The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > Hogan's Alley > Handguns: General Handgun Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old April 28, 2019, 09:20 AM   #26
briandg
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 4, 2010
Posts: 5,327
Quote:
My son's ex girlfriend is a full blown doctor that works for the drug companies as a drug rep. She is well paid with over one million in her personal bank account and she is around 35 years old. But don't call her drug rep. She will straighten you out damn quick and make it known she is a licensed doctor. And I can tell you that the drug companies grease the rails everywhere they go. If you think insurance companies are flush the drug companies make them look like pikers by comparison.
This is not a joke, an exaggeration, or a lie here. I'm being as serious as I ever will be. It is the truth.

There was a medication that my daughter took for a while. $1,600 for a one month fill of 2mg tablets. The active ingredient was selling for approximately 1,000 times the price of gold. After twenty years the medication at the last time I checked is still nearly $1,000 a fill.

The point here is that there is a lot at stake in these games. Whether you are selling antipsychotic drugs to children so that they can live normal lives, or you are selling $1,500 optical sights for a pistol, that's a lot of money that changes hands and every industry on the planet will maximize revenue by intensive personal indoctrination, a strong system of encouragement and rewards and flat out bribes.
__________________
None.
briandg is offline  
Old April 28, 2019, 01:00 PM   #27
SIGSHR
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 13, 2005
Posts: 4,238
I recall a magazine from 1979-1980 or so entitled "Totally Honest Gun Reviews" or something like that. They did a review of an Arminius .357, said it was junk-but amazingly accurate.
What do we really expect from reviewers ? As a Life Member of SNM-Sons of Neanderthal Man-I am a Steel and Walnut man, if giver a non-steel frame handgun to review I would state that I don't care for non-steel frames.
SIGSHR is offline  
Old April 28, 2019, 09:01 PM   #28
Bill DeShivs
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 7, 2006
Posts: 9,939
Paul Harrell thinks an awful lot of himself, and it's obvious.
He knows very little about gun history. He simply markets himself as an "expert."
He's not. He's simply making money off of videos.
__________________
Bill DeShivs, Master Cutler
www.billdeshivs.com
Bill DeShivs is offline  
Old April 28, 2019, 11:22 PM   #29
CLYA
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 31, 2017
Posts: 125
Quote:
Paul Harrell thinks an awful lot of himself, and it's obvious.
He knows very little about gun history. He simply markets himself as an "expert."
He's not. He's simply making money off of videos.
Just asking.....

Did you watch all of his videos, to make that conclusion?

Personally, I like his videos a lot. At least the majority of them, even when I sometimes disagree. I think he's quite thorough.


I find Hickok45 interesting too.
CLYA is offline  
Old April 29, 2019, 12:31 AM   #30
JERRYS.
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 23, 2013
Location: Alabama
Posts: 2,178
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill DeShivs View Post
Paul Harrell thinks an awful lot of himself, and it's obvious.
He knows very little about gun history. He simply markets himself as an "expert."
He's not. He's simply making money off of videos.
I don't know if he makes any money from his videos, I don't recall him beckoning the patreon schpiel at the end of his videos.... I don't really know how much of gun history is needed to be known with regards to what gun or ammunition works in a given set of circumstances. with regards to his expertise, his professional time behind the trigger is fairly well known.
JERRYS. is offline  
Old April 29, 2019, 09:01 AM   #31
Carmady
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 26, 2013
Location: on the lam
Posts: 1,227
Why shouldn't Paul make money off his videos?

He puts a lot of time into them, and those meat targets don't grow on trees.
__________________
John Wayne called a revolver a pistol so it's a pistol, pilgrim.
Carmady is offline  
Old April 29, 2019, 01:05 PM   #32
Bill DeShivs
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 7, 2006
Posts: 9,939
I didn't have to watch all his videos. Just a few let me know he is ignorant of a lot of gun history. He is also very opinionated.
Shooting well makes you a good shot-a marksman. It doesn't make you a gun expert.
I'm not saying he shouldn't make money off his videos (he does.) Youtube pays you for videos. I'm saying he makes the videos solely to make money. Why else would he do them?
__________________
Bill DeShivs, Master Cutler
www.billdeshivs.com
Bill DeShivs is offline  
Old April 29, 2019, 01:20 PM   #33
Lohman446
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 22, 2016
Posts: 1,943
Quote:
I'm saying he makes the videos solely to make money. Why else would he do them?
I don't assume to know intent or motivation. For instance ask yourself why do you, or I, bother to post on this forum? Why does anyone make any YouTube video?
Lohman446 is offline  
Old April 29, 2019, 02:38 PM   #34
Carmady
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 26, 2013
Location: on the lam
Posts: 1,227
Maybe he makes the videos for the webcred. j/k
__________________
John Wayne called a revolver a pistol so it's a pistol, pilgrim.
Carmady is offline  
Old April 29, 2019, 03:50 PM   #35
totaldla
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 10, 2009
Posts: 871
I like hicok45 but then I skip ahead through most of his 30 minutes videos - I probably only watch 3 minutes worth. Takes him 5 minutes just to say hello. But to his credit, he almost never bad mouths a firearm.

I like Paul Harrell, but I always skip past his chronograph work - who still buys chronographs that can't remember a string and compute avg, es and sd? Ugh!

I don't like Death Metal music - instant skip ahead. I don't like watching a mediocre shot plunk away at a piece of steel 15yds away. The only shooter I like watching is JM. I don't like water jug penetration tests.

I don't really like gun comparisons because 99% of the time the comparisons are irrelevant. Nowadays there really aren't any truly bad firearms. I throwup a little bit when I see TheYankeeMarshall.
__________________
Kel Tec PF-9 Review
totaldla is offline  
Old April 29, 2019, 03:52 PM   #36
GarandTd
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 15, 2016
Location: Western PA rainforests
Posts: 1,166
Quote:
He is also very opinionated
Aren't we/they all? That's what those videos are, their opinions.
__________________
22lr, 20 gauge, 8mm Mauser, 35 Remington, 30-06, 5.56x45/223, 9mm, 380acp
GarandTd is offline  
Old April 29, 2019, 04:03 PM   #37
stinkeypete
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 22, 2010
Location: Madison, Wisconsin
Posts: 281
“Nowadays there really aren’t any truly bad firearms.”

I love you, man. That would make a hilarious new thread. I can think of a few!
stinkeypete is offline  
Old April 29, 2019, 04:20 PM   #38
FITASC
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 6, 2014
Posts: 4,988
Quote:
But to his credit, he almost never bad mouths a firearm.
Then how is that giving an objective, fair and balanced review? If every gun is great (and we know they're not) then the credibility goes out the window and all you have left is the entertainment aspect of his shooting ability.
__________________
"I believe that people have a right to decide their own destinies; people own themselves. I also believe that, in a democracy, government exists because (and only so long as) individual citizens give it a 'temporary license to exist'—in exchange for a promise that it will behave itself. In a democracy, you own the government—it doesn't own you."- Frank Zappa
FITASC is offline  
Old April 29, 2019, 04:40 PM   #39
totaldla
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 10, 2009
Posts: 871
Quote:
Originally Posted by FITASC

Then how is that giving an objective, fair and balanced review? If every gun is great (and we know they're not) then the credibility goes out the window and all you have left is the entertainment aspect of his shooting ability.
Well actually pistols are pretty much great today. We don't have many(any) truly bad designs, nor do manufacturers ship junk anymore that requires a trip to the gunsmith to make right*.

What we have today is subtle differences that hicok45 shows are subjective. E.g. I like the rough texture of the M&P 2.0, some folks will not. I never liked finger grooves on Glocks - obviously a lot of folks did. The trigger on the PF9 doesn't pinch me but it did him.

If you have big hands then hicok45's big paws are meaningful. If you have small hands then his viewpoint doesn't mean as much.

The only way "objective" would matter in a sea of "subjective" subtle differences is IF hicok45 was reviewing a firearm for a specific role. But he doesn't do that. Or at least I haven't watched it if he has.

We are blessed today with a plethora of good working firearms. I can remember back 40 years ago when if I wanted a decent 13 round 9mm I had to put up with a gritty trigger or send it to a smith to have the magazine disconnect removed. And getting a Colt to feed hollowpoints was another visit to a smith. Times have changed.

* I did have to send a brand new S&W revolver back to S&W because of light strikes after all of 14 rounds. They replaced the firing pin and had it back to me in 9 days total.
__________________
Kel Tec PF-9 Review

Last edited by totaldla; April 29, 2019 at 04:49 PM.
totaldla is offline  
Old April 29, 2019, 05:10 PM   #40
Jim Watson
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 25, 2001
Location: Alabama
Posts: 15,565
I have watched a number of Patrick E. Kelley's 'Out of the Box to the Match' videos.
I don't usually watch every Clang of his usual Steel Challenge match but he finishes by shooting groups on paper and stating conclusions.
Jim Watson is offline  
Old April 29, 2019, 05:36 PM   #41
Cosmodragoon
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 18, 2013
Location: Northeastern US
Posts: 1,612
YouTube has become my favorite platform for reviews because I can see products in use. I like s00tch because he often includes glamour shots of the gear and action shots of him (and sometimes friends or family) using it. I don't always agree with his opinion but the reviews themselves are usually fun.

He definitely seems to like a lot of the gear he reviews. Jeff Quinn is another one who tends to like the things I see him review. That doesn't make me think anything funny is going on. I think it is just an issue of sensitivity or natural bias. So I do prefer watching more critical channels as well.

Hickok45 is fun but I sometimes end up fast-forwarding or not watching the whole video. The Military Arms Channel is good. His gauntlet tests are pretty brutal and go beyond what I consider fair for a CCW.

Paul Harrell is my favorite presenter in this realm by far. However, I wouldn't really consider him a gun reviewer. He likes to explore guns, ammo, issues, etc. Some of his content is like a lab for stuff that gets discussed here in the forums. Some of his content in the same category as the "Active Self Protection Extra" channel. That said, Active Self Protection with John Correia is an extremely valuable resource for anyone who carries.
Cosmodragoon is offline  
Old April 29, 2019, 05:38 PM   #42
Aguila Blanca
Staff
 
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 12,062
Quote:
Originally Posted by totaldla
I like hicok45 but then I skip ahead through most of his 30 minutes videos - I probably only watch 3 minutes worth. Takes him 5 minutes just to say hello. But to his credit, he almost never bad mouths a firearm.
Why is that to his credit? Isn't what we usually complain about is gun reviewers who never have anything bad to say about the guns they test? Seriously -- if someone has tested 25 guns, or 50 guns, or 100 guns -- they can't all have been free of defects or negative features.

Unfortunately, regardless of the reviewer's inherent honesty, there is a built-in conflict of interest. It's probably worse for the print magazines, because they make their money from the ads. If you still subscribe to any of the dead trees versions of the gun rags, open a couple and count how many pages there are of full or half-page ads out of the total page count.

Then pick a gun review ... and see how many pages away from the review the full-page ad for that gun is. If a magazine allows a writer to really tell the truth about a lousy gun, the manufacturer may stop advertising in that publication, and may not submit samples of other guns for future reviews. That's a death sentence for a magazine. They need the ad income. They don't make money from subscriptions; that's why many will practically give away subscriptions, if you know where to look. They want to pump up the circulation numbers so they can charge more for ads.

So the writers are kind of walking a tightrope, trying to present an honest review while at the same time trying not to alienate the manufacturer of a turkey of a product.
Aguila Blanca is offline  
Old April 29, 2019, 06:34 PM   #43
CLYA
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 31, 2017
Posts: 125
Quote:
I didn't have to watch all his videos. Just a few let me know he is ignorant of a lot of gun history. He is also very opinionated.
I figured you didn't watch many. Just a few, and then a strong negative opinion to spread to others.

Maybe I'm the same. I read something that really ticks me off. Then see the writer has a website. Problem is, I'm so ticked off, that I won't farther investigate the website, that sells products I might be interested in. I won't, because I've based customer service, on my quick opinion, of what the owner wrote. I'll never know weather this website has good products or not.


As to Paul Harrow, I've watched a lot of his videos, and checked out much of his background. I do totally disagree with your assessment.


edit: sales to sells.

Last edited by CLYA; April 30, 2019 at 08:03 PM.
CLYA is offline  
Old April 29, 2019, 06:40 PM   #44
CLYA
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 31, 2017
Posts: 125
As to Hickok45

Quote:
But to his credit, he almost never bad mouths a firearm.
Quote:
Then how is that giving an objective, fair and balanced review? If every gun is great (and we know they're not) then the credibility goes out the window and all you have left is the entertainment aspect of his shooting ability.

Actually, quite often, he'll discuss just what he doesn't like about a particular firearm.

I can think of a bunch of them, even when I don't agree. Hickok likes Glocks, I don't, but my wife sure does.
CLYA is offline  
Old April 29, 2019, 06:50 PM   #45
TXAZ
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 5, 2010
Location: McMurdo Sound Texas
Posts: 3,645
One guideline that seems to apply when inputs may be questionable:

If virtually all the reviewers like a weapon, it's probably pretty decent.

If virtually all the reviewers don't like a weapon, it's probably not a good weapon.

(It clearly applied for 1980's Yugo's )
__________________
!أنا لست إرهابياً
TXAZ is offline  
Old April 29, 2019, 08:23 PM   #46
totaldla
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 10, 2009
Posts: 871
Quote:
Originally Posted by TXAZ

One guideline that seems to apply when inputs may be questionable:

If virtually all the reviewers like a weapon, it's probably pretty decent.

If virtually all the reviewers don't like a weapon, it's probably not a good weapon.

(It clearly applied for 1980's Yugo's )
True as long as the reviewers aren't parroting the same line.
So when you have a YouTube Pistolero saying that "X sucks" - skip that video.
__________________
Kel Tec PF-9 Review
totaldla is offline  
Old April 30, 2019, 08:48 AM   #47
Lohman446
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 22, 2016
Posts: 1,943
By the time a gun reviewer has built enough credibility to have ongoing reviews I assume the manufacturers are supplying the guns tested. I also assume, wrongly it appears, that every person in marketing doing such a job is familiar with the fiasco of the 1968 Corvette sent to Car and Driver in December of 1967 that was deemed unsafe and unable to be tested by them. As such I assume these internet reviews are with hand picked samples that are not reflective of what I will be buying.
Lohman446 is offline  
Old April 30, 2019, 10:29 AM   #48
Aguila Blanca
Staff
 
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 12,062
It's possible that some reviewers may get a specially selected gun for testing once in awhile but, overall, I don't think that's as common as most people think. I've seen some guns sent to reviewers that probably should never have left the factory, including one compact 1911 that literally started to disassemble itself with every shot.
Aguila Blanca is offline  
Old April 30, 2019, 01:25 PM   #49
TruthTellers
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 22, 2016
Posts: 2,621
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill DeShivs View Post
I didn't have to watch all his videos. Just a few let me know he is ignorant of a lot of gun history. He is also very opinionated.
Shooting well makes you a good shot-a marksman. It doesn't make you a gun expert.
I'm not saying he shouldn't make money off his videos (he does.) Youtube pays you for videos. I'm saying he makes the videos solely to make money. Why else would he do them?
Youtube doesn't pay crap anymore to gun channels, Paul Harrell included. I'm pretty sure he is fully funded through Patreon and viewer donations of ammo, the meat and fruit targets cost money as do the guns he buys to make the videos.

It doesn't take an "expert" to make an in depth video of the Miami shootout and the effects it had on LEO tactics and ammo design.

Since you haven't seen most of his videos, while I have, and don't know the current climate of youtube demonetization of gun videos, I can easily say the only ignorant one is you.
__________________
Any good revolver > Any good semi auto

^Not so much anymore.
TruthTellers is offline  
Old April 30, 2019, 01:46 PM   #50
lee n. field
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 12, 2002
Location: The same state as Mordor.
Posts: 5,140
Any You-tuber that starts his review "whatup youtubers" will get ignored.
__________________
"As was the man of dust, so also are those who are of the dust, and as is the man of heaven, so also are those who are of heaven. Just as we have borne the image of the man of dust, we shall also bear the image of the man of heaven. "
lee n. field is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:25 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2018 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.09673 seconds with 8 queries