much informational value (it has some but not much). To me it was a fun mag or a toy magazine for men. Nice pictures, nice tacticool items, etc. I have told friends that read Recoil to consider reading SWAT as well, as a real gun magazine with real world practical content to train with, survival ideas to practice and employ, and opinions from guys like Pat Rogers, Louis Awerbuck, Brent, Jeff, Scott, Ethan, Todd, Ed and all the other writers I missed. They write without bias, they write what they believe works, what they have seen work, what they have employed and has worked, what also write they like and what they don't like about certain gear and items. Recoil is like Maxim mag or Stuff for gun guys not much usable content and info, just something that looks nice and has nice pictures, and a bunch of cool gear. SWAT I can read from cover to cover and not be bored one single bit. I love the living off the grid portion, it is by far my favorite. Recoil has lost three readers due to that article and a few more to come if I can help it.
 
D

drail

Moderator
A gun rag for Socialists. Cool. Someone needs to sit down with this guy and explain to him where he lives and who his audience is. A similar thing happened a few years back when a writer at a popular motorcycle monthly wrote a piece that basically was a gross insult to gunowners. Imagine her surprise when the backwash hit the publishers and found out that a lot of guys who own motorcycles also own handguns and are strong vocal supporters of the 2nd A. She apologized in print but the damage was done and they lost a LOT of readership. Maybe she works at HK now. Just because someone has a Journalism degree doesn't mean that they're not an idiot.
 
Last edited:
G

Glenn E. Meyer

New member
FN has commercial versions of a similarly oriented gun platform. It's probably a market decision on HK's part not to do market a semi version.

FN's hasn't exactly taken off.
 
T

Technosavant

New member
FN has commercial versions of a similarly oriented gun platform. It's probably a market decision on HK's part not to do market a semi version.

FN's hasn't exactly taken off.
Click to expand...

I don't blame HK for not making a civilian market legal version of the gun- who really wants an oversize semiauto pistol chambered in a weird round and sized to just under an actual rifle, all at HK prices? Sure, you'll find somebody to drop the bucks, but not enough to actually justify it.

But then, I agree with Rob that the attitude of the author of the article is a problem. If these super operators think that I'm so on the edge of going on a rampage that I can't be trusted with this super special aitchundkay, then I wonder what they would think of my safe full of ARs and milsurp guns. My guess is they don't want me to have those either. That puts them in the same class as Feinstein and Schumer- people I have no use for, no matter how much actual gun knowledge they may have.

Let me make the decision as to what I'll buy. Don't assume that it's the tool that will encourage violence. If I can be trusted with what I now own, I am not going to be causing mayhem even with a minigun. If I can't be trusted with a German subgun in a centerfire flavor of .22WMR, I can't be trusted with even a penknife.
 
G

Glenn E. Meyer

New member
If they have to tool up to make a product that will have few buyers, it makes sense not to. That's different from the columnist's views that we shouldn't have them because they are evil.
 
R

Rob Pincus

New member
Some people are asking, understandably, why I have been so involved in the Outcry against Recoil Magazine's Editor's Statements over the last couple of days:
I labored under & against the "Sporting Purpose" concept since the '90s and have had to deal with several companies/organizations over the last 15 years that were slow to move out from under that politically correct marketing approach. When I taped my first DVDs for the PDN Series distributed by the NRA in the mid-2000's we weren't allowed to use human shaped targets. There was no "Tactical" section at the first several SHOT Shows I attended. Just recently, another instructor and friend was uninvited from teaching at a shooting range that claims now to be for 'sport shooting' only. I've had trouble booking courses in certain areas for the same reasons.
Especially in an election year and especially from a magazine that has a growing influence on younger shooters new to our community, I won't tolerate the concept of guns needing a "sporting purpose" inside our own ranks... and Recoil Magazine has certainly put itself into the training community in a big way.
Do I have a dog in this fight? Yes... and the dog is long in the tooth with a good memory and a perspective on how far we have come in recent history. Let's not start slipping backwards.
-RJP
 
L

LockedBreech

New member
This guy's stance, his "clarifying" response, and the old Jim Zumbo fiasco all sound to me exactly like my left-leaning friends who claim to be "pro-gun", but limit that to 26"-barreled hunting shotguns (in nice, safe wood, not tactical plastic), revolvers, and semi-autos with 10-round magazines.

