SEAL M4s - Page 3

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - SEAL M4s (Page 3 of 3)

Posted: 5/27/2009 7:59:01 AM EDT

[#1]

Quoted:

Quoted:
SMGLee posted a bunch of pics he took in a SEAL armory. That same day his server supposedly crashed. A couple of days later another member reposted the pics. The next day they were removed. Apparently someone believed the photos, mostly of junked M4s, trashed optics, and refurbed Sigs were violating OPSEC. Given the tens of thousands of photos of actual people and equipment in theater on the internet I think this is completely ridiculous.

Edit-

Here's a starting point if you are interested in the drama.
http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=1&f=5&t=876263

And I really want to see them...

Toward the bottom of page 3 of that link...

OMG OPSEC MOTHERFUCKER!!!111!

I have to agree. We take OPSEC very seriously. Those that dismiss it only care about the eye candy they want to have.

I helped inventory the armory on my previous base as the "third-set-of-eyes" outside of those that work there (for accountability reasons). Strict rules were no pictures and no discussions about the specifics of what is in the armory.

SMGLee didn't secretly climb the fence with a tiny spy camera up his ass.

And it is the second time he was allowed to take SEAL pictures and posted them on the forums.

Posted: 5/27/2009 8:00:57 AM EDT

[#2]

Quoted:
So my question is who makes the current M4s for the SEALs? LWRC?

No.

The exact configs you will find in any individual's hands can vary considerably. Many are DI guns. The only piston guns you are likely to see would be 416s.

Posted: 5/27/2009 8:04:43 AM EDT

[#3]

Quoted:
Well this post went a little crazy awful quick. I was just curious on the manufacturer of their weapons since they seemed so reliable despite all the abuse they took. I figured they would be at least a gas piston gun and LWRC seems like they show a SEAL in their ads in the magazines?

Rule 1: Do not believe ads in gun magazines.

I wasn't trying to say that a certian manufacturer wasn't as good as another, I was just commenting on how rugged their weapons seemed to be in particuliar.

The genuine military spec weapons built for military contracts are generally very rugged weapons. Part of the contract award process is testing them for the durability and reliability that the military needs in their issue weapons. Thus the desirability of the term "milspec" and why most manufacturers out there hideously abuse it.

Posted: 5/27/2009 8:51:29 AM EDT

[#4]

Quoted:

http://www.konstipation.com/stuff/yank/seal/jimseealan4.jpg
OMG HIS NAME IS JIMSEEALAN4 !!!!!11!!!!!!1!!!!!!eleven!!!

Posted: 5/27/2009 11:35:41 AM EDT

[#5]

Quoted:

Quoted:
here are some FACTS:

- the majority of the folks here do not have security clearances
- of those with clearances, probably half have never seen secret/top secret documents
- the DoD marks everything even unclassified material that is not considered "general knowledge" or "public domain", ie: UNCLASSIFIED/FOUO, EXPORT CONTROLLED, etc
- the process to get a camera onto a Navy base typically requires approval from the CO/XO, and usually they review the photos prior to you leaving OR your escort will tell you what NOT to take pictures of
- OPSEC is extremely overused by the firearms community as some sort of neat "buzzword", civilians also like to misuse terms like "classified", "secret", "top secret", etc. It makes them feel like James Bond or something.

to the OP, if the internet wasn't the single LARGEST source of MISinformation, it would come as no surprise at all that the M16/M4 (and in this case their cousin the MK12 SPR) was as durable as Luttrell reports.

Um, it's really easy to take cameras onto NAS Jacksonville. I've been on base many times with my cell phone.

I have been on Burke's where the CO has let us take pictures and videos of all sorts of shit... as soon as we pulled into port, the naval base was like no fucking way, cameras are verbotten, they sanitized our photos before letting us off the base, and then we had to keep the cameras in our hotel room...

when i was on LCS1 i was in radio surfing the web on my iphone looking up the specs of the USS Elrod that was sitting next to us in port...

then again at NAVSEA in DC i can't even get into the building with a personally owned cell phone...

if the location was so "secret" and no one was allowed to have pictures, it would be clearly posted at all entrances and the security checkpoints wouldn't even allow a camera into that section of the building...

furthermore, assuming SMGLee has a clearance and a proper visit request, he would more than likely still need an escort into an armory which i believe would be a restricted access area (RAA) or a secure room (SR) by Navy definition.

if somehow between the CO, MPs, and an authorized escort, he left with material in violation of OPSEC, there is a huge failure in base security, and if this was TRULY an issue, I would have read something about it on SIPR, since we get a summary of all the incident reports at all naval installations...

Again, I've been on NAS Jax with cameras many times and no one has ever cared. I even had a camera phone aboard a Navy ship helping a buddy get all his stuff out of the hold. No one cared. Also, that meant I was on NS Mayport with a camera phone and no one cared. I'm also just a civilian. It's really easy to be places one theoretically isn't supposed to be on the Navy bases around here. I will say I have the common sense to not take pictures of things and I don't touch the stuff marked "secret."

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - SEAL M4s (Page 3 of 3)

General » General Discussion

Win a FREE Membership!

Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!

You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.

Warning

Confirm Action

About AR15.COM

Stay Connected

Newsletter

Contact Us