Richard Tip on Tactical Bumhats.

Remember Richard Tip? He posted a video about an experience he had at a Gander Mountain.

Well he has another video about a particular group of “Tactical Asshats”. He comments on a group’s video that promotes a future training course they will be holding. Only they can’t seem to get their own demo video right.

Warning: There is some colorful commentary.



Richard Tip’s comments are just hilarious and he speaks what we are all thinking. Thank you Richard. Please keep posting your insights.

Nicholas C

Co-Founder of KRISSTALK forums, an owner’s support group and all things KRISS Vector related. Nick found his passion through competitive shooting while living in NY. He participates in USPSA and 3Gun. He loves all things that shoots and flashlights. Really really bright flashlights.

Any questions please email him at


  • Nicks87

    It makes me sick, the garbage that some people try to pass off as “training”. Everything they did in that video was wrong. They didnt even have the basic knowledge of how to take cover behind a vehicle by positioning yourself so that the engine block is between you and the threat. Like Master Yoda once said: “cover, does not, a jeep cherokee, make.

    • This is exactly why I avoid shooting like all the “tactical” goobers at the range. The people dressed up in battle rattle running around like Red Dawn just came to fruition are always flagging myself and other shooters and are carelessly throwing bullets over the berm. While I am not the fun police at the range by any means, be damn sure I will call you out for muzzle sweeping other shooters or being ludicrously unsafe.
      Meanwhile, I am often the dude in socks and sandals shooting a Mauser at 2-300 meters making the steel ring, while laughing at Billy Joe Operator throwing thirty round mags at 50 yards and satisfactorily nodding when he hits it 2 or 3 times.
      Don’t get me wrong; If you want to dress up and play army then do so, but be safe and responsible.

      • JumpIf NotZero

        What’s coming around worse than guys going overboard I think are the guys who rail on all forms of training because they are too intimidated to actually take a class. For fear of being told they aren’t doing something correctly, but that would hurt their egos. Dunning-Kruger effect of overestimating ability runs rampant among gun owners! And/Or the financial commitment to formal training. They just determine that all formal training is the video above. There seems to be an anti-training sentiment.

        So instead of taking any training at all, they hop on comment boards and automatically rail against it calling anything new as “tacticool” or “operator” without a consideration of it’s validity. The “discussions” about temple index or “high port” which are both perfectly valid in certain scenarios come to mind, those article and videos were ruthlessly demolished by people who have no effing idea.

        I go to the range in flip flops. I’ll take an 300y bay to myself and my party to do 200y run down drills. I have nicer than average gear. So when I see a guy in a tact vest with a garbage AR or a fat guy doing mag dumps I laugh myself silly where they can’t see – but those guys might see my group and figure we’re as dumb as they are from ignorance.

        Not implying that most “tactical goobers” have evert taken formal instruction at all, it’s clearly the opposite. I suppose I’m finding that the is those that know, know. Those that don’t know seem to have an almost furious desire to continue not knowing.

        • But some, like myself have absolutely no interest in trying to become tactical or fit in with other civilians who train tactically as if they were going to engage an enemy force. Don’t get me wrong, I know how to and am capable of defending myself, but the whole “take a class and learn how to become more operator” has never appealed to me.

          I just want to hit the range, relax, throw around some lead, and have a good time with friends. Others approach this pastime differently and I am completely cool with that!

          • JumpIf NotZero

            “take a class and learn how to become more operator”

            wow… Whoosh! That’s 100% the point I’m trying to make. I’m not sure if you thought my comment was ‘directed’ at you but it wasn’t just showing the other extreme from Army-Wanna be to Willfully-Ignorant.

          • joshua

            I don’t get the tactical training at all, seems like fun and do whatever floats your boat but

            in what situation would civilian tactical training be up to par with either the gov gone truly tyranical or an invading force?

          • JumpIf NotZero

            I’m confused as to why you think “tactical” means military and invading force? I was at a Vehicle CQB class that was all concealed carry, all regarding laws and when to engage, how to work in and around a vehicle. Is that a tactical class? Definitely as it was tactics of guns+vehicle. Was it taught by guys with tons of PSD contracts under their belts? Yep. Was it entirely related to civilian life? Yes.

          • n0truscotsman

            In many cases, it depends on the training and how it is applied in relation to the unit’s objectives and mission types.

            Guerilla units are not intended to go toe-to-toe with professional forces, but are intended to harass, disrupt, and/or delay. Historically speaking, guerrilla forces make up for their lack of firepower and equipment with surprise and mobility.

            If the guerrilla force has inferior training, but is able to inflict considerable losses in men and materials on the invading/tyrannical force, and create the impression that the superior force is *losing*, then that is a victory itself. Insurgencies are about a credibility battle between the guerrilla forces and the invader/occupier.

            Theoretically, the best way for a invader/occupier to win is to not be held back by stringent ROE and considerations for civilian casualties and their own public opinion. This course of action, in this day of age, also results in more foreign intervention if not an outright military coalition against the occuyping power in another theatre of conflict.

          • Nicks87

            You have to find the right instructors that teach current tactics used by LE and the military. But it’s trickey because there are soooo many BS artists out there, like the clowns in the video, that claim they know what they are doing but are just charlatans.

          • I said I am not interested in tactical training and you assume I am not prepared to defend myself?

          • JumpIf NotZero

            Hello strawman?

            You said you “are prepared” / “are capable” to defend yourself, I merely commented that’s a big assumption to make without having been through a way to know that. Maybe a quick google on Dunning-Kruger?

          • Naw, it’s more fun watching you make an ass out of yourself in the comments here 🙂

          • JumpIf NotZero

            Oh, are you just skipping to personal attacks? Way to represent the brand bro!

            Go ahead and read it again, from the start this time without all your insecurity. I was never actually attacking you. But again, you are making this site look really good.

          • Point proven 😉

          • Jake Barnes

            I would just like to say – from an entirely outside perspective – that you, Alex, are the one making an ass out of yourself in this thread.

          • DonDrapersAcidTrip

            “”Don’t get me wrong, I know how to and am capable of defending myself”
            How did you do when you did force on force? Because I don’t care how
            big a boxer is, if he has only ever practiced on the bag, he has no idea
            how capable he is. Shooting paper and steel even on a timer is like
            punching the bag, no serious boxer would ever only punch the bag.”

            what is this if not directly addressing him? lmao

        • nadnerbus

          I don’t think anyone belittles actual training. I think there is a bit of a backlash against the whole Magpul dynamics style of training because it simply isn’t necessary or relevant to most average Joes.

          To be truly proficient at the tactical arts, as it were, would take a lot of training, constant practice, and large sums of money in ammo and instruction to become and stay that way. Most of what people do doesn’t come anywhere near that.

          Average shooters like myself are content to shoot for groups, do a few ready-up shooting drills, and maintain basic proficiency with their firearms. The tactical stuff is just superfluous and unnecessary in our cases. And honestly, I think it is for most people. Perhaps not so in your case.

          • JumpIf NotZero

            You are right that the era of Magpul blasty courses is over. You are not correct that people do actively belittle training (worst among are cops or basic mil who think they were “already” trained, second up are males with egos who don’t want to be told they aren’t great.

            I used to wonder why more women didn’t take firearms training and falsely thought it was because of intimidation. But it’s not, it unawareness and socializing concerns. For men, it’s intimidation. If you don’t see it, you aren’t really looking.

        • Don Ward

          You know, you never did mention YOUR tactical training when you were advocating creeping through the house in the dark instead of just – you know – turning on the light in order to see what went bump in the night.

          • JumpIf NotZero

            As previously discussed… You’re absolutely right!

            The first thing you would want to do if someone is in your home is turn the lights on so that both you are equal footing, you know your house and they do not, so yea, turn the lights on to make sure they can see you and your kids, and all around your house with ease. I mean, who would ever want to be in an unfair fight!?

            You should teach low light / no light courses. Totally serious, I’d fly to you and take that course. I’d write it up and everything!

          • Don Ward

            Ah. So again with the evasion. Fair enough. It must have been a super secret course that advocates escalating a situation in your own house. Because the first thing that should go through your mind is “Oh boy, I finally get to kill a man!” as you creep through your own home trying to bushwhack someone. Because turning on the lights and saying “I’m the homeowner. I have a gun. What are you doing here?” is for Fudds. Because you never want to adequately identify a target. So what if you blow away the neighbor kid with Downs Syndrome in pajamas who lives down the block and got scared because it was dark and ran away from home and just wants a hug because you “coulda swore” it was a methhead in a hoody holding a knife. He had it coming.

          • JumpIf NotZero

            Were my posts talking about shooting someone in the dark?

            So when and where can I sign up for the Don Ward’s Low Light / No Light Tactics class? I’m 100% serious, you should teach.

          • Don Ward

            Sigh. Dude, if you’re going to be strutting around TFB calling out folks about training – including Alex C – and evade when asked to reveal yours for the third time? Or is it fourth? Folks will begin to wonder. And if you want, come up to South Naknek, Alaska this summer and I can show you plenty of risky no and low light situations that I work with.

          • noguncontrol

            all that time working in the liberal media has clearly infected Don Ward with liberalism.

          • iksnilol

            Can you Americans please stop misusing that word? Does anyone of you even know what liberal means?

            Seriously, words have meanings for a reason.

          • “Does anyone of you even know what liberal means?”

            Yes, but unfortunately the ‘liberal media’ does not. [Many of] The self-identified ‘liberals’ in this country are not classical liberals. In many ways, I am a ‘classical liberal’ myself, but most people would count me as a ‘conservative’ and I am member of the Republican party which itself has classical liberal roots (“Free men! Free soil!”) which modern US progressives (e.g. Wilsonian Progressives and positivist utilitarians, often self-identified ‘liberals’) are actually directly opposed to as well as many modern US ‘conservatives’. I feel sorry for you as an outside observer because it really IS awfully confusing. That tangled mess is, in my mind, one of the reasons our politics are self-destructing.

          • iksnilol

            It isn’t as much confusing as it is annoying. I mean, in the US the conservatives are liberal while the liberals are socialists or something. I don’t want to drag in politics but at least use the correct labels. It is just a pet peeve of mine I guess.

          • Seriously. This.

            The single most worrisome thing I encounter with regard to my opinion on firearms (and my possession of a CDWL) is being confused or identified with the faux news crowd that doesn’t even know the definition of either fascism or socialism.

            What’s really hilarious is that America as of today has behaviorally a right wing president, and a far right court and congress.

            All these people know of Obama is that his name occurred with the word “democrat” adjacent to it on the ballot and he’s black.

            Professional current republican legislators are just as anti gun as democrats ever were as proven by what they allow and what they don’t move as a block to counter.

            After all, what could be more anti-gun than totally crushing the economy so badly to further pay multi billionaires such that the thought of spending money on a trip to the range is akin to the thought of setting your wallet on fire.

            Turning guns into an unaffordable luxury item is just as much an infringement of the 2nd as incrementally banning them and all the ammo.

          • Nicks87

            You know what, bro? Maybe he doesnt want to list the classes he’s taken because, this being the internet, he knows people will just call BS anyway, so why waste time trying to convince people that dont want to be convinced. I know jumplf is legit because he is pretty up to date on what is being taught in most LE courses that I’ve taken in my career. He’s the only person on these forums that has been consistantly familiar with techniques and terminology associated with high levels of firearms tactics and training. I would love to post my DD214 and a pic of my badge and credentials but this is the internet and I think we all know the consequences of putting our personnal info out on public forums, bad things could happen and I dont want to lose my job.

        • Grindstone50k

          mmm, dat butthurt

        • DonDrapersAcidTrip

          You constantly come across as timothy olyphants character in the movie perfect getaway lol

        • n0truscotsman

          Most people bash all training “because they dont need it”, then they use stupid videos like what was shown above to somehow check the box for their own self-validation.

          Its quite sad.

    • JumpIf NotZero

      Exactly Nick, these clowns make people think all training is like this. That’s good for nobody.

      Vehicles are concealment, not cover. That said… I’ve found Jeep Cherokees to be very bullet resistant! 😀 Most 556 into the body side or doors if it hit two pieces of contoured sheet metal would not even make it to the other side of the vehicle. But new vehicles aren’t made this anymore.

      • Nicks87

        Lol, I stand corrected. I knew the older ones were fairly solid but 5.56 usually turns cars into swiss cheese. My point being just keep as much metal in between you and the bad guy but even then vehicles are bad cover unless they are up-armored.

      • iksnilol

        Gotta see how one fares against an AK.

      • “Most 556 into the body side or doors if it hit two pieces of contoured sheet metal would not even make it to the other side of the vehicle.” True, but the driver and passengers would still be Swiss-cheese in the video’s scenario. Maybe you could do what they did there if you had another source of suppressing fire to temporarily pin down the enemy, but why would you *want to* as opposed to just having your patrol withdraw on foot and pick them up somewhere else?

        Now, as a temporary measure between one source of cover and another, a vehicle isn’t too bad, particularly the engine block. LEOs often have little choice at least initially (it’s the only protection they bring to the fight). At worst, concealment, at best, limited cover, but you should have a plan for what’s going to happen next, and it probably shouldn’t involve getting in and expecting to drive off quite like that…

  • Phillip Cooper

    I’d take him a lot more serious if he’d let the cat lick the rest of that mess off his chin, and lose the “modern tribal” crap in his ear.

    • Hank

      … And when he learns more than three words.

    • Grindstone50k

      Thank god the fashion police showed up!

  • Pete Sheppard

    Sheesh. Who’re the bigger idiots; the people in the video or this clown?

    • John Yossarian

      All of the above? But at least “Tribal Ears” isn’t training people to get killed.

  • Vitsaus

    I agree that a lot of training nowdays is ridiculous, but what are this guy’s qualifications again? Aside from looking like a guy you’d by meth from at 3am in the parking lot of a True Value.

    • JumpIf NotZero

      I couldn’t even finish it. It was one terrible video wrapped up in a bad video. That had no redeeming quality for me.

    • DonDrapersAcidTrip

      Great stereotyping of anyone who doesn’t fit your 1950s idea of what people should look like. I love how inclusive gun people are.

      • schizuki

        Like guys in suits aren’t stereotyped. Or guys in golf shirts and khakis.

        Look a certain way, you’ll get a certain reaction. And people with intentional body mutilations are sure as Hell looking for a reaction. So, mission accomplished.

        • DonDrapersAcidTrip

          “Like guys in suits aren’t stereotyped. Or guys in golf shirts and khakis.”

          And they suffer so much for that stereotyping lmao

          • schizuki

            Thanks for proving my point.

          • DonDrapersAcidTrip

            I guess your point was you’ll bend over backwards to point out how guys in suits “have it tough too!” cause you’re a moron?

          • schizuki

            Now you’re stooping to ad hominem name-calling. You continue to prove my point.

  • ruinator

    Spit coffee I was laughing so hard. I agree this guy has a uhhhh “poor vocabulary” but he is right. Totally right when he talks about how dangerous these clowns were.

  • West

    I honestly do not understand why these people do not simply join the military where they can wear camo all the live long day and maybe actually learn something that wont get their toes shot off.
    Its embarrassing to watch.
    Although I do own an NFA rifle/suppressor and other “black” guns I’d much rather spend an afternoon out in the country shooting clay pigeons off the bank of a stock tank with my old .22 than run around like a jack ass pretending to be a Navy SEAL.

    • Dropship Ace

      Because they want all the prestige of being a soldier with none of the work attached to it. For the most part these courses are exercises in self delusion and wish fulfillment

      I seriously doubt that many people who do these courses do them for self improvement. There might be a few but they would be rare.

  • schizuki

    He makes valid points, especially at the end. But I find it hard to take people seriously when they drop f-bombs every third word. This video was like watching Frito Pendejo watching “Ow! My Balls!”

    • nadnerbus

      Go away, ‘baitin’!

    • mosinman

      “He intiruped me while I wus wachin ow muh bawls”
      -best Cosco lawyer ever

  • MountainKelly

    Tactitards is the right term

    • JumpIf NotZero

      This, tactitards! I mean anyone that pays hundreds of dollars to take formal instruction from some former special forces dudes is just throwing that money away! There is no way you can leverage their combine experience and their training package in a condensed form. It’s all just wanna-be commandos for sure!

      Almost none of that crap applies to a concealed carrier anyhow. You can learn way more at the range with just ammo and some alone time!

      • MountainKelly

        Tactical off road space shuttle door gunning indeed

        • JumpIf NotZero

          We are so on the same page!

          Trigger time is really all you would ever need.

  • Joe Schmoe

    Actually this guy is wrong, you do yell out ‘contact+direction’, In addition, you also yell out range and type of targets, in that order.

    So I’m not sure who’s more retarded, the one’s in the video or the Mr. Know-it-all.

  • Patrick Mingle


  • n0truscotsman

    “contact, front (or left, right, whatever)” and/or “contact (w/ direction, distance, description ((if possible)) 3 D’s)” is common parlance in a infantry context. The issue I have with the video is context. Why are you “patrolling” with a two-man team? The types overseas that did operate in such small units would not engage a enemy to begin with, let alone patrol solely on foot. They certainly wouldn’t have closed in with the bad guys, instead, choosing the more common sense choice of breaking contact to reach their vehicle (get off the X. Or “leaving the engagement line”)

    So much wrong with that video.

    The problem too is that the “elitist” gun owners try and label all tactical training courses as invalid because of this. This is simply untrue.

    There are plenty of reasons for “tactical training” by somebody who knows what they’re talking about, and we’ve seen the rise of mcdojos in the training community for sure.

    For one, that whole 2nd amendment thing. The prime purpose being to thwart a tyrannical government. Or protect your community from hostile outsiders by applying light infantry patrolling techniques (2 sticks in size on average). I consider training a part of that “well regulated” part, applying to the 18th century context of “in proper working order”.

    There are plenty of reasons for tactical training beyond gun fighting too. Medical, patrolling, survival skills, camouflage, and basically anything else you can find in the ranger handbook. Training is appropriate to put the information in manuals and handbooks into context and practical understanding.

  • Bill

    The word “tactical” no longer means anything. “Tactics” are the means to achieve a strategy, no more, no less. it’s become an advertising buzzword.

    Besides the fact that wars and gunfights are themselves unfortunate, albeit sometimes necessary, the conflicts that have occurred post 9//11/2001 have spawned this tactical-industrial complex that I don’t know has ever happened before, unless you count fencing, sword-fighting and archery training during the middle ages. It seems that anyone who has every worn a uniform of any type is now a trainer. And it’s a specious type of training, because it’s value and results really don’t have a means of assessment, and it can be difficult to test for validity. Some very highly trained people have been killed in conflicts, while lesser trained and/or skilled have succeeded.

  • Pistone

    Still clicking your way through endo I see. What page ru on now?

  • Orion Quach

    JumpIf NotZero needs to go to another website

    • iksnilol

      He should make a blog. I would read, just to see a different mindset.

  • n0truscotsman

    weapons handling familiarity and stress shooting are invaluable aspects to proficiency with your primary weapon, so carbine classes have plenty of validity.

    Range time cannot replicate the many aspects covered in a good class. And “I dont need carbine classes” just provides contrarians with an excuse to waste their money hoarding M855 rather than training. Or to simply do nothing but treat their guns like a magical talisman.

    • schizuki

      Since I don’t agree with the notion of using an AR-15 for in-home defense, there is literally no scenario in which I would find myself using the “weapons handling familiarity” and “stress shooting” aspects of a carbine course. And the courses I’ve seen are most definitely not accenting in-home defense.

      • n0truscotsman

        Exchange “carbine” for “handgun” or “shotgun” and my point remains equally valid.
        What do you have to “lose” from such training, other than money for ammunition, travel, and the course? From what ive seen, weapons handling, in general, leaves much room for improvement among the american gun owning population.
        All of the gripes about “I dont need X quantity of rounds in training because ill never need that many for home defense” are excuses for not training. I consider it the mating call for fellow “ill rise to the occasion”-types.

        • schizuki

          There’s nothing wrong with Walter Mittyism. Have fun. But I’m not going to spend money learning something that has no real-world application outside of filming a homemade “Red Dawn” video.

          “What do you have to “lose” from such training, other than money for ammunition, travel, and the course?”

          Well… yeah. That right there. Exactly. I don’t piss money away on useless things.

          Again, though, if it’s fun for you, great. Just don’t try to convince me I’m throwing away a chance to learn something that I will actually use in real, as opposed to fantasy, life.

  • “Two-man or single man surveillance elements do not draw attention to themselves (they dont wear “assaulter”-loadout plate carriers, but more low profile equipment) and break contact when received (in fact, in a “2nd amendment context”, breaking contact is the most desirable action/s on contact most of the time anyways…”

    That point really needs to be underscored because it is *exactly* correct. As a farmer with outbuildings and livestock that needs protecting, I might very well need to investigate a disturbance in the middle of the night where an armed adversary is not certain but cannot be ruled out. That may involve doing an amount of area/building search in a “tactical” manner: I don’t want to be ambushed and I don’t want to shoot something/someone by mistake. I am going to do that by myself if necessary or with backup if possible. But it wouldn’t look anything like that video.

    For one thing, The whole point of having a second person is to have an overwatch so that both people are not overwhelmed in the same ambush. The second person can then help extract you, call for help, or escape as appropriate, preferably well-arranged in advance.

    But I have a lot of trouble imagining a situation where I would meet serious resistance and not immediately break contact, retreat back to a strong point, and *call in the cavalry*. We can’t have deputies out here in a rural area every time something goes bump in the night. Calling them for that would pull them away from other tasks which might involve saving lives or solving crimes that are much more important than the fact that I have a possum in the barn with its head stuck in a pail making a noise I cannot identify from the house. We absolutely *can* call for deputies if someone shoots at us, and unless I cannot extract myself, I will until they get here.

    That’s even true when we are patrolling on duty (Auxiliary) in pairs in support of LE (we are *never* singles in that case, by policy, and we will almost always be in quads in mutual support distance supervised by LEOs). We carry weapons for self-defense but would not generally have the authority to *pursue* contact even if for some reason we thought it was a good idea. We meet resistance, back off to a safe distance, call in the cavalry, observe, wait for orders. There are life-safety issues where we might bend that (stopping a forcible felony, retrieving a victim), but even that would be *extremely hard to justify* unless we knew we had overwhelming force and a way to do it which would not simply further endanger lives. If we can neither withdraw nor assume a defensive posture, then we have almost certainly already screwed up somewhere. Either way, our conduct would and should be heavily scrutinized afterward.

    What about a TEOTWAKI crisis? Even the zombie apocalypse wouldn’t justify the behavior in the video. Wouldn’t the first thing you would do be to group up for mutual defense? If you did, why would you patrol like that? If you had such limited manpower that you had to patrol in a pair, why would you then expose it so carelessly?

    “Maybe they had a context that wasn’t covered in the video.”

    I doubt it, because I cannot even imagine any, particularly a scenario background which would not show up in differences within the ‘training’. Now, maybe you could imagine that the students screwed up and are doing stupid things the instructors don’t countenance, and certainly really dumb things are done in training, but 1) you would not show that as a positive example, 2) you simply don’t structure live fire exercises to permit certain mistakes, and 3) you stop the action when things derail with live fire. You can let a team muck around and screw up by the numbers as an object lesson in a simmunitions/blanks/airsoft-type exercise (as an exercise role-player, I *love* cleaning the clocks of LE students in exactly that circumstance), but not with live ammunition.

    It is important to discuss these things, though, and at least the video provides a good example of idiocy for identifying what really should be taught. LE and military training are not appropriate to most people’s purposes, but some of the principals do port *if* you do the selection with intelligence and with a constant mind to *what your objectives actually are*. LE Academy instructors often meet that issue when training LEO candidates with military backgrounds: the objectives of LE are quite different, and that leads to veterans having to unlearn behaviors which have become instinctive. Same for non-LE in bad situations. That is a big worry with increasing militarization of police: porting of technique must be done with *great care and discernment* not just increased firepower and cool accessories.

    • Excellent comment. Stuff like this is what keeps me dredging through trolls and the like.

    • n0truscotsman

      Thanks for your response. I was actually curious what your thoughts on this was.

      Farming for a living seems to make people pragmatic =-)

      My main issue with this is to keep things in perspective, to sort out the popular misonceptions with the reality of how things like this work.

      “What about a TEOTWAKI crisis? Even the zombie apocalypse wouldn’t justify the behavior in the video.”
      Very true. Not even the zombie apocalypse. Certainly not protecting ones property during a hypothetical riot or natural disaster (Watts Riots or Post-Hurricane Katrina New Orleans). Or even something less catastrophic like trespassing.

  • SD

    They should start a self defense class for people with stretched ears. How to tactically prevent the enemy from grabbing them. One of the more stupid things you could do to yourself.

  • kit

    Nice Video!…These type of fools need to be shamed as much as possible. There are WAY! to many the list could go on forever….

    The whole “gun industry” and all the “gun enthusiasts” are SHEEP!!!!

    All you Sheeple with your stupid beards and “Distressed” camo guns will buy anything..and act out your Lone Survivor fantasy.

    I mean look how many of you sheep follow that hack Costa and his stupid
    grip and stance. The gun community is the new place for all the loners
    who want to play dress up and follow in line. There is not a original
    thought from any of you.

    Miyamoto Musashi
    Weapons should be hardy rather than decorative.

    means stop trying to decorate your guns…they are meant to be
    black..Also can someone please tell me what part of America is looks
    like “flat dark earth”?

    Also whats with this new “distressed” look everyone is doing to their guns…99.99% of you have never been in combat or even pointed your guns at a human.Your guns never get scratched. Why do you try so hard to make your guns looks worn like you where in combat..

    All you fools think your in iraq or somewhere fighting ISIS…While the only thing you are fighting is Obesity! Come on…really I actuly saw 6XL 5.11 pants…hahaha…what a operator you all are!

  • Core

    It’s amazing the driver didn’t get killed.