MidwayUSA = good guys

[Redbar]

Does it matter WHY? I mean, the point is that they wrap it up under false pretenses. We get pissy with a private company and their donation, but we got no issue with our government sending billions in aid (false or not) to foregin countries. In fact, I'll say this, MIdway has far more integrity than our federal government. At least they make their intentions known.

And I could use a number of different countries that receive aid from us that aren't a war profit location.

Hence the reason I also included Cargill and Monsanto in my original point. It isn't always weapons, sometimes it is to pay for the other side of the giveaway here at home, subsidies to Big Agro-business. All of us appalled at the deficit need to start looking at the real culprits and quit pointing the finger at the poor and powerless. I promise they are not ruining anything. The powerful and greedy are.

Our focus and anger at the poor is a testament to how effective the marketing of ideas are by the ones who are really lined up at the trough.

 

[Bogtrotter07]

Hence the reason I also included Cargill and Monsanto in my original point. It isn't always weapons, sometimes it is to pay for the other side of the giveaway here at home, subsidies to Big Agro-business. All of us appalled at the deficit need to start looking at the real culprits and quit pointing the finger at the poor and powerless. I promise they are not ruining anything. The powerful and greedy are.

Our focus and anger at the poor is a testament to how effective the marketing of ideas are by the ones who are really lined up at the trough.

Execlent post. Bold = exactly.

 

[Bogtrotter07]

Yes the modern AR have a safety (located right where the selector switch on the M-16 is).

Not sure what you mean by the bold...

As for the .22, thanks but I have a Ruger 10/22 and an old Sears 22 bolt actions that will be his.

What do all you pig and varmint shooters do when shooting almost anywhere where civilization could be within the half mile kill range, for shots that go astray.

Back in my day, we just received the M16A1A1 which had 27 engineering fixes. I forget what they called them. We had the first ring around the three pronged flash suppressor. Immediate action worked a little better, as the charging handle was fixed and made larger, but it would still randomly blow back and gouge your cheek. The closest thing we had to a safety was A) a bolt catch; B) a nylon insert for the chamber that would eject rounds rather than chamber them; C) Drill instructors and range coaches that would knock you senseless if you ever pointed your weapon at anything you weren't supposed to point it at!

I have no problem with someone like you FLDomer having one, pig exploder and NRA VP's who think we need to use them on illegal immigrants, not so much.

 

[FLDomer]

What do all you pig and varmint shooters do when shooting almost anywhere where civilization could be within the half mile kill range, for shots that go astray.

Back in my day, we just received the M16A1A1 which had 27 engineering fixes. I forget what they called them. We had the first ring around the three pronged flash suppressor. Immediate action worked a little better, as the charging handle was fixed and made larger, but it would still randomly blow back and gouge your cheek. The closest thing we had to a safety was A) a bolt catch; B) a nylon insert for the chamber that would eject rounds rather than chamber them; C) Drill instructors and range coaches that would knock you senseless if you ever pointed your weapon at anything you weren't supposed to point it at!

I have no problem with someone like you FLDomer having one, pig exploder and NRA VP's who think we need to use them on illegal immigrants, not so much.

Well to answer the first part regarding the hunting in populated areas. First off, where I hunt is not too populated. Not shooting willy nilly is key, knowing what is beyond your intended target, even if you can't see it. Hell a 22 can shoot 1 1/2.

 

[GoIrish41]

Hence the reason I also included Cargill and Monsanto in my original point. It isn't always weapons, sometimes it is to pay for the other side of the giveaway here at home, subsidies to Big Agro-business. All of us appalled at the deficit need to start looking at the real culprits and quit pointing the finger at the poor and powerless. I promise they are not ruining anything. The powerful and greedy are.

Our focus and anger at the poor is a testament to how effective the marketing of ideas are by the ones who are really lined up at the trough.

This is a great post.

 

[Fbolt]

NOTE:

M16's, to include A1's have always had a safety-always. I've shot Vietnam era M16A1's that rattled and had the traigular hand guards - they had original safeties.

The most significant difference in models has been the elimination of full auto to a 3 round burst. More accurate.

 

[Bogtrotter07]

NOTE:

M16's, to include A1's have always had a safety-always. I've shot Vietnam era M16A1's that rattled and had the traigular hand guards - they had original safeties.

The most significant difference in models has been the elimination of full auto to a 3 round burst. More accurate.

I can only assume that different models for different branches of the service. I will also assume that you were not trying to get in a pissing match by contradicting my earlier post. In the 1970's we had a Model M16A1A1. It was fully automatic, had a standard 20 round clip (18 actually) and had no safety, only a bolt-catch. I was issued one for Basic training at MCRD San Diego, and the same model at various times in FMC duty. I was discharged in August of 1979.

Here is something I found on line:

The M16A2 rifle entered service in the 1980s, being ordered in large scale by 1987, chambered to fire the standard NATO cartridge, the Belgian-designed M855/M856 cartridge.[11] The M16A2 is a select-fire rifle (semi-automatic fire, three-round-burst fire) incorporating design elements requested by the Marine Corps:[11] an adjustable, windage rear-sight; a stock 5⁄8 inches (15.9 mm) longer; heavier barrel; case deflector for left-hand shooters; and cylindrical handguards.[11] The fire mode selector is on the receiver's left side.

The article goes on to state differences for different models for different branches of the service.

Our fire mode selector was a switch on the left side, the bolt catch on the right. So I don't know you are confusing the A1, A1A1, and A2, all with each other or what. And though most of the literature I have looked up does show safe, semi, and auto on that selector, I don't for the life of me remember it having a safety on our models. I remember it being two position. I will look up my rifle manual. I may still have that somewhere.

 

[Fbolt]

Before I posted, I also researched to ensure that my memory was correct. I have found no place that indicates that there was NO safety, but notations (like you saw(did you mean all the literature or most?)) where the selector switches were S, Semi, and Auto. BTW-Drills still beat one senseless when they point the weapon at any other direction than down range. Even with a S.

Think about this: Would the military provide guns to knuckleheads without a safety? This is the military, where everything is written and prepared at the 6th grade level. I would put money on this. I think your memory is incorrect. No p!ssing match here btw-seriously.

 

[Fbolt]

Before I posted, I also researched to ensure that my memory was correct. I have found no place that indicates that there was NO safety, but notations (like you saw(did you mean all the literature or most?)) where the selector switches were S, Semi, and Auto. BTW-Drills still beat one senseless when they point the weapon at any other direction than down range. Even with a S.

Think about this: Would the military provide guns to knuckleheads without a safety? This is the military, where everything is written and prepared at the 6th grade level. I would put money on this. I think your memory is incorrect. No p!ssing match here btw-seriously.

Wiki:

Summary
model Military designation Trigger pack
601 AR-15 Safe-Semi-Auto
602 AR-15 or XM16 Safe-Semi-Auto
603 XM16E1 Safe-Semi-Auto
603 M16A1 Safe-Semi-Auto
604 M16 Safe-Semi-Auto
645 M16A1E1/PIP Safe-Semi-Auto or Safe-Semi-Burst
645 M16A2 Safe-Semi-Burst
645E M16A2E1 Safe-Semi-Burst
N/A M16A2E2 Safe-Semi-Burst
646 M16A2E3/M16A3 Safe-Semi-Auto
655 M16A1 Special High Profile Safe-Semi-Auto
656 M16A1 Special Low Profile Safe-Semi-Auto
945 M16A2E4/M16A4 Safe-Semi-Burst



*The 601 was adopted first of any of the rifles by the USAF, and was quickly supplemented with the XM16 (Colt Model 602) and later the M16 (Colt Model 604) as improvements were made.

 

[Fbolt]

The issue here is not if the 16 has a safety or not, or if the 16 is a terrible weapon designed with one purpose in mind - killing another human (which, btw, is probably the reason you carry a S&W - personal protection (correct?)-Having a difficult time coming to grips with your point on that portion of the debate).

The issue is if MidwayUSA is a good company. I suppose that depends on your perspective, which as we have seen, varies quite a bit.

 

[Bogtrotter07]

I saw the same lists, and I didn't see the A1A1 listed. I think I still have my old rifle manual. USMC had a severl hundred page, non-standard size paperback manual, which had everything from field stripping your M16, to Immediate Action, to the Rifleman's Creed! And it had pictures. I hope to find it over the weekend because now I am beyond curious. I also have an acquaintance that was a military armorer. I may give him a call.

This all goes back to an incident in basic, up at Edson Range, at Camp Pendleton, where we did our marksmanship, which I would prefer not to discuss. As you may guess, this is a big part of why I do not object to limiting access to this weapon.

I will let you know what I find. (Another part is not wanting to find out this is a senior moment.)

 

[Bogtrotter07]

The issue here is not if the 16 has a safety or not, or if the 16 is a terrible weapon designed with one purpose in mind - killing another human (which, btw, is probably the reason you carry a S&W - personal protection (correct?)-Having a difficult time coming to grips with your point on that portion of the debate).

The issue is if MidwayUSA is a good company. I suppose that depends on your perspective, which as we have seen, varies quite a bit.

Actually, to summarize my whole perspective, I don't believe any company is a good or bad company. With my use of the word, a company is amoral. In other words, a company operates on business principles, which are different than those principles, known as morals that we operate under.

I thought of a pretty good example: everyone know of the guy who threw himself on the hand grenade, without a moments hesitation. He did it knowing he was giving his life to save a number of his buddies. A human moral system, when finely tuned allows for that.

Conversely, no business can afford the possibility of doing the same. Are you going to do business with company that may put itself out at any minute? No. To maintain itself, therefore to remain a viable business entity, a business by accepted, and expected design is amoral.

Another, the difference between our justice and political system and those of some other countries is ours is amoral, which is what allows those actors within (juries and voters) to act in a moral or responsible fashion. Usually, those of us used to the American justice system (warts and all) decry these other systems that are tied to any moral system.

