inSight-NEO
Member
- Joined
- Nov 8, 2008
- Messages
- 842
-A bit off topic (and not meant to cause controversy or to be argumentative in regards to the OP)-
The very word tactics implies, and I quote, "the art or skill of employing available means to accomplish an end."
Hence, whether one has a flashlight on the gun, a certain type of stock, a particular sighting device(s), whatever...all of these are just tools, which, in all honesty, mean absolutely nothing if they do not meet a specific need or plan. What these needs are and what the plan may be, are very subjective.
My point is, too many focus on the hardware and how it looks or whatever..all while ignoring the fact that the very term "tactics" implies an effective idea on how to best achieve a particular goal. Only when this idea has been solidified, should the implementation of various devices, whether necessary (or at least helpful) or useless, be decided. This, of course, becomes a personal choice based on ones needs and capabilities....and particularly when relating to weapons, ones preferences.
Whether one has a weapon for HD, PD, hunting...whatever; we all have to eventually decide on what equipment will (or will not) help us meet a certain desired result and/or fulfill a specific plan. Therefore, regardless of which equipment we choose, we are all essentially making an equipment choice based on our perceived "tactics." Hence, the phrase "tacticool," in an of itself, is rather superluous.
Now, I am not supporting the idea that one should add just about every accessory he/she can think of to a shotgun simply because it MIGHT prove useful. After all, each item should provide an immediately practical and useful advantage, whatever the circumstances, all while keeping deficiencies at a minimum. But, this is where it get dicey, what one deems practical, necessary and useful often proves to be quite subjective, to say the least.
The very word tactics implies, and I quote, "the art or skill of employing available means to accomplish an end."
Hence, whether one has a flashlight on the gun, a certain type of stock, a particular sighting device(s), whatever...all of these are just tools, which, in all honesty, mean absolutely nothing if they do not meet a specific need or plan. What these needs are and what the plan may be, are very subjective.
My point is, too many focus on the hardware and how it looks or whatever..all while ignoring the fact that the very term "tactics" implies an effective idea on how to best achieve a particular goal. Only when this idea has been solidified, should the implementation of various devices, whether necessary (or at least helpful) or useless, be decided. This, of course, becomes a personal choice based on ones needs and capabilities....and particularly when relating to weapons, ones preferences.
Whether one has a weapon for HD, PD, hunting...whatever; we all have to eventually decide on what equipment will (or will not) help us meet a certain desired result and/or fulfill a specific plan. Therefore, regardless of which equipment we choose, we are all essentially making an equipment choice based on our perceived "tactics." Hence, the phrase "tacticool," in an of itself, is rather superluous.
Now, I am not supporting the idea that one should add just about every accessory he/she can think of to a shotgun simply because it MIGHT prove useful. After all, each item should provide an immediately practical and useful advantage, whatever the circumstances, all while keeping deficiencies at a minimum. But, this is where it get dicey, what one deems practical, necessary and useful often proves to be quite subjective, to say the least.
Last edited:
