Defensive Carry banner

Recoil Magazine - "This firearm shouldn't be available to the public" piece (MERGED)

8K views 75 replies 40 participants last post by  RedSafety 
#1 ·
Recoil Magazine - "This firearm shouldn't be available to the public" piece (MERGED)

They published a piece on the HK MP7A1 and they had the unfortunate idea that saying this about it would be a good idea...

"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..."
The amount of hate they are receiving on Facebook is as humorous as it is well deserved.

The editor made the mistake of trying to spin some damage control and actually just made matters worse. I'm guessing someone is going to be hitting the Help Wanted ads pretty soon.
 
#4 ·
Yeah, that's probably not a real smart mindset to take if you are a firearm publication. I think you could probably make that statement if it were a rocket launcher or something similar, but trying to make the statement that a firearm has to have "sporting applications" to be deemed acceptable for the general public is pretty darn stupid.
 
#66 ·
Why would it be OK with a rocket launcher? The 2nd Amendment says "...Shall not be Infringed!" It says nothing of sporting purposes or anything being too dangerous. I would say that it just says arms which would include nuclear arms, biological arms, fighter jets, and other weapons of war. Many will disagree with me but it still is correct in my view.
 
#7 ·
They act like defeating body armor is a difficult task it is not. Does not require any special weapon. Most weapons with the right round in them can do the job.
Body armor is not meant to make you bullet proof your not going to do the super man thing and walk up a BG shooting you. They are a second chance.
And one you hope you never need to relay on.
Most weapons made have no real propose in hunting, that is not why we own them.
 
#14 ·
Yup, my mosin is capable up to somewhere just north of 500m i believe, of it no matter what ammo i use in it and theyre now only $90 at Fleet Farm. I own it because its a beautiful and capable weapon that defeated Fascism. Its cheap, reliable, sturdy and a good conversation piece at the range. Of course it does take down game quite well...I did not buy it to use on cops or whatever this editor had in mind. Im not seeing why a semi auto mp7 couldnt be released to the public. Its not like releasing the semi auto g36 was a big issue. Its a much better weapon system anyways. And with pistol versoins of ak47s and m4s, who really cares?!
 
#13 ·
I never subscribed, something kinda bugged me about it but I never could put a fix on what. I really liked the DIY section and the one about successful small businesses in the industry. Other than that it just seems to have Mall Ninja written all over it.

I bought the first 4 issues to give it a chance and now my mind is made up. Thank you for saving me money TX!
 
#16 ·
"... good reason ... we all know that ... no sporting purpose ..."
Language of the usurpers.

Many of those who ostensibly "know" haven't given it beyond a passing thought. It's certainly incorrect to presuppose "we all know."

And to suggest "sporting purpose" as a goal of weaponry is laughable, both for its falsity as well as its pointlessness. Pure spin, implying a "sporting purpose" is the point of the 2A.

My take: they need more shoulder padding and fresh air.
 
#18 ·
I've seen a copy of this "RECOIL" magazine on the news stand. I dont like it. It seems to be marketed to the rich and famous. Most people I know and shoot with sacrifice to participate in shooting. Most of us must save to buy what we want. Recoil is not for a guy like me. However...I have not seen the offending artical, and I'm not familiar with this particular firearm. If it's designed to defeat body armor I find it hard to justify needing or wanting one. Most any rifle will defeat most body armor, if that is for some odd reason what I need to do.
 
#20 ·
The thing that stuck out the most to me was the writer's complete lack of knowledge of firearms laws. No "commoner" would ever be able to own the real deal just because of the fact that it is capable of automatic fire. Also, unless HK ditched the stock and the foregrip, it would have to be sold as an SBR, which is possible for us commoners to get, but still a PITA.

I really hope this stupid magazine doesn't recover from this. I bought one issue at the grocery store once because it featured something interesting. Now I know to avoid it.
 
#22 ·
#29 ·
I just have one question for this soon to be I'm guessing ... unemployed gun magazine's ditsy person. Or if he's connected financially, soon to be out of print magazine.

Out of all of the firearms on the market now just how many wit ah "sporting purpose" only intention's are for sale now; that we all can buy?

Has he ever never heard of firearms designed for "self-defense" = "personal-protection" = "target-shootin" =
< "insert-intended-usage-here-other-then-for-sportiness-purpose" >???????

I don't know what his background is working with firearms or what his dealings are with gun enthusiast but that magazine ... well they seem to be in a world of hurt now after a visit to their facebook page, and because of this quote slipping through their copy editor or paginators eye without getting a red flag.

Although. This pub could service though if all the tree-huggers get wind of this since they too are of his level of thought. They'll buy onto his train about to derail.
 
#30 ·
I've never heard of this magazine. I don't ever pay attention to the magazines while in grocery (or the likes) stores but will do now. Could have some fun and hide the issues behind the kitty litter. :yup:
 
#31 ·
Seems to be just another person looking to make money and not believing in the cause or lifestyle. The people involved in the creation of this magazine were not "gun people" and were not smart enough to hire gun people from the start to not only create content for them, but educate them on how gun people think. A fundamental lack of understanding of gun culture was very obvious from the first issue on. As in his article his true colors are shown, and thus could be the demise of this rag.
 
#32 ·
From what I've seen from videos when criminals get surprised by armed Homeowners,shop owners etc. the resulting escapades can be quite "Sporty" kinda like walking into a covey of quail just before they take off.
I'm all for any Firearm that can not only deliver a punch,but due to low recoil followup shots are fast and accurate which this gun claims to have about 50% less recoil than 9mm.
As far as "RECOIL MAGAZINE" I don't think they ever expected to experience the "RECOIL" this story got them
 
  • Like
Reactions: FTG-05 and phreddy
#33 ·
H&K isn't going to complain. It's basically advertising.

I've seen similar things with weight-lifting supplements. They put on the "not recommended for women" tag, and it makes it vastly more likely the men will buy it because it sounds more potent.
 
#34 ·
RECOIL Magazine--My personal belief that what they did was wrong.

Many of you may have heard of the article in RECOIL magazine that put its creators up against the Second Amendment. I started following this story last night and thought I'd share some of my personal feelings about what the editor, Jerry Tsai, did.

Here is the first statement, published in issue 4 of the new magazine.

“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.”
Problem? This implies that civilians should be limited in what firearms they can own, and more alarmingly that apparently a weapons needs "sporting applications" as a basis for civilian ownership. This is wrong.

Now, had they issued an apology at this point, some may have accepted it as a stupid mistake. However for me the real issue comes from the first response (rather, justification) given by JT.
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.
According to JT, owning a specific type of firearm shows disrespect for those serving in uniform!? As a service member, its a shame to see someone justifying limitation of the Second Amendment by claiming that my safety is at risk....

He later issued another apology, however for me it doesn't make up for his attempt to use Military and Law Enforcement to back up his anti 2A statements. That is the EXACT same reasoning pushed by gun control groups in this nation. What a disgrace.

Thanks,
Clay
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top