TRUSTWORTHY GUN REVIEW OR SPAM? Guns and Weapons for Law Enforcement review raises questions
November 19, 2015
Guns and Weapons for Law Enforcement is a Harris Publication that has been around for a long time. I can remember buying it twenty-five years ago when I got out of college.
It's still around today, although like many, they are shrinking in circulation.
An article has come to our attention that might detail why that is.
Specifically, take a closer look at that photo and the scope mounted backwards, then read the relevant sections of the article below.
Gun Test: Windham Weaponry’s SRC-308 Carbine in 7.62mm
Sight-Ready Carbine packs the hard-hitting 7.62mm power to bust through barriers!
My labeling the SRC-308 a “thumper” was somewhat prophetic.
…The SRC-308 handled well, smoothly transitioning from target to target. It felt nice to handle a carbine with all of the critical features and no unnecessary extras!
… To test the SRC-308’s long-range capabilities from a benchrest, mounted in a Caldwell Lead Sled, I used a crisp, clear U.S. Optics 1-8x28mm SR-8C scope.
… In the accuracy department, Windham Weaponry’s SRC-308 performed quite well, hammering targets and producing groups in the 1.25-inch range at 100 yards.
Really now. 1.25" groups at 100 yards?
Mr. Pridgen, if you can shoot just over one minute of angle with a scope mounted backwards, my hat is off to you and you are a god.
I'm probably not going to make a friend of D.K. Pridgen or Harris Publications (add them to the Taurus and Guns & Ammo club), but c'mon. Is this typical of the quality of your work? How many of your reviews are utter works of fiction? Was this entire review was written in his home office, and the range evaluation nothing but a bunch of fanciful writing and nothing more?
Another question: Was this faulty review a Quid pro quo for a big advertising deal?
This entry was posted on November 19, 2015 at 3:25 pm and is filed under Blog, Product Reviews. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
6 Responses to TRUSTWORTHY GUN REVIEW OR SPAM? Guns and Weapons for Law Enforcement review raises questions
Ken on November 19, 2015 at 7:03 pm
Wow! ARe you being petty, or what?
You do realize the gun was handed over to some photographer who, unless it’s Oleg Volk, probably doesn’t know the dangerous end of the gun from his own nostril.
he probably dropped it and had to get the scope back on for a quick photo shoot.
C’mon, John! YOu can do better.
Dyspeptic Skeptic on November 19, 2015 at 7:22 pm
I would just about bet the camera guy was the author.
Either way, why would Mr. Cameraman change something like a scope.
Parabellum on November 19, 2015 at 8:31 pm
My money is on spam.
It is curious how in many gun rags there is never a bad review?
When it comes to gun reviews, the only national mag I trust is GunTests.
bangbang on November 20, 2015 at 7:34 am
I always found it a bit hokey how in other reviews I’ve read they’d take closeups of everything, including the shot groupings. Now I respect that kind of detail and transparency.
JC on November 20, 2015 at 8:06 am
Yep! No pics of groups here, or of the author shooting it, or of his range/setup.
BEST case, the guy’s otherwise telling the truth, an idiot photographer messed up … and both the author AND editor didn’t catch this. Nor did anyone else at the rag. Completely inexcusable, even if this best case scenario is true.
Sam Whittemore on November 22, 2015 at 5:22 pm
Does anyone actually buy or read that crappy mag?
It is about as worthless as Guns & Ammo, and that’s pretty worthless.
G&A hasn’t even bothered to visit us in Peoria, either. Somehow I think their dedication to gun rights is tissue thin.
But what do ya expect from a mag (rag!) for Fuddy-types?
Wow! ARe you being petty, or what?
You do realize the gun was handed over to some photographer who, unless it’s Oleg Volk, probably doesn’t know the dangerous end of the gun from his own nostril.
he probably dropped it and had to get the scope back on for a quick photo shoot.
C’mon, John! YOu can do better.
I would just about bet the camera guy was the author.
Either way, why would Mr. Cameraman change something like a scope.
My money is on spam.
It is curious how in many gun rags there is never a bad review?
When it comes to gun reviews, the only national mag I trust is GunTests.
I always found it a bit hokey how in other reviews I’ve read they’d take closeups of everything, including the shot groupings. Now I respect that kind of detail and transparency.
Yep! No pics of groups here, or of the author shooting it, or of his range/setup.
BEST case, the guy’s otherwise telling the truth, an idiot photographer messed up … and both the author AND editor didn’t catch this. Nor did anyone else at the rag. Completely inexcusable, even if this best case scenario is true.
Does anyone actually buy or read that crappy mag?
It is about as worthless as Guns & Ammo, and that’s pretty worthless.
G&A hasn’t even bothered to visit us in Peoria, either. Somehow I think their dedication to gun rights is tissue thin.
But what do ya expect from a mag (rag!) for Fuddy-types?
Sam