American Rifleman magazine has become a corrupt joke.

Status
Not open for further replies.
All magazines covering all topics have been doing this since the first magazine was published. Lol Some more blatant that others.

Good news! We now have internet forums. The bad news is we have to distinguish fact from fiction.
 
I'm a lifetime member of the NRA. I do think lately they are getting soft and, unfortunately, I think The American Rifleman is a corrupt propaganda piece and used to mostly generate advertising revenue at the expense of the truth and honest firearms evaluations.

They mostly test guns for manufacturers that pay them to run full-page ads in their magazines.

When is the last time you've seen a full-page Glock ad in the magazine? Now when's the last time you saw an article on Glocks in the magazine? Hmmm... When's the last time you saw an article on a Ruger in the magazine? Every damn month. Or a 1911... It's so blatantly obvious that it's pathetic. Now, their online edition did indeed run a few articles on Glocks. But I don't recall ever seeing a review of the Gen 5 Glocks, or the new 19x, or the G45, or the MOS Gen 5s; all very significant events in the self-defense and law-enforcement world.

And the biased accuracy testing is getting old.

The most recent blatant attempt to hide a gun's poor performance is in the latest issue.

AR is a long-time shill for Wilson Combat. They can print nothing negative about the company or it's products. In turn, Wilson Combat pays a lot of money for monthly ads in the magazine.

On page 78 of the January 2019 issue, they tested the new Wilson Combat EDC X9. Of course it got a glowing review complete with absolute lies...

"On the range, the EDC X9 proved to be every bit as accurate and reliable as any pistol we've tested - performance we have come to expect from Wilson Combat. As the accompanying table shows, this gun is a shooter with excellent sights a light, smooth trigger. More impressive than the groups from the bench, though, was how well the gun..."

Yeah... All lies. Because, if you actually look at the accompanying table, and see the 1.77" group, you would be impressed.

Unfortunately, that's at 15yds and not at the normal, standard 25yd distance that most of their reviews are at. A $2800 9mm pistol should be getting sub-2" groups at 25yds and 1" groups at 15yds. Nearly 2" at 15yds is what every single one of my Glocks will get. As well as my $200 Taurus. What a joke.

Why did they choose to intentionally mislead their members? It's all about the money and their personal biases.

I fear The American Rifleman has been corrupted for years now. And the NRA is becoming just another group of the rich and powerful elites in Washington DC that have little regard for the common American.

The only magazine I buy is Survival Guide. I almost always learn several new things from each issue. Gun magazines suck.
 
I remember when I was a kid the AR was dedicated to shooting and the shooting sports. All those old men died out. Things changed. Foo is going to hit the fan on sources of money domestically and foreign among other things. If that suits you fine. Personally, I'm deeply resentful of being played. Look at the overhead and salaries and see what you find.
 
When is the last time you've seen a full-page Glock ad in the magazine? Now when's the last time you saw an article on Glocks in the magazine? Hmmm...

October 2018: NRA Gun Gear of the Week: Glock 19 Gen5 on the range
January 2018: Glock introduces G19X Crossover
January 2018: Glock expands Gen 5 series.
May 2018: Editors Picks 2018: Glock 19X
June 2018: Building a custom Glock at Home
July 2018: Glock 19X test
July 2018: Nine lives of the 10mm Pistol
August 2018: NRA Gun of the Week: Glock 19X
September 2018: Glock introduces G45
September 2018: Glock Adds Gen5 G17 and G19 MOS pistols


Jesus you Glock people are annoying.

So what, American Rifleman hyped a $2,800 1911. Did their review change your mind on buying one? I hope not, it's a freaking $2,800 1911.
 
Why do Glock-ophiles even want a magazine review? What's to review? It's a Glock. It will probably run. It will have an "acceptable" trigger, it will have "acceptable" sights, it'll be pretty lightweigh, it will be "simple" to operate. They're all the same. Whatever tiny differences exist will either be readily apparent in the numbers (I don't need an article to tell me the 17L is a lot longer than a 19), or will be such subtle and subjective little differences that there's no way to have any clue what you will like better or worse than the other 50 different Glocks you've shot.

For that matter, why do people love to see magazine reviews of guns they already own? I admit, I will grab a magazine off the newstand if it looks like it contains an article on a gun that I own. Why? I already decided to buy it; I already know my experience with it; I already have spent more time with it than the gunwriter scribbling down his notes. What am I hoping to get from it? Validation? Why would it matter, especially because we all know perfectly well that gun review articles are mostly nonsense. Something to get angry about if I think it's "wrong"? Heck if I know. Objectively, it's beyond pointless.

For as long as I can remember (going back to reading G&A as a kid in the 80's), gun review articles were just more catalog copy. Anyone thinking that this is some kind of useful journalism is... mistaken. It's just stuff to drool over. Any real content is in the other articles.
 
Let's see, the AR could choose to not accept advertising. Then they would have to raise dues in order to keep putting out a magazine. Then membership would drop. Then they would start accepting advertising again in order to put out a magazine and increase membership. Then some readers would gripe over the fact that they are biased towards their advertisers.
 
I wish that the NRA would stop publishing those magazines and save the money on the token Chinese gifts they send us and use the money saved fighting for the 2nd Amendment .

I haven't bought a gun magazine since going gun forums like this one and youtube , about 10 years ago .
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top