PDA

View Full Version : S.W.A.T. Magazine- Why?


Martin Luther
December 3, 2002, 01:14 AM
TFL,

Why is SWAT Magazine affiliated with a pro-Second Amendment site? If the unthinkable happens to the Constitution, it won't be Sarah Brady going door-to-door confiscating weapons. It will be... SWAT teams.

I am just wondering why a publication which reviews many weapons that we (pro 2nd Am. citizens) can't legally own is affiliated with TFL. Also, judging by its advertizers, it seems that it caters more toward militarized law enforcement than citizens.

Seems a fox making a PR appearance at the henhouse.

Coronach
December 3, 2002, 01:15 AM
LOL. Uhm...because TFL bought the magazine? Kinda like the chickens purchasing the fox, no? ;)

Mike :D

Martin Luther
December 3, 2002, 01:29 AM
I just wonder why a magazine that reviews rifles off limits to 99% of this website is affiliated with this website.

Hmmm... Doesn't quite add up.

Coronach
December 3, 2002, 01:33 AM
No, seriously. The guy that runs TFL bought the magazine. And SWAT does a bit more than review LEO-only equipment.

Mike

Martin Luther
December 3, 2002, 01:44 AM
Understand- there are non-LEO firearms in its reviews, but why SWAT? Why not a pub tailored more toward 99% of the members here?

Don't you get a little concerned when you see a picture of some dude from the Mayberry PD sporting woodland camoflage and an MP5 or a LEO SIG battle rifle? Seems a little far from "Protect and Serve", especially in rural, low crime areas.

Mike Irwin
December 3, 2002, 01:56 AM
"but why SWAT?"

Uh, because it was the magazine that was for sale when Rich Lucibella went looking for one to purchase?

Send a PM to Rich and ask him.

He owns SWAT, he owns this web site.

Seems to me like you'd get better, and quicker, answers if you went straight to the source.

Hkmp5sd
December 3, 2002, 01:58 AM
The articles are geared toward the CCW user as well as the LEO's. It's not only about subguns (although I like that part best). Plus I think it helps reduce the "Us" and "Them" lines between the two groups both here and out on the street.

germanguns
December 3, 2002, 02:05 AM
I agree with Hk. I am entering Law Enforcement, and many LE officers I speak with are very pro-second. I believe that in a SHTF scenario like you speak about (And I consider confiscating all weapons a SHTF scenario) that many police officers would simply refuse to enforce the laws or resign. I know I would.

But perhaps I am idealistic. I will see how I like LE after I have been in it for awhile. :)

<edit>Fixed some spelling</edit>

bastiat
December 3, 2002, 02:26 AM
Have you actually read SWAT? If you went through back issues, you'd probably see that 90% or more of the articles relate to firearms most anybody here could obtain (well, except for some of the california readers).

And what does it matter if they write about weapons we can't currently buy? I may never own an A-10 Thunderbolt, but I really enjoy reading about how they function and are built.

Not being able to purchase post 86 MG's isn't the fault of SWAT or any of its writers. It's the fault of politicians. When they offer the rest of us a glimpse into weapons we can't buy, they're providing a service, not rubbing our noses in it. Geez.

bastiat
December 3, 2002, 02:43 AM
Here's a brief rundown of what's in the Jan 2003 issue, and who is able to take advantage of the item or article:

6 - Denny Hanson briefing - Everybody
8&9 - Reader Comments - Everybody
10 Kahr T9, Buck's Strider Solution Knife -Everybody
11 - Flashlight addon, AR foregrip accessory, Shotgun follower - Everybody
14 - Importance of communication - Everybody
16 - Failure of restraining order - Everybody
18&19 MTM case gard article - Everybody
20,21,76 - Presumptuous training - Everybody
22 thru 24 - Lazermax review - Everybody
26 thru 29 - Increasing shotgun effectiveness against vehicles - Everybody
30 thru 34 - gunsite 556 carbine course - Everybody
36 thru 41 - traveling by air - Everybody
42 thru 45 - Sig 552 commando - LEO Only
46 thru 49 - Charles Daly 1911 Pistol - Everybody
50&51 Goggle Covers - Everybody
52 thru 55 - Ithaca M37 Shotgun - Everybody
56 thru 58 - HS precision Bolt Action - Everybody
59 thru 61 Century AR15 Rifle - Everybody
62 thru 64, 67 - Building your own shooting range on a budget - Everybody
66 thru 71 - Rangemaster's combative skills course - Everybody
72 & 73 - HeaterMeals - Everybody
78 - 'The overlooked aspect of fighting' Article- Everybody

25 or so articles. Only one thing written about that is limited to law enforcement.

Or shouldn't they have written that one article???

jmlv
December 3, 2002, 09:14 AM
Is it on the newsstands yet? I gotta get there this week!
also courious to see Runts efferts on the mag as well.

Don Gwinn
December 3, 2002, 09:31 AM
Rich Lucibella, who owns TFL, purchased SWAT lock, stock, and barrel. I believe a change of names was discussed at some point, but I don't know if it's still in the offing. What I do know is that SWAT is not a magazine aimed only at SWAT team members. Denny Hansen's briefings are quite often musings on the rights and responsibilities of American citizens with and without badges. In addition, the new "Enemy at the Gates" column is purely focused on the fight for our rights. Clint Smith writes for SWAT, but as often as not, he's writing about historical firearms and the great stories of gunfighting (something he's good at, by the way, and not something most gun mags seem to want from him.)

Stay awhile and look around. I think you'll find you like TFL. You might notice that there are no banner ads or popups here; that's because Rich doesn't allow any advertising on the site. He pays the entire cost for this operation out of his pocket every month because he thinks TFL should exist as it does--beholden to no one. Heck, you can even badmouth SWAT here, and people do--though Rich and the membership here will likely reserve the right to respond. ;)

In the meantime, I'm going to move this to the SWAT forum so it can get aired in the right place. Maybe Denny or Pat Rogers can explain these things better than I.

Rich Lucibella
December 3, 2002, 10:11 AM
Welcome Martin-
Your questions are more than fair. I don't think there's a thing I can add to the answers already provided.

Best regards-
Rich

Dennis
December 3, 2002, 11:26 AM
On a strictly personal basis, I believe it's important to see what firearms we are not permitted to have (or must pay a fine, fee, tax or other penalty to purchase).

Then, with the Right to Keep and Bear Arms in our minds and hearts, we should ask our government why they have made us second-rate citizens (in violation of our Natural Rights, the basic Constitution and the Bill of Rights).

For our safety? Or for government control over us?

Betty
December 3, 2002, 11:56 AM
also courious to see Runts efferts on the mag as well.

You'll see my handiwork starting with the February issue.

S.W.A.T. is not only owned by TFL, it's also operated by TFLers who post here often. I've seen alot of Molon Labe hats pictured in the last few issues. And I'll spill a little bean by calling the February issue the "Rob issue" - kinda like "Where's Waldo", but with Rob. :D

Seriously, I think S.W.A.T. and TFL make a perfect marriage. One reason why I really like S.W.A.T. is because it gives honest product reviews, not "bought" reviews based on the size ad an advertiser purchased (and I just came from a publication that did just that).

Denny Hansen
December 3, 2002, 12:51 PM
Martin-

Welcome to TFL.

Along with photos of "regular citizens" (I’m in that category myself) you probably will see a lot of photos of LEO and military personnel in S.W.A.T. The reason for this is because most of our writers are actually involved in training—not sitting in a mahogany paneled gun-room dreaming up techniques they can name after themselves. In short, real "been there, done that" kind of guys. Take away the uniforms and titles and I believe you can put yourself in most of the articles published.

Case in point: A while back Pat Rogers wrote an article with tips for shooting the AR-15/M16. I thought some of the techniques would not work for me, but since Pat probably has more experience (including instructing Marine Force units) than any other current author on that weapons system I thought I would give the techniques a fair shake. Guess what? While I’m neither a Marine nor a peace officer, my shooting has improved by roughly 20% in unsupported field positions.

If you give S.W.A.T. a chance, I think you'll like what you see.

NIGHTWATCH
December 3, 2002, 06:58 PM
Uhm, mmmm, ehemm! :rolleyes: Havent I been here before?



Seriously, I have pretty much shared the same need for balance between LE and citizen coverage to the point that Rich would probably like to shoot me. :D Bottom line. Its his work in progress. :cool:

Rich Lucibella
December 3, 2002, 10:23 PM
Nightwatch-
Yes you have. I think it was here: http://www.TheFiringLine.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=130950

If I recall, you asked for a full issue dedicated to "citizen gunowner/un-organized militia". I offered to put up the first $50K for that issue, taking back only the first $50K in revenue and leaving you with the remainder of the expenses and revenues

If I recall correctly, you passed. Fact is that [i]every issue of S.W.A.T. is dedicated to "citizen gunowner/un-organized militia", to my thinking. Therefore, you passed up the opportunity to take about 11% of our yearly "profit" with zero risk!

Eight of the most poorly thought out words in the English language: "Why, if I owned that business, I'd"....[fill in blank; ].
Eight of the most embarrassing words of follow up: "Well, I meant with the other guy's money!"

:D
Rich

Rob Pincus
December 3, 2002, 11:46 PM
ML,

Thanks for asking the question, it gives us a chance to make sure that the SWAT vision is clear. While name changes were discussed, I'm glad that Rich has not decided to make that move. SWAT has a long history and I'm proud to be a part of it. I explain the name this way (I forget who originally came up with this concept):

S pecial W eapons A nd T actics... for the responsibly armed citizen (in Uniform and Out).

The truth is that more and more over the past 20 years Special Weapons and Training have become more and more a thing of The People. 20 years ago how many places could the average citizen go to learn "tactics"? How many options were there for the average citizen when it came to reliable semi-auto pistols? When the magazine was first conceived "SWAT" may well have been a concept which applied only to LE, but that is clearly not the case today.

For myself, while the majority of my articles have dealt with LE training or gear issues, I hope it is clear that they are meant to inform the interested public as much as our LE readers. I know that Denny is always sure to caution me when I cover an issue like "Contain & Call" or "Explosive Entry" (Feb '03) that I address concerns and interests of those outside of LE, particulary those in our audience who might say, "There is no way local US LE can justify using Explosives!".

I am proud to be associated with a magazine that is willing to be a bridge between two cultures which often misunderstand each other, but have many of the same beliefs, attitudes and goals for our country.

Spectre
December 4, 2002, 01:58 PM
ML,

Welcome to TFL. The sad truth is, the "unthinkable", Constitutionally, will be Federal units, probably military. (In fact, I was once on very good terms with the then head of the Marine Weapons R&D program. About 6 years ago, he told me he believed that the American public would have to be "pacified" in the near future! This was in response to a question about the future of American gun ownership.) Yes, this will be in opposition to the Posse Comitatus Act, but you spoke of the abrogation of the Constitution, so why not other laws..."SWAT" refers to police units.

Those in Federal Law Enforcement agencies that have a slanted view against firearms ownership are not really comfortable with firearms hobbyists and open dissemination and discussion of leading-edge firearms technology. "The truth shall set you free", and tyrannical folk everywhere want to limit your access to it. Viewed in that light (and the already mentioned applicability of SWAT articles to the tactically aware citizen), it should be fairly obvious whose side SWAT is on. Yours.

And mine, too. SWAT and TFL are anti-tyrant, pro-American, pro-technology, pro-time-tested tactics, pro-Peace Officer, pro-Military,and, by golly, pro-fun. (Can you tell I love this mag?)

Let go of any preconceptions you have, read both this site and the magazine honestly, and if you see any contradiction after careful perusal, speak up. I first ran across Rich online 5 or 6 years ago. It was obvious he had a lot of knowledge about firearms, tactics, and politics, but what impressed me was his willingness to admit when he was wrong, and change accordingly. I reckon if we were all that ready to evolve mentally, there'd be a lot less friction in the world.

Martin Luther
December 4, 2002, 04:35 PM
TFL,

Thanks for your informative and courteous replies. The sunshine approach is great for a free society, and that seems to be the intent.

...About making sure that the "Assault Weapons Ban" sunsets in 2004... Hopefully SWAT has some major activism planned. I know that Larry Pratt of GOA is going to make that a major issue in the near future. It would be a great day when I can ask my friendly neighborhood Peace Officer for sighting-in tips for my HK G36 or SIG Commando (currently LEO weapons).

Thanks again, gentlemen. Appreciate the site.

Tamara
December 4, 2002, 04:43 PM
It would be a great day when I can ask my friendly neighborhood Peace Officer for sighting-in tips for my HK G36 or SIG Commando (currently LEO weapons).

Too bad those won't be affected if the AW ban sunsets. :(

Those are covered by the Bush import ban of '89 (in their semiauto 16"+ barrel versions) and NFA '34 (in their shorty & full auto versions).

KSFreeman
December 4, 2002, 07:07 PM
Spec, a couple of years ago at a well-known shooting skul, a fellow TFLer and I meet a couple of fed types who worked in the "Office of Planning & Research" in this investigative agency. They talked like your friend but believed the cause would be refusal to comply with taxation withholdings.

I was fascinated by the talk of "zones of control", blocking supply routes, and [shudder] "camps." I did not know which was more frightening--hearing the words from their mouths or my realizing that the feds have already made advanced plans for this.:eek:

Dennis
December 4, 2002, 09:32 PM
KS,

And, of course, the Democrats did that all by themselves, right?
With the Republicans fighting against them all the way, right?

You know, it was simpler in the old days when the joke was,
"American optimists are learning Russian.
American pessimists are learning Chinese."

And it turns out the sheep are our neighbors
and the tyrants are our leaders.

(sigh)

At least we won't have to learn another language--just another way of (not) speaking....
and/or "bureaucratese."

I guess Rich then will become one of "America's Most Wanted!"

KSFreeman
December 6, 2002, 06:37 PM
Dennis, do not know if they were Democrats or Republicans. Never came up. I just listened in a combination of awe and horror.

The way I remember that joke was from the CCCP daze and English or Chinese ("I can't read it; it's in Chinese).

Marty Hayes
December 16, 2002, 04:26 PM
I don't think the majority of people give LEO's the credit they deserve. I would be willing to guess that most state and local cops throughout the U.S. would never start going door to door to confiscate firearms. Perhaps the feds, but there aren't enough fed's to come and disarm the little rural county I live in, let along America.

On the other hand, there is a lot that civilians can learn about studying SWAT tactics, which are little more than indivdual tactics performed in a group.

yy
July 2, 2004, 11:37 AM
Academy-
not to contradict your post that SWAT tactics aren't intimidating, just "individual tactics performed in a group," but...

people are often surprised at the result of group activity formed by the sum of individual activities. Examples are the gridlock in Los Angeles, giant ant hills in Africa, and "killer" bees. Each individual perform its task in each example only to result in a group behavior that was not forseeable based on analyzing the individual.

-just my geeky two cents.

Whats my point? That the individual tactics are not intimidating. But it's exactly the "performed in a group" that gives SWAT its power. This is also why individual suspects have such a hard time evading even just two officers in pursuit who are in constant communication.

Quartus
July 2, 2004, 12:36 PM
Yes...

I agree with Hk. I am entering Law Enforcement, and many LE officers I speak with are very pro-second. I believe that in a SHTF scenario like you speak about (And I consider confiscating all weapons a SHTF scenario) that many police officers would simply refuse to enforce the laws or resign. I know I would.

But perhaps I am idealistic. I will see how I like LE after I have been in it for awhile.


Kudos, to you, sir, and I hope you are representative of a new generation. I'm afraid I don't share the optimism of "Firearms Academy" about most LEOs these days. I vaguely recall a survey to that effect, and the overwhelming answer was that orders would be followed.




In light of that, Martin Luther, I can't think of anything better than to have a magazine like SWAT being read regularly by LOTS of LEOs. The more the better. (I'm sure Rich agrees! :D) What better way to get the message of FREEDOM into the LEO community? They sure aren't getting from the mainstream media. They sure aren't getting if from their unions. They sure aren't getting it from City Hall, in most cases. Everywhere they turn they are being told, "You are not civilians. You are ABOVE civilians. You enforce the LAW. You ARE the law. Obey orders."

Certainly it's not that blatant, but that's still the message they hear most often.


I'm glad SWAT is there giving them a healthy message. And reading a bit here and there about a gun I am wrongly prohibited from owning doesn't make me mad at SWAT.

gifted
July 2, 2004, 04:17 PM
I believe that in a SHTF scenario like you speak about (And I consider confiscating all weapons a SHTF scenario) that many police officers would simply refuse to enforce the laws or resign. I know I would. I know that LEO isn't the only place this would happen. How many military members are gun owners? I plan to be, and would do what little I could(consiencous objecter most likely). They'd have to institute a draft to keep the numbers up, and even then they'd have trouble.

RWK
July 2, 2004, 07:21 PM
Martin,

Welcome, and let me make a simple – but important – point. There are a few critical and common links between TFL and SWAT (in addition to Rich’s farsighted generosity in underwriting both):
> INFORMATION. Both SWAT and TFL provide copious amounts of firearms, RKBA, and self defense related facts.
> ADVOCACY. Both SWAT and TFL promote our rights to keep and bear arms.
> COMMUNITY. Both SWAT and TFL advance the firearms and individual rights communities.

geegee
July 2, 2004, 10:40 PM
I would be willing to guess that most state and local cops throughout the U.S. would never start going door to door to confiscate firearms.
I've taken a few tactical firearms courses taught by SWAT officers (both in their late 30's or early 40's). I have zero concerns about them, as regards a house to house gun grab. Now as far as a new LEO, about 23, and a year or two out of the academy...that makes me want to bury a rifle or two. :(

K80Geoff
July 7, 2004, 09:06 AM
To really appreciate the significance of a magazine like SWAT...perhaps Martin Luther you should read Sun Tzu.

gdeal
November 20, 2005, 04:19 AM
I think S.W.A.T. Magazine is a good magazine. Neat pictures too.

Eghad
November 23, 2005, 04:07 PM
I just subcribed to SWAT and am kicking myself for not doing so sooner...

The monthly columns are chock full of stuff for the LEO and the citizen.

The Dec issue had the article about restoring firearms that were in a fire.

article about a course civilians can take

chock full of goodies that we can buy!

DannyB KY
December 3, 2005, 04:57 PM
The sad truth is, the "unthinkable", Constitutionally, will be Federal units, probably military.

I was fascinated by the talk of "zones of control", blocking supply routes, and [shudder] "camps." I did not know which was more frightening--hearing the words from their mouths or my realizing that the feds have already made advanced plans for thi

I would be willing to guess that most state and local cops throughout the U.S. would never start going door to door to confiscate firearms.

September 2005 in New Orleans gives us the inside "scoop".

Elderly woman tackled in her home and disarmed by CHiP (mms://a568.v129484.c12948.g.vm.akamaistream.net/7/568/12948/v0001/vod.ibsys.com/2005/0908/4946889.300k.wmv)

Home Owners handcuffed, disarmed by US military (http://www.gunowners.org/abcnews.mpg)

Have "they" determined WHO gave the order to disarm the public?
My impression is the governor.

Hornblower
December 7, 2005, 11:05 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I agree with Hk. I am entering Law Enforcement, and many LE officers I speak with are very pro-second. I believe that in a SHTF scenario like you speak about (And I consider confiscating all weapons a SHTF scenario) that many police officers would simply refuse to enforce the laws or resign. I know I would.

But perhaps I am idealistic. I will see how I like LE after I have been in it for awhile.

******Wait until you don't get your first paycheck and see how you would feel about confiscating your confederates weapons!!!!??

Glock 31
December 9, 2005, 07:22 AM
Guns & Ammo is centered toward the 99% of us. I think SWAT teams should have something that could be considered "Just for them".:cool:

Pat Rogers
December 9, 2005, 02:10 PM
Glock 31,
Their is a magazine that is dedicated to, and available only to those directly involved in police special operations.
That magazine is The Tactical Edge, the official magazine of the National Tactical Officers Association.

SWAT Magazine has a more broad based population, both as writers and readers.
There are some tactics, techniques and procedures (TTP) that are transparent, but there are others that are not.

There are no articles in SWAT that are only for police and military. Even those that (for example) review a certain weapon, piece of equipment or ammunition available only to a specific user community are included for general information- something that a great many people want (take a look at any errornet forum and see what people are interested.

From my viewpoint up here on the soapbox, i would not submit a story to SWAT that had anything to do with sensitive information relative to TTP.
There are other venues for that (such as NTOA). SWAT Magazine is a general type magazine, and covers a wide variety of subject matter for the benefit of all.

Glock 31
December 10, 2005, 03:29 AM
Sorry, my mistake.:(