When I care enough to engage, I explain as best I can why that is the furthest thing away from being "pro-gun". In a way, it's much more dangerous and much more anti-gun. At least the full-on antis like Bloomberg and Feinstein are predictable. They hate guns. Don't like 'em. Wish people didn't have 'em.

But the folks who proudly talk about how they support the Second Amendment while constantly and quietly pushing for narrower definitions of what that support means are a plague from inside the shooting community itself. Much harder to combat.

IMHO, of course.
 
S

Strafer Gott

New member
Sinister

Ever see a SPAS12? Purpose built for sport. Gave mine to the S-I-L. The tree rats love it. They come running down the tree for the privilege.
Am I evil?
 
J

Joe_Pike

New member
Just thumbing briefly through Recoil I kind of thought it looked like a Mall Ninja Outfitters Guide. I thought about buying an issue to be sure, but now I think I will pass.
 
D

dZ

New member
I'm sure the Brady Bunch can herd a pack of million mommies to "like" many posts.
They just can't get them to show up in person, like they did when they engineered
the Clinton driven, Al Gore Election MMM push.

The "sporting purpose" is a meme manufactured to erode your rights.

It's obvious now that we've been lulled by an 8x10 glossy siren song
played by people intent upon eliminating our rights.

Gun rights advocates should mark this tempest in the never forget list
and make sure "Recoil" is always moved to the back of the rack when it's encountered.



Long live the Tyranny Response Team.
 
D

dZ

New member
Some readers have misinterpreted a recent feature story in RECOIL magazine as a reflection of HK policy. Heckler & Koch has a long presence in the US civilian market and throughout that time has been an ardent and passionate supporter of the Second Amendment and the American civilian shooter. This will always be the case. The contents, opinions, and statements expressed in that feature story are those of the writer, not Heckler and Koch’s. Additionally, the writer and RECOIL magazine have issued a clarification and apology for the ill-chosen words used in the story.

The HK MP7A1 4.6 mm Personal Defense Weapon mentioned in the story is a selective-fire product (capable of “full automatic” fire) and is currently restricted to military and law enforcement agencies by BATF. HK-USA has previously researched introducing similar commercial products, chambered in 4.6 mm, but it was determined that the final product would not have enough appeal or be legally feasible.

— Heckler & Koch USA
 
O

Old Grump

Member in memoriam
Last person out of the Recoil office, don't you forget to turn off the lights before you close the door for the last time.
 
B

Brian Pfleuger

Moderator Emeritus
dZ said:
Some readers have misinterpreted a recent feature story in RECOIL magazine as a reflection of HK policy. Heckler & Koch has a long presence in the US civilian market and throughout that time has been an ardent and passionate supporter of the Second Amendment and the American civilian shooter. This will always be the case. The contents, opinions, and statements expressed in that feature story are those of the writer, not Heckler and Koch’s. Additionally, the writer and RECOIL magazine have issued a clarification and apology for the ill-chosen words used in the story.
Click to expand...

I don't think too many American readers are blaming H&K for not selling the rifle to civilians. It is, after all, illegal under federal law.

However, the editor's "clarification" is anything but, in my opinion. His initial statement was clear and unambiguous, rather difficult to misinterpret and if he meant something other than what he said, he is clearly not well-skilled at putting thoughts into words.

His "clarification" took a clear, unmistakable, unambiguous statement and made it vague, unintelligible and ambiguous, while simultaneously seeming to attempt to transfer any angst to H&K, by making this statement: " It's their decision to make and their decision they have to live with not mine nor anybody else's. "
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top