Tactical Burn-Out

The most tacticool I get is a bone stock M&P Sport and a Sig P226. The Sig is an old one before they started adding rails. Oh yeah, I also have a M16A1 clone upper. Haven't had time to put the lower together.

Most of the rest of my rifles have wood and blue and date from the 1940s and 1950s. Most of my handguns have this revolving thing in the middle of them.

I guess my tacticool gear consists of a couple of M1 helmets and cartridge belts from the same era as my rifles. One helmet has a 1940s era net over it and the other has a 1960s camo cover meant for use in Southeast Asia.

If the tacticool guys want to train to be "operators" more power to them. Keeping gun, ammo, and accessory manufacturers in business is important.
 
Totally agree about the tactical burnout. Tacti-cool has become fashionable and it sells products these days.

As a LEO, I've got some tactical gear including an AR equipped with an Eotech and Surefire flashlight and a plate carrier with extra rifle and pistol mags. That stuff rides in the trunk the majority of the time.

No doubt good tactics and equipment saves lives when you're actually amongst those closing with the enemy, but things have gotten a little absurd. I see guys on various forums that are better equipped than the average soldier, marine and policeman. I just shake my head and wonder what it's like to have that much disposable income to throw around. ;)
 
...The problem for many of the tactic-cool folks is that they have their priorities in the wrong order. How you shoot matters a lot more than what you shoot, and all that time wasted agonizing over what firearm to get, in what caliber, with what tactical **** attached and shooting what load is totally wasted when they don't put in the time learning the basics of how to shoot accurately and re-load efficiently before working on increasing speed, adding in movement, etc.

Almost a century ago, Sergeant Alvin York used a bolt-action rifle and a 1911 pistol -- both plain and unadorned -- to kill 20 German soldiers and capture 132 others.

It ain't what you got...it's how you use it! :)
 
I must admit I have/had interest in some of the tactical stuff and I've had 3 AR15s and a Mini 14 but I've been going old school lately. Recently bought a Marlin 30/30 and a Rem 700 BDL 30-06 and I'm currently looking for another nice SXS shotgun for bird hunting. But what surprises me is all the silly stuff that's out there. I was at Walmart the other day and they had a tactical lever action Mossberg and about 3 shotguns with pistol grips or door breaching thingies on the muzzle.
 
My concession to tacti-cool on my built for the purpose XM-177E1 clone is an extra inch of barrel, a heavier barrel profile and tire sandals. Gotta have the tire sandals to make it harder for the bad guys to track you.

d5302e16.jpg


----

More seriously though, one of the nice things about shooting is the sheer diversity. Over the years I have shot (in no particular order):

1) Trap and Skeet
2) Bullseye
3) High Power Rifle / Service Rifle
4) Black Powder Cartridge Rifle
5) small bore prone and 3 position
6) tactical rifle
7) practical pistol
8) hunting
a) prairie dogs
b) predators
c) deer
d) antelope
e) upland birds - pheasant, grouse and dove

I've also enjoyed reloading since age 12 (38 years and counting) and I enjoy the added dimension that brings to all of the above (except of course the small bore shooting).
 
Almost a century ago, Sergeant Alvin York used a bolt-action rifle and a 1911 pistol -- both plain and unadorned -- to kill 20 German soldiers and capture 132 others.

It ain't what you got...it's how you use it! :)

No its both. A century ago the most common rifle on the battlefield was a bolt action. Now the most common rifle is at least a semi auto. Tactics are also different. Try that today with 20 men who are armed with G36 select fire rifles holding 30 round mags and capable of 750 rounds per min of sustained fire...with each soldier carrying around 210 - 240 rounds. That's at least 4200 rounds.
 
Back in 93 right before the Clinton gun ban, I bought an AR15, called a Colt Sporter then. Since it was so cool it was about to be banned, I thought I should get one.

The cool factor soon wore off. It is heavier than my bolt action rifle and less ergonomic. The magazine gets in the way. It is harder to shoot off-hand. Maintenance is more of a nuisance.

Most of the people I see with them put huge overpowered scopes on them and shoot from a bench.

I don't claim to be a great rifle shot. I was at the range one day with my 03a3, this particular range is restricted to 100 yds bench only. There were a couple guys with scoped AR15s. Apparently they were watching my target, they came over and complemented my shooting. I didn't see their targets, but from their comments my groups were as good as theirs.

They didn't strike me as mall ninjas, just a couple guys shooting their rifle of choice.

Myself, shooting from a bench bores me. I don't like rifles that are too heavy to shoot off-hand. Accurate shooting interests me much more than the ability to spray rounds down range.
 
What the tact tee cool people call a pistol grip on a shotgun is really an abomination. I have shotguns with Prince of Wales, straight hand and pistol grips but none have abominations on them. Larry
 
No its both. A century ago the most common rifle on the battlefield was a bolt action. Now the most common rifle is at least a semi auto. Tactics are also different. Try that today with 20 men who are armed with G36 select fire rifles holding 30 round mags and capable of 750 rounds per min of sustained fire...with each soldier carrying around 210 - 240 rounds. That's at least 4200 rounds.

I would respectfully suggest that the situation Alvin York faced that day in 1918 was at least as dire and deadly as the scenario you describe above.

Here is the wording of his Medal of Honor citation:

"After his platoon had suffered heavy casualties and 3 other noncommissioned officers had become casualties, Cpl. York assumed command. Fearlessly leading 7 men, he charged with great daring a machinegun nest which was pouring deadly and incessant fire upon his platoon. In this heroic feat the machinegun nest was taken, together with 4 officers and 128 men and several guns." (Source:
CMOHS.org - Corporal YORK, ALVIN C., U.S. Army )

And here is what happened in Alvin York's own words:

"The Germans got us, and they got us right smart. They just stopped us dead in our tracks. Their machine guns were up there on the heights overlooking us and well hidden, and we couldn't tell for certain where the terrible heavy fire was coming from... And I'm telling you they were shooting straight. Our boys just went down like the long grass before the mowing machine at home. Our attack just faded out... And there we were, lying down, about halfway across [the valley] and those German machine guns and big shells getting us hard.

And those machine guns were spitting fire and cutting down the undergrowth all around me something awful. And the Germans were yelling orders. You never heard such a racket in all of your life. I didn't have time to dodge behind a tree or dive into the brush... As soon as the machine guns opened fire on me, I began to exchange shots with them. There were over thirty of them in continuous action, and all I could do was touch the Germans off just as fast as I could. I was sharp shooting... All the time I kept yelling at them to come down. I didn't want to kill any more than I had to. But it was they or I. And I was giving them the best I had." (Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alvin_C._York )
 
You missed my whole point. I wasn't taking anything away from him or the men there

I didn't say you were taking anything away from York. It appeared you were suggesting that he faced off against men armed, as he was, with bolt-action rifles, and that today, the outcome would be different. In fact, re-reading your post, I don't see that you were making any other point.
 
I guess I must be odd man out. I served in the Army from July 1967 to March 1970. During that time I never handled much less fired am M-16. I did fire several M-14's including a few National Match converted ones. Of course I never went to Vietnam either and I was not in combat arms. I have never owned nor shot an AR anything. I do own and shoot a NM M-14 and a DCM M1 Garand. I would like to maybe sometime own an AR 10 but doubt I ever will. I have nothing against anyone that shoots AR's but it is just not my cup of tea. I would much rather shoot one of my bolt action silhouette rifles or one of my single shoot BPCR rifles.
 
Eh... a lot of guys enjoy that there is an endless variety of aftermarket gear for their ARs. It's a hobby. It's fun.
Heck, the fact that is causes heartburn to missionary position purists makes it that much more fun! :D
 
Last edited:
I would really.....

Almost a century ago, Sergeant Alvin York used a bolt-action rifle and a 1911 pistol -- both plain and unadorned -- to kill 20 German soldiers and capture 132 others.

It ain't what you got...it's how you use it! :)

I would really like to see that. Not the German. Just York working the bolt, aiming and shooting. He also had to reload twice.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top