« Oops: Coakley's Blunder Of The Day #2 | Main | Gallup: Don't Be Surprised By A Scott Brown Win »

Monday, January 18, 2010

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451c1db69e2012876ec2bdf970c

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Update: Someone Better Get Andy A Tranqulizer:

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

...Yes, but it's a tool dedicated for the use of Marines.

United States Marines.

Absent a defense contract with the actual Heavenly Host itself...

If that doesn't do him in, this excerpt from Marc Thiessen's book ought to ..

'"Several senior officials told me that, after undergoing waterboarding, Zubaydah actually thanked his interrogators and said, “You must do this for all the brothers.” The enhanced interrogation techniques were a relief for Zubaydah, they said, because they lifted a moral burden from his shoulders — the responsibility to continue resisting.'

We know what to think when people see the face of Jesus in a grilled cheese sandwich. How is finding biblical references in the model number of a rifle scope different?

The ACOG was developed by Trijicon without government funding AND is available commercially. That makes it COTS (Commercial Off The Shelf) equipment. That they put an engraving as part of their design on it is their business. If the government decides the device meets it's requirements and wants a version without said engraving, that would be a special order at the least. Can't say what that will do to the price.

This is not a government conspiracy to push religion. Unless someone can find evidence this was bought because of the engraving, there is no case that this is the government sponsoring religion.

Sometimes, sometimes a Bible verse just fits the situation w/out actually being a "religious reference". Other times, people, especially some Bible thumpers misuse verses and other thumpers consider it to be sacrilege (sp?) Even I, no thumper, would consider this situation to be a disresectful use. Then too I might feel completly stupid to learn that it was the manufacture date or location or some such identifying mark normally included in serial numbers.

Arggh, it's different because it's actually a real reference. My bad. Can they figure out how to laser inscribe bullets with appropriate crusade friendly messages?

I just bought a brand new Ruger version of the AR-15 and put an ACOG on it. I gotta say I love this sight better than any I have ever had, and that includes the red dot on my son's AR-15. And my sight has a reference to a Bible verse on it, I had never noticed that before.

Cool, I say. If the owner of this company wants to put a Bible verse on his product, good for him. If the government wants it taken off, then take the reference off. It shouldn't be a problem, as there are many ways to eliminate that part of the serial number you don't want on there. Or better yet, specify it in the contract. Quit beating up on the guy who did what he wanted to with his own product. That is his perogative, and the American way I might add. Had the government funded the developement of this product, then I would say foul, not appropriate. Otherwise, leave the guy and his company alone.

It's an expensive sight, simply because you pay for quality; the thing is designed to keep working during use that would trash most sights. Son finally managed to get one issued to him, worked at it a while because he thinks it's the best gunsight he's ever used, period.

This is just one more example of our professional media looking for things to scream about.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Donations Appreciated

Blog Ads


Syndigo

AdSense

Infolinks

Search

Wikio Top Fifty

Memeorandum

Blog Roll

February 2012

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
      1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29      

Find the best blogs at Blogs.com.

2006 Weblog Awards


Technorati


Blog powered by TypePad