So since a company is amoral, or not acting in a moral or immoral fashion, calling them a "good guy" for a standard business activity, that has no morality, is also amoral. Read advertising.

Further, I have a daughter. When I teach her the "lie" of every advertisement, (we are working on television commercials right now" I don't mean lie with a moralistic implication. I mean lie in the sense of a plain fact being covered up. Brushing with one toothpaste won't give me more "sex appeal" to quote from one classic example. It is among other things, a businesses job to convince its potential customers it has the best products. That may or may not be true, or there may be a whole bunch of products that are equally good. Again, the business making its living is outside of the moral system.

Finally, cheating. Breaking the rules. A business or individual within a business can act in an immoral fashion. The perfect example on this board seems to be USC or Univ of Miami. I have never likened any company including Midway or any person (save one), certainly no one on this thread to the morally corrupt methods of Miami. I hope this makes things a little clearer, from my perspective.

 

[kmoose]

Tell you what. Set up a poll thread. Show my exact words in context and ask if it is clear that was a personal attack or not.

I don't need a poll thread, but an exact reading of your words is probably a good idea, for clarification:

Your amorality is evident; your analogy defies logic; your final statement is false.

I wouldn't classify this as an attack, but it sure is personal. Your amorality, your analogy, your statement....... all directed at the person.

You are amoral because you insist on seeing a self serving stunt as a patriotic event, when it is just an attempt to fuel the incredible murderous violence that these merchants are arming us for. And you do this on the basis of an ideology, not love. (of your fellow man)

As far as your point or perspective, I don't care whether anyone on this site like me or not.

This one is even better... you go so far as to seperate your thoughts on him, versus your thoughts on his point or perspective. That one certainly was personal. Again, I wouldn't classify it as an attack, but it's obviously personal. So don't try to backpedal now, and say that you were talking about the posts, not the person.

 

[Bogtrotter07]

I will take that! Poor wording, for sure. I was trying to get across that it was his. (ownership) But not exclusively or without exception all of him. That is was his as far has his actions, without debasing his humanity. (which is why I took such exception to it in the first place.)

 

[irishpat183]

Bogs- How is Midway not acting morally, again?


They're donating to a cause that they believe in. Whether you do or not.

They believe that Americans 2nd amedment rights should be protected. The NRAs, lobbist yes, goal is to protect that right.

 

[Bogtrotter07]

Bogs- How is Midway not acting morally, again?


They're donating to a cause that they believe in. Whether you do or not.

They believe that Americans 2nd amedment rights should be protected. The NRAs, lobbist yes, goal is to protect that right.

I will do it one more time. What they are doing is not a matter of morality. BUT ESPECIALLY, IT IS NOT A MATTER OF IMMORALITY EITHER. I can only do this so many times. There is nothing immoral (or moral) for a business to give money to the NRA.

Immorality would come with an individual if they believed the NRA may use their money to promote an agenda that has some culpability for the 40,000 plus deaths by firearms in America each year, and that maybe they (either the individual or the NRA) had some responsibility to help reduce that. The individual's responsibility would be on moral and human grounds (human and moral); the business or NRA's would be on business (or amoral) grounds, a business cannot afford to kill off customers! (Slight black humor intended!)

 

[phork]

Bogs- How is Midway not acting morally, again?


They're donating to a cause that they believe in. Whether you do or not.

They believe that Americans 2nd amedment rights should be protected. The NRAs, lobbist yes, goal is to protect that right.

The NRAs job is to lobby for the gun manufacturers and make sure sales are booming.

 

[Irish Houstonian]

Morality itself is just a matter of perspective.

If I think Planned Parenthood is immoral, and you think gun manufacturers are immoral, neither one of us will ever be objectively "correct".

 

[irishpat183]

Morality itself is just a matter of perspective.

If think Planned Parenthood is immoral, and you think gun manufacturers are immoral, neither one of us will ever be objectively "correct".

YES!!!!

That is what I meant.

 

[irishpat183]

I'm glad there are people on here that are smarter than I, that can convey things more eloquently.

 

[Bogtrotter07]

YES!!!!

That is what I meant.

Me too. We must all have a working moral system. Doesn't have to be the same! The reason I said "amoral" in the first place is that is a judgement I can live with. I avoided saying immoral, because I cannot judge you based upon your values. Now if you or someone steals a million dollars, or shoots someone for no reason. That is a moral judgement we can all be comfortable making.

I was actually trying to have the respect for those I felt opposed to by the way I phrased things. And I was trying to use a logical arguement, which you cannot do without taking out the differences in individual perspective.

I am taking off for a while. Thanks everyone for the stimulating conversation. Special thanks to FL Domer and Fbolt!

 

[phork]

I'm glad there are people on here that are smarter than I, that can convey things more eloquently.

Its all those micro concussions from shooting guns.

 

[irishpat183]

Its all those micro concussions from shooting guns.

Exactly. LOL

 

[Bogtrotter07]

Exactly. LOL

(Exploding pigs!)