This Is A Story That Could Send Me Screaming Into Christopher Hitchens’ Arms. [UPDATED]

January 19, 2010 at 12:54 pm (By Amba)

UPDATE: This is no longer a story.

Trijicon, the company that made the scopes, has proactively decided to stop printing Bible chapter and verse citations on rifle scopes to be sold to the U.S. military and any foreign military that so prefers (as New Zealand, Australia, and Canada evidently do).  The company will also make kits available at no cost that can be used to remove existing inscriptions.

That decisiveness and dispatch is free enterprise at its best.  Now we’ll see who doesn’t want to let go of this story.

Thanks to reader_iam for the heads up.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

And that takes some doing.

Coded references to New Testament Bible passages about Jesus Christ are inscribed on high-powered rifle sights provided to the United States military by a Michigan company, an ABC News investigation has found.

The sights are used by U.S. troops in Iraq and Afghanistan and in the training of Iraqi and Afghan soldiers. The maker of the sights, Trijicon, has a $660 million multi-year contract to provide up to 800,000 sights to the Marine Corps, and additional contracts to provide sights to the U.S. Army. […]

Trijicon confirmed to ABCNews.com that it adds the biblical codes to the sights sold to the U.S. military. Tom Munson, director of sales and marketing for Trijicon, which is based in Wixom, Michigan, said the inscriptions “have always been there” and said there was nothing wrong or illegal with adding them. Munson said the issue was being raised by a group that is “not Christian.” […]

That would be the Military Religious Freedom Foundation, “an advocacy group that seeks to preserve the separation of church and state in the military.” headed by one evidently “not Christian” Michael “Mikey” Weinstein.

Weinstein, an attorney and former Air Force officer, said many members of his group who currently serve in the military have complained about the markings on the sights. He also claims they’ve told him that commanders have referred to weapons with the sights as “spiritually transformed firearm[s] of Jesus Christ.”

Let’s note that this is hearsay from an advocacy group with an agenda.  Still, the firearms are on the record.  Photographs of the cast-metal scripture citations illustrate the post.

If you can swear an oath on the religious text of your choice*, should you be required to shoot a firearm explicitly dedicated to Jesus?  Yes, Virginia, it violates the Constitution.

Those Christian soldiers (in and out of uniform) who fervently believe we’re in an apocalyptic theological struggle against Islam — yes, by God, a Crusade — will nonetheless find it thrillingly appropriate.  So will their opposite numbers, who’ve thought so all along.

Hat tip:  Peter Hoh.

*Does anybody know the restrictions on what texts you can swear an oath on?  Could it be, like, Atlas Shrugged?

Advertisements

54 Comments

  1. Melinda said,

    They fired one of those at an Iraqi soldier, but it was stopped by a Koran in his jacket pocket.

  2. amba12 said,

    I know why you did standup, Bruno baby.

  3. Ruth Anne said,

    My nephew’s parents bought him that scope for his recent year in Iraq. They’re kick-ass scopes. Who the fuck cares how they inscribe their fucking serial numbers?

    Someone’s LOOKING to be upset.

  4. Ron said,

    ACME must have built my scope: It says, “Be Bwery Quiet, I’m Hunting Tworrists”

  5. amba12 said,

    It motivates the enemy, Ruth Anne. It plays into enemy propaganda. It makes us look like a theocracy. Come on. Glad those people make good scopes. Glad if they pray over them. But writing Sripture on them violates the constitution and makes our national mission one with a religious one. Uh uh.

  6. amba12 said,

    I do agree with you that someone’s looking to be upset — not coincidentally, someone “not Christian” — not pagan, not Muslim — someone Jewish. And you will kindly note that I took the description of officers’ behavior with a real grain of salt. I know there is an organization with an agenda. Denominational religious tracts still have no business on government property.

  7. amba12 said,

    Ron: Separation of Toontown and state, please!

  8. Charlie (Colorado) said,

    I’ve got to admit my annoyance on these things is usually fairly fine tuned, but I’m having a little trouble getting excited about the discovery that the last six characters of an apparently random serial number like AC0G4X32JN8:13 has a biblical interpretation.

    First, if no one had told you, would you know looking at it that there’s an Easter egg in the serial number?

    Second, does it really violate separation etc? I’m pretty sure that the stamped on serial number is only used for tracking the part, and it doesn’t cost anything extra to stamp the extra six characters. I doubt seriously that the exact format of the serial number, including “this is our biblical interpretation of the last six characters” was established or approved by the DoD.

