Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
9/22/2017 12:11:25 AM
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 12/7/2005 11:00:17 AM EDT
Ok Rich & Denny you guys know I enjoy SWAT.

But I gotta ask, WTH were you guys thinking with that 'Vampire & Zombie' 1911 article? I mean it sounded more like something that would belong in GUNS or American Hangunner - not SWAT.

Maybe my sense of humor is broke or something, but I didnt' get it. The article was mostly fiction and didn't even touch much on the handgun (then again what's there to say about a 10mm 1911 with lots of 'Gothesque' symbols on it?

I enjoyed the rest of the magazine, but the above article left me going WFT?
Link Posted: 12/7/2005 3:23:30 PM EDT
Link Posted: 12/7/2005 9:39:43 PM EDT
Hello,

When can we see the issue on the stands?
Link Posted: 12/8/2005 6:39:53 AM EDT
Link Posted: 12/8/2005 6:49:03 AM EDT
Denny,
No problem, just thought I'd give some feedback. However as a semi-regular column, a piece of fiction that highlights some gear/firearm might not be a bad thing. As a column the readers would know what to expect.

Anyway as usual Pat & Louis had great pieces. I liked the LaRue battlelight article (though you might want to mention to the author that visible spectrum LEDs don't produce IR light so using the IR filter would be pointless - its one of the issues with leds. You need a separate IR illuminator if you have NVG)
Link Posted: 12/10/2005 8:12:18 PM EDT
Aren't zombies the reason we own Evil Black Rifles? Renewing my subscription in a couple minutes, your magazine is the best one I recieve and the only one I am renewing.
Link Posted: 12/11/2005 4:57:22 AM EDT
A shotgun is the only effective weapon against Zombies and re-animated humans.
I thought everyone knew that.

Denny,
Did my scrip' run out?
I usually have my issue by now.

Jay
Link Posted: 12/11/2005 6:20:43 AM EDT
My issue hasn't arrived yet either? My address change was acknowledged several weeks ago, but I usually have it by now.
Link Posted: 12/11/2005 2:03:53 PM EDT
Louis Awerbuck's article was excellent (as usual).

Claire Wolfe's piece this time was even better than usual. One of the best I've read and made some very important points that clearly need repeating until more people understand.

I haven't read most of the rest yet!
Link Posted: 12/11/2005 5:28:31 PM EDT
Link Posted: 12/12/2005 5:12:47 AM EDT
Don't Panic?
DON'T PANIC ?????????

Jay
Link Posted: 12/12/2005 5:33:49 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/12/2005 5:34:16 AM EDT by GUNGUY1911]
Can I panic? I'm in IN, and there already seems to be magazines here. I checked, and my address change was confirmed by email 15 November. Maybe the mailman stole it!()
Link Posted: 12/12/2005 6:14:26 AM EDT
Link Posted: 12/13/2005 6:46:04 AM EDT
Loved the guns 'n gear articles as always, and Claire's was a winner yet again.

As much as lawmakers attempt to make weapon ownership limitations appear to be about skill, training, proficiency, or public safety...they aren't. Not even close.

I didn't suddenly forget how to safely handle and accurately fire a weapon when I was honorably discharged from the Army.

My oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic, didn't have an expiration date.

Living in New Jersey for the past few years, I'm seeing the extent to which government is willing to go in preventing law-abiding citizens from having the means of self-defense. (Unfortunately, with Jon Corzine arriving as our next Governor I may not have seen the full extent just yet...)

For example, when challenged by an activist group called the Second Amendment Sisters on the issue of concealed carry in this state, then-Senate President Richard Codey's response: "I'd like to believe that most women will choose to use basic common sense, such as traveling in large groups and only in well-lit, heavily populated areas, before resorting to violence on their own."

This from the man whose wife travels with armed protection courtesy of the NJ State Police.

Link Posted: 12/16/2005 9:01:32 PM EDT
I'm panicking. I all most bought it at the store....
Link Posted: 12/19/2005 7:14:18 PM EDT
Aside from the aforementioned monthly fix of Louis A. and Claire Wolfe, I really enjoyed seeing the return of the sweepstakes!

I never win anything, but I always enter!
Link Posted: 12/20/2005 9:38:11 AM EDT

Originally Posted By rhino_:
Aside from the aforementioned monthly fix of Louis A. and Claire Wolfe, I really enjoyed seeing the return of the sweepstakes!

I never win anything, but I always enter!




What do you win this month I might have to enter.
Link Posted: 12/20/2005 10:49:23 AM EDT

Originally Posted By death451:

What do you win this month I might have to enter.


One of Sully's ARs!!!!

Back off it's mine!
Link Posted: 12/20/2005 7:17:37 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Forest:
One of Sully's ARs!!!!

Back off it's mine!



In the immortal words of Undercover Brother ...

"Back up off meeeeee!"

It's mine, baby! I wants it! I needs it!
Link Posted: 12/20/2005 10:21:05 PM EDT
It's a twin of my new SLR15 Commander.


Somebody is going to be real happy
Link Posted: 12/21/2005 6:13:27 AM EDT
Link Posted: 12/21/2005 8:25:15 AM EDT
Gentlemen,

Congratulations on an outstanding magazine. I've just recently discovered SWAT magazine and I am truly enjoying it. It's one of the few magazines that I find myself making time to read, cover to cover. I am a police officer in the midwest and as such get a considerable amount of police/military related periodicals in the mail. Most of it is bulls**t and not worth my time. But I've found yours to be very informative and accurate. I plan to subscribe and pick up the back issues I missed. Keep up the good work!

Scott

Link Posted: 12/21/2005 12:41:33 PM EDT
Link Posted: 12/21/2005 2:14:26 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/21/2005 2:15:18 PM EDT by Denny_Hansen]
Link Posted: 12/21/2005 2:42:29 PM EDT
Link Posted: 12/21/2005 3:29:46 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/21/2005 3:30:39 PM EDT by AZCOP]
I waited long enough.
I picked the Jan issue at B&N.

Hey Denny:
GET OVER IT !!!!!!

What a dickhead.

Further comments as I read on.

Jay
Link Posted: 12/21/2005 10:51:02 PM EDT

Originally Posted By AZCOP:
Hey Denny:
GET OVER IT !!!!!!

What a dickhead.




I don't normally talk to my gun magazines......but I went off on this comment! Dickhead is WAY too nice a term.....

Glad things are coming back together for you, Denny. Probably see you at SHOT again.

Vaughn
AmericanSnipers.org
Link Posted: 12/22/2005 11:34:44 AM EDT
Not too bad of an issue. I found the fiction piece amusing.

Of course Wolfe's column was filled with the typical pissing and moaning I've come to expect. I do have one specific point/question about it. In it, wolfe mentions HR 218 and how it gives LEOs the ability to carry anywhere regardless of laws for that local. From everything I've read, HR 218 doesn't superceed the firearm laws an area already has in place.
Link Posted: 12/22/2005 12:41:35 PM EDT
Link Posted: 12/22/2005 12:53:00 PM EDT
Link Posted: 12/22/2005 1:02:01 PM EDT

Originally Posted By NCPatrolAR:
Of course Wolfe's column was filled with the typical pissing and moaning I've come to expect.



You might feel differently if some day you find yourself not in the law enforcement business, where all your training and skill are irrelevant in terms of the limitations the politicians force on us citizens.

There are currently three strata that we see patterned into the laws:

1.) Current law enforcement and military.
2.) Retired law enforcement (not military, though).
3.) Everyone else, including former law enforcement and former/retired military.

I suspect that if for some reason you or the other Claire-bashers found yourself in bucket #3, you might have a different opinion.
Link Posted: 12/22/2005 1:09:15 PM EDT
Link Posted: 12/22/2005 1:13:28 PM EDT

You might feel differently if some day you find yourself not in the law enforcement business, where all your training and skill are irrelevant in terms of the limitations the politicians force on us citizens.
- Since I wasnt born a police officer, I've already been in the situation where I was prohibited from owning certain items.


I dont view myself as a Wolfe basher. I simply point out that I dont agree with most of the stuff she writes and honestly state how her writings come across to me
Link Posted: 12/22/2005 1:18:56 PM EDT
Link Posted: 12/22/2005 1:54:01 PM EDT
If posting incorrect information and gross exagerations is stirring the pot I guess you are correct. However, is it benefical?
Link Posted: 12/22/2005 2:40:16 PM EDT

Originally Posted By NCPatrolAR:
Since I wasnt born a police officer, I've already been in the situation where I was prohibited from owning certain items.




Hey, you too huh? I thought I was the only one that was born neither a soldier nor a deputy sherriff.

All sarcasm aside, my point was that the legal boundary line regarding weapons makes things tough going back to civvy mode, and it lends some credence to a portion of Claire's rant this month.
Link Posted: 12/22/2005 3:26:57 PM EDT
Hell, even as a LEO I cant own class 3 items in the county I presently live in.
Link Posted: 12/22/2005 3:42:14 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/22/2005 4:28:32 PM EDT by Rich_Lucibella]
Link Posted: 12/22/2005 4:04:19 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Rich_Lucibella:

What's the "even" mean there, guy? As in "different" from me?

- Nope as in derailing the "as a LEO you can own whatever you want" arguement before it starts.



As in greater needed to personally own such items than me? See where I'm going?
- Nope, I'm not trying to pitch the "LEOs are a superior class" line that you keep hinting at.


Some FedAgency operatives in your county can own such pieces.
- If they are agency owned they can have them. Far as personaly purchasing them, that isn't happening.


Is there a reason why I have a 40% hearing loss, when suppressors would have saved that?
- Weak arguement at best. If you had worn ear pro I'm sure you would have that reduction in your hearing.


Link Posted: 12/22/2005 4:33:11 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/22/2005 4:35:00 PM EDT by Rich_Lucibella]
Link Posted: 12/22/2005 7:05:18 PM EDT

Originally Posted By NCPatrolAR:
Not too bad of an issue. I found the fiction piece amusing.

Of course Wolfe's column was filled with the typical pissing and moaning I've come to expect. I do have one specific point/question about it. In it, wolfe mentions HR 218 and how it gives LEOs the ability to carry anywhere regardless of laws for that local. From everything I've read, HR 218 doesn't superceed the firearm laws an area already has in place.

Tell that to the NYPD officer that shot the guy in D.C. he was carrying under 218, and last I checked, I or any other non-LEO is forbidden to do that. (Not a cop basher BTW)
Link Posted: 12/22/2005 7:57:13 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Denny_Hansen:
"Get over it!" was so mild it was pleasant compared to a hate letter I received last week accusing me of being a total coward, spiraled downhill from there, and demanded I give Rich my resignation.

Of course, it came unsigned with no return address.



Sorry Denny,,,

Send it back and I'll sign it this time.

Jay
Link Posted: 12/22/2005 8:01:56 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Rich_Lucibella:
She sure can stir a pot, can't she?

Rich



You should just pin a thread after every issue is released called This issues' claire wolfe bitching thread.

Her January article didn't have all the Tin Foil crap she usually has:
I still think she's a nut job, but at least this article was tolerable.

Jay
Link Posted: 12/23/2005 5:29:49 AM EDT

Originally Posted By GUNGUY1911:
Tell that to the NYPD officer that shot the guy in D.C. he was carrying under 218, and last I checked, I or any other non-LEO is forbidden to do that. (Not a cop basher BTW)

- was he authorized to carry though. Just because he states he was using 218 doesnt mean he was using it within the guidelines provided.
Link Posted: 12/23/2005 6:16:24 AM EDT

Originally Posted By NCPatrolAR:

Originally Posted By GUNGUY1911:
Tell that to the NYPD officer that shot the guy in D.C. he was carrying under 218, and last I checked, I or any other non-LEO is forbidden to do that. (Not a cop basher BTW)

- was he authorized to carry though. Just because he states he was using 218 doesnt mean he was using it within the guidelines provided.

If he wasn't authorized, why hasn't there been any charges brought against him, IIRC D.C. has mandatory jail time for firearms offenses? H.R.218 does override local laws(as far as ccw), that is why NYC, Chicago, and D.C. were all up in arms after its passage.
Link Posted: 12/23/2005 10:39:05 AM EDT
Just did some more research on 218. The law does supercede some local laws, but not all.


`(1) permit private persons or entities to prohibit or restrict the possession
of concealed firearms on their property;
or

`(2) prohibit or restrict the possession of firearms on any State or local
government property, installation, building, base, or park.




And as most of us have stated before; 218 is the 1st step to national ccw for everyone.
Link Posted: 12/23/2005 11:15:14 AM EDT
Link Posted: 12/23/2005 11:37:58 AM EDT
Link Posted: 12/23/2005 11:44:28 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Rich_Lucibella:
NCPatrolAR-
IOW, Claire didn't have her facts wrong, agreed?
Rich

-

She wasnt completely correct. LEOs still arent permitted to carry everywhere they want. She seems to have the gift of making huge blanket statements.
Link Posted: 12/23/2005 12:04:13 PM EDT
Link Posted: 12/23/2005 12:13:16 PM EDT
Notice that I went on and did more research on the subject and stated so? To me, if you are going to have material published in a printed publication that prides itself on conveying accurate and timeyl information you'd have the actual facts, not just an exageration.

And the huge blanket statement is more in reference to her previous columns than this month's issue.
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top