Recoil editor Jerry Tsai has backtracked, issuing the following statement:
I’d like to address the comments regarding what I wrote in the MP7A1 article in RECOIL issue 4. First and foremost, I’d like to apologize for any offense that I have caused with the article. With the benefit of hindsight, I now understand the outrage, and I am greatly saddened that it was initiated by my words. Especially since, I am an unwavering supporter of 2nd Amendment Rights. I’ve chosen to spend a significant part of both my personnel and professional life immersed in this enthusiasm, so to have my support of individuals’ rights called into doubt is extremely unfortunate. With that said, I retract what I wrote in the offending paragraph within this article. It should have had been presented with more clarity.
In the article, I stated some information that was passed on to me about why the gun is not available for civilian purchase. By no means did I intend to imply that civilians are not responsible, nor do we lack the judgment to own such weapons, if I believed anything approaching this, clearly I would lead a much different life. I also mentioned in the article that the gun had no sporting purpose. This again, was information passed on to me and reported in the article without the necessary additional context. I believe everything published in RECOIL up to this point (other than this story), demonstrates we clearly understand and completely agree that guns do not need to have a sporting purpose in order for them to be rightfully available to civilians. In retrospect, I should have presented this information in a clearer manner. Although I can understand the manufacturer’s stance on the subject, it doesn’t mean that I agree with it.
Again, I acknowledge the mistakes I made and for them I am truly sorry.
Sincerely,
Jerry Tsai
Editor
RECOIL
Not good enough, JerryYou made your position very clear with your original statement:
Like we mentioned before, the MP7A1 is unavailable to civilians and for good reason. We all know that’s technology no civvies should ever get to lay their hands on. This is a purpose-built weapon with no sporting applications to speak of. It is made to put down scumbags, and that’s it. Mike Cabrera of Heckler & Koch Law Enforcement Sales and veteran law enforcement officer with SWAT unit experience points out that this is a gun that you do not want in the wrong, slimy hands. It comes with semi-automatic and full-auto firing modes only. Its overall size places it between a handgun and submachine gun. Its assault rifle capabilities and small size make this a serious weapon that should not be taken lightly.
You say that there are good, justifiable reasons why civilians should not own firearms like the MP7. This demonstrates a very clear disrespect for civilians and a fundamental lack of understanding of the Second Amendment to the US Constitution. You didn't help yourself with your followup statement:
Hey guys, this is Jerry Tsai, Editor of RECOIL. I think I need to jump in here and clarify what I wrote in the MP7A1 article. It looks like I may not have stated my point clearly enough in that line that is quoted up above. Let's be clear, neither RECOIL nor I are taking the stance on what should or should not be made available on the commercial market although I can see how what was written can be confused as such.
[...]
Let' also review why this gun should not be taken lightly. In the article it was stated that the MP7A1 is a slightly larger than handgun sized machine-gun that can be accurately fired and penetrate Soviet style body armor at more than 300 yards. In the wrong hands, that's a bad day for the good guys.
As readers of RECOIL, we all agree that we love bad-ass hardware, there's no question about that. I believe that in a perfect world, all of us should have access to every kind of gadget that we desire. Believe me, being a civvie myself, I'd love to be able to get my hands on an MP7A1 of my own regardless of its stated purpose, but unfortunately the reality is that it isn't available to us. As a fellow enthusiast, I know how frustrating it is to want something only to be denied it.
Its manufacturer has not made the gun available to the general public and when we asked if it would ever come to the commercial market, they replied that it is strictly a military and law enforcement weapon, adding that there are no sporting applications for it. Is it wrong that HK decided against selling a full-auto pocket sized machine gun that can penetrate armor from hundreds of yards away? It's their decision to make and their decision they have to live with not mine nor anybody else's.
I accepted their answer for what it was out of respect for those serving in uniform. I believe that we as gun enthusiasts should respect our brothers in law enforcement, agency work and the military and also keep them out of harms way. Like HK, I wouldn't want to see one of these slip into the wrong hands either. Whether or not you agree with this is fine. I am compelled to explain a point that I was trying to make that may have not been clear.
Thanks for reading,
- JT, Editor, RECOIL
Jerry, you can't have it both ways. Your conflicting statements that I have highlighted above in
bold belie your false "apology." You made it abundantly clear how you felt about civilian ownership of such weapons and then extend that feeling to everyone else, saying that "We all know that’s technology no civvies should ever get to lay their hands on." Then, in your backpedaling, you pass the buck by saying that
your opinion that you wrote and assigned to everyone else was just information that was passed on to you. Not only do you lack understanding of and belief in the Second Amendment, you demonstrate a lack of journalistic integrity by admitting that you parrot whatever information is fed to you (whether you agree with it, whether it is true, whether it is diametrically opposed to your target demographic's feelings, etc.) with no fact checking or research.
I fully support the manufacturers, vendors, etc. who are pulling out of your magazine:
SWR/SilencerCo:
Recently we were made aware of some disturbing “Editorial” comments on behalf of Recoil magazine, concerning the illegitimacy of a certain firearm ( and by extension, an entire class of firearms) for “sporting purposes”.
We feel these comments are counterproductive and are certainly NOT reflective of the opinion of Silencerco/SWR or the American shooting public.
Original Recoil Text:
[...]
The statements made by the editorial staff and others interviewed for the article were so poorly stated, factually inaccurate and so misrepresentative of the core values and beliefs of our company and our mission, that we have written the editor of Recoil magazine and asked him to discontinue all scheduled advertising for both Silencerco and SWR products.
We sincerely hope that the owners of Recoil will get a strong message from the shooting public and all reputable manufacturers that our people will not tolerate the mindset behind those statements. We urge you to make your opinion known to recoil and their advertisers.
Thank you for your continued support of our company, our sport and our collective right to keep and bear arms.
Panteao ProductionsI learned today about the article in the latest issue of RECOIL magazine on the HK MP7A1, or more specifically the comment within the article by the editor pertaining to who should own an MP7A1. I also saw the follow up in their Facebook page explaining their reasoning behind the editorial. For those that have not already seen the response from their editor, here it is:
[...]
Panteao Productions has a very clear position when it comes to the Second Amendment. We do not agree with the opinion of the editor from RECOIL magazine and I am personally very disappointed that he would make such a statement about what he views as a firearm that should not be getting into the “wrong hands”. I would have expected that kind of ignorant comment coming from someone not in the firearms community or from one of the anti-gun organizations.
Until such time that the staff of RECOIL magazine changes their view on firearm ownership and the Second Amendment, Panteao Productions will be discontinuing all scheduled ads in their print publication and website and requesting that all Panteao video content be removed from their website.
I hope that someone at RECOIL magazine steps up and issues a formal apology to the firearms community. They have a great concept for their magazine and it would be a shame to see it go away. The ball is in their court with regards to how they handle their mishap.
Thank you for your continued support of Panteao Productions.
Fernando Coelho
President/CEO
Panteao Productions LLC
Midwest Armor & Strategic Solutions
Friends,
Midwest Armor has been made aware of the issues with RECOIL magazine and their article on the HK MP7A1 and the comments by Editor Jerry Tsai. Midwest fully supports the 2nd Amendment and the right of every law-abiding person to own firearms, body armor, submarines, or rocket ships, if that's what they want.
While Midwest was not yet an advertiser with RECOIL, we had been in recent negotiations for a 12-month full-page run. At this time, we have expressed to RECOIL that we will not be acquiring that advertising space.
It is regretful that a magazine about firearms and related equipment could take a stance that the 2nd Amendment only applies to "sporting purposes" and that certain guns are not to be trusted in the hands of their own readers.
We hope that RECOIL owns their mistake and makes the appropriate changes to their culture.
Thanks,
Tom McClure
President of Operations
Midwest Armor & Strategic Solutions
http://www.midwestarmor.com