Sunday, September 09, 2012

It's a bird! It's a plane! It's SUPER ZUMBO!

Before today I had never heard of RECOIL Magazine.

Which is probably not a Bad Thing, because the editor appears to be a gun-banning wolf in geeks clothing.


By way of George Hill, we learn that the afore-mentioned magazine apparently ran an article on the H undt K MP7A1 in which said editor writes:

"…the MP71A is unavailable to civilians and for good measure. We all know that’s technology no civvies should ever get to lay their hands on. This is a purpose-built weapon with no sporting applications to speak of."

Goodness.

Why do the gun-banners always, ALWAYS bring up "sporting purpose?" Or in this case "sporting application"?

It's right up there with the "For the chhhiilll-dren!" trope.

Once again, I have re-read my copy of the Constitution of these United States, and -- yet again -- nowhere in the Second Amendment to that Constitution do I find any Freyja-be-damned thing about "sporting purposes" or "sporting applications".

As an aside, I have to wonder just exactly how good the firearms knowledge of that editor is, because the technology of the MP7A1 is based on designs developed in an Ogden gun shop by John Moses Browning in the 19th century.

If they mean the 4.6X 30 cartridge the MP7A1 was designed to fire -- there are plenty of 40gr bullets running at 1900 FPS at Wal-Mart. We just call it the .22 WMR. Oh, wait. The 40-grain .22 WMR generally runs about 100 FPS faster than the 40-gr 4.6. 

 My bad.

Not sure that I've heard very much about the death-dealing potential of the .22 maggie -- but since it's actually faster with the same weight bullet as the 4.6 I'm sure DOD will be all over it right skippy.

Snort.

It gets better.

Apparently there was a bit of a backlash, so the very same editor who wrote the article decided to double-down on the stupid on Facebook.

Again, from George Hill:

"Hey guys, this is Jerry Tsai, Editor of RECOIL. I think I need to jump in here and clarify what I wrote in the MP7A1 article. It looks like I may not have stated my point clearly enough in that line that is quoted up above. Let’s be clear, neither RECOIL nor I are taking the stance on what should or should not be made available on the commercial market although I can see how what was written can be confused as such.

Because we don’t want anything to be taken out of context, let’s complete that quote and read the entire paragraph:

“Like we mentioned before, the MP7A1 is unavailable to civilians and for good reason. We all know that’s technology no civvies should ever get to lay their hands on. This is a purpose-built weapon with no sporting applications to speak of. It is made to put down scumbags, and that’s it. Mike Cabrera of Heckler & Koch Law Enforcement Sales and veteran law enforcement officer with SWAT unit experience points out that this is a gun that you do not want in the wrong, slimy hands. It comes with semi-automatic and full-auto firing modes only. Its overall size places it between a handgun and submachine gun. Its assault rifle capabilities and small size make this a serious weapon that should not be taken lightly.”

Let’ also review why this gun should not be taken lightly. In the article it was stated that the MP7A1 is a slightly larger than handgun sized machine-gun that can be accurately fired and penetrate Soviet style body armor at more than 300 yards. In the wrong hands, that’s a bad day for the good guys.

As readers of RECOIL, we all agree that we love bad-ass hardware, there’s no question about that. I believe that in a perfect world, all of us should have access to every kind of gadget that we desire. Believe me, being a civvie myself, I’d love to be able to get my hands on an MP7A1 of my own regardless of its stated purpose, but unfortunately the reality is that it isn’t available to us. As a fellow enthusiast, I know how frustrating it is to want something only to be denied it.

Its manufacturer has not made the gun available to the general public and when we asked if it would ever come to the commercial market, they replied that it is strictly a military and law enforcement weapon, adding that there are no sporting applications for it. Is it wrong that HK decided against selling a full-auto pocket sized machine gun that can penetrate armor from hundreds of yards away? It’s their decision to make and their decision they have to live with not mine nor anybody else’s.

I accepted their answer for what it was out of respect for those serving in uniform. I believe that we as gun enthusiasts should respect our brothers in law enforcement, agency work and the military and also keep them out of harms way. Like HK, I wouldn’t want to see one of these slip into the wrong hands either. Whether or not you agree with this is fine. I am compelled to explain a point that I was trying to make that may have not been clear.

Thanks for reading,
- JT, Editor, RECOIL"


Really.

Well, that just speaks volumes about the mindset of the staff over at RECOIL Magazine, doesn't it?

Makes me wish I had a subscription so that I could cancel it.

Sigh.

Far be it from me to offer advice to those who are neither kith nor kin, but I'm thinking that the hard-earned money of gunnies can be better given to people who actually support the Second Amendment. Unlike RECOIL Magazine.

But that's just me.

LawDog

22 comments:

Mikael said...

It is made to put down scumbags, and that’s it.

That has civilian applications as well... Just saying.

mustanger said...

Seems to me not only do I have the option of not reading "RECOIL", I also have the option of not buying/using H&K products. They're not the only game in town.

John B said...

I used to remember when HK courted the civilian market. That was 30 years ago, well 25.

45er said...

I think the only thing worse than an anti-gun wack is a "gun" person that thinks this way. It's the, "I own a gun, but..." crowd. The reason I think they are MORE dangerous is because they give them idea of legitimacy to the antis banning hysteria. They are the ones that will lift the edge of the tent to let the camel stick their nose under there.

Joe in PNG said...

And just as an aside, scuttlebutt from users in Derkaderkastan has it that this supposed uber awesome teutonic killing machine has all the stopping power of an underpowered .22WMR. It appears that one needs to dump the whole mag into a bad guy to stop him from doing bad guy things.

Robert Fowler said...

"It comes with semi-automatic and full-auto firing modes only."

What am I missing? Is there another mode of fire that was developed when I wasn't looking? Ron White is right, you can't fix stupid.

TBeck said...

The issue in question was actually the first and last copy I purchased. I read the article, thought about HK'a unofficial marketing slogan, and moved on. The issue had a pretty good article on various NFA stamp collections but other than that I wasn't that impressed.

Jeffro said...

But that's just me.

Nope!

Firehand said...

Mr. Fowler beat me to it, dammit.

Everybody made fun of the clown before I could play!

Anonymous said...

should anyone feel this warrants further discussion:

Editor
Jerry Tsai

Contact:
recoil@sorc.com

It might be worthwhile to contact our pal Jerry.

Tam said...

They're based out of Cali, 'Dawg. It's Stockholme Syndrome.

I don't see things going well for them unless Jerry publicly throws himself on his sword and there's a very public reshuffling at the top of the masthead.

Maybe there are enough potential subscribers in CA and NJ to take up the slack?

Anonymous said...

I like how "civilian hands" and "slimy hands" are the same thing to him.

Anonymous said...

*I* am in CA, and I'm here to tell you we have no more use for this kind of quisling than anyone in the other 49 does.

But somewhere on the intarwebz, there's a splendid Demotivation poster regarding crappy jobs, featuring an asian lad sitting under a rifle target and holding it up.
If that job's available, I'm thinking Mssr. Tsai would fit it like a round peg in a round hole.

Particularly since he seems to be such a flaming hole himself.

Best regards,
- Aesop

Anonymous said...

The most surprising part of that article to me was finding out that the magazine actually has an editor. Reads like drunken drivel, and not the good kind.

Kristophr said...

If you didn't serve in the military, or aren't talking about military news or history, the word "civilian" should not be coming out of your mouth.

Anonymous said...

Police are not miltary, and are civilians.

Navy and Coast Guard is not military and are not civilians, but are naval.

Marines are not military, but are naval.

Air Force is not military, not civlian, and not naval.

Army is military, is not civilian, and is not naval.

Drang said...

I've looked at RECOIL magazine on the newsstands a couple of times, and couldn't get past the blurb on the masthead: "A Magazine For The Gun Lifesyle."
What?

Anonymous said...

Re. nowhere in the Second Amendment to that Constitution do I find any Freyja-be-damned thing about "sporting purposes" or "sporting applications".

Nope. And reading Federalist Papers and other contemporary sources makes it quite clear that the reason the Second Amendment was included was to enable the people to have a decent chance of overthrowing the government (again), should it be necessary.

NotClauswitz said...

Advice regarding recoil: don't pull the trigger on a twelve-gauge when you're naked and the butt-stock is resting on your limp dick.
And don't do it a second time when you're confused and hurt after the first time.

Bergman said...

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

A militia that isn't allowed to possess, own or train with military weapons will generally do poorly if ever called to serve as militia even if you issue them military weapons when they are called up.

Geodkyt said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Geodkyt said...

OTH, under the (IMNSHO, correct) "insurrectionist" interpretation of the 2nd Amendment, there really ISN'T a real good civilian justification for this gun.

BECAUSE it is a militarily ridiculous Euro-pellet poodle-shooter.

An M4, M1928 Thompson, or Bren gun, on the other hand, ARE militarily useful, and thus have their "civilian purpose" right there.