Tactilicious
Inspired by Tam:
Update: or the Mastercard theme:
Salary $52,500
Training: $27,000
AR-15: $700
Ammo and gizmos: $1,100
Gym membership: $500
Knowing that any schmuck would pwn his ass in a gun fight: priceless.
Update: Ben says he thinks the bottom pic is mag couplers linked in an unusual manner (i.e., one backwards which I’ve never seen before and find odd). Could be. Some pics here and here.
Update to the update: Could be a backwards 40 rounder?
May 6th, 2007 at 12:29 am
for the record, while that chick does sport a mean chickenwing, she apparently does not have the mag in backwards as it appears at first glance. I’m not sure if we discussed that here or on THR, but it was the consensus, and it’s obvious on closer inspection that it’s not the case, or is the case, depending on what you think is or is not the case.
May 6th, 2007 at 12:34 am
Also, I guess that sight being on backwards implies that the rifle is not sighted in. Kinda makes it double worthless, since the guy really has no clue that should he need his weapon, he won’t be able to hit anything more than 20 meters away, and then only with a little luck. And also then only if he can get past the duh moment in less than 5 seconds.
May 6th, 2007 at 5:14 am
I think that you would point out that his aimpoint is on backwards, most people aren’t going to notice that.
May 6th, 2007 at 8:15 am
ben, it looks backwards to me.
May 6th, 2007 at 10:52 am
kind of a weak article, but check out what’s on the front page of the NYT today:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/06/us/06firearms.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&hp
May 6th, 2007 at 11:00 am
it’s not backwards because the mag loaded into the gun is not the one you see. She’s super tactical and has two mags clipped together. You can tell if you zoom in on the pic or find a higher res pic. The ribs on the mag in the foreground don’t line up with the one inserted into the magwell. There are two mags there.
May 6th, 2007 at 11:24 am
Ah, that makes sense. The mag in the first pic does look pretty long…like a 50 rounder.
I wouldn’t have picked up on what the steroidally amped guy in the second pic was doing wrong either…but that is funny.
May 6th, 2007 at 11:48 am
ben, then where’s the properly inserted mag? you should be able to see it.
I have mag clips too and mine make the mags face teh same direction.
May 6th, 2007 at 12:39 pm
“Kinda makes it double worthless, since the guy really has no clue that should he need his weapon, he won’t be able to hit anything more than 20 meters away, and then only with a little luck.”
That’s ok, according to the MSM the”high-powered assault weapons” are designed to “spray from the hip”. And since they have “high capacity magazines” they can spray hundreds of bullets all over the place. I know that’s true ‘cuz Sarah Brady said so.
May 6th, 2007 at 3:16 pm
like I said, download that pic and zoom in. You can see that the upside down mag is more in the forefront than the mag in the mag well. They look like 10 or 15 rounders. Here, I’ll post a pic showing the mag outlines.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v665/hautlipz/marblefallspd2mags.jpg
There is no doubt that there are two mags there. You must zoom in to see this, about 300-400% zoom helps. They are definitely two straight mags of low capacity.
May 6th, 2007 at 3:18 pm
Here’s the zoomed image
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v665/hautlipz/marblefallspdzoom.jpg
May 6th, 2007 at 8:29 pm
Ben, if anybody can see what you’re describing in that image … well I commend their eyesight. I will say that there appears to be a shadow (as you’d expect) at the bottom rear of the mag well, which doesn’t appear all the way across the bottom of the well, as you’d expect. So there’s an argument in favor of it being a piggy-backed mag. Also, as Uncle points out, it’d have to be a very long mag to be jammed into the mag well such that it doesn’t just drop out.
So, if it’s two mags, is it more tacticool to have to flip your mags fore-aft, or left-right when reloading?
BTW, how do people expect to hold steady with their support elbow hanging out in the breeze that way?
May 7th, 2007 at 8:23 am
There most certainly is.
That is one plain ol’ thirty rounder, inserted fore-to-aft. You can easily duplicate that picture with your own AR and any magazine. We went over this thing with an electron microscope at PDB’s joint back when it happened…
May 7th, 2007 at 3:13 pm
I dunno, Tam. I think that second pic is conclusive that there are two mags there. Otherwise the image was either photoshopped or an abberation occurred.
I think there are two mags there because the second mag, or the bend in the first, doesn’t bend smoothly… there is an abrupt joint at the bend, and second, the inserted mag appears to be behind the thing that is at a different angle. I guess either you see it or you don’t, but I see it clearly.
May 7th, 2007 at 5:19 pm
AR mags don’t “bend smoothly”; there is a straight section and then a curve.
Look, go get your own AR out, attempt to stick a 30-round GI mag in backwards, and you will be rewarded by something that looks exactly like the picture. Don’t take my word for it, go do it.
May 7th, 2007 at 7:39 pm
The top photo’s pretty fuzzy, but: The guy in the bottom photo is scary. That was taken a few years ago. He’s apparently never trained with an Aimpoint and never even used an Aimpoint. In fact, he’s likely never even looked through an Aimpoint– certainly never looked through that one since someone put it on there for him as a gag.
If you’re on guard duty, or any other standby situation, you have the thing zeroed, open and turned on. If you’re on dumbass detail, you look like that guy (can’t see low enough to tell whether he has his shoes on the wrong feet, or whether he’s trailing toilet paper). So clearly he pulled dumbass detail that day.
One wonders if he’s ever even handled that rifle before, or if maybe he was hired off the street to stand there and look cool, or look dumb, depending on the eye of the beholder.
May 7th, 2007 at 8:25 pm
Okay, I have here in my grubby little paws an NHMTG S/42 30 rd. mag. It won’t even go in the mag well backwards. Perhaps if I had Mr. Aimpoints arms (his bicep could feed an Ethiopian family for a week, I think) I could jam it in there. But I suspect I’m at least as strong as Ms. Chickenwing there, so I’ll assert that there’s no way she could have stuffed one in there such that it wouldn’t just fall out. Unless she used a mallet.
If there are mags without the rib along the back, then maybe those could go in backwards.
(BTW, Uncle, yes, this means I did finish my AR build, if you can call buying a complete upper to stick on my complete lower a “build”.)
May 7th, 2007 at 11:28 pm
Look, Tam, all I want to say is that the evidence for either side is inconclusive at best, given the quality of the photo. I think the super chicken-wing gives that photo all the verve it needs anyway.
July 19th, 2007 at 8:32 am
[…] the lady cop in Marble Falls who had her AR-15 magazine in backward? Then we argued about whether that was the case or not due to the pic? Well, looks like it was, in […]