No I did not take it down because of that, I took it down because I have no wish to stay offensive.
In addition to the paperwork at the patent office, publication is as simple way of showing the origins of this concept. The film was designed to catch the attention of viewers with a professional background that now sits in positions making decisions about equipment. It did, outdoor forums are saturated with these people. Patents must be defended in court for own money (very expensive) and it is very difficult to win. When the customer knows the origins, it is more beneficial for a optics manufacturer to include me. I know of certain reticles that was simply taken from the designers. In terms of money, it cost me nothing to reach a market others are simply unable to penetrate. In terms of lost sleep and esteem, the price was significantly higher. Believe me, I found this video as offensive as most of you.
But considering this was created to ultimately tip difficult situations in favor of persons exposing themselves to potentially lethal injuries, I decided it was worth the mental abrasion of being offensive. It wasn't a good or pleasant decision, but given the situation, it was likely necessary.
Spot on. Military and law enforcement. Static targets simply does not relay the same understanding of the decision-support the reticle gives. Once it was decided there was no way around it, I tried to make the presentation as clinical as possible yet forceful enough to get the message across. Eventually, situations or enexpected where you run out of options do occur. I believe most of us are against violence, but we are also thankful that the Police will do a hands-on brawl when required.
Bookmarks