What is the biggest out and out lie you have ever read in a Firearms Magazine?

I believe I have the winner, if it were a contest.

The March-April 2016 issue of Rifle Magazine.

There is an article on a Cooper M54 bolt action rifle.

The writer states that Cooper began getting requests for a repeater bolt rifle in 2004, and a prototype was made. It appears the person who wrote this article got a "Freebie" Antelope hunt to write the article.

He says production was delayed until 2007.

Here's the quote "During this era Dan (then owner Dan Cooper) wanted to pursue other interests, and began negotiations (to sell the company) with Hugo Vivero, owner of Wilson Arms (barrel maker).

Vivero "took control in January of 2009".

For those of you who remember, the story was made public was that Dan Cooper had contributed several thousand dollars to the Obama Presidential campaign in 2008, and that the massive backlash from the firearms community threatened the survival of the company. Dan Cooper allegedly removed himself from any association with the company.

Once a company prints one falsehood, all trust is gone. It cannot ever be regained.

"I have a lot of friends in the Special Forces Community" is the biggest lie I see anymore, and I see it about 2 or 3 times a month in various magazines and on tv.

Unless you were in the Special Forces community, you do not have friends in the Special Forces Community.

I know of two people serving right now in Naval Spec War, I had the honor of serving with when I was on active duty. I admire both of them, we were friends as E4/E5 Sailors, but things are different now. For a person who has never served to tell me that is hard to believe.

I was a spec-war support guy, but at the end of the day just a dude helping the throat punchers, and not a bad ass myself. My military career was split half in as an aircraft mechanic and half doing Radar O'Reily stuff for the cool guys. So when people tell me they are best friends with a SEAL, Navy/Marine EOD, Special Forces, Marine RECON or anything else I have a hard time believing it.

I get a kick out of it, and it brings a laugh.

"I depend on this product with my life"

"I use this product and you should too"

Any article claiming the quality of rifles made 50 or 100 years ago that are "clearly superior" to those rifles made today.

Any review of a high fenced white-tail hunting operation.

Any article claiming that scent blocking "technology" works. It can't as you cannot hold your breath or encase yourself in a scent sealed bubble.

To name a few.....

there are a couple of pretty good ones here.

My connections to the Rangers are still strong, but the closest I get to SF these days is a member of my church did 30 years with them.

I also see meet a very large number of E9's in retirement. Only 1 in 10,000 recruits will make E9. So how the hell do I meet them on a regular basis?

Every place I go anymore someone is wearing a shirt or hat that says Retired SGT Maj or Retired MCPO.

Ross is right, I see a lot of claims on TV from outdoor tv presenters claiming a million and one things about every product they are endorsing. Pretty lame.

I like Gunwerks a lot as a company, but they switch back and forth between Hornady and Berger like underwear. Every year it is something different.

I am so humbled to just have made E-5 in three and a half years...

But, I do have a CIB and an Air Medal with six clusters. That should count for something.

Everything factual counts!

quote:

Originally posted by Idaho Sharpshooter:
I am so humbled to just have made E-5 in three and a half years...

But, I do have a CIB and an Air Medal with six clusters. That should count for something.

ISS: You do have my respect for that, all bullshit aside. I know you like to talk about it, but at least you can. I served too, but in the 80s.

AAW,

you have my thanks for your military service. Yes, we butt heads a lot, but if we were neighbors, we'd probably be friends.

scary thought, huh?

Rich

quote:

Originally posted by Idaho Sharpshooter:
AAW,

you have my thanks for your military service. Yes, we butt heads a lot, but if we were neighbors, we'd probably be friends.

scary thought, huh?

Rich

I have more in common with you than many of my friends.

quote:

Once a company prints one falsehood, all trust is gone. It cannot ever be regained.

Huh? Even with a new owner? Who or what exactly is "a company".
Peter.

It wasn't out of any magazine, but just about anything Peter Capstick ever put on paper, from what I have been told. Granted, I have never been there, but I was told first hand by a man who made two trips to the black continent that "the PHs over there hate him".

Good enough for me...

A few of the PHs. hated Peter capstick for no other reason than they were jealous of his success in his literary achievement and his success as a PH..

He was a successful writer and saved the dieing hunting industry in Africa. He was a PH and probably gave more to the industry than all the PHs your referring to combined..I knew Peter and his wife from SCI and being in the business. He was a gentleman.

Careful with "I been told" by a friend of a friend,thats hand me down BS and no more then sewing circle gossip..Not even admissible in court.

"We can win the war in Vietnam."

No disrespect intended to you Rich, or any who served. This was more the hubris mindset of MacNamara and others.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07...?pagewanted=all&_r=0

I know you won't believe it, Bill, but we could have won the Vietnam War if we had fought it like we meant it. It would have required continuing the B-52 strikes that were already starting to cripple North Vietnam. We could have crushed every port facility, airfield, dam, bridge, and factory, and reduced every major city to rubble. It would have required completely and utterly destroying the entire infrastructure and economic viability of the North. We could have done that. But it would have created a tremendous number of civilian casualties and left North Vietnam in ruin. The people of the USA and our Presidents were not willing to accept that humanitarian cost and the political fallout, nationally and internationally, that would come with it. So, the war was never fought like a real war, although it had to seem that way to the soldier on the ground. Instead, because of politics and international relations, it was fought like a "conflict".