Tactical Excess?

[Hoshnasi]

Wear, shoot and live however you want. HOWEVER! If there ever is some WROL/SHTF/OMFGBBQ situation, if you're a fat lop there is no amount of tactical that can save you.

Just replace "Prepping" with "WROL" etc. I get alot of this with the prepper groups on YouTube. You can't shoot or prep your way out of bad lifestyle choices.

[Gutz]

I just play tons of COD.

[Untamed1972]

And...others can criticize you for criticizing others. Imagine that.

Criticize all you want......as long as it ends there. Lift one finger to attempt to impose your "whatever" on me, well.......let's just not go there.

Like I said, i'd much rather see guys spending their time doing "tactical training" then sitting on the couch playing COD, or wasting their brain power on becoming walking sports stats almanacs.

What about those retards who paint their faces and wear a jersey with some other dudes name on it and scream at the TV on game day?

[Standard]

Criticize all you want......as long as it ends there. Lift one finger to attempt to impose your "whatever" on me, well.......let's just not go there.

Are you really getting worked up over someone physically imposing their ideas of "too tactical" on you?

[bigbearbear]

You can't shoot or prep your way out of bad lifestyle choices.

Nice, I'm going to use this line.

[Chaparral]

Man this thread started out on the rim and is now circling the bowl. IBTL!!

About 15 odd years ago I remember seeing quad picatinny forends showing up and wondering "who the hell would want that fugly arse thing on a rifle?" and then I noticed personnel overseas using them and then I tried one out for myself. Even without all the stuff mounted on it, I like it better than the old M4 handguards. It gives me a more positive grip with gloves or sweaty hands.

Same goes for VFG..I thought that was a useless gimmick and then I picked one up used for 20 bucks...and while not perfect, It's more comfortable for me than the old M4 handguards.

Then I picked up a used and really dirt-cheap Surefire M961 and whattya know but that made things kinda nice in certain situations. I had it on a 9mm AR build for home defense before that piece got decommissioned. If I lived in a free state where I'd run a better chance of not going to jail for defending my home, I'd have an M4gery by the bed and it'd have a light mounted at 6 or 9 o'clock.

Then I tried a Magpul PRS and liked it better than the A2 stock or the 4 position collapsible so I picked up a used one off a Calgunner for dirt-stinking cheap. Got it extended to the maximum length and I like the feel for longer distances.

Red dot sights aren't tacticool, they're just plain essential to 40-something eyeballs so IMO, those shouldn't even add any points towards mall-ninjaness.

Tried a visible laser...meh. Couldn't see a personal need for it. Tried one in a practical scenario...Ok, still not worth the cost and additional complexity for me. Stuck it on an airsoft gun and took the nephews out. Took it off the airsoft gun with my left hand and held it way above my head and while they thought I was three feet farther to the left than I actually was, I was able to get a couple of kills. Its fun to be evil that way.

Can't see any need for an IR unit unless I'm doing serious hog hunting at night with friends and then those are as much a communication aid as anything. Maybe I'll win the lottery, move up to Western Sonoma County, buy a vineyard or three and spend the rest of my days hunting hogs between Cloverdale and the coast at night with friends. Then I'll need that PEQ.

[Hoshnasi]

I would totally buy these for tactical use, but they don't have my size (46x28).

I'm hoping this is for the lulz?

Otherwise, you should be runnin, minus the gunnin on a treadmill. lol

[jerhyn]

some awesome definitions of tacticool.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Tacticool

[SWalt]

Criticize all you want......as long as it ends there. Lift one finger to attempt to impose your "whatever" on me, well.......let's just not go there.

Like I said, i'd much rather see guys spending their time doing "tactical training" then sitting on the couch playing COD, or wasting their brain power on becoming walking sports stats almanacs.

What about those retards who paint their faces and wear a jersey with some other dudes name on it and scream at the TV on game day?

I agree, and learning the difference when to argue helps. Personal preferences don't add up to a hill of beans and not worth arguing over. Stating opinion doesn't have to turn into a pissing match. I try not to get butt hurt if someone takes an opposite view. I just realize I'm not all that and a bag of chips. When I first started shooting you used 1 outstretched arm, then it was the tea cup hold, then it was grab your strong side wrist with weak hand, then it was weaver, then it was isosceles. So when the tactical ninjas say "you have to have this, that, and shoot like this" or else you aren't doing it right can get old too.

[jerhyn]

I've had it. Honestly.
My patience with the trendy tactical BS has run out. Let me be clear that training has its place; but people running around a field with MOLLE gear, body armor, and mag pouches with an AR and a drop leg pistol holster are only training to prop up their egos.

There's nothing wrong with having fun at the range, but calling it "training" is doing a disservice to the actual activity. Rifle skills have nothing to do with concealed carry of a pistol under a cover garment. If the government's not in the picture in your neck of the woods, packing up and leaving makes more sense then hunkering down with an AR15 while your family plays backstop.

O, the world's ending and all is collapsing around you? OK. Good luck convincing whoever's operating the last evacuation vehicle to let you and your tacticool gear in. I imagine that convo's going to break down to "come on in, but leave the AR and mags outside".

Otherwise, I hope you can stuff that 500lb safe full of guns on your back for the 100 mile march out of town on foot!

The REAL, actual SF people who use this stuff for a living can do it because they're trained for MONTHS at a time on the US taxpayer's dime. Not 5 hours every month in a field with surplus store ammo. Furthermore, those skillsets exist for one purpose-efficiently murdering the enemy. Not paper targets on a one-sided range.

The person with a single handgun, monthly range practice, and a well rounded education in field medicine with a gym membership will survive a WROL situation a lot longer then some wannabe ninja with a $3000 AR15 and a Special Ops fetish.

Then, when someone does take the tentative steps into gun ownership, theyre bombarded with overwhelming BS about "getting off the X" and "tactical manipulations" . And then gun owning folk wonder why uninitiated people think we're nuts. I can barely comprehend this attitude, and the soccer moms of America will DEFINITELY not like the idea of folks in the woods playing Army with actual rifles. The latter point matters, because the Bambiist soccer moms' votes count equally as much as yours do on Election Day.
Rant over.

I may or may not have a problem with your post depending on the intent of the message. Maybe after you read mine, you can let me know. It also varies on your definition of Tacticool, I am taking it to mean in your post, tactical excess or overkill in terms of firepower and gear.

The 2nd Ammendment

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Arguing against what gear a person should be using is like arguing against the 2A and I'll explain why. What it comes down to, is that the 2A gives you the right to "keep and bear arms"… period... I firmly believe that everyone has the RIGHT to decide what THEY feel is NECASSARY in the defense of their life and that right is protected by the 2A. It doesn’t say to "keep and bear a minimal amount of Arms,", or to "keep and bear arms that your peers feel is acceptable and not overkill," it just says to "keep and bear Arms."

Which brings me to my next issue. When all those anti-gun people out there try to tell me, having an assault rifle is overkill and that I don't need one to defend my life… reminds me of the same ignorance in those who rant about Tacticool. It is my life and I will do whatever I feel is necessary to defend it... Tacticool or not.

So why are some of you making fun of people who just want to defend their lives….?

Now I do agree that being Tacticool is not a guarantee in the protect of your life, training and experience is equally important.

If you meant to say Tacticool is:
"Someone who thinks that dressing up in military surplus gear (especially Russian or Army camo), along with unnecessary straps and pouches, and adding gratuitous amounts of accessories (rail systems, adjustable stocks, laser targeting systems, aim point, optic scopes, grenade launchers, fore grips, duct tape, etc.) to their airsoft or paintball gun, with the mentality, that they are a complete and total badass and in the military. "

Pasted from <http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Tacticool>

Then I agree with you. However, if it gave you confidence and the mental ability to overcome fear, that alone redeems the tacticool gear you are wearing.

[American Samurai]

Don't partake of the "Tacti-crack".

[Untamed1972]

Are you really getting worked up over someone physically imposing their ideas of "too tactical" on you?

Not getting worked up at all...you must have me confused with the OP. More curious about why someone else would be worked up enough to post a 3 paragraph rant about guys doing nothing more than engaging an activity they enjoy?

My point is it is such thinking where the seeds of control start to germinate. Today it's ranting about someone doing something you think it silly and it progresses from there.

It's just rather disturbing to hear from a freedom loving, free-stater like the OP.

So one had we have guys that will talk smack stating "You're not a shooter until you can put rounds on a moving target with your feet moving." Then we have those will bash guys training to do just that and calling them "tacticool posers."

So which is it guys......do we want our fellow gun owners to be well trained and proficient with ALL of the firearms they own or dont we?

[stix213]

I've had it. Honestly.


My patience with the trendy tactical BS has run out. Let me be clear that training has its place; but people running around a field with MOLLE gear, body armor, and mag pouches with an AR and a drop leg pistol holster are only training to prop up their egos.

There's nothing wrong with having fun at the range, but calling it "training" is doing a disservice to the actual activity. Rifle skills have nothing to do with concealed carry of a pistol under a cover garment. If the government's not in the picture in your neck of the woods, packing up and leaving makes more sense then hunkering down with an AR15 while your family plays backstop.

O, the world's ending and all is collapsing around you? OK. Good luck convincing whoever's operating the last evacuation vehicle to let you and your tacticool gear in. I imagine that convo's going to break down to "come on in, but leave the AR and mags outside".

Otherwise, I hope you can stuff that 500lb safe full of guns on your back for the 100 mile march out of town on foot!

The REAL, actual SF people who use this stuff for a living can do it because they're trained for MONTHS at a time on the US taxpayer's dime. Not 5 hours every month in a field with surplus store ammo. Furthermore, those skillsets exist for one purpose-efficiently murdering the enemy. Not paper targets on a one-sided range.

The person with a single handgun, monthly range practice, and a well rounded education in field medicine with a gym membership will survive a WROL situation a lot longer then some wannabe ninja with a $3000 AR15 and a Special Ops fetish.


Then, when someone does take the tentative steps into gun ownership, theyre bombarded with overwhelming BS about "getting off the X" and "tactical manipulations" . And then gun owning folk wonder why uninitiated people think we're nuts. I can barely comprehend this attitude, and the soccer moms of America will DEFINITELY not like the idea of folks in the woods playing Army with actual rifles. The latter point matters, because the Bambiist soccer moms' votes count equally as much as yours do on Election Day.
Rant over.

So on the one hand you're against "training" with tactical gear because it is only to prop up their egos. Then on the other hand you're against using tactical gear because they haven't had enough training with it...... hmmmm

Also, I didn't realize that real SF training has them shooting at live people and never any paper targets. Learn something new everyday, but seems like a human rights violation.

[SilverTauron]

Not getting worked up at all...you must have me confused with the OP. More curious about why someone else would be worked up enough to post a 3 paragraph rant about guys doing nothing more than engaging an activity they enjoy?

My point is it is such thinking where the seeds of control start to germinate. Today it's ranting about someone doing something you think it silly and it progresses from there.

It's just rather disturbing to hear from a freedom loving, free-stater like the OP.

So one had we have guys that will talk smack stating "You're not a shooter until you can put rounds on a moving target with your feet moving." Then we have those will bash guys training to do just that and calling them "tacticool posers."

So which is it guys......do we want our fellow gun owners to be well trained and proficient with ALL of the firearms they own or dont we?

My core problem with the "tactical" movement can be described in two ways.

One is the barrier to entry.Its not cheap to buy 'tactical' holsters,gear,and so forth.When new shooter observe that kind of activity and realize each person is walking about with $5,000 worth of gear apiece,its an intimidating prospect for someone who got into gun ownership to defend themselves .It doesn't improve matters that most shooters in this camp insist that unless one owns a 17 round Glock with "tactical sights" and a G-code drop leg bolster ,said individual is not ready for "SHTF" .It can have the effect of turning off new shooters.

Problem two is the practical utility behind it.Civilians routinely defend themselves with 5 shot revolvers ,and I've yet to see a real world defensive case of someone transitioning to a handgun from a rifle.If people wish to play Special Forces that is their time and money; however attendant to that is the complex that a person is somehow an inferior type of gun owner if they don't know how to 'get off the x'.I would wager a rural farmer with his 1960s era Marlin 30-30 would stomp all over those "tactical" guys if the S hit the F.

Before spending $ on a tactical course,a person should ask themselves why.

[Untamed1972]

My core problem with the "tactical" movement can be described in two ways.

One is the barrier to entry.Its not cheap to buy 'tactical' holsters,gear,and so forth.When new shooter observe that kind of activity and realize each person is walking about with $5,000 worth of gear apiece,its an intimidating prospect for someone who got into gun ownership to defend themselves .It doesn't improve matters that most shooters in this camp insist that unless one owns a 17 round Glock with "tactical sights" and a G-code drop leg bolster ,said individual is not ready for "SHTF" .It can have the effect of turning off new shooters.

Problem two is the practical utility behind it.Civilians routinely defend themselves with 5 shot revolvers ,and I've yet to see a real world defensive case of someone transitioning to a handgun from a rifle.If people wish to play Special Forces that is their time and money; however attendant to that is the complex that a person is somehow an inferior type of gun owner if they don't know how to 'get off the x'.I would wager a rural farmer with his 1960s era Marlin 30-30 would stomp all over those "tactical" guys if the S hit the F.

Before spending $ on a tactical course,a person should ask themselves why.

I've been into alot of different things over the years, and there are douchebag know-it-alls in every hobby and sport there is. Regardless of my Noobness in any of them I've never let that turn me away. At some point people just need to "man up" and do what is right for them despite what the douchebags say.

Why does some need to have a reason for taking a tactical course? Can't they just do it because they want to? Because it might be fun? Sounds very akin to needing "good cause" for a CCW.

In the current 2A-hostile climate I fully support people doing anything that furthers the hobby, the sport, the cause.....whatever you wanna call it. If you can handle your firearm safely, and put your rounds on target.....that's all I care about....other then that....have fun. Spend as little or as much money as you want. Again...Id' rather see a guy with $5K worth of gear running and gunning at the range then sitting in front of a $5K computer playing COD for countless hours.

I learn best by doing.....so I go do things, and try things and figure out what I like and what works for me and what doesn't. Throw in being left handed and just about everything I've ever learned when it comes to shooting has to also be adapted somewhat since most guns aren't made for lefties.

Honestly, the tacticool douchebag thats gonna tell a new shooter he needs 5K worth of gear to be any good is kind of the opposite end of the beel curve of the guy who has nothing better to do than rip on the guys who enjoy tactical shooting and do it because they enjoy it.