TacticalRifles.net Sues The Snipers Hide – The Truth About Internet Bullies

Send to Kindle

Some of you may have heard about the new lawsuit from Tactical Rifles, suing the internet Forum The Snipers Hide. This is the other side of the story.  At the bottom as the first comment is Frank Galli's rebuttal.

Some of you may have heard about the new lawsuit from Tactical Rifles, suing the internet Forum The Snipers Hide. This is the other side of the story. At the bottom as the first comment is Frank Galli’s rebuttal.


Intro by Paul Helinski

Rather than try to edit the essay intro that was here to reflect the fact that Frank and I finally spoke, I am going to just rewrite what has come out since the original aired. The comments below will stay as is.


If you haven’t seen the “blogger” stories on the case, the basic story is that an anonymous video was posted on YouTube, embedded here, beating up the workmanship of rifles from TacticalRifles.net. As you can see in the comments below, Frank Galli completely denies any involvement whatsoever. The video goes on to explain about some imperfections in the plastic of the stock on the gun, then they demonstrate wobbling that is clearly done at the end of tapered barrel threads, where any barrel will and should be wobbling. Then it goes on to admit that the rifle is 1/2MOA, which would be impossible without top notch workmanship, methods and materials. At the very least, the video should have had an introduction explaining that the gun had a prior history and that messages were exchanged between the customer and Tactical Rifles.

The Truth About the gun is that it was bought over 4 years ago, and the customer recently contacted David Rooney to pay over $1,000 to pay for work that the customer had done on his own volition. When David refused to pay, this video was the result and it’s clearly a hit piece. The gun is still 1/2MOA of course, and I had David look up the original test of the gun. On the 100yd test target the group size was .172” with Federal Gold Medal. This was done back in November of 2008.

This is the November of 2011 article that David Rooney wrote for American Rifleman.  You can click all of these to make them bigger so you can read it.

This is the November of 2011 article that David Rooney wrote for American Rifleman. You can click all of these to make them bigger so you can read it.


It will never happen here pg1
It will never happen here pg2
It will never happen here pg3

This is where my conversation with Frank Galli of the Snipers Hide has influenced my ongoing understanding of the story and why things have played out the way they have.

The Truth About the lawsuit is that David has an entire binder of “proof” that The Snipers Hide has been perceived as dogging Tacrifles for years. Now it has come out that David had actually sent Snipers Hide a lawyer letter back in 2010, demanding that they take down the negative posts, so they did. For some time after that, no mention of TR was allowed on the website. When David would send in his happy customers, they would be turned away in one way, shape, or form. For quite some time now, Frank dropped that policy and allowed both positive and negative comments to be published about TR.

The only points of the story that Frank and David seem to vehemently disagree about is whether David’s account was ever deleted from SH. As you will see in my comments below, I feel that it was a long time ago and that either could be true. Frank may very well be correct that David confused his account on another site with an account on Snipers Hide that he never created. There are other possible explanations, but Frank’s is the most plausible.

The popularity on Snipers Hide of this hit video was the last straw in a long history between David Rooney and the Snipers Hide. My take is that if you empathize with David a little, it is easy to add up a whole string of different and unconnected dots into a picture that looks like Frank had something out for Tactical Rifles. After speaking with Frank for some time, I was clear with him that though I do wish we had spoken at the very latest on Sunday (I will take the blame for it), I think there is an important nuance to this case that goes beyond just removing posts as a forum moderator. We remove all kinds of nasty and mean comments, as do all forums and blogs.

David’s article and the comments will be left below intact for everyone to make their own judgement. I am deeply sorry to Frank for his perception that word “parasite” was in any way directed toward him. It was not, and I will explain it more clearly. There are a few “bloggers” in our gun world that latch themselves onto negative stories just to stir up a bees nest and take credit for it. Their stories are then quoted by dozens of other bloggers, and those stories stay there forever so that when you Google someone or something, those stories dominate the landscape. These people are the “parasites” and should be ostracized from our community. Dick Metcalf was the latest victim of this, and he was too proud and probably afraid of further repercussions to call out who really owned the article that he wrote.

My article on Friday was meant to nip the cascade of bad press for Tactical Rifles in the bud, and it worked. In this case both parties mostly agree on the facts, and they are just viewing them in different ways. It is a dumb lawsuit and could have been prevented with some communication. Lawyers love egos. As many have said below, we shouldn’t be wasting our time on it, and this is where my time on it ends. -Paul Helinski@GA

TR: Setting the Record Straight!


by David Rooney
TacticalRifles.net

After more than a decade of building high precision custom rifles, we were recently forced to file a Federal Lawsuit against a web forum. For the past two years, this forum owner has embarked on a campaign to smear the good name of Tactical Rifles (TR). We don’t understand the intent behind this unprovoked attack, particularly as cohesion within this industry is vital for the protection of the Second Amendment.

Please note that the forum members **are not** part of this lawsuit, Only one is a defendant. If you haven't been served, you haven't been sued.

Frank Galli is building his legal defense on the premise that the forum members are being sued. A few have even called TR to ask about what they have to do.


There comes a point at which the dirty tricks can longer be tolerated. The following are examples of documented abuse:

Allowing supporting companies of the forum to maintain multiple screen names so that anytime TR is mentioned, these companies can pose as dissatisfied customers;

  • Deleting our account so we could not respond to posts;
  • Deleting positive posts from our customers;
  • Sending private messages to people who post positive comments, threatening them with expulsion from the forum and lifetime bans;
  • Promoting a fabricated video of a 4 year old rifle that was part of a third party’s attempt to extort monies from us.
  • Misleading people into believing that the forum has reviewed one of our rifles with unsatisfactory results, when they have never been sent a TR rifle in any capacity.

Now, in what seems an attempt to further mislead his forum visitors and to extract money from them under false pretenses, the forum is posting that we are suing them to suppress their First Amendment Rights. This is a distortion. The intent of the lawsuit is to bring a halt to the malicious skewing of the truth, thus protecting First Amendments Rights.

We believe strongly in supporting all of our Constitutional Freedoms. We support the NRA, having donated money, rifles, and written articles for them. We seek unity within the industry, as the enemies of our Freedoms revel in our division; however we cannot tolerate abuse of our good name by bullies hiding behind the anonymity of the internet. For all of those who have contacted us with support, we thank you sincerely. To those who have only been exposed to the one-sided falsehoods promoted by this forum, we encourage you to seek the truth prior to formulating an opinion. That is the very Freedom we celebrate in this Great Country

{ 185 comments }

{ 174 comments… add one }

  • Frank Galli February 21, 2014, 6:12 am

    Paul,

    Perhaps you should have attempted to get a comment from me @ Sniper’s Hide instead of taking David’s side on this matter. I would be happy to answer. Let you, David never once attempted to contact me either.

    1. We did not delete David’s account, he never made one. Deleting an account does not block it, if he truly was prevented from speaking we would have banned the account. That ban would still exist. Deleting removes any blocks the site employs through the software. By David saying he had an account and it was deleted is one of those hard to prove things… however it does not pass the sniff test and I have yet to see David respond on any other forum to negative comments about his rifles.

    David was able to send several “shills” to SH and we have also documented this with pictures. So representatives from TR have posted on SH and their comments still stand. Minus the picture which were removed by their request. We do delete shills because they are generally dishonestly representing themselves. We keep notes too.

    2. David threatened to SUE SH in 2010 and asked through a 3rd party all comments be removed. We have this documented as well. In 2008 we helped David by preventing a disgruntled employee from attacking TR and contacted David about it, he makes no mention of our assistance in this matter or the fact he tried scaring us with a threat in 2010.

    3. We never said we reviewed a rifle as part of SH, however while working as an instructor we had a new student in Texas receive a brand new rifle from TR in 2008. The rifle was unusable and I had to take apart my personal custom rifle to get the TR Rifle to even function. I replaced the action screws, and correctly adjusted the trigger. The student was completely distraught with his purchase. This was witnessed by more than 10 students at the time. We have names and dates. First hand experiences do matter.

    There are plenty of end user accounts on SH (Not to mention other site) of his product and service, not just revolving around the video. We have more than one thread started by his customers. Invoices, emails, etc. all document a consistent level of sub standard work. Easy to see, not just on SH but else where away from GA.

    Paul, the fact you elude to SH as a parasite shows your bias, with 99,000 registered user and going on 14 years, we have served this community well.

    I have more, but we’ll leave it for court… however, I will say the bully is not Sniper’s Hide or it’s members but David Rooney. He is using the court system to remove negative reviews that document poor service. These rifles are not cheap, theses experiences should not be dismissed. If he invested in quality control instead of lawyers we would not be here.

    Sniper’s Hide

    • Administrator February 21, 2014, 10:44 am

      Frank I am very happy to post your reply here, but my opinion of the case hasn’t changed. As I said, I will be happy to post your deposition transcript. The fact that you are telling the members of your forum that they are getting sued is reprehensible. You know that they are not, and some have even called TR and asked what they can do to resolve the case. We are all well aware of your website and what it does, and I’d love to be proven wrong and have to apologize myself. We will see I guess what you have to say under oath. Just keep track of what you lie about because they can really come back to bite you later.

      As for David’s products, the internet is full of “bad reviews” from disgruntled customers just like this guy who have unreasonable expectations from a manufacturer. We live in a world where the good hearted people who are happy inside are mostly quiet, and the angry ones with an axe to grind get a lot of attention because they make all the noise. David has thousands of satisfied customers, including us. The video is clearly a hack and doesn’t even mention that this gun is many years old.

      We stay out of most of these petty little fights Frank. The reason I got involved was that my hackles were raised when I first heard about it, in support of YOU. Even though I had known David for years, I really felt like it was a case of a big rich guy beating up a little guy and I was pissed. So unlike the “bloggers,” I called and emailed David to please get back to me immediately and he did. What I heard on the phone was not a self righteous asshole who was trying to beat someone up. I heard an exasperated guy who felt like he had no other choice to protect his business. In your deposition you won’t have the internet as a buffer, and yours won’t be the only deposition taken. You have a large forum to tell your story, and I provided this one to David to tell his, because we have over 800,000 subscribers and 3,000,000 people per month on the website. Your shills parrots have already started to show up, so please tell them that we will let them comment starting on Monday, so save up all that self righteous hate for now ok.

      • Chris Baker February 24, 2014, 7:36 am

        heh, I hate bullies. Will be interesting to see how the case comes out. With that said I’d be freaking ecstatic to have a rifle that would shoot a 1/2MOA, let alone .172″. Best I’ve ever had was 2MOA from a rest. I was pretty thrilled with that. I can’t afford one of these rifles, being relatively low middle class income and all but I’d be happy with his worn out rifle if he’d like to sell it to me fairly cheap.

      • Alvia M Martis February 24, 2014, 10:01 am

        The problem with the internet is it is easy to hide behind anonymity, say crap about what one doesn’t know, then when called on the carpet hide behind the 1st Amendment!

        The second biggest problem is with those who engage in this crap without checking to see if the facts are true.
        People today are lazy. It is so much easier to find someone out there to “tickle itching ears”, telling them what they want to hear.
        Too bad everyone using their 1st Amendment rights don’t follow the 8th Commandment. “Do not bear false witness against your neighbor.”

      • Laird John Rothenberg September 2, 2014, 3:39 am

        I have a TR rifle, other than it took for times as long as they said the build would take, and I never got the build list, it is a great rifle. I also have some experience with SH, first it is without doubt the clearing house for all long-range shooting information. That said, they are frankly rude and arrogant and have little tolerance for those of us with less knowledge then them.

  • BoilerUP February 21, 2014, 6:47 am

    Well there’s a subjective emotional appeal if one was ever written…”NRA, Second Amendment, unity, we must stop these attacks”…

    I’m curious if Mr. Helinski ever reached out to Frank Galli or Mark Soulie to get *their* version of things on this matter, or simply regurgitated Mr. Rooney’s version of “the truth”.

    In the highly unlikely event this thing ever gets to discovery, will Mr. Helinski will be open minded enough to review the evidence surrounding each claim himself, and publicly admit if he was wrong.

    • Administrator February 21, 2014, 10:41 am

      We just let Frank put in his rebuttal. He has a forum to tell his story. Now David has one too.

    • Archduke Franz Ferdinand February 24, 2014, 3:02 pm

      Discovery starts the minute you answer, without a request from the other party. (Federal Rule of Civli Procedure 26.) Short of a demurrer (Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12; which has not been filed so I assume SH’s attorneys don’t think it is viable or is tactically advisable) or a successful motion for summary judgment. (Which, according to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 56 (B), can’t be filed until 30 days after close of discovery) This will proceed to discovery.

      So, how do you figure this won’t “get[s] to discovery?” It’s been filed and, apparently, answered. Discovery has already begun. (According to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.)

      • Wayne Anderson February 26, 2014, 12:28 pm

        And this is why you are not an attorney.

        It has to survive jurisdictional challenge FIRST.

  • Frank Galli February 21, 2014, 10:54 am

    Did you ever consider calling me ? Or Marc … that makes you the same. You contact the guy that will give you something, and nobody else.

    There are more than a few disgruntled customers, this is $8000+ rifle people are getting and are not happy with the delivery times or the quality of the product. The stories are the same over and over… how you handle these customers is what makes you successful.

    We keep notes too and David’s victim status will be shown to be a figment of his own doing. We have nothing to hide, as the site is an open book.

    Don’t worry about the deposition, you might get a better view than you think.

    You being a Shill yourself when we document his shills posting you’ll feel right at home. Attacking me and defaming my character is clear to see. Others see it too… the posts are still there in all their glory.

    My supporters our your readers, our members, and not parrots, I am not giving them anything in return and none of them are my advertisers. The truth is clear to see for all and this why they are commenting. Calling them parrots doesn’t change the fact, the reputation is out there, not just on SH, but other sites, the Better Business Bureau, we all can’t be wrong.

    No Paul, you did hit piece with very little fact, like the sly little implication my voice is on the video. HA, and the flag waving is not making your case. What’s your background in all this, you call people arm chair expert, and “Bloggers’ as if you actually did something worth talking about, so please enlighten us.

    • Administrator February 21, 2014, 11:05 am

      So is it your voice on the video Frank? I don’t think it was sly. Can you share that with us, because this isn’t print and I can edit that right out before we email it to 800,000 people in our next digest on Monday.

      Deliver times are always an issue with custom gunmakers Frank, and yes, that is the constant complaint about TR. I just ordered two rifles from Shiloh Sharps, who exhibit across the isle from us at SHOT. I won’t see them for 18 months or more. Maybe I’ll go on your website and start whining on 18 months plus one day when my rifles aren’t ready, because there is at least a 50% chance that they won’t be. We are a small company industry Frank. Even our two public companies are little more than mom and pop operations with a lot of employees, because almost everyone in this business is an enthusiast.

  • Frank Galli February 21, 2014, 11:18 am

    Call me Paul…. you have my email I will give you my number.

    For the record, not only NO, but hell no I had nothing to do with the video, it was made without my knowledge, and was posted on youtube before I saw it. I live in CO, not CA … or do you need a geography lesson on top of a legal one.

    Email I’ll send you my number

    • Administrator February 21, 2014, 11:26 am

      Thanks for the answer Frank. It was changed in the article to reflect this. I am out working in the sticks in Okeechobee, Florida, because we actually shoot and demonstrate the guns in our reviews. There is no cell here, just sat internet. But if you email your phone number to customerservice@gunsamerica.com, I will get it later today and call you when I get back to uncivilizednation.

  • Wayne Anderson February 21, 2014, 11:19 am

    Quoting the “Administrator”:

    Deliver times are always an issue with custom gunmakers Frank, and yes, that is the constant complaint about TR. I just ordered two rifles from Shiloh Sharps, who exhibit across the isle from us at SHOT. I won’t see them for 18 months or more. Maybe I’ll go on your website and start whining on 18 months plus one day when my rifles aren’t ready, because there is at least a 50% chance that they won’t be. We are a small company industry Frank. Even our two public companies are little more than mom and pop operations with a lot of employees, because almost everyone in this business is an enthusiast.

    I put my real name up because when I have something to say, I am willing to stand by it.

    I don’t have a dog in this fight, so to speak, but I would point out that having been a customer of custom rifle gunsmiths before – with an overdue build of my own, I can understand how you might take this view.

    I think there is a difference for the community and your readership at large to consider here: it’s not just the delivery time. A number of customers have had poor experiences, reporting wait times that can be a multiple of the original expectation. Not one but several customers have communicated issues that have then been seen and discussed by other knowledgeable and trusted gunsmiths in the gun community.

    I think the question here is not “why jump on these guy’s back when they have one bad build?”

    I think there are at least three legitimate issues at discussion here that the community of gun owners (and more specifically of precision rifle shooters) can and should be talking about:

    1) Is it acceptable to discuss, demonstrate, look at, talk about a sub-par experience with a vendor? Whether that is excessive timing or build quality – or both? I would suggest my position would be probably “yes” in most cases. There is a line, but that leads to…

    2) When you look at what constitutes libel and tortious interference, should people posting their experiences – and other manufacturers or vendors who are helping these individuals ‘cure’ their poor experiences and disappointments – real or perceived – be muzzled because the experience that they have acquired is not positive to that original manufacturer? The law has a position on this, that absent evidence of clear intent to interfere with other business that ‘sounds’ a tort, SLAPP suits generally fail at law. I think the question of the law is separate from the question of acceptability. What standard do we as a community expect vendors and our own members to abide by? Personally, I would hope someone would warn me if I was heading for trouble.

    3) Where is the line where a lawsuit is perceived as ‘ok’ against speaking out like this in the gun community? I mean, the complaint is pretty much “there is a video out there that someone posted that has hurt me, I didn’t get a fair shake from these guys, and that has harmed my business”. Is that enough that the community should accept suing forum owners? What about contributors? Why should this lawsuit be perceived any differently than any other suit filed to keep bad reviews of a product off the web because someone didn’t like what was written about them?

    • Administrator February 21, 2014, 11:37 am

      What you didn’t address is that good reviews have been treated as “shills” on the forum. Nobody says you can’t review a bad build. As to the he said she said about deleting accounts, that is when lawsuits are actually required. Lawsuits in the gun industry happen all the time over patent infringements and many other issues. We are not immune to infighting and we never will be. In fact I am not sure if you even read the article in full Wayne. That is the problem with forums and blog comments. Everyone wants to “be heard” but nobody wants to listen. The key to this case is intentional interference with TacticalRifles.net’s business and name in the marketplace. Actual reviews of “bad builds” would never fall into this. Did you even play the video Wayne? Did you see the wobbling of the barrel with it unscrewed, which is should do? To all of you whose comments are being deleted for now, this is why. But as I said before, post them again on Monday and they will go through, no matter how nonsensical, unthoughtful and polly wants a cracker they actually are.

      • Frank Galli February 21, 2014, 12:08 pm

        We have photographic evidence of the “Shills” this charge was not levied against them in a vacuum. We have it documented. I even spoke to one on the phone. He was contacted by David to post his nonsense, I even know who called David to tell him about the original post.

        Positive posts are allowed, however they are few and far between. We only deleted posts at the original request of TR as part of their 2010 letter that threatened to sue us. We felt if we can’t post the negative we won’t do the positive either. It’s that simple… he created the situation, not us. It’s on record as he sent it through his attorney.

        If you bothered to do you Homework, you can read the current positive reviews on the site. If you want links let me know. Who is blame that people dismiss the positive, David Rooney and Tactical Rifles.

        I love how you continue to attack the commenters, calling them parrots. These are your customers in many cases, and you continue to call them names.

        • Administrator February 21, 2014, 12:21 pm

          Frank this is for your deposition, or for a conversation between you and David in hopes of disposing of the lawsuit. I got David’s side of the story and explained his perspective, while allowing him to write a very proper English explanation himself. We don’t have a “side” to this and I would like nothing better than to come out after the verdict and say what do you know Frank was in the right after all. At this point, you are in a lawsuit. Public discussions and explanations of your side are probably not even a good idea (as your new attorney would advise you) because it gets the other side ready to question your explanations. This is an adversarial process and you are knee deep in it. So clam up and face the challenge like a Marine, and go beat him. I’m the guy who wrote the quickie into to a Browning High Power article and said that they are double/single made in Japan. Admitting mistakes is part of what GunsAmerica stands for Frank. David told his side. You told your side. I gave everyone some background information about David and explained his side more specifically than he was willing (because he knows that he is in a lawsuit and you don’t seem to understand what that is going to mean). If the complaint is just paranoia in David’s head and he is imagining the printed evidence, so be it. You have already admitted in a public forum that you spent time to research a positive comment about David’s business, and pressed the issue so hard that you found the entire information chain. Sure Frank, we believe that it was the timid English guy who answers his own phone who bullied the USMC Sniper. I’m sure you’ll prevail.

          • Frank Galli February 21, 2014, 12:32 pm

            Oh trust me I am not saying anything that isn;t already public, and easily found. None of the nuts and bolts have been stated. My original letter to TR is online it addresses every complaint as he just recycled them from 2010. This is 4 years in the making. He is not the only one to keep notes.

            But as I said, you’ll have a front row too if it goes that far. Most doubt it.

            The judge has already told them unless he fixes it, it’s being tossed. Its garbage.

            In this case, the Complaint alleges that Snipers Hide is “a Colorado corporation, with its
            principal place of business located at ____________________________ Doc.
            1 ¶ 4. However, the “LLC” in the entity’s name indicates that Snipers Hide is actually a limited
            liability company, and a search of the Colorado Secretary of State’s website confirms this to be
            the case.1 Despite Snipers Hide’s status as a limited liability company, the Complaint does not
            indicate the states of citizenship for each general and limited member of Snipers Hide, or
            whether those members, in turn, have members of their own (and their corresponding
            citizenship). Based on this lack of information, it is unclear whether there is complete diversity
            in this case.

            Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED as follows:
            1. Plaintiff is directed to SHOW CAUSE as to why its Complaint should not be
            dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Plaintiff shall file a written response
            with the Court within FOURTEEN (14) DAYS from the date of this Order. Failure
            to respond within the time provided will result in dismissal of this action without
            further notice.

            DONE and ORDERED in Orlando, Florida on February 10, 2014.

            As I told him then, Laughable…

          • Administrator February 21, 2014, 12:44 pm

            Yes, that is the way people weasel out of having to answer for what they have done. They just use the broken system to go around any process that would require them to go under oath. Meanwhile David just emailed me the screenshots of his “invalid username” login on your website. I’m so happy that you are proud of the progress you are making in getting out of going under oath and having to face the binder of evidence one page at a time. Don’t worry Frank, I’ve already had one of your shills call me un-American. That is always the default when someone in the military says something that you find to be untrue. Its un-American to question that you would tell the truth, because were in the military. Semper Fi!

          • Infringed711 February 22, 2014, 8:09 pm

            Maybe it’s an invalid username because he never made an account so it doesn’t exist?

          • Administrator February 22, 2014, 8:14 pm

            It doesn’t exist because someone deleted it from the database so there wouldn’t be any evidence of suspending it.

          • Infringed711 February 22, 2014, 8:16 pm

            That in no way disproves Franks comment that he never had an account, actually kinda supports his statement.

          • Administrator February 22, 2014, 8:20 pm

            There are actually several ways that it could be that David used to be able to log in with his name and password, then could not. Apparently nobody finds it interesting that Frank seems to have known that David was trying to log in with his old login, TacticalRifles, and couldn’t. The site may not have always even been on Wordpress and accounts had to be migrated at some point from forum software. If David was suspended back in the day, why would he think that he would be allowed back? You will see in the comments that Frank has banned and threatened to ban a lot of people. Anyone that actually reads what has been written will re-think what they originally thought about this case.

          • Frank February 24, 2014, 11:26 am

            All Registered Members Agree to our Terms of Service:

            Registration to this forum is free! We do insist that you abide by the rules and policies detailed below. This site is a privately run forum as such it is subject to being run at the discretion of the site owner. We reserve the right at all times (but will not have an obligation) to remove or refuse to distribute any Content on the Services and to terminate users or reclaim usernames. If you agree to the terms, please check the ‘I agree’ checkbox and press the ‘Complete Registration’ button below. If you would like to cancel the registration, click here to return to the forums index.

            Although the administrators and moderators of Sniper’s Hide Forums will attempt to keep all objectionable messages off this site, it is impossible for us to review all messages. All messages express the views of the author, and neither the owners of Sniper’s Hide Forums, nor vBulletin Solutions, Inc. (developers of vBulletin) will be held responsible for the content of any message.

            By agreeing to these rules, you warrant that you will not post any messages that are obscene, vulgar, sexually-oriented, hateful, threatening, or otherwise violative of any laws.

            The owners of Sniper’s Hide Forums reserve the right to remove, edit, move or close any content item for any reason.

            Though it really does seem consistent that in 2010 when David Rooney accused me of deleting his account back then, I replied:

            Dear David Rooney,

            Today i received your letter from the Law Offices of John Schwartz, and immediately after reading it one word comes to mind, laughable.

            I would welcome the opportunity to defend any of those points in Federal Court, as we both know they are all false and in fact empty threats. Having a lawyer send a letter does not in anyway mean you have any grounds to stand on and in fact only burned any bridge leading to Sniper’s Hide you might have had a chance of crossing.

            First point, there was not a single point of slander, I understand you had your surrogate post on many sites from Sniper’s Hide to Sniper Central, and M4Carbine in order to solicit interest about your rifles. However this back fired as the reputation as read on multiple forums points to an issue of Quality Control which has been experienced by me, first hand. In case you’re wondering my experience as an industry expert is well known and well regarded, so at no point did I or anyone else engage in public or private “slander” of you or your company. You may not have liked the “reviews” your rifles received, by end users, however these were all factual representations of actual experiences using them. The main point of slander is “falsely” and clearly nothing represented was false as I have a full class of witnesses which I would be happy to parade into Federal Court in order to prove my experience beyond any shadow of a doubt. I don’t think it would be hard to use the power of my forum to mine of those, other than myself who have had a some what questionable experience similar to mine.

            As far as denying you access to defend your company on Sniper’s Hide, again this is completely false. You never attempted to once contact me on this matter or log onto Sniper’s Hide. I will remind you of the incident when a disgruntled employee attempted to attack Tactical Rifles and he was promptly removed by me without any word from you. Afterwards you had no problem reaching out to me giving me thanks for such actions. I happen to still have the email from 2008 when this took place and the exchange between you and I that followed. You are lying when you say you were denied access to the forum. There is no method to deny anyone access who doesn’t wish it, and nothing was put in place to block you. You were able to unleash a host of surrogates on Sniper’s Hide to speak on your behalf, including certain gun writers who reviewed your rifles. Also the original surrogate who wrote the original post was in contact with you as it was told to me that he forwarded my private message to him on to you. None of those people were prevented from posting and in fact I only closed the post and then deleted at your urging through a 3rd party.

            Let’s face it, you knew how to reach me has evidence by a previous incident with one of your disgruntled employees, you were able to reach people who immediately called me and it was told to me you were going to “put some fear into me” with a letter from an attorney or something to that effect. This is nothing more than a emotional response to something out of your control and has no basis in the facts of the matter. It was 100% made up by you in an effort to force a position or change something you didn’t like and has no legal grounds. If you feel this matter does have legal standing I have an attorney in FLA and would be happy to sit across a table from you, as this isn’t my first rodeo and I will not let these blatant falsehoods stand undefended.

            I sincerely hope this wasn’t your 2010 sales and marketing strategy, threatening the owner of the most popular Tactical Rifles forum on the internet, as I think you have failed completely in your efforts.

            Good Day Sir,

            Frank L. — Written in 2010, sound familiar ? It’s been online all that time.

          • Beacon of Sanity February 24, 2014, 12:13 pm

            WooHoo … glad I’ve got my supply of PoppyCorn cause this is just more fodder from an internet commando falling back onto a TOS as a defense.

            I really wish SH.con would do the shooting world a favor and just delete itself from the internet. I am still a member there but rarely if ever post because if you don’t fall in line with the clique off internet experts who consider themselves to be ….. well lets just say there are a few there that are actually intelligent and knowledgeable but the rest are wannabe shooters who I honestly do not think own anything more than a Ruger 10/22 all decked out with a tactical looking stock which of course we all know now makes them an expert in the eyes of the SH.con community.

            Regarding the Frank all I can say is we have spoke many times in person and your just a blowhard that if it were not for SH.co would just be another hack trying to be way more than what your capable of being. Do the shooting world a favor and come out of the basement into reality and take your forum off the web.

          • Jack Mehoffer February 24, 2014, 8:38 am

            What was his screen name?

          • michael B February 25, 2014, 1:59 pm

            I would like to see it also. It shouldnt be hard to post,or verify, If it was real. But if we continue to hear excuses…. well we will leave it at that.

          • 0311Hesco February 24, 2014, 11:57 am

            Can’t wait to see the “proof” of this!

          • Sam February 24, 2014, 3:24 pm

            ….or it really never did exist.

          • Steve February 24, 2014, 10:26 am

            Admin. Well, knowing almost nothing about BOTH sides, I was leaning toward supporting you, after all this reading because, although Paul apparently lied (don’t know your connection to him…) about JUST wanting to provide both sides an opportunity to have their say, that did seem to be a part of your/his effort. But when you said, “…call me un-American. That is always the default when someone in the military says something that you find to be untrue. Its un-American to question that you would tell the truth, because were in the military.” you lost me. THAT, sir, was simple stupidity, and clearly exposes what WAS a hidden bias. Naughty, naughty…

            Enough of that. Before I go, I’d like to say:
            From the article: “…Unity among the true supporters of the 2nd Amendment is crucial to the future of our freedom. …”

            That’s absolutely right. And because it is, it’s time we re-examine “true supporters”. When the NRA lost sight of the fact that virtually EVERY congressional Democrat was morphing into an Obama Communist (If you have ANY argument with that statement of FACT, DO check the voting record, and its significance, of EACH and EVERY ONE of them – to include those the NRA contributes to OR otherwise supports) they lost their way AND they lost ME as a member/supporter/contributor. There are NO MORE DEMOCRATS in D.C. and it IS time we withhold our support of the NRA if they continue to support Obama Democrat Communists. NRA support for THEM undermines the 2nd far more effectively AND insidiously than the “official” Left ever could.

          • Ben February 24, 2014, 12:41 pm

            I’m just curious at what you think Frank owes you? TR.net? Rooney?

            Frank has gone above/beyond and provided actual information w/evidence that Rooney was never a registered member of SH so, of course his username is invalid.

            Binder of evidence? Have you even seen this purported binder? Godzilla exists too, you know.

            I wouldn’t call you un-American but, I would call you a very shitty journalist.

            You have picked a side, demanded evidence from one source without equally accepting evidence from the other so, how do you expect either side to properly defend themselves?

            Innocent until proven guilty is the American way, is it not?

      • Wayne Anderson February 21, 2014, 5:23 pm

        First, I have read every word of the article, watched every second of the video (there are actually 2 videos, by the way), read every word of the complaint and attached Exhibit A, and been a member of various forums in the gun communities for a number of years. Your point on listening being as important as being heard is well taken but rather snarky and frankly misguided.

        I have sitting next to me a stiller receiver and AAC barrel assembled into a long-action with a 308 bolt face. I happen to know from personal experience that with the barrel half way unscrewed from the receiver, that I would be unable to get even 10 degrees of “wobble” – if I even got close to that. Why? Because I personally mated the barrel and action on this rifle. With a custom ground PTG lug. I did the headspace.

        The discourse should not devolve into name calling and attacks on your readership, I posted 3 serious questions.

        I am trying to get at two points:

        The first is that we as a community can and absolutely should talk about our experiences with purchasing. Some of them are great, some of them are not. Even with die-hard standards around the industry, like Pacific Tool and Gauge, or GA Precision, sometimes product makes it out the door that is not ok. And people talk about that alongside the good. The companies often fix it and make it better. In TR’s case, can you point to where the official “Tactical Rifles” account has gone into any venue and participated like many of its peers? Where it has directly said “gee, we are working with this customer to fix it, sorry about that folks, we pride ourselves on quality and this was an abberation”?

        I admit I only spent a few minutes on it but darned if I could find one. I certainly dont have experience with it on the 10 or so precision shooting communities I belong to.

        The other point I was trying to make is that there is a separation between what one might like to have, or assume to have happened, and what the law says someone has to have done or said or been involved with in order for a breach of the law to have occurred. An issue you seem to completely sidestep in your discussion here.

        I understand that you feel that TR should have been permitted to have a fair shake with acounts and posts and what not. It’s one thing to say that. It’s another thing to prove that they have not.

        Did you know that their libel claim is incomplete? Under Edelstein v WFTV, Inc. 798 S0.2d 797, 798 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001) TR’s attorney didn’t actually plead any actual damages. There is a repeated demand for $75k but no where does TR actually communicate any real world losses related to the libel or tortious conduct. This isn’t a new principle, either, that their attorney simply missed in the case law. It goes all the way back to Miami Herald Publ’g Co v Ane, 423 So. 2d 376, 388 (Fla. DCA 1982).

        So we start with an incomplete claim. And then when you look at what the legal complaint actually is, there is an accusation, but not a single point of fact which ties either party to either the video or seeks prove that any activity actually happened to make libel, etc.

        Let’s use the video as an example. There are two. They are posted publicly under a “John Smith” account.

        What Exhibit A is in the complaint is an email thread which includes an earlier email of Mark Soulie providing a *private* linked video to a customer where he is alleged to be correcting what was presented to him by the customer as that other companies work.

        Can anyone prove that the two public videos under the “John Smith” account are the same as the one linked to that is “private” and youtube indicates is no longer available?

        Can anyone prove that Mark or Frank, who are the defendants are linked to the John Smith identity?

        Even if we can accept, arguendo, that these things are true, is that libel? It would seem hard to say that it would be. Were the videos or comments “demonstrably false”?

        What about tortious interference? Can TR prove the intent to interfere in the business relationship? Frank is under no obligation to provide any platform to anyone for anything. There is nothing in case law that would compel an internet communications platform, absent monopoly conditions, from providing an account and unfettered communication to discuss or rebut others’ communications. In fact, in recent case law notably against Angie’s List and Tom Martino, the opposite has been held true.

        If my thoughts are “nonsensical, unthoughtful, and polly wants a cracker”, that is unfortunate, but I think it warrants community discussion on where the line is here. What really gives rise to this lawsuit? When does true internet discussion of people and products become too far? Was the TR situation really over the line? These are hard to answer questions with many perspectives.

        I think TR will find from the legal perspective, he is facing a hell of a burden to get over. From a community perspective, a more open discussion and exploration is probably a better pursuit for “Snipers Hide” and other gun or sporting communities.

        • Administrator February 21, 2014, 5:54 pm

          Getting the actual story out is the purpose of depositions Wayne, and it is the whole story in this case. Nobody said that David is going to have an easy road to even get the case heard, but he said she said gets everyone nowhere. You make some great points, but nobody does customer service in the court of public opinion, precisely because the people who you can’t make happy you can’t make happy, and they make the loudest noise. We just saw a recall from Springfield on the XD-S and they handled it better than any recall in the history of firearms on a gun that is the absolute best concealed carry gun in the market. The noise floor of “I’m going to sue Springfield if they don’t give me my money back” was deafening. We stood up for Springfield too, and we should have stood up for Dick Metcalf because his anti-gun employer and the guy who took his editor’s position threw him under the bus and the polly wants a cracker “bloggers” vilified him for something he probably only wrote half of and certainly didn’t select the title for. None of these cases are a clear cut, this is right, this is wrong. But when only one side gets to tell their own story in their own fifedom, it just isn’t fair. Likewise when someone has complaints against him in the court of public opinion and when he asks a satisfied customer to tell their story in response, that satisfied customer with a legitimate story is called a shill and banned from the discussion. Frank admitted to doing that here in the comments, and if the case makes it to trial, his admission is going to cost him damages, and possibly his business. Unless you have personally gotten a rifle new from TR and tested it for yourself, nobody here has any right to comment on what is shown in the video. That is an old rifle and who knows what has gone on with it since the buyer received it. You sound reasonable, and you should have reserved your own judgement.

      • Laird John Rothenberg September 2, 2014, 3:49 am

        I have to say when I posted on SH expressing concerns (because I just didn’t know) I was treated rather harshly.

    • Jason Keen February 24, 2014, 10:16 am

      Wayne-

      I agree with what seems to be an implied point of yours; isn’t it ironic that a subset of a group of people who are so angry when the *slightest* encroachment on one’s second amendment rights occur are willing to let lawsuits fly when the first amendment is implied?

      I know the government is not involved here, and thus there is not *actually* a first amendment implication, but the point is that exceptions to freedoms create a slippery slope, in general. Hopefully Guns America has considered that as they support potentially silencing a popular firearms review entity.

      • Knifefighter February 24, 2014, 12:45 pm

        This Wayne Anderson guy is a hoot

        You see a guy like this guy, who is just excellent at debate on any forum that will allow him to pontificate.

        Personally, I think it is interesting to see a legal discussion on a gun site. But it is simply not a place I would expect to see anyone with a legal background to actually waste their time to debate and rebut him. (Although I see him tear all comers to sheds, he is a brilliant debater.)

        What I really wonder is, why did the original ‘harmed’ consumer who spent $8k on a rifle not simply sue the manufacturer? I mean really, my $8600 weapon has all these defects, I have to go to experts in the field to have them corrected, and instead of suing I post an internet video? (If someone else created the video and the original guy had enough money to simply pay to fix it then I am just wrong. I know a lot of people who have enough money and simply do not care past making things work for them.)

        Knife (Yeah, Frank can out shoot me, I am all good with that.)

  • Frank Galli February 21, 2014, 11:31 am

    Oh, what a burn…
    Anytime you want to shoot against me let me know, I have the Sniper’s Hide Cup in May, the countries largest tactical rifle match of its kind. I will give you a slot to come prove yourself. Bring your TR rifle he gave you.

    I actually served, was a USMC Scout Sniper and walk the walk, not just talk trash like you big guy. Though the beard is a nice touch, says operator to the core.

    • Administrator February 21, 2014, 11:41 am

      Oh you don’t want to shoot against me Frank. I only shoot competition when there is a old fat guy on blood pressure pills handicap added, and you’d for sure lose with that.

    • Beacon of Sanity February 24, 2014, 3:17 pm

      Ya know just a really crazy thought but you served only 4yrs in the United States Marine Corps and of that time only with only about 2-1/2 years as a scout/sniper and at the rank you achieved in the Corps you were nothing more than support for the actual shooter. Yes you trained and spent time on the ranges with a weapon in your shoulder but as an actual combat operative … well many can hold the title and talk the talk but only a few have walked the walk and you sir definitely talk the talk.

      You may have served but serving and being is 2 very different things we all do owe you a debt of gratitude for the short time you served and then all of the weekends and 2 weeks a year with the Connecticut National Guard. I wonder why you need so badly to live your reputation on just 30 months of your life when you never really were an operative shooter other than to boost your own self-esteem and to bolster your resume so people think you are far more than what you actually were but then you have all that time being a surveillance operative in NY which is in question in itself. Lets do the math on that. 40,0000 hours of covert surveillance watching cheating spouses in 10 years of time averages out to 75+ hours a week after week after weed after week for 10yrs straight. Once again seriously bolstering your resume but then your good at that and that is why so many of your loyal followers believe in you so much. If it were not for the online community you created you would have nothing and really be nothing other than what you actually are which is … well do you really need to hear nothing again?

      • Jaeger308 February 25, 2014, 9:36 am

        Hey Beacon your light is getting dim, why the character insults? This is still about delivery of a poor product and how a review of said product was presented and received, right? And teeing off on someone’s service as a USMC scout sniper without having much, if any knowledge of this world again makes your light rather dim. In order to educate you, it is very common for a Marine scout sniper to graduate the basic school as a young Lcpl serve for a time and due to limited leadership slots get forced out back into his primary MOS once he becomes an NCO, few remain as team leaders especially in the era Frank served. Today there are more options for these warriors to move around. Also your statement about nothing more than support for the shooter well this is actually called spotter/shooter and yes both are able to do either job however the more experienced team member is quite often the spotter. Why you ask? Shooter has the easy job clear your mind and send the round the “supporter” aka spotter jobs list is long: Communication, hide security, final firing solution calls, observation, and egress route selection list goes on.
        Now I have known Frank 10+ years and consider him a friend, I do not know much about this soap opera law suit BS other than what I read, I say both sides step back before this goes too far and only the lawyers win. I have shot with Frank on different venues, ranges and locations over the years some big name matches as well as on our own time fun/training stuff. From where I sit, Frank has many times gone out of his way to help others and has always shown good character. Stay away from the personal insults it makes you look petty.

        • Beacon of Sanity February 25, 2014, 11:03 am

          When you read his bio and 80% of it boasting his 2-1/2 years as a Marine Sniper and while he is constantly boasting and telling all who will listen that he was a Marine Sniper people also need to know the talk he is talking but realize he never really did walk, he might have crawled a little in that 2-1/2 years but he never really did walk.

          Regarding your Team Leader all that can be said is when you graduate and you are good you do not go back to your primary MOS. I would love to see his actual SRB because if he was any good and/or wanted they would have kept him but where did he go after his career as a Marine Sniper? He went into the National Guard and became a “covert” surveillance … he became one of those people who spy on cheating spouses while he touted himself as a Marine Sniper and many on SH.con have fallen for his story.

          FYI … have you recently read SH.con? It seems that place is full of personal insults to anyone and everyone who somebody doesn’t agree with so possibly the majority of that forum should listen to your suggestion.

  • Dean Miller February 21, 2014, 4:01 pm

    It is a shame that it has come down to a law suit. I too have had to deal with bully web sites (not snipers hide) because I simply run my own web forum. Some folks, I guess, think that they are the best thing since sliced bread and their web sites are god given.

  • neal February 21, 2014, 4:05 pm

    Hey Frank, could you just hold a builders match and let Tactical Rifles face its competitors (and critics) in the real world. I’m sure GAP, AO, and plenty of others would be happy to put their work on display.

  • Joe February 21, 2014, 7:04 pm

    I’ve been following this and other TacticalRifles.net sagas for a while.
    In the meantime, I’ve read quite a few reports about abuse that TacticalRifles.net customers have been subjected to; deadlines being missed over and over, incomplete rifles with the wrong parts finally showing up years later and accessories that were paid for never arriving, no communication or hostility from David Rooney when the customer tries to get what they’re owed, etc.
    A well known and highly regarded gunsmith shot the video revealing the terrible craftsmanship apparent in one customer’s rifle from TR.net initially to document for the customer what was involved in fixing the abortion that TR built.
    I am definitely not a fan of Frank Galli, I’ve been kicked off his forum after telling him what I think of him, but in this instance I believe that he has done nothing other than provide a medium for exposure of the truth. There appears to be no way to malign David Rooney’s character as he doesn’t have any.

    • Administrator February 22, 2014, 7:40 pm

      I’m not sure what part of Monday people don’t understand, but Joe’s comment reflects the feelings of many of the people who have posted comments *before Monday* that have been deleted. What nobody seems to want to ask is what happens when an individual, or a group of individuals, are controlling the discussion, and who are also on a mission to destroy someone’s business. Nobody seems to even want to acknowledge that the video they were taking as gospel was from a rifle many years old, that was shot who knows how much and worked on by who knows who. TR customer service may indeed suck. The rifles may not be liked by such and such notable gunsmiths, but the lawsuit isn’t about that. If a small group of people are out there yelling the loudest because they are on some kind of vendetta against TR, what do you expect to google and find? Frank admitted, plain as day, above, that he was dogging TR and chasing down the origin of any and all positive comments. Is it sending in a shill to not be allowed to answer criticisms yourself, so requesting that a customer who paid you $8,000 and is satisfied follow up the complaint with their own story? No, it isn’t. A shill is sending in someone to answer it with “no dog in the fight” as many of you claim to be. By commenting and just repeating what Frank claims, you are just polly wants a cracker shills and you contribute nothing to the discussion, and yes, your comments will be thrown into the bit bucket with Bloomberg’s paid shills. That you can’t find positive stories about TR is really just proving David’s case.

  • Dennis Howard February 22, 2014, 9:08 pm

    Actually, there is a way to prove he had an account. Anytime you register for an forum account, you get a emailed verification for account activation. Why has he not supplied that? I still have mine from 2008 when I first started LR shooting.

    Until that’s resolved, Frank still has my full support, as well as all of the dissatisfied customers.

    • Administrator February 22, 2014, 11:50 pm

      He has all the evidence he needs to prove his case. As I said to Frank, and the reason obviously why David hasn’t gotten into the back and forth here, is that they are in active litigation. All of this stuff will come out in discovery, assuming the case goes forward. Venue is always the first issue of cases like this because of state vs. federal court and then which one it belongs in. It isn’t an out by any means for Frank, just the beginning of a long, arduous, and expensive process. So save your pennies Dennis. Keep supporting him even though he admitted here what he has been accused of and refuses to just man up and apologize.

    • Dennis Howard February 24, 2014, 3:32 pm

      “Administrator February 22, 2014 at 11:50 pm
      He has all the evidence he needs to prove his case. As I said to Frank, and the reason obviously why David hasn’t gotten into the back and forth here, is that they are in active litigation. All of this stuff will come out in discovery, assuming the case goes forward. Venue is always the first issue of cases like this because of state vs. federal court and then which one it belongs in. It isn’t an out by any means for Frank, just the beginning of a long, arduous, and expensive process. So save your pennies Dennis. Keep supporting him even though he admitted here what he has been accused of and refuses to just man up and apologize.”

      Why should Frank apologize? For telling the truth about a poorly done rifle that costed WAY more than any renowned rifle manufacturer would ever ask? I hope you have done your homework on this issue as to how it reflects on you. You jumped in and joined sides, no matter how buddy-buddy you are with this company. People who have never HEARD of Snipers Hide LLC have been introduced to the forum, with great intentions of staying in the community, peoples eyes have been opened to a company that disregards customer service, and now your business will suffer the loss with unsubscribing members as you have put your chihuahua in a pitbull fight you never should have entered the ring with.

      Not to mention, until this link was shared on SH, most of us have never heard of this website to begin with…

  • Greg February 22, 2014, 11:56 pm

    So, if that’s the case, why doesn’t he just create a new account and respond RIGHT NOW? Nothing is stopping him.