    Third, wouldn’t we be making fun of the opposite reaction, eg, if a particular part’s vendor number included 666 so someone claimed it was supporting Satanism?

  9. PatHMV said,

    As I understand it, ALL of this company’s products, not just the items produced for the military, use serial numbers which are composed of letters and pairs of numbers which are references to particular Biblical verses. In other words, the sights do not have the actual text of any Bible verse. Thus, if the Army wants to purchase gun sights without those markings, it will either have to amend its contract with this company (paying a premium, no doubt, for custom-made sights) or it will have to purchase different gunsights from another company.

    So I tend to agree with Ruth Anne on this one.

  10. amba12 said,

    So what you’re saying (Charlie) is, the enemy (or the Afghani or Iraqi trainee) would never have noticed; so the person who pointed it out, HE’s the traitor?

    Hmmm. Interesting point of view. Wait till Cedarford gets hold of it.

    I had my doubts about the anecdote of the officer saying these are spiritually transformed weapons. I can see that if that were done, as opposed to the number simply being a coded part of the product, it would tend to bring attention to the numbers in an offensive way. But that remains anecdotal till proven otherwise.

  11. Peter Hoh said,

    Our enemies find plenty of excuses for anti-American propaganda, but this is a especially damning. It feeds right into their effort to paint this as a religious war, in which Muslims are the target.

    Furthermore, we are using weapons with these sights to train Iraqi and Afghan security forces. It takes little imagination to see how these inscriptions could be used to create a wedge between these new security forces and our troops.

    I wish I had time to summarize the rumors that sparked the Indian Rebellion of 1857, but I’ll point you to a link. In short, the soldiers revolted because of a rifle.

  12. amba12 said,

    I agree with Peter’s first paragraph. Look what they made of GWB using the word “crusade” … metaphorically.

  13. Ruth Anne said,

    The thing that ‘motivates the enemy’ is the principle of jihad. Do you REALLY think that changing the serial numbers or closing GITMO or the dhimmi thing du jour will really change these assholes? No. They are motivated by a murderous fervor masquerading as a religion.

    And PatHMV is right: if it had MATTERED to the gov’t they could’ve specified in their contract. This is a free market company, using its 1st and 2nd amendment rights while making a revolutionary great scope. Some GS-13 contract negotiator messed up. This company’s scopes cost about one month’s salary for a Private First Class. Which is worse? Making them unobtainable via the military system because of this tempest in a teapot or giving our troops the best friggin’ scopes needed to prosecute a war with extreme prejudice? They can just take out their bayonet and scratch out the offending letters and numbers. And then kill the enemy.

  14. amba12 said,

    The ultimate question is, who are we? What do we stand for? Why do we do what we do?

    Anyone is free to put their own private theological spin on that; no one is free to impose it on all.

    Suppose we decided, OK, we’re a Christian nation. Other religions are such a tiny percentage of the country, and we’re so tolerant. Let them have the Christian equivalent of privileged dhimmi status. Honored guests.

    What happens next is that Christians start to fight each other over what kind of a Christian nation we are! That’s how separation of church and state started, not over the rights of nonChristians or nonbelievers. Remember what a short time ago Catholics were a discriminated-against minority! We’ve gone beyond that, but people go back as well as forward! None of this is Christian nature, it’s human nature.

    Would you have been unperturbed if you got a weapon made by a Mormon company that had some kind of Mormon scripture on it? Would you have been mad at the person who pointed it out, figuring that it was a well-made weapon and what you didn’t know wouldn’t hurt you?

  15. Ruth Anne said,

    Good weapon and I don’t care if the Koran is quoted on its serial number. DON’T CARE.

    If the GOV’T cared, they should have done something about it at the point when they were negotiating their contract.

    We are a Christian nation with a secular government. The gov’t should not promote NOR IMPEAD religion.

  16. Ruth Anne said,

    Impede, dammit. IMPEDE. I knew it looked ‘off’.

  17. El Pollo Real said,

    First I find it hard to believe that this company has a monopoly on military scopes. A while back, I was researching military weapons and I came across a bio on Carlos Hathcock, (a legendary sniper) and he relied on Unertl scopes. In case you don’t read the the bio, one of Hathcock’s most famous accomplishments was shooting an enemy sniper through his scope, hitting him in the eye and killing him).

    Next, aren’t there other obvious aspects of military service that violate the constitution under this interpretation, for example, the paid military service of chaplains and priests? It seems there are some who would bend out of shape at the mere mingling of anything religious and military.

    Next, when it comes down to it-and like it or not-we fight faith with faith. Faith in something greater than ourselves. For Hathcock, it was faith in the USMC and the lives of his comrades. In his words: “I like shooting, and I love hunting. But I never did enjoy killing anybody. It’s my job. If I don’t get those bastards, then they’re gonna kill a lot of these kids we got dressed up like Marines. That’s just the way I see it.”

    To remove any soldier’s faith or open expression of it because it threatens another (the enemy) seems both suicidal and idiotic. It’s playing into their hands. Jihadis will not be defeated by aetheism.

    Last, Weinstein reminds me of people who get upset about how “In-N-Out” Burger makes reference to a bible verse on the under side lip of every beverage cup and how they need to be boycotted because it’s all some evil plot by the owners to christianize the heathen.

    It might be OK to accommodate a soldier who insisted that he or she not be issued an inscribed scope, but I wonder if they’d refuse to pick up and use that weapon in a foxhole.

  18. amba12 said,

    To remove any soldier’s faith or open expression of it because it threatens another

    HOW is a biblical verse imprinted on a government issued gun an expression of a soldier’s Individual faith?? Even if the soldier HAPPENS to be in accord with that expression, it is imposed. It is imposed in either case; simply in one case accepted

    You’re saying “majority rules” and majority welcomes no separation of church and state because, as Ruth Anne says, we are a Christian nation, and you are a Christian,

    YOU GUYS ARE SCARING THE SHIT OUT OF ME.

    You’re also forgetting what I mentioned above, that if one religion can be imposed, it could end up being a variant of your religion that you DON’T accept. That was the FFs’ problem. Not a few scruffy Jews who don’t want to shoot in Jesus’s name.

  19. Randy said,

    The GOVERNMENT did not dictate the serial numbers, so I find the argument that this is some violation of laws about the separation of church and state mystifying. The government bought a product from a private manufacturer that uses an unusual method of recording its serial numbers. The government can quit buying the product or ask that the manufacturer quit recording the serial numbers in that manner. When I first heard about this, I expected to find biblical verse recorded in detail not an obscure set of numbers, some of which refer to biblical verse. As to some weapon made by a private, Mormon-owned company, containing similarly indirect reference to Mormon scripture, how can you be sure that hasn’t already happened? What if it did and no one noticed? Who cares?

    I do think this is an ill-considered way to track product, and the negative PR outweighs the psychic benefit to the manufacturer, but I don’t see any reason to convert to militant atheism of the Hitchens variety in response.

  20. amba12 said,

    So? ARE we on a crusade? Gott mit uns?

    Or is it just like painting a pair of boobs on a bomber fuselage?

  21. Peter Hoh said,

    Randy, it’s not a way to track product. It’s Christian triumphalism. And it flies in the face of Matthew 6.

    It is possible to be a Christian — a non-pacifist Christian — and be offended by this.

  22. Randy said,

    It sounds like you are on a crusade, which is fine with me. Demand the government stop buying the product as currently shipped. WRT boobs on a fuselage: No, it is different as the individual service member paints/painted those on the fuselage while this serial number is put there by the manufacturer. The other difference is that the boobs are quite obvious to anyone who sees them while the reference to biblical verse within a long series of numbers would be completely overlooked by almost everyone unaware of the secret. Now that the secret is out, however…

  23. Randy said,

    Peter: Whatever it is, it is their right to do it. It is the government’s right, now that it is aware of it, to do what it wants to do about it.

  24. amba12 said,

    Well? Do you blame the person who pointed it out?

  25. amba12 said,

    It certainly isn’t worth having to throw away good weapons. But now it puts our government and military in an ugly position.

  26. Randy said,

    Well? Do you blame the person who pointed it out?

    Of course not. Whatever gave you the idea that I did?

  27. Ruth Anne said,

    You only half quoted me. We are a Christian nation…something upwards of 55% or more call themselves Christian BUT WE ARE ALSO A SECULAR government. [Here’s the think test…Mexico, with upward of 70% of it’s citizens being Catholic is a ……what?…..that’s right a CATHOLIC nation. I was making a DEMOGRAPHIC point.] The government cannot require a religious test but it cannot also prevent a person’s religious expression [within some very narrowly conscribed limits]. This company is a free enterprising company…a private company whose owners chose to label their serial numbers [which probably require at least a strong pair of reading glasses to see, btw], with a veiled reference to scripture. It’s not quoting scripture. It’s short-handing a Bible reference. You still have to go look it up to see what the heck they’re talking about.

    And, it’s manufacturing legal products protected by the 2nd Amendment.

    Tempest in a teapot, you guys.

  28. amba12 said,

    Of course not. Whatever gave you the idea that I did?

    That would be one logical response. “Oh for Christ’s sake. Big deal, until you made it one. YOU are giving ammunition to our enemies. YOU are causing unneeded expense and strife to our military.” I’m not sure I don’t feel that way myself.

    Except that someone, sometime, would have noticed, eventually.

    Jesus is on our guns. This is the world view of Lt. General Jerry Boykin. I’m not personally comfortable with his worldview and don’t want it sneaked into my cereal.

  29. PatHMV said,

    Certainly you are correct as a general matter, amba. We must indeed be scrupulous to avoid even the appearance of religious overtones in our fight against the Islamic fundamentalists. I don’t think, however, that this particular episode is likely to cause that widespread of a reaction in the Muslim world. It will be one more al Qaeda bullet point, but a tiny molehill compared to our presence in Saudi Arabia, our invasion of Afghanistan, etc., etc. Generally speaking, anybody in that part of the world who would be offended by this most likely already believes we routinely pee on Korans and otherwise denigrate the Muslim religion en masse.

    So, in the ideal world, I would agree that our military weapons should not have these very obscure coded markings, but I think it’s a quite minor matter in the grand scheme of things. So the question is more practical at this point, what are we to do now? Do we destroy all of the sights? Keep those in current use and simply mandate to the contractor that they change their numbering system? Keep those in current use and revoke the contract, obtaining future sights from other companies?

    Also, how different do you think this is from, say, a practice of routinely blessing (complete with Holy Water or something) all weapons on their way out the door of the factory?

  30. PatHMV said,

    I would also add that I do agree with you, again as a general matter, that military personnel should not be required to use weapons which might have religious overtones. As always, the flip test should be used. If the sights were manufactured by Muslim-owned company with references to a surah in the Quran (or perhaps the shahada, “there is no god but Allah, and Mohammed is his prophet”), would a devout Christian feel comfortable using such a weapon or other equipment?

    Rationally, it shouldn’t make any difference. They are merely lines, scribbles, letters, numbers, scrawled in engraving in tiny letters hidden away somewhere. But religious behavior and beliefs are not always swayed by such rational considerations, because words have meanings and consequences, and symbolic actions can have significant meanings.

  31. Donna B. said,

    Ruth Anne – if you merely mean demographics by writing “this is a Christian nation” then you are the first person on the internet that I’ve run across who meant it in that way.

    But even if it is true that over 50% of our population calls themselves Christian that in no way makes us a Christian nation and it doesn’t justify the stupidity of this particular company.

    And that’s what it is – they are doing something that could, if advertised or more well-known, alienate (according to your numbers) 45% of the population. Perhaps even more, because there are many Christians who look askance at others advertising their religion.

    Anecdotally, of course, but it was being ripped off by a business that loudly proclaimed their Christianity that set me to thinking about exactly what it meant to call oneself a Christian and what one was implying they believed by doing so.

    From what I understand, this company makes excellent scopes. For now. Carlos Hathcock’s experiences with a different brand years ago does not mean they are still making the best scopes. And it doesn’t mean that what is best for a sniper is best for more general use.

    One of the most interesting books I’ve read in the last few years is The American Rifle (author’s last name Rose) that looks at the history of rifles procured for the military. One of the themes is that the best equipment did not always win out at first. Politics played too big role.

    So… if this company makes the best scope for its intended use, I’m willing to overlook their past stupidity. If they want to stay in business, I do think it will be “past” stupidity too. There’s no doubt in my mind the DOD will do what it can to put a stop to it.

    Thus, I agree that it’s a tempest in a teapot.

    And, it threatens to overshadow the more egregious problem of who “endorses” military clergy, which is one of things MRFF should continue to expose.

    Then again… which sect of Christianity is behind this company’s acts is a question I’d like answered.

  32. amba12 said,

    This is very very different from blessing the weapons on the way out of the factory. I have no objection to that. It doesn’t become a physical, visible, official part of the weapon that is going to be carried in the defense of our country by a wide range of citizens of our country.. Yet, in fact, if you really believe in the efficacy of prayer, you should believe that it empowers that weapon just as much to pray over it. And that way everybody’s happy.

    I also believe that unless you’re fighting a religious war (and some of those — between Christians and Christians — were among the worst humans have ever endured), putting God’s name on a weapon is likely blasphemy. I hold with Abe Lincoln. “Sir, my concern is not whether God is on our side; my greatest concern is to be on God’s side, for God is always right.”

  33. Randy said,

    Donna: Sounds like we have had similar experiences. I have learned that the best thing to do whenever a business touts it’s religious affiliation is run for the exit.

    Pat: Well said! (#30 especially)

    Amba: That wasn’t my logical response. Mine is more along the lines of “The military is usually better at avoiding things like this than other organizations. And usually better at taking care of the problem before whistle-blowers contact reporters. Wonder why the delay.” And I do wonder at the delay. But then I wonder about the military’s failure to acknowledge the danger posed by the Ft. Hood murderer. I’m not going to go ballistic over it, however, as I doubt the military officially endorses the practice.

    RuthAnne: IMO, Pat has effectively answered your defense. (Aside WRT to Mexico, I’m sure you know that Mexico is ruled by a secular government with an anti-clerical tradition that continues today.)

  34. Icepick said,

    It motivates the enemy, Ruth Anne.

    I would posit that the fact we are shooting at them would provide sufficient motivation. Certainly more than a cryptic Biblical reference on the site of a gun which they would likely never see, or understand if they did see.

    It makes us look like a theocracy.

    Hardly. In any event, the Jihadis have already declared that this is a Holy War. Anything other than converting or dying will just aggravate them.

  35. amba12 said,

    They might understand it better than you think, because they themselves think that way. But it’s true that it can at worst confirm what they already believe, and would believe even without this “evidence.”

  36. amba12 said,

    However, it certainly undermines the assertions of anyone swearing up and down that this is NOT a religious “war.of civilizations.”

  37. PatHMV said,

    How does it do that, amba? It’s not as if these sights were custom-marked just for shipment to the Army for use in this war. It’s not as if the Army asked for these markings. It’s not even as if most of the soldiers actually using the sights likely had any idea the references were even there. So while I agree it will provide some propaganda value (I don’t think that much value, in the end, but some), I don’t see how it provides any actual evidence in support of the claim that this is a religious “war of civilizations.”

  38. GN said,

    The “micro” argument could go on forever and not be resolved. OTH, from a “macro” perspective, I remember the film of “religious” leaders exiting American and European “Brand” SUV’s while talking on Nokia cells when they arrived at the public execution of women under the guise of strict religous zealotry.

    So, I guess, if I had the skill to read the scope AND keep a bead on the Jihadi, I would …. squeeze …. not pull

    I would tend to put most religous wars as “brand expansion” in my most skeptical of moods …. and mis-guided application of beliefs in my most benevolent mood.

    War is war … fight to win, period! Boot on neck, as an old blogger used to say

    I have never heard of any backlash from the masses all over the globe from the inscriptions “Kilroy was here” and methinks Kilroy was Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Morman Muslim or some such …. maybe agnostic, but it doesn’t matter ….. he kicked ass … and that was his job.

    If the possibility ever existed to agree on religous belief, there would be one religion …. there are legitimate concerns about how we “brand” what we do in the name of our government, and they should be resolved, but not while we are being assaulted from behind someone else’s zealous beliefs. War is War!!! Boot on neck!!!!

    Just a thought :)

  39. Charlie (Colorado) said,

    So what you’re saying (Charlie) is, the enemy (or the Afghani or Iraqi trainee) would never have noticed; so the person who pointed it out, HE’s the traitor?

    I think, if you look at that again, you might want to rephrase it. I don’t think I said anything that justifies “traitor”.

    I’m saying that I don’t think a Christian Easter Egg in a company’s model numbers — not serial numbers, and not just this scope but everything they manufacture — justifies this much excitement. It isn’t the government’s doing, it’s the private manufacturer; they get to put whatever they damn want in their model numbers. The notion that this violates the separation of church and state seems overheated.

    I’d also say that I doubt there’s anything we could do except convert en mass to their particular 7th century branches of Islam that would stop the Talibs and Salafists from saying it’s a clash of religions and civilizations, so I doubt the incremental effect of this is large.

    I’ll add that this is a repetition of a breathless OMG discovery that’s been made periodically for more than 20 years.

  40. wj said,

    If the company was inscribing the text of particular religious verses (or any religion) on their products, I would have a problem with it. But if they are just incorporating into their serial numbers letters and numbers which refer to particular verses in their personal religion’s holy works, I don’t really see that as a problem. Heck, for all we know, other companies serial numbers do something similar, just with the letters given as numeric equivalents so nobody has noticed.

    So I think that, in this specific case, the agenda of the group objecting is overwhelming the actual behavior that occurred. Probably best to ignore them and move on.

  41. amba12 said,

    I miss Michael when he was all “boot on neck” instead of “Democratic boot on Republican neck.”

    And look how that worked out.

  42. amba12 said,

    I agree that it doesn’t justify getting rid of good scopes. In that regard, I regret contributing to the dust-up.

    If I’d known Dawkins was behind it, that would’ve been another reason to step back. I consider him just as much a zealot as General Boykin.

    The world belongs to the zealots. Or at least the news cycle does.

    Today, however, the angry Independent is king! For one brief shining moment.

  43. GN said,

    Killing people is NOT about religion … it is about elimination and control for the purpose of perceived elevation of self. I wish I could capitalize a scope factory and inscribe ” Adios ” but I am pretty sure some wordsmith would take offense.

    I miss Michael’s ability to strip the minutae and take a position … even if I didn’t agree with all of his thoughts … and he added significant humor to wieldy topics

  44. Icepick said,

    However, it certainly undermines the assertions of anyone swearing up and down that this is NOT a religious “war.of civilizations.”

    But those people are wrong. This is a religious war, and it is a war between civilizations. The other side has declared that this is so. Most likely, it is also a war of extermination. The question is, what will it take before the West decides to fight this war in those terms?

  45. amba12 said,

    This is a religious war, and it is a war between civilizations.

    I don’t agree. I think it’s a war between fanatics and reasonable people. There are reasonable Muslims. The fanatics would like to persuade those that Muslim brotherhood is more important than reasonable brotherhood. The fanatics on our side (and I grant you that our fanatics don’t hold a candle to theirs, thank God) make that easier. Our fanatics are not so dangerous in themselves–free speech enables them to blow off steam harmlessly–but they actually strengthen their fanatics.

    The rub is that we need to fight like fanatics for our reasonableness. If we can’t do that, we’ll need our fanatics to defend us.

  46. GN said,

    “The question is, what will it take before the West decides to fight this war in those terms?”

    Reasons don’t matter (religion, zealotry, etc.) As you have pointed out so clearly, a declaration has been made. War is war, boots et al

  47. Charlie (Colorado) said,

    It seems a little unfair to say that a company that has been using biblical references in its model numbers for 23 years with little fooraw can be characterized as “fanatics”. As I said, the trigger pull on my guns of annoyance is pretty durn light, and this one isn’t doing it for me.

    This, however,

    “we need to fight like fanatics for our reasonableness”

    you should have someone sew into a sampler.

  48. wj said,

    Amba, I wonder if it might not be more accurate to say that it is a war between two different brands of religious fanatics. With the reasonable members of both faiths caught in the middle. Certainly the Muslim fanatics have managed to kill far more Muslims than they have Christians.

    And that’s before you figure that most of the Christians that they have killed were in range, in significant part, due to the support for various wars by Christian fanatics. (Not to say that all of the military actions taken were taken by, in primarily at the behest of, Christian fanatics. But judging by the noise here in the US, a significant part of the support for those military actions comes from them.)

  49. reader_iam said,

    Trijicon has agreed to no longer print chapter/verse #s on scopes intended for the U.S. Military and will also provide removal kits to customers who already own inscribed scopes.

  50. reader_iam said,

    Also, Trijicon will be removing the numbers from orders that have already been fulfilled but not yet shipped from the factory for those shipments intended for the U.S. Military as well as the U.K., New Zealand and Australia.

  51. amba12 said,

    Thanks for that info, reader. That’s free enterprise at its best — it is decisive and acts fast, no explanations, apologies or excuses.

  52. Peter Hoh said,

    Of course I’m happy to see this development and to let go of the issue.

  53. wj said,

    Ah, capitalism: “the customer is always right” . . . no matter how silly the request may seem.

  54. Norma said,

    As a Christian, I’m not too thrilled about scripture in scopes either.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: