You will often read a review or hear testimony from someone that a certain gun (insert whatever type you wish here) has a “disadvantage.” Often times, this disadvantage is perceived from the standpoint of a comparison to a completely different gun – and usually this is one they have the most familiarity with. And as such, that familiar gun will become their baseline (and ultimately their bias) for measuring any future gun against.
Now, I am not referring to internal setup (gearbox, barrels, etc.) so much as an external feature set, ergonomics, or a manual of arms (i.e. methods of manipulation.) This sort of thinking is incredibly commonplace in the firearms world, and it has by extension trickled into the airsoft world too. The two are very much intertwined, actually. So it’s natural to see the same evolutions take place in airsoft as in the real steel world.
I’m going to cite an example here. There is a famous saying that has been around for a long time now: “stop trying to run it like an AR.”
The origin behind this saying is the tendency for people (mostly American’s, as few other nationalities are as firearms obsessed as we are) to attempt to apply the same methodology and techniques used on an AR/M4 platform to every other firearm design out there. Hence the plethora of AR/M4 style accessories developed for various non-AR platforms – many of which are aesthetically displeasing abominations… but I digress.
Due to this tendency to make gross comparisons, perceived “disadvantages” or “deficiencies” are suddenly manifested in the end users eyes when looking at weapons they are not immediately familiar with. One should also not discount the effect of doctrinal thinking or institutional bias as it applies too. Industry lobbyists also play a heavy hand in propagandizing the purported superiority of one design over another as well. It’s how they make their money, after all.
For the end user, however, this is basically an error in logic and critical thinking. Certainly anyone can spot a sloppy or poorly built design. Shoddy workmanship is and always will be a testament to its own downfall. But completely disregarding the design choices or feature-set of a particular design because it isn’t “like an AR” (as an example), is to put it bluntly: willful ignorance.
American gun culture in particular is very guilty of this type of thinking. We are unfortunately affected by what is commonly known as the “Not Invented Here” syndrome. A quick trip to any internet gun forum, blog, or industry news source will reveal an endless litany of dismissive and derogatory commentary from folks who believe that firearms technology peaked with the AR, M14, M1 Garand, or the 1911 (AKA, the Right Hand of God). Anytime the military or various agencies has conducted weapon trials for possible future replacement of current small arms technology, this same commentary devolves into a verbal crescendo of dick measurement and overtly biased opinion.
People tend to forget that part of the joy of owning firearms and airsoft is the ability to experience completely new and novel designs. Airsoft in particular is blessed in this regard because it allows access to many designs that we cannot ever hope to own or even fondle in the real steel world. We even get the joys of having the “happy switch” without the involvement of the BATF or $200 tax stamps and an expensive diet of ammunition (knock on wood).
Despite this, people still tend to fall back on their habits. Industry being industry, will follow the money and the desires of the people. This is why certain mainstream designs garner the lions share of the market and aftermarket support too. Few actually spend an honest amount of time behind a new design to properly evaluate it. Your little magazine-dump at the range doesn’t exactly count as quantifiable experience either….
To truly evaluate a design and appreciate it, you have to invest your time and thinking into it. Keep an open mind. Learn it inside and out. Discover the techniques and methods of operation. Gain insight into what the engineers were trying to accomplish. Examine the ways foreign militaries, SF groups, and training organizations utilize that platform (the latter two will provide more insight than the first group, incidentally.) Understand that the same operating principles do not necessarily apply from one platform to another. Learn the difference between hearsay and fact. Also, one needs to unhinge their mind from western thinking and idealism of how we perceive a gun should be used, and look at from how (insert country) uses it. We often make the mistake of assuming everyone things like us (quite the opposite really). Lastly, actually train behind the gun.
In other words, you need to become a student of the gun. In the end you will see that you can be just as effective with one design as another.
Having done this many times myself, most of what I see described of as a “disadvantage” is simply bullshit driven by ignorance or arrogance. Pardon the French : )
|
|
