I cancelled my subscription to American Rifleman today.

[Andy Griffith]

I did something that I should have done long ago.

I don't mind some advertising, but if any more than 50% of the magazine is ads, it becomes ridiculous, in my opinion.

I've gotten where I feel alienated from the "mainstream" firearm buyers today. Everything I nearly see advertised is tactical, plastic junk- it probably is good stuff...but it's the same if I browse through the toy section at any of the box stores...I become so disgusted with the absolute plastic junk! It isn't what I like, so why even bother?

Therefore, if it doesn't interest me, why should I have to waste my time throwing it in the trash can? Those slick pages don't even make good wiping paper.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not knocking the NRA, as I am a life member- just the fellers that organize the magazine could be more NRA members than publishers. I just can't see that there is anything it it that makes it different from anything on the store shelves...other than it came with my membership.

[M29since14]

Annoyance with the "modern junk" understood, but the organization still needs our support. We are on the way out, and to survive, the organization understands it has to recognize the changing of the guard.

[woodsltc]

I'm a hunter and enjoy the articles in the companion magazine...American Hunter. If you hunt or enjoy articles about hunting, I recommend you switch to the American Hunter.

Don

[Evil Dog]

I gave up on all of their magazines.... just too many ads.

[Road Rat]

The only reason I'm still a member is they need the money for the legal hassles!!

The magazine is really of poor quality.

I'm currently reading the American Rifleman from 1955 and 1956. Great stuff..............many generals, politicians, etc., with input articles.

Today..........not so much.

And as the OP said - - - black plastic!! That must be where the younger folks are looking because us oldsters just don't like that stuff.

[BobK]

The benefits package and the fact that it's the largest, and most powerful gun organization, keep me as a member. The magazines don't have a lot of useful articles for me. I'm not going to Africa, or to hunt "exotics" on the west coast.

Since it goes with the membership, I switch back and forth on the mags. Neither is very good, buy they tend to keep me informed as to what is going on in the shooting sports. It's fun to thumb through, read a couple things.......then dump it. It's the only "gun rag" that I get. They're all .......a bunch of B.S., in my opinion.

I read what interests me in "GunBlast" and "Guns and Ammo", online. Don't really take any of them seriously. Bob

[pownal55]

i've been with the NRA for many years and will stay with them. i also have the utmost respect for our miltary everywhere they serve. but i must say, i am sick of looking at "black guns" and everyone is not a soldier. this goes for all gun mags. the majority of us shooters are still sportsman and i like walnut stocks with blued barrels which seems to becoming a thing of the past.

[truckemup97]

Again, I'm an anomaly. I'm one of the younger generation (at least for this forum) and I don't like all the black plastic tacticool stuff either. I read the back page of AR, and the Armed Citizen article. Occasionally they'll have an article about old stuff that interests me. After about three minutes flipping through it, I cut the address label off and put it in the recycling bag. See, even an ultra-conservative gun nut can be green!

[MikeD99]

I don't mind the ads except that many are for really dubious stuff. Also, every issue is packed with those annoying cardboard inserts that make the pages jump right to that page when you just try to turn to the next page. I also chose the political news slanted "new" mag First Freedom (or whatever its name is) about self-defense and handguns so I wouldn't see so many dead animal pictures. I am not a hunter and don't like the activity. They put a hunting article in almost every issue anyway. I guess I get the magazine for free seeing as I am a life member, but I sure wouldn't buy it off the newsstand.

Mike D.

[sw_1911]

I agree the rag sucks. Didn't they put out a self-defense type pub about 10 years back as part of the selections? I remember something like that but they discontinued it after a short run. It was actually interesting.

[Out West]

I like the Amercian Rifleman. I can see why some, like the OP, may not. To each their own. No one is forced to read it. Doesn't seem like a difficult issue to deal with.

Out West

[Andy Griffith]

Originally Posted by Out West

I like the Amercian Rifleman. I can see why some, like the OP, may not. To each their own. No one is forced to read it. Doesn't seem like a difficult issue to deal with.

It isn't.
I'm just ranting because I feel left out, and as a customer- my wants and interests aren't being met and captivated.

Perhaps the forum world mentality has taken over?

Frankly speaking, there is more knowledge here amongst the membership than on the staff of gun rag- and I have access to that knowledge and experience with nothing more than a post.

There really isn't a reason to buy a firearms magazine anymore, is there?

There are pros and cons to buying mags...you can use them when the power is down, they make great fire starting material, they are always "on" and never break down (unless coffee get on it!) and lastly, they can be gathered over the years as reference material.

[10-12]

I am presently three issues behind in reading. I prefer the tactical and defense articles. I don't hunt nor shoot bullseye so I pass on those. Regardless, I plan to continue to support the NRA because that is the best defense we have. If it were nothing but ads, I would still subscribe.

Bill

[RonJ]

I usually find an article or two that I like.
This month I enjoyed the model 70 article and also Ayoobs article on the Beretta 92 (M9).

[sigp220.45]

This is one of the few gun rags I can stand today:

[PDL]

Neither here nor there, I thought the mag was a piece of junk when I first joined 30 years ago. I only took it cause it came with the membership.
There are too many other places for good info, including this site. But the NRA does work for us, and they have to come back with something tangeble to satisfy the masses. Hence the two mags.
Their main job is not producing a useful magazine. It's keeping those butt heads in DC in line.

[rimfired]

Save the NRA some money and cancel your subscription to the mag. No problem, you're a Life member. Might be that will allow them more .01 to help fight for our rights.

[m657]

It takes me most of the month to wade thru that part I do read....

Sometimes there is a real gem of a historical weapon etc that is wonderful. Probably there's less than half that I *do* have active interest in reading.

[josephthreedogs]

My AR doesn't even make it into the house, trash can is next to the mail box. I have asked them to cancel my subscription and all they do is swap it for a sub to AH. I like the NRA just not there magazines.

[Gunhacker]

I just consider the ads a "necessary evil" for the NRA to generate needed revenue to help keep fighting the fight. As such, I mentally filter out the ads that I have no interest in, I look at the table of contents straight away, see which articles interest me and go directly to them. If there's nothing in the issue for me, it goes right to the circular filing cabinet.

Perhaps if more of the NRA membership responded to those fund raising campaigns sent by "snail mail", they might be able to slack off on the ad content?? Just a thought...

Who knows, but with what we're potentially faced with for the remaining Obama adminstration years and the current make up the Legislative and now Judicial branch (with the newest Supreme Court Justice appointment)... the NRA more than ever, needs all the revenue sources that it can garner so for the time being, I'm willing to put up with it.

Unfortunately Tacticool is what's paying the bills for a good percentage of the firearms industry right now... and IMHO, I would rather see a healthy firearms industry (even if it's due to stuff that I have minimal interest in) than a weak one possibly more vulnerable to antigunner attack.

[rockquarry]

I've been reading the publication since the mid-sixties. Perhaps I'm wrong in my assessment, but it appears that the AR has suffered a significant deterioration with its current leadership. Seems the magazine no longer maintains a technical staff, some of their writers aren't the best, and the small-minded editorial attitude prevents them from seeking out interesting, informative articles from those outside their staff. Much better magazine when Ron Keysor, Ken Warner, and others were running the show. Its easy to go through the entire magazine in a matter of minutes. In their defense, they do have at least a couple of good writers in John Barsness and Bruce Canfield and their articles are usually worth reading.

[amd6547]

I read it, but it really is a pale reflection of the old American Rifleman. I grew up reading a stack of back issues from the 1950's and 60's...After I got past drooling over the ads for war surplus great handguns and rifles, I started reading the articles, which were quite technical and in depth.
Today, everything they "test" is advertised in the magazine, and, surprise!, they always like it.
American Rifleman is so behind the curve on the milsurp front, it is pathetic.

[moosedog]

"The Rifleman" is only one of three or four magazines offered as a member of the NRA.
Possibly you might want to try one of the others.
I get feed up with alot of things like you mentioned but as I get older I figure if I can't fix it or influence it, no sense worrying about it.
You can always take the magazines to the Barbershop, Chiropractor, Doctors office etc and drop them off. Never know, might pick up a few new members.

[putt45]

As has been suggested before, I cut the labels out of all three NRA rags and leave them in public places. Sometimes they stay there, mostly they disappear.

[mstuhr]

Hi all,
I still find things I like in it.
A person can get the "E" version and save on paper etc.
There are very few, if any, magazines that are packed from cover to cover with stuff I like.
A lot of their articles are promoting newly released products and everyone who is not Colt is bringing out a "Black rifle".
I expect sales are brisk and people who are in the market for one can learn a little from A.R. on AR's
Good luck
Mike

[BreakerDan]

I am like most of you guys that don't care for all the new plastic toys and I am from the younger group on here.

My complaint with many of the articles is the authors. So few gun writers now have any real, actual experience with anything serious when it comes to guns. You know if Elmer Keith, Jack O'Connor, Skeeter Skelton or Bill Jordan wrote something they weren't just parroting what they heard from someone else. Also the you need a 300 Mag to hunt deer or you are unethical is getting old to. Too much on the net now of that. And then you have the likes of Chuck Hawks, the self appointed gun expert who claims the S&W 36 is weak and badly designed. Really? what a dummy.

As for the ads, everything they review they seem to like. Some of the guns/gear/ammo being sold now is high price junk. Back in the day, telling someone to buy a Taurus level/quality gun would be an insult! I get so tired of all the gun gurus peddling hi cap, plastic, hollowpoint etc and convincing people that is what they have to have when most people can't effectively use it or need it.
Example: most non-experienced people would be better off for SD with a 38 revolver than going out and buying a hi cap Glock or some of the new alloy semi auto pocket cannons. Have proved it out on the range many times. That is just real world common sense but the gun mag ninjas might think a revolver looks "old school" .....gasp.

Just my two cents, but I don't read it. Besides, many of the people on this forum have more technical, real-world experience about guns and ammo than many of the writers and the common sense to tell it like it is.

[jrm53]

I will agree that the mag is not what it was 50 years ago but you have to look at all the different weapons that we have now. I have A. R.'s from the 40's the 50's and on up until now. My favorite in the current mag is the "Armed Citizen" and "I have this old gun" they provide a wonderful service to us by being an early warning system as to what the TWITS in D.C. are going to try to cram down us. Remember that 40-50 years ago we never had the variety of guns to try to cover and back in the good old days not to many imports to try to cover. Jeff

[Tom Beavert]

I have ask them to, but I find the same problem with all gun mags/tv shows/ect. they don't write for me, I buy used - all steel - proven guns. I'm not their market.
I can live with that
tb

[therevjay]

So the mag has a lot of ads, so what? It's free. OK nothings really free, but you pay for it whether you read it or not, so why not? Just skip past the ads.

[Bullseye 2620]

It long ago stopped being a serious magazine for serious shooters. I went back and looked at some of the old articles -- timeless classics with useful information. Now, it is all geared now to moving product off the shelves. I figure I save the NRA a pile every year by insisting that they not send me the magazine or any of the other promotional mailings. When I want to give them some bucks, they are sure easy to find.


Bullseye

[smitty_bs]

I would agree with you with regard to the advertisements, and it certainly isn't what it used to be. However, just as we start complaining the January issue arrived. It has two articles (one very in-depth) on the Model 70 and one on the new Hornady ammunition. It's actually a good issue, and I haven't been able to say that in a while.

[Keith Brown]

Andy, I'm glad that your still a member of the NRA and I agree with you on the ads but I'll make one suggestion. Go ahead and continue to receive the magazine and offer each copy to a different person you know or meet, remove your name and address and anything else attached that might identify you individually, you never know you might be responsible for a few new members this way.

Keith

[cflier]

Somebody likes that black plastic semi auto stuff. I've been a range officer at my local shooting club for many years. As recently as five years ago not more than one in 30 centerfire rifles coming through the door was a "black" semi auto center fire rifle. Now a days during one of my four hour shifts more than half are the black plastic war machines. I really don't understand it except that every once in a while there is a gold rush that people get excited about. Those rifles are sure gold to the manufacturers.
cflier

[sceva]

Here's my take;

I did not join the NRA for the magazine, I joined to be part of the membership of like minded people and to help support them. I look at the magazine as something they throw in, nice but if I didn't receive it I would still be a member.
The cost of your membership mostly goes to paying the NRA's way. The only way they can offer the magazine along with the membership is because the advertising pays for it.

[BLACKHAWKNJ]

I have developed the capacity to tune out and ignore what does not interest me, especially advertising-must have been all those copies of MAD I read as a kid. I agree that AR is not what it used to be, conversely as I have gained knowledge I often find articles on collectibles or milsurps not as interesting because they don't tell me anything I don't already know and they often show the same stock pictures I have seen many times. But I still look forward to it.

[gripper]

I understand that it is nice to pick up a magazine that contains articles of are own personal interest. Just remember that the biggest assault on our gun rights is directed towards the semi auto firearms industry. Companies like Sig, Glock, Springfield Armory, Rock River Arms, etc make up a huge part of the shooting industry. They also thank goodness provide millions of dollars of donations to the NRA to help fight this assualt on our gun rights. Part of the doations are in the form of advertisement money and I assume lots of it, hence all the articles and "black rifle" ads. Be very thankful of this. If one is dissapointed there are not enough articles about Elmer Kieth, handloading, shooting, or even their favorite Smith & Wesson please visit us here at the forum and we would love to chat with you about all these things. Whatever you do please embrace the NRA and all of its supporters even if they don't always print what you want to read. A very Merry Christmas to everyone. -Chad Gripp

[Dr.-d]

It's the only gun magazine I read anymore and that's because it's a freebie. I usually will not buy any gun related magazines anymore. The internet has way more to offer with forums like this etc. I belong to the NRA only because through them gun owners have a voice in general that politics can't easily ignore. And also it's a requirement for membership at the range I belong too.

[Faulkner]

Originally Posted by Andy Griffith

I'm just ranting because I feel left out, and as a customer- my wants and interests aren't being met and captivated.

Though I'm not necessarily into poodle shooters myself, I betcha the current marketing data supports the popularity of them, hence the advertising and the proliferation of them in the market these days. I think it's a good thing . . . and I'm hoping the governement is taking notice of their popularity among the general public.

[SWID]

The "American Hunter" thing came out in the late seventies, a few years after I became a life member. They told me I could subscribe to it. So they took one of the main benifits of member ship and cut it in half. That's when I stopped sending in money. And I didn't subscribe to AH either, I don't like being played for a fool.

It's not just the ads, it's the way the articles are cut up with a little bit here and a little bit there. Why can't they keep the ads in the front or back like other mags?

There are articles that interest me from time to time but mostly they could cover what's good in a little newsletter.

[R. G. Amos]

Actually I rather like the articles about assault rifles. However, these articles when they appear are often shallow and not particularly well written. I also enjoy the old books by Keith and others of his ilk. Unfortunately, the Keith's (as well as walnut and blue steel) are gone forever.

[OLDFED]

After many years, I reupped with NRA and today just got my first AR...Disappointing, compared with the articles of yore. I went thru it three times and found the Mod 70 and Armed Citizen the only worthwhile parts. I'll tell them to drop my subscription tomorrow.

[BarbC]

Sometimes the AR articles are annoyingly repetitive about black rifles and stuff I'm not interested in, but I get it (and the American Freedom for our 2nd membership) because circulation numbers are what ad prices are based on. And those ads pay for the magazine publication and mailing, and quite possibly leave a bit of profit for the NRA which they can certainly use to help fight anti-gun legislation.

So do your part and use it for bird cage liner if you must, but please keep the numbers up.

[msgdan]

Remember that the NRA is the one strong organization that has the clout to fight the battles for us in congress and on capitol hill. I'm not brainwashed and I don't agree with every decision they ever made, but I support the NRA.
Barb is right, the ad's pay the bills, that's the way it is. Overall the American Rifleman is still a good magazine, in my opinion.
I've used black rifles for 25 years in the military but I don't own one. For me a rifle, or any gun, is wood and blue steel. However, the membership of the NRA is a few million strong and I'm sure many of those people like the black guns, good for them. The NRA knows that and knows their audience so I'm sure the black gun articles are here to stay.
Either way I believe we need to support the NRA and keep fighting the good fight.

Dan

[reddogge]

I get the American Rifleman and my neighbor gets the American Hunter and we switch every month. Works for us.

[handejector]

Originally Posted by BarbC

Sometimes the AR articles are annoyingly repetitive about black rifles and stuff I'm not interested in, but I get it (and the American Freedom for our 2nd membership) because circulation numbers are what ad prices are based on. And those ads pay for the magazine publication and mailing, and quite possibly leave a bit of profit for the NRA which they can certainly use to help fight anti-gun legislation.

So do your part and use it for bird cage liner if you must, but please keep the numbers up.

Precisely. Well said.

I've been a life member since 1978, and have always taken The Rifleman. True, I hardly ever have time to read much, but I still take it. I also endure the mailings without moaning, and send them money every time I can.

I quit subscribing to other gun mags more than 25 years ago. After a couple of decades, it became apparent that subjects were rehashed over and over. For example, I read my first "Which is better- 9mm or 45ACP?" article in 1963! There is only so much stuff to write about.

[Dave from Pa]

If the magazine articles are not up to your standards maybe you can write an article and submit it. While the advertising is annoying it`s not nearly as bad as the shooting programs on the Outdoor Channel. Ten minutes of programing and 20 minutes of ads it seems. Canceling is not an answer,a letter to Mark Keefe may be more productive, besides they have 3,000,000 members to appease. In spite of it all the NRA is still the big dog in the fight to help preserve the 2nd amendment.

[bgrafsr]

It's about money. The NRA needs money to fight the establishment in D.C., and of course in all of the States, so to help with that they do need ads in their magazines to generate the income. I also think that they are putting in a lot of articles on "the black rifle" to get the younger shooters interested and hopefully get them to join to help with the "fight". I'm sure a lot of you know about the Jim Zumbo fiasco when he wrote the article on AR15's and the backlash he received because of it. The AR started putting in more articles on the rifles when they realized how many people actually liked, bought, and shoot those guns. I've been a life member for 20 some years now and don't regret it, and I have seen the changes in the magazine over time. If you don't like it, just cancel the magazine, but please, don't give up on the NRA.

[n4zov]

I agree that the overall quality of The American Rifleman is pretty dreadful compared to what it was in years past. If younger members could see what the NRA published in the 40's, 50's, and 60's they would probably revolt. The NRA shifted its main focus to lobbying and political activities long ago and they publish only so they can claim they offer members something for their dues. It has become a "send us your money and don't ask any questions" kind of organization IMHO. For example, when was the last time you saw a letter to the editor that offered even the tiniest bit of criticism of the NRA? The answer is NEVER! I continue to support the NRA financially because it is the only effective pro gun organization, and our firearms rights would have been flushed long ago without their work, but I don't necessarily like how they operate.

[sipowicz]

I don't find much to read in it either..but it's free...and I like the fact that the Postman gets to see it...who knows, maybe he will breeze through it while delivering the mail and decice to become a member....that's the right way to go postal...

[perpster]

BarbC made an excellent point about circulation numbers and ad revenue. BTW, circulation numbers have to be officially submitted to the Post Office annually and can be prosecuted for false statements.

I usually find a few things of interest, and I don't mind when the bath water ruins the pages.