This is a discussion on Now I know I am buying a Trijicon sight!!! within the General Firearm Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; Originally Posted by Captain Kahr Why not crusade and put that energy where it's better served. Like holding the government accountable for their misuse of ...
Capt Kahr, this attempt at misdirection is a classic example of what a child might do when caught doing something wrong - complain that "those other guys are worse, why don't you do something about them!" It makes what the child was doing no less wrong, it only attempts to assign some sort of moral relativism (where none exists) and to distract from the fact that the child (or, in this case, Trijicon) was WRONG. No amount of complaining that other people/institutions are worse will change that fact.
I'd encourage you AND Trijicon to keep your religious views where they belong - which is not on US Government equipment nor on this forum.
A man fires a rifle for many years, and he goes to war. And afterward he turns the rifle in at the armory, and he believes he's finished with the rifle. But no matter what else he might do with his hands - love a woman, build a house, change his son's diaper - his hands remember the rifle.
Good for Trijicon.
"The pistol, learn it well, carry it always ..." ~ Jeff Cooper
"Diligentia Vis Celeritas"
"There is very little new, and the forgotten is constantly being rediscovered."
~ Tiger McKee
Anyway, I've said my peace and I appreciate when others contest my way of thinking. It' been a fun morning and has put a pep in my step.
So basically we're still waiting on some facts:
1. Are the sights delivered for DoD contracts by Trijicon using the same serial number system Trijicon uses for its commercially available optics? (I am an Army grunt, and we use Aimpoint M68s, so I haven't seen an issue ACOG myself). There seems to be conflicting info in this thread.
2. If so, is this a violation of federal/DoD acquisitions procedure? One of the posters here has stated that it is.
3. If the answer to 1. and 2. is yes, then was it intentional? I find it entirely plausible that it never occurred to Trijicon that their serial number system might conflict with some regulation in the large and unwieldy pile of paper that is the DoD logistics and acquisitions process.
4. If the answer to 1., 2., and 3. is yes, then does it matter?
And there, of course, is where all the heat comes from.
Now, again, it seems that concluding that Trijicon is trying to preach to the Taliban and Al-Qaeda from a serial number like "A427683191COR2:8" in very small engraving on a what is a small piece of equipment by itself seems to be outrageous hysterics IMHO.
I think that's probably what will happen. They'll end up with a request to have a separate serial number system for DoD contracts (assuming they don't already) and this whole thing will fizzle out.Originally Posted by torgo1968
Actually, I kind of do, based on the intent of this guy's group. It seems unlikely to me that a former Air Force JAG officer would have any first-hand experience at all with a Trijicon ACOG on an issue rifle or carbine, and since Trijicon has been doing this for so long, hundreds of atheists in the Army and Marine Corps must have been using ACOGs ever since they got an NSN without noticing or suffering any kind of psychic harm from the serial number on the optic.Originally Posted by torgo1968
I would agree that any chaplains or chain of command that used this to paint the rifles as "Jesus guns" are so far beyond the bounds of propriety and reason as to deserve thorough reprimand and censure, but the simple existence of the serial number issue for me is on the same level of importance as Masonic symbols on U.S. currency. I just don't really care.
It doesn't disappoint me at all to see disagreement with my opinion, but as a journalist I have the highest opinion of the first amendment. Nowhere in which will you find a constitutional right to go through your life without having to occasionally handle, look at, or do things you find distasteful or offensive. There is no constitutional right to censure everything one finds offensive. The first amendment exists to protect the practice of religion, public assembly, and the independent press from government interference, not to prohibit any of those practices.Originally Posted by torgo1968
And to be honest, the comparison between the current controversy and stamping "There is no god" on government-issue items seems unfair. A more fair comparison would be "Would it offend you if some company with an atheist founder put a serial number like BZ39885T1NG on your issue compass?" And my answer would still be no.
That seems about as convincing an argument to me as "One man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist" or "One man's semiautomatic hunting rifle is another man's murderous assault weapon."Originally Posted by torgo1968
I agree that proselytizing in the military is a real issue, but this discussion is solely about the Trijicon serial number issue, which is a Bible reference, not a quote. Complaining about this is just like the American Library Association complaining about the official use of words derived from military expressions or weapons, which they think promote violence.
As to my own energies you have no idea what I do or have done.
In fact my career among govt. started and has been as directly related to accountability as with procurement, and specifically reducing costs toward procurement as well as maximizing tax payer dollar function in doing so.
I have sitting in my office multiple awards and recognitions for as much from industry and govt. including a highly coveted and rare Excellence in Partnership (EIP) award as from a coalition of industry and govt. as in direct relation to work I and my company have done to do exactly what you suggest/request.
Excellence in Partnership Awards Recipients
Note: The EIP award began in 2000 and as current the website listing only goes back to 2005.
I assure you as with complete seriousness, my energies personally have been quite direct...As along with _many_ other persons both in government as well as industry. As for many years on the scale of decades, and I'm a relatively young whipper snapper at that as some of these people have 30, 40, 50 and 60 yrs. of notches on their belts in doing same.
There is no government no where on this earth current or as in past history that has not had waste, 'abuse of power', and overall operational disfunction.
This is a fact of government and will always be the case no matter how small the government might be as an agency or entity at large. This is a function of having more than three human beings involved/tasked to manage any job that involves monies flowing in and out. To think or wish for some nirvana like solution is a dream as by ignorance and/or political chicanery.
Fact is waste and people acting wrongly will always exist in govt.
But!!...It is very much possible to root out and contain wrong as it occurs and to actively dissuade if not deny same when and where it is found.
Thus it is the responsibility of us all as tax paying citizens to report and not support actions by those who we discover are doing us all wrongly, be it personally or as by in this case the regs, statutes and ways of our government...Which is us.
P.S. - My first post required practically no energy at all, all things being relative.
Those links I provided, as aside from the Wiki one, are among my normal work related bookmarks and the words as typed took me no time at all to draft in one draft. Very little energy at all.
My mother also had another saying as she being super old school was full of'em; "Don't tell me a problem if you can't do the math."
As a kid this for many years made zero sense to me. But then I got older and began to gain life experience.
So I'll say this, if you have an issue with ACORN then rather than speak of it here I would encourage you to do something about it and make things better to that end. Maybe that is what you do IRL, I don't know and have no way to know. But if not, then the only thing stopping you from doing so is you.
Many people prefer to whine and complain about this or that being wrong or not right. Very few people though can or will do the math.
As my mom also would say; "Show me don't tell me."
As originally featured at the main page this past Friday by ABCNews.com:Originally Posted by SamRudolph
Yes they knew, it was purposeful and as for specific intent and is not accidental as by directive from the companys then foreign national founder....Trijicon confirmed to ABCNews.com that it adds the biblical codes to the sights sold to the U.S. military. Tom Munson, director of sales and marketing for Trijicon, which is based in Wixom, Michigan, said the inscriptions "have always been there" and said there was nothing wrong or illegal with adding them. Munson said the issue was being raised by a group that is "not Christian." The company has said the practice began under its founder, Glyn Bindon, a devout Christian from South Africa who was killed in a 2003 plane crash.
In August of 2005 Trijicon was awarded a $660 million dollar, multi-year contract to provide up to 800,000 of its Advanced Combat Optical Gunsight (ACOG) to the U.S. Marine Corps. According to Trijicon, the ACOG is "designed to function in bright light, low light or no light conditions," and is "ideal for combat due to its high degree of discrimination, even among multiple moving targets." At the end of the scope's model number, you can read "JN8:12", which is a reference to the New testament book of John, Chapter 8, Verse 12, which reads: "Then spake Jesus again unto them, saying, I am the light of the world: he that followeth me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life." (King James Version) (ABC News)
News report - Marines Concerned About Secret Bible Verses on Guns - ABC News
Image - http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/slideshow?id=9580847
As well here, in America, for the issue to be pointed out and inquired about as related to _tax payer_ dollars to the tune of $660M going to a single source supplier as related to Constitutionality and governmental procurement regulation should have zero to do with whether such person, group or organization is "Christian", or not. To state such a response is equally ridiculous and egregious.
For the record up to initially seeing this report last Friday morning I'd had zero negative thought or opinion as toward Trijicon.
They make a good product that has been quite useful for our government's use both military and else wise.
I have no bone or beef nor ulterior motive to post as I have as toward Trijicon. This could have been any other vendor and my view would be same.
Time to get an ACOG to show my support! Now, what to do with my Aimpoint...
"In America, freedom and justice have always come from the ballot box, the jury box, and when that fails, the cartridge box."
-- Steve Symms, US Senator from Idaho, 1990
Weinstein, an attorney and former Air Force officer, said many members of his group who currently serve in the military have complained about the markings on the sights.Pyschic harm is not the issue.and since Trijicon has been doing this for so long, hundreds of atheists in the Army and Marine Corps must have been using ACOGs ever since they got an NSN without noticing or suffering any kind of psychic harm from the serial number on the optic.
Again, you are completely missing the point. This isn't about being protected from offense. It's about church/state separation, government endorsement of a particular religion. Obviously the government didn't know about it until now, but if they fail to act, they will be tacitly endorsing one religion over others.It doesn't disappoint me at all to see disagreement with my opinion, but as a journalist I have the highest opinion of the first amendment. Nowhere in which will you find a constitutional right to go through your life without having to occasionally handle, look at, or do things you find distasteful or offensive. There is no constitutional right to censure everything one finds offensive. The first amendment exists to protect the practice of religion, public assembly, and the independent press from government interference, not to prohibit any of those practices.
We already have seen reports of Christian soldiers being emboldened by this. It's a real issue.I agree that proselytizing in the military is a real issue, but this discussion is solely about the Trijicon serial number issue, which is a Bible reference, not a quote.
I might be wrong, but I thought the whole idea of the military in combat was to break things and kill people regardless of the motivation. That, in and of itself, would be more than enough to pi$$ off the enemy.
If Trijicon incorporates chapter and verse as a part of serial number, how does that violate the prostelyzation clause? The sights aren't big enough to inscribe the whole passage. In order to have any meaning other than a chapter and verse reference, the user would have to open the Bible and look it up. But then, I have a tendency to simplify things rather than pick the fly crap out of the pepper.
"Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups"
I think many here would be singing a different tune if they did not agree with message portrayed.
It is an invaluable skill to be able to look at a situation objectively without interjecting your own opinions and prejudices. This is a skill we constantly accuse judges, liberals, and politicians of ignoring. I am sad that many in our firearm community seem to dismiss it as well.
You may agree with the hidden message, but it is immaterial. What is important is the manufacturer willfully ignoring the guidelines and law regarding manufacturing/procurement for the armed forces. There may be a contractual recourse or other effects Trijicon will face over time.
"a reminder that no law can replace personal responsibility" - Bill Clinton 2010.
I would be comforted to carry an ACOG with these references into battle. I would not be as comfortable with carrying Koran related references into battle. If Trijicon consciously sent these to our military, knowing it was not allowed, then they are wrong. I think it is awesome that they found a way to put a piece of God out there with the Soldiers but I might not feel the same way if I was Jewish or Islamic. I think I will shoot an e- mail forward and see if we have any of those.
[Here's my "on-topic" justification--for a group of folks who take a literal, original intent understanding of the Second Amendement, it it highly inconsistent to take a revisionist interpretation of the First Amendment. These comments reflect both my calling as a pastor AND my background in History/Political Science.]
The First Amendment of the Bill of Rights states:
The clear intent of the framers was to prohibit the establishment of a state religion, such as the Church of England. The founding fathers were deeply religious and found no conflict in opening the first session of Congress with a three-hour long Bible study or commissioning the printing of the "Bible of the American Revolution' within a month after the victory at Yorktown. Perhaps George Washington said it best in his farewell address of 1796:Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;
Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens. The mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and to cherish them. A volume could not trace all their connections with private and public felicity. Let it simply be asked: Where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths which are the instruments of investigation in courts of justice ? And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.
I would humbly submit that Trijicon putting a reference to a Bible verse in no way establishes a state religion.
God is love (1 John 4:8)