    • Administrator February 23, 2014, 1:10 pm

      If your account is suspended on a forum, the worst thing you can do is to go create another one. Even if you have a floating IP, eventually the mods will figure out that it is you and make a public stink out of “we banned this guy and he’s back.” From your armchair, it is really easy to think up all of these things, but when you are in it and someone is actually trying to hurt your business it is a whole different story.

      • ed February 24, 2014, 6:21 am

        If your account is deleted, the WORST thing you can do is file a frivolous lawsuit. Now the mods on all the forums can raise a “big stink” about how you’re trying to infringe upon freedom of speech, spreading the bad publicity much further and faster than those initial bad reviews ever would have.

      • Greg February 24, 2014, 9:05 am

        Actually… in this instance, Frank is wanting TR to come and post there. Frank is INVITING them to come and create a username. If TR was then banned, they could take a screenshot of logging in and seeing the message saying they have been banned. This would only strengthen their lawsuit. It is what any rational person would do if they had the facts on their side. However, we know that isn’t the case… don’t we? From my armchair? The condescending tone in which you address anyone that disagrees with your viewpoint is very telling of the kind of organization GunsAmerica is. You’ve lost a customer for life, and I’m going to do everything in my power to ensure everyone knows exactly what kind of people you are. I will be spending today calling every single sponsor and industry tie you have and expressing my absolute disgust with Guns America and the condescending elitist way they have treated people here.

        • Army127 February 25, 2014, 4:40 am

          Greg, really! You don’t know much about GunsAmerica do you? And no I am not affiliated with them in any way just a customer and a reader of their blog and many more, which included Sniper’s Hide at one time until I found out how they treated new subscribers on their site. This is a well respected blog in the industry, just actually do some homework and you will see how well respected they are. The GunsAmerica site is also a great place to buy and sell guns, and to find that gun you have been looking for everywhere but can’t find anywhere else. You stating you will cal their sponsors and tell them that this blog is this and that and horrible etc. would probably be a bad idea since first most people won’t take your call or listen to some silly person who is upset that GunsAmerica is an honest place where you can post ridiculous posts such as yours and they let it stay so people can see all sides of a story.

          I have read the above article, seen the videos, and read the way Frank has responded, which to me seems like he would rather take the low road and bash a Company (Tactical Rifles), only post the negative, and deny posters of the positive. Most completely custom gun shops ( gunsmiths, builders) are having a difficult time meeting deadlines due to all the panic buying that has taken place since Oboner got elected. This had caused part shortages which in turn effects how long it takes to build a rifle, pistol etc now. There are companies that are still backed up from anywhere from 12-18 months from all of this, and ammo companies that are backed up, up to 24 months from all this crap. I personally think that quality has suffered across the board due to this but that’s just my opinion from all the research I have done on this subject. Heck, I ordered a custom rifle from a company last year, ( not TR ) and was told no worries nine months max we will have it all finished for you sir. Well nine months came and went, and instead of getting all crazy and calling them, yelling saying I am going to post bad reviews or call all of your suppliers and tell them you suck, I spoke with them calmly and asked if they were backed up? The answer was yes sir and we apologize terribly for taking longer than anticipated on your rifle. They offered free shipping and a discount, and you know what I said, I told them not to worry about and to take their time and make it right, I could wait. I got the rifle after 13 months and its beautiful, works as advertised and even though I told them not to worry about it I got free shipping and 20% off. You know why I got that, because I calmly explained that it was ok I understood that it may happen due to the current business climate.

          Which is the issue with most Americans today. They are impatient and if something takes even a day longer than someone said it will the freak out, act like 12 year olds and say they will go on the internet and bash the company telling all their friends to do so as well. Most of you people are quick to take sides or judge here without even getting the full facts of the situation. You either want to just start an argument for the sake of starting one, or you take sides without knowing anything because your buddy said this is what happened. It’s rather embarrassing to be honest, and maybe you people should reserve your judgement and hold your tongues until this is over. Which I am sure most of you won’t do because you need to get your two cents in so you can stick your nose where it doesn’t belong and act sadly like idiots.

          I have seen plenty of good reviews on Tactical rifles, as well as bad reviews. I have also seen plenty of bad reviews about the conduct of Sniper’s Hide, and it’s admins, as well as good reviews on the same. So my suggestion is for everyone to relax and see where this goes. Snipers Hide gas it’s stage to present its side on and now Tactical Rifles has theirs, which is only fair, so let’s shut up and see what happens. Try to act like adults and not whiney 12 years olds!

          • John March 9, 2014, 10:08 pm

            Well, THANK YOU for a decent posting in the middle of most of everything else!

  • rdsii64 February 23, 2014, 7:16 pm

    I really doubt this will make it to court. If it does, I truely believe TR will loose.

  • Julius February 23, 2014, 9:54 pm

    What a bunch of morons^ All of you. I don’t care who’s right anymore. Clearly nobody on this page is. Frigging 2 year olds in a dick waving competition.

    • Michael February 24, 2014, 5:57 am

      I’m with my orange brother on this one :)

      • James Massman February 25, 2014, 3:53 am

        Now, THAT’S the first intelligent thing I’ve read so far!

  • Wade February 23, 2014, 11:25 pm

    I have a Para .308 that David built for me a couple years ago. Beautiful rifle and I’ve had no issues. Having met David in person and after spending multiple hours with him on the phone discussing my rifle, I am confident that he would correct any issues if they were his fault. If it was my fault, I am sure he would correct them for a fee. I don’t have a dog in this fight, but if David is ever in this part of the country, he is always welcome to join me for a beer.

  • JJ February 24, 2014, 1:19 am

    If Rooney “looked up” the target, and it was ” .172″ with gold medal match” he has records back to at least 2008, how about you post a picture of the target, including the rifles serial number as I know we, including the rifles owner would like to see at least one test target from TR…

    JJ

  • chicago76 February 24, 2014, 4:30 am

    I have looked at Snipershide website before. I was not impressed with the comments. I would not join. Too many armchair experts there. Waste of my time.

  • Jack Grotenrath February 24, 2014, 4:53 am

    Tacticalrifles.net bullied me. I’m a small dealer (class III also) in Virginia. I received one of their rifles for a transfer. A customer of mine in mid (June/July) 2013 came to pick it up. Turns out it was a straw purchase. Now I had one of their rifles sitting here for several months. ATF didn’t confiscate it, nor did VA Police. I informed Tactical Rifles of the straw purchase at the time it happen. Long story short after the rifle was sitting here for several months, the owner who has an English accent called me to have me ship the rifle back to him. I had to cut him off (he was very rude & over assertive) in the conversation to explain that I need to verify that a refund was giving to the purchaser so the purchaser couldn’t sue me. He said “It was none of my business”. I explained that it is my business to know if a refund was issued so I can be clear who owns the firearm & ship it to its owner. During my conversation with him, he was rude the entire time. Eventually hung up on me. With in a week I received a letter from his Lawyer with all kinds of lies, example: I want to keep this gun, & I was just making up stories. They also wanted to charge me with theft & have my business shut down. I have never dealt with anyone so evil in my 3 years of business. There is more to this story but I don’t think many people will bother to read this or it will even matter, its just good to see someone out there with money that can stand up to bullies like TacticalRifles.net.
    jcfirearms

  • Jack Grotenrath February 24, 2014, 4:53 am

    Tacticalrifles.net bullied me. I’m a small dealer (class III also) in Virginia. I received one of their rifles for a transfer. A customer of mine in mid (June/July) 2013 came to pick it up. Turns out it was a straw purchase. Now I had one of their rifles sitting here for several months. ATF didn’t confiscate it, nor did VA Police. I informed Tactical Rifles of the straw purchase at the time it happen. Long story short after the rifle was sitting here for several months, the owner who has an English accent called me to have me ship the rifle back to him. I had to cut him off (he was very rude & over assertive) in the conversation to explain that I need to verify that a refund was giving to the purchaser so the purchaser couldn’t sue me. He said “It was none of my business”. I explained that it is my business to know if a refund was issued so I can be clear who owns the firearm & ship it to its owner. During my conversation with him, he was rude the entire time. Eventually hung up on me. With in a week I received a letter from his Lawyer with all kinds of lies, example: I want to keep this gun, & I was just making up stories. They also wanted to charge me with theft & have my business shut down. I have never dealt with anyone so evil in my 3 years of business. There is more to this story but I don’t think many people will bother to read this or it will even matter, its just good to see someone out there with money that can stand up to bullies like TacticalRifles.net.
    jcfirearms

    • DNS Guns February 24, 2014, 8:02 am

      As a dealer you should have been told by the Atf agent at the time of your interview that when a gun comes in and you put it in your book it becomes YOUR gun, period. We were told that if a shill buys or a person who failes background then too bad they loose. The dealer who sold and shipped the gun no longer has a claim and DOES NOT owe a refund as he transfered ownwrship to the buyers agent. In other words you have a free gun. Now if you want to work something out between all interested parties you can.

      • Gus February 24, 2014, 11:08 pm

        Wow, you actually think that a rifle that fails transfer just magically becomes yours?

        You sound about as knowledgeable about the law as Rooney is about building rifles.

        • Administrator February 24, 2014, 11:17 pm

          This is actually a convoluted story that I won’t repeat here but you are on the right track with your comment Gus. I believe this did end up going to court to get the rifle back.

          • Jack Grotenrath April 2, 2014, 6:19 am

            This didn’t go to court, but almost did. If the owner of Tactical Rifles was reasonable in a conversation & allowed me to be privy as to the partial refund there would have not been a problem. Real simple, all the owner of Tactical Rifles had to do was let me know a partial refund was issued or some kind of refund as to prove they were the rightful owners. Instead I had to contact the straw purchaser to verify any kind of refund after the VA Police & ATF had been involved, talk about uncomfortable. Tactical rifles refused to show any proof & had his Lawyer send me several treating letters. To top if off, I was never compensated a dime. I had to deal with the straw purchase, ATF, VA Police, write several depositions to both agencies, store the gun for several months & then deal with Tactical rifles owner, his Lawyers threats, have to contact the straw purchaser to verify some kind of refund to avoid a match of “chicken” with the owner of tactical rifles & then I shipped it to them. Come to find out Tactical Rifles only refund the straw purchaser $3000. The firearm was purchased for $6,750. So, tactical rifles got to double dip & screw me in the process. To answer DNS Guns, I didn’t want the rifles as it had a GI Joe style camo finish to it. It was the ugliest gun I have seen in some time. I could go on & on about their rifle, but that besides the point which is the arrogance of the owner.

  • DEADTIME February 24, 2014, 5:41 am

    With every progressive Marxist in the nation trying to destroy the 2nd Amendmant and take our guns I wish the industry and gun owners could work together to protect each other. I understand that you can have an unhappy customer and I’ve seen first hand how that one customer can create a shit storm.

    Let’s say it’s the worst case scenario, that a 4 year old rifle doesn’t shoot 1/2 MOA….how freaking ridiculous is that. If I used a rifle a lot for 4 years and it shot 1 MOA I’d be thrilled, I don’t believe in MOA shooting to begin with I believe in minute of man not minute of stationary black dot but still 4 years old and still 1 MOA? I’ll take that rifle thanks.

    Knowing that a business, especially in the gun industry closes fast when they make crap but TR has been making rifles for many years tells me this story is probably crap. That someone got butt hurt because they couldn’t get a free re barrel after 4 years so they thought they could hurt a business in retaliation or blackmail is probably what’s going on here.

    Message boards that deal with firearms need to balance freedoms of speech while weeding out the bitching Bettie’s that create mad stories the moment their order is one day late or they don’t get that free magazine. I’ve read snipers hide posts a few times, they have the usual internet tough guys and know it alls who post things they would never say in person.

    I feel like yelling “girls, girls your all pretty, now let’s all get long” sniper hide should fix the problem, do a rel review of a new TR rifle minus the butt hurt whiner quotient. TR could send them a rifle to be used or an owner with a NEW rifle could volunteer theirs. This issue could be resolved quickly with some adult supervision and less pissing contest.

    The fact that Mr. galli throws out his “I’m a Marine scout sniper and I’ll out shoot you any day” claim strikes me as more than a bit childish. And leads me to believe that their is merit to TR’s claim. If our past military training and service dictates our truth quotient I’ll see Mr.Galli his scout sniper and raise him 23 years as an M1 Abrams tanker who can kill anything…I do mean ANYTHING out to a mile and a half while moving at 50 miles an hour….I guess I win…I must be telling the truth.

    Let’s hope this gets solved quickly and we can all face our real enemies and not each other.

    • Ben February 24, 2014, 8:47 am

      Firstly.

      He ordered an $8600 rifle.

      That’s 8 thousand, six hundred dollars.

      This wasn’t a stock, off of the shelf Savage, or a Remington “tactical” 700…This was a custom, tactical, apparently precise $8600 rifle.

      Simple yes/no answer…Is this rifle, the one in the thread below, something you would PAY $8600 for?

      http://forum.snipershide.com/snipers-hide-bolt-action-rifles/223193-tacticalrifles-net.html

      In an industry where precision is life/death, would you pay for that rifle?
      Is that the quality you’d expect a nearly $9000 rifle to come in?

      Also, it didn’t shoot sub 1MOA “out of the box” it only shot well AFTER a reputable gunsmith FIXED Tacticalrifles.net horror show.

      The customer also NEVER received items he paid for.

      The stock was also unnecessarily hydro’d at a cost to the customer in a pattern that Manners offers FOR FREE.

      Mr. Galli is actually telling the truth in regards to his service…You do realize that practically our entire industry consults Frank on rifle performance/etc? There’s a very good reason for that.

      • Administrator February 24, 2014, 9:14 am

        It is amazing that you don’t get it that you haven’t been allowed to hear the other side of the story. That’s what this is about. By telling us how important and influential Frank is, coupled with your complete ignorance and inability to understand a simple explanation of why you believe what you believe, you are making TR’s case. Nobody from SH who has commented here has actually purchased a rifle from TR, and surprisingly, NONE have said “I bought rifle so and so.” I don’t think any of you even own a high end sniper rifle.

        • Ben February 24, 2014, 9:31 am

          I asked a very simple question. One which you have failed to answer.

          Would you expect an $8600 rifle to arrive in that condition?

          Look at it. Seriously, look at that rifle.

          In an industry where 1/4 moa means life or death (If we believe Rooney builds rifles for the armed forces) this is a 100% epic fail. It’s a spit in the face to anyone actually depending on that rifle. What if this rifle had shipped off to Afghanistan? Would you want to be the sniper on the receiving end of that horror show?

          My comment represents a first hand account from someone who did order from TacticalRifles.net and posted their direct experience.

          This is an epic fail: http://forum.snipershide.com/snipers-hide-bolt-action-rifles/223193-tacticalrifles-net-2.html#post2821082

          Just because Rooney actually produces 1 quality rifle a decade, does not make his product of equal quality. It’s disgusting that he even allowed that rifle to ship in that condition…

          • Knifefighter February 24, 2014, 12:34 pm

            “My comment represents a first hand account from someone who did order from TacticalRifles.net and posted their direct experience.”

            That is called a second hand account and what I believe is called hearsay?

            Just wanted to point out that to you can’t take someone else’s experience and call it your own.

            Knife

        • JJ February 25, 2014, 12:49 am

          There is a very good reason why few people have come here saying ‘I own a TR rifle and Its great”.. ..

          Unlike the many happy customers of other custom rifle builders found through google and 5 minutes of basic research.

          If there were more reviews outlining TR’s work ethic, customer service, and quality workmanship I’m sure we wouldn’t be having this discussion.

  • ed February 24, 2014, 6:15 am

    TAPERED BARREL THREADS!!!! ROTFLMAO!!!! You should review the video again, the rifle shoots 1/2moa AFTER it is TRