Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Frazzled wrote:
You can kowtow to the terrorists and do what they say. Not I. Again it was a serial number and the point stands.

The very worst part of effort to combat terrorism has been information and propaganda control (its been a significant topic in almost every national security journal this year); something that always begins to fall off when people allow their machismo to get in the way of actually achieving progress with respect to a conflict.

If the enemy relocated to a different area would you consider adapting your tactics to match "kowtowing"?

JEB_Stuart wrote: Religion isn't being forced on you, and you wouldn't even know that the weapon has religious connotations unless you asked the manufacturer. This isn't forcing people to go to church...

I had no idea that proselytism involved forcing people into pews.

The relative insignificance of this issue aside, there have been a number of cases involving the regulations against proselytism within the military. This is a good organization; founded and run by a former Air Force officer, and legal adviser in the Reagan administration.

JEB_Stuart wrote:It certainly isn't limited to it. It was ruled in Inouye v Kemna that parolees, that were known alcoholics, could not be forced to attend AA meetings because of possible conflicts in religious persuasion. It was seen that even something such as AA could be proselytizing.

Well, the thrust of my comment was that proselytism involves everything except forcing people to sit in pews; ie. no conversion by force. Sometimes I forget that sarcasm doesn't mix well with internets.

JEB_Stuart wrote:
If the reference had been stand alone, then there may have been a much stronger argument against the company, but it is clearly part of a serial number. To cry and complain about such a reference is stupid.

That's what advocacy groups do, they manufacture issues in order to attract attention to the cause. The squeaky wheel gets the grease, and such.

JEB_Stuart wrote:Follow Dogma's link, it is very definitely part of the serial number.

Well, now that I've looked up Trijicon's serial system, I can say that it isn't actually part of a serial number. The line number actually end immediately before the passage quote, the model number is either located after it (out of frame) or on another part of the sight.

Though there would be no way for anyone to know that without first being told, or questioning the odd colon in the number itself.