Oh Guns&Ammo, don't ever change

Status
Not open for further replies.
The Kershaw

The Kershaw

Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2007
Messages
62
A coworker was finished with the latest copy of the Guns&Ammo rag, so I asked to look at it. The back cover page is adorned with an advertisement for DEFENDER SOFT ARMOR SOLUTIONS, for everyday Americans! It depicts a sleepy woman being wrenched from her slumber to an intruder slinking through the house.

This woman has the time and presence of mind to don this TACTICAL soft armor MOLLE weapons system, complete with magazine holsters. This peace of mind can be yours for the modest price of $199.95, starting.

Personally, I keep an IOTV with front and back, in the tactical OCP as well as side SAPI plates at all times!
 
The Kershaw said:
Personally, I keep an IOTV with front and back, in the tactical OCP as well as side SAPI plates at all times!
Click to expand...

Everybody knows those side plates just impede your mobility too much :scrutiny:
 
I was kidding about the IOTV :)

I haven't found the limit anything to be honest. In fact, the IOTV I wear in Afghanistan feels like a t-shirt!

I just found this advertisement to be funny because who is going to roll out of bed at 0300 and slap on some tactical armor.
 
The Kershaw said:
I was kidding about the IOTV :)

I haven't found the limit anything to be honest. In fact, the IOTV I wear in Afghanistan feels like a t-shirt!

I just found this advertisement to be funny because who is going to roll out of bed at 0300 and slap on some tactical armor.
Click to expand...

My perception of the ad was similar. Major eye-roller.
 
I dropped my G&A a while back because of who they choose to sell advertising space to. I don't want my kids reading about "enhancement" or see the pictures for "adult instructional videos".
 
I just found this advertisement to be funny because who is going to roll out of bed at 0300 and slap on some tactical armor.
Click to expand...

I wear it instead of PJs.
 
Ad is probably made by the same people who make the alarm company TV spots in which a panicky woman gets a "callback" by the alarm monitoring station and she shakily reports that she had a break-in but the fellow dutifully left after hearing the screeching alarm.

As for firearms magazines, I usually just read a few articles at the bookstore and re-shelve them where I found 'em.

BTW, Chuck Norris doesn't wear body armor - body armor wears him for protection!
 
Last edited:
The only gun magazine I still get is the American Rifleman (NRA menber) and I rarely bother to look at the others in the store.

My dislike(s): Every month it's typically a cover with the "latest & greatest" gun, sensationalism. Most "reports" will not list the height of the pistol, but will always include detailed accuracy information, typically with disclaimers. Nearly every time the author will use some unneeded little worn out phrase or expression :barf: . Seldom does the review (test) go past 250 rounds.

Suggested changes: Include long term testing. Often an author will say they bought the pistol for themself at the end of their article; well, have a follow up report a few months later when you have shot several hundred more rounds through it. Include the height of the pistol with magazine inserted. Ditch the worn out lingo, for example the term "venerable" when discussing the 1911. Finally, don't put an accuracy report on the front cover; save the, "It's _'' accurate at __ yards" for the review. Also, if it's windy (or whatever) at the range that day, delay the testing for another day then the obligatory :rolleyes: accuracy information won't have to include a disclaimer.
 
I quit gun rags a long time ago.
Click to expand...

I quit ALL magazines a long time ago. In modern times the format just doesn't work. Who wants content from a month ago in a completely static non-interactive form? I personally find discussion forums like this far more valuable, but even if I wanted a straight up written article a website is far more convenient.

Aside from reminders like this I have mostly forgotten that magazines even exist anymore :).
 
When Jeff Cooper died,my G & A subscription died with him.They've never tested a gun they didn't like.Usually with an ad for the tested Model on a nearby page.
Click to expand...
+1. I had enough after they did a big glowing story on Extreme Shock Ammo. That in of itself was OK but then every gun article they did for months following the handgun was tested with Extreme Shock ammunition as one of the test loads. I don't know anybody who carries that in their gun and it was obvious they were shilling for the company longterm.
 
Hehehe..... youngins. One nice thing about books and magazines.....

After the EMP kills everything electronic - the books and magazines still work! :evil:

That being said, I only get American Rifleman, due to NRA membership.

But my printer gets a good workout when I find good info on the Net.
 
mgmorden said:
Who wants content from a month ago in a completely static non-interactive form?
Click to expand...

Those of us who don't want to take the laptop into the bathroom:neener:

I still get Guns and G&A. I use the magazines to keep me updated with the newest thing coming out, then I use this forum to see if anyone has one and get a more down to earth review. IMO, Guns has the more applicable articles, and I do like Duke's stuff, but G&A occasionally has some good articles too. Plus, in my profession, you can still earn "professional development points" for getting an article published in a journal or magazine. Forums don't count. And one of these days I'll get off my tail and actually submit one.....
 
Ditch the worn out lingo, for example the term "venerable" when discussing the 1911.
Click to expand...

That rag should change it's name to "1911s & Ammo" if you have read a couple, you've pretty much read 'em all...
Click to expand...

I agree with these two statements above. I'm not opposed to the 1911, but it doesn't mean I want to read about one in every issue. The same goes for AR's. I'm looking at building my own in the coming future, but it also doesn't mean that they should be on the cover every other issue.
 
I just found this advertisement to be funny because who is going to roll out of bed at 0300 and slap on some tactical armor.
Click to expand...

Why not? It takes about 5 seconds to put an IBA style vest on, or slip on over your head. If you have one, why not use it? Guns make a great offense, but why is it so preposterous to consider defense?

There's a million threads about which ammo to use, where you keep your HD weapon, what kinds of tactical lights are best, methods for securing your house in a break-in etc. Why is the idea of armor, something that costs less than 1 gun, so ridiculous? Gun, lights, knives, sprays, etc are all designed to protect you by inflicting harm on others. Only armor is designed to protect you by preventing damage to yourself. I don't find anything ridiculous or over the top about that.
 
Most of the gun press (including the NRA pubs) is in the pockets of the advertisers. You'll never see a review panning a product, no matter how bad it is. If it's both a horrible product and a non-advertised one, then they'll just not cover it at all. The motto seems to be, "If you can't say anything good, don't say anything at all."

This tends to mislead readers who aren't aware of this bias.
 
That vest was tested by some show recently, sorry I can't remember which one, but it impressed me. I don't think the idea of body armor is that ridiculous at all, especially at that price. I also love G@A.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top