Now I know I am buying a Trijicon sight!!!
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; Bill of Rights and Later Amendments
Index to this page
Bill of Rights
Amendment 1 Freedoms, Petitions, Assembly
Amendment 2 Right to bear arms
January 20th, 2010 07:54 PM
Bill of Rights and Later Amendments
Index to this page
Bill of Rights
Amendment 1 Freedoms, Petitions, Assembly
Amendment 2 Right to bear arms
Amendment 3 Quartering of soldiers
Amendment 4 Search and arrest
Amendment 5 Rights in criminal cases
Amendment 6 Right to a fair trial
Amendment 7 Rights in civil cases
Amendment 8 Bail, fines, punishment
Amendment 9 Rights retained by the People
Amendment 10 States' rights Later Amendments
Amendment 11 Lawsuits against states
Amendment 12 Presidential elections
Amendment 13 Abolition of slavery
Amendment 14 Civil rights
Amendment 15 Black suffrage
Amendment 16 Income taxes
Amendment 17 Senatorial elections
Amendment 18 Prohibition of liquor
Amendment 19 Women's suffrage
Amendment 20 Terms of office
Amendment 21 Repeal of Prohibition
Amendment 22 Term Limits for the Presidency
Amendment 23 Washington, D.C., suffrage
Amendment 24 Abolition of poll taxes
Amendment 25 Presidential succession
Amendment 26 18-year-old suffrage
Amendment 27 Congressional pay raises
Original Ten Amendments: The Bill of Rights
Passed by Congress September 25, 1789.
Ratified December 15, 1791.
Freedoms, Petitions, Assembly
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances
For all you crybabies who do not understand how the amendment READS, it is saying THE government cannot establish a religion, ie;(The church of England)
OR prohibiting the excercise THEREOF. Trijicon is EXERCISING their right. IF you're in the military AND you do not like them exercising their right on a piece of equipment you are using, don't use it
Good Grief Already
The debate between Socialism and Capitalism is only over because Capitalism was bound, gagged, and locked up in a deep, dark dungeon around about the time the Fed was established and income taxes started being levied. Capitalism didn’t lose. Capitalism was never even allowed to show up for the debate—because if it had been, it would have won hands down. The best way for the Socialists to assure victory has always been to cheat.
Last edited by oneshot; January 20th, 2010 at 09:30 PM.
If you want to make God laugh, tell him your plans.
Washington didn't use his freedom of speech to defeat the British, He shot them!
Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it whether it exists or not, diagnosing it incorrectly, and applying the wrong remedy." -- Ernest Benn
January 20th, 2010 07:54 PM
January 20th, 2010 10:26 PM
re: oneshot-- really? some common civility please
Really? You suppose if you are in the military and are handed a piece of equipment that has an inscription you don't approve of you can just say NO. Come on now. You know that isn't a viable option and that you'd be mad as a hatter in the August Texas Sun if someone gave you a piece of equipment with 666 or 777 or whatever number it is that is supposed to be the sign of the devil engraved on it.
Originally Posted by oneshot
Why would you think non-christians wouldn't be similarly upset if they were handed equipment with sectarian christian inscriptions?
You'd be jumping up and down that devil worship is being forced on you. You'd complain that the government has no business supporting the devil. And you'd be right. The government needs to stay out of any appearance of supporting any particularized religious viewpoint-- christian, islam, buddist, atheist, bahai. It doesn't matter.
In a way this "controversy" regarding Tricon has less to do with constitutional issues than ordinary civility. We all have to get along. No point to deliberately being antagonistic or deliberately being offensive.
January 21st, 2010 11:19 AM
At this point it still seems to me like the whole issue is now dependent on whether or not Trijicon knowingly violated the terms of their defense contracts.
As I said before, if they did, then I understand the trouble. I don't care about first amendment issues if this is the case, because if Trijicon was specifically told not to do something and went ahead and deliberately did it in spite of the rule, then that's a clear contract violation.
If it was accidental, I think it's a harmless mistake that is easily fixed by running all new ACOG and reflex sights for the military with different serial numbers. Since it's harmless, there's no need to freak out about the sights in current use. Just let them be eventually cycled out of service.
I know CAIR is up in arms about this, claiming that this will let Islamic fanatics claim the crusaders are out to get them... but if we're honest, they've been saying that anyway, so there is no effective change here.
If the terms of Trijicon's contract say nothing that would prohibit the serial number system they use, and Trijicon did it because they've always done it, then again, I see nothing that changing the contract terms for next time won't fix.
The reason I don't think this is a first amendment issue is this:
1. Trijicon is a private company providing items to the federal and state governments.
2. The purpose of the government acquiring those items is to improve the combat capabilities of American troops (Not to proselytize anything or impose anyone's religion or lack of religion on anyone else).
3. The items in question are not proselytizing or endorsing anything in a manner that I think could be reasonably considered offensive. In order to be offended, one would have to look at the very small serial number, understand what the last few letters and numbers are, understand what the reference is to, and decide that this is the federal government attempting to convert you to Christianity or favor Christianity over any other religion.
That seems unreasonable to me. The only thing I conclude from ACOGs being in service is that the US military favors Trijicon over other providers of similar sights.
4. American currency still has "In God We Trust" stamped on every coin and printed on every bill. I don't think any sane person considers this an attempt by the Treasury to make people believe in God. Yet, if anything should be an issue, this should be. The reference is blatant, the thing with the reference on it is actually made by the US government, and there are no other choices of currency to use.
January 21st, 2010 05:52 PM
re: Sam Rudolph
These sights with inscriptions were sold in countries where forms of christianity are the official state religion. Yet, even in such places, the governments have determined to get the inscriptions off their military equipment. Specifically, I'm referencing decisions by both Australia and New Zealand. It seems like those governments, officially christian, didn't think this was harmless.
Originally Posted by SamRudolph
January 21st, 2010 06:13 PM
Well Trijicon has offered to stop producing the ones with the biblical passages and offered to "fix" the ones already deployed. I guess that $660 million dollar means that much to them to get rid of something they've been doing since the founder passed. Funny what money will do.
January 21st, 2010 06:26 PM
Here's the story for those who want to read the whole thing: Company offers to stop putting biblical references on military scopes - CNN.com
Originally Posted by cuban11182
See now folks? Just like I said, it didn't require any great output of time, effort, or taxpayer dollars. They obviously got told to stop if they wanted to keep their contract and they did.
January 21st, 2010 11:18 PM
I foresee this thread coming to a close very soon and just wanted to make a few final comments. More than anything, what this controversy shows is a great divide among the American people with regard to their interpretation of the Bill of Rights. As much as folks want to parse the 2nd Amendment to suit their agendas, it says what it says in plain English.
Likewise, the 1st Amendment. When I studied translation of ancient texts in college we had a rule, "Context is king!" It makes no sense to attempt to interpret Akkadian or Syriac texts outside of an understanding of the views of their authors (if known from other texts) or in light of modern principles and philosophies. This is called anachronism.
The 1st Amendment cannot be interpreted and applied without understanding the intent of the framers from their other writings and the context of their time. It was not a guarantee against exposure to religion. Much less was it intended to preclude the United States Government itself from practicing or participating in Christian rites. To assert as much is to completely ignore a wide body of documentation to the contrary. The intent was to prohibit the Government from establishing one particular State brand of interpretation of the Scriptures as England had done with the establishment of the Anglican Church. I would wager my life that no thought entered any signatory's mind that it would at some later date be used to enforce prohibitions against any sort of common Christian practice. Our national historic artifacts are rife with scriptural references.
As Pastor said earlier, the idea of "separation of Church and State" does not reside in the constitution. Jefferson himself was no fan of tyranny, specifically that committed by religious tyrants against whom he variously expressed his vehemance. Yet, he asserted to the Danbury Baptist Association in 1802 that they ought not feel any limitation on their free exercise of religion due to the 1st Amendment "building a wall of separation between church and State". Meaning, he said nothing about the 1st protecting government from religion. Any views to the contrary, despite Jefferson's general animosity toward the established Church (not God or religion, as in this particular case Baptists), is a whimsical fabrication and distortion of the quote and its intent.
Current law may have been violated, but we all really hate some of those unconstitutional limitations of the 2nd Amendment don't we? *rhetorical lilt*
Likewise with the 1st.
I am not endorsing Trijicon's actions, nor am I commenting on any person's choice to believe or not believe. I am simply offering a bit of a history lesson on the content debated and some insight into Principles of Interpretation of historic texts.
For your consideration with respect to THIS author's "context":
I am a bit more open minded than I believe are most folks of my religious heritage and am alternately accused of being a liberal by my Republican friends and a right-wing nut job by my Democrat friends. As a strict Constitutional Libertarian I am quite staunchly opposed to government establishment of any Christian sect. I can't quite say that Trijicon's actions are in violation of the intent of our Constitution's authors. Perhaps some folks are becoming Christophobic.
NRA Certified Instructor (6 years)
Former LEO/DOD Contractor
Active Duty Marine (Martial Arts Instructor)
Glock 17, Kel-Tec P-11, S&W Model 60, various rifles
January 21st, 2010 11:45 PM
This thread is going to be canned for the same reason that the other one was. It became a thread about religion which we have learned always ends up with hurt feelings and for that reason I will be closing this one soon.
Just heard that this same topic was canned earlier today.
Sorry Mods, I wasn't on line today so I didn't see it. If you want to dump this one too, feel free.
I will say this. I think the whole thing is ridiculous. The Scriptural references have been there for nearly 2 decades.
It was the U.S. Government that bought the sights because they were good sights and felt that they would offer an advantage to our warriors, of which I have no doubt, since I have used them myself on police weapons. It was the responsibility of those originally purchasing the product to make sure that it adhered to governmental standards.
Apparently it wasn't an issue then like it seems to be now. And since this subject could be argued for the next hundred years between those with religion and those with none, this topic doomed from the start.
Any more argument about religion and government and what is supposed to be an what aint and this one is over.
The further a society drifts from the truth, the more it will hate those that speak it...- George Orwell
AR. CHL Instr. 07/02 FFL
Like custom guns and stuff? Check this out...
January 22nd, 2010 01:42 AM
You know there's a really great quote from the Talmud I'd like to have on a weapon.
"If a man comes to kill you, rise early and kill him first"
January 22nd, 2010 09:55 AM
Originally Posted by HotGuns
Yep, totally agree...and again, you have saved my fingers from allot of typing.
January 22nd, 2010 10:07 AM
I saw that Trijicon will be renumbering all future DoD contract optics and is providing the means to modify the serial numbers on current units.
I got the feeling from them that they were a bit flustered by the whole thing. Kinda like a "Wow... we've been doing this for 20 years, never thought it'd be such a huge stink..."
January 22nd, 2010 10:41 AM
January 22nd, 2010 11:07 AM
The only thing I have to add to this post is that the irony that the US Gov. is buying these sights with money that has "In God We Trust" printed on it is not
lost on me.
Zoe: "Preacher, don't the Bible have some pretty specific things to say about killing?
Book: "Quite specific. It is, however, somewhat fuzzier on the subject of kneecaps."
January 22nd, 2010 06:44 PM
January 23rd, 2010 01:15 AM
The issue isn't exposure to religion.
Originally Posted by HardCorps79
By GHFLRLTD in forum Defensive Carry Guns
Last Post: November 2nd, 2010, 05:03 PM
By resqr9142 in forum Defensive Carry Guns
Last Post: January 16th, 2010, 10:21 PM
By aznav in forum Related Gear & Equipment
Last Post: December 29th, 2009, 12:05 AM
By NCMedic8617 in forum Firearm Cleaning & Maintenance
Last Post: August 29th, 2009, 08:48 PM
Search tags for this page
is trijicon publicly traded
military property markings trijicon
trijicon gov investigation
trijicon government contracts
trijicon government procurement optics
trijicon night sight jesus codes
trijicon public trading
trijicon publicly traded
trijicon serial number list
war idiot trijicon site
Click on a term to search for related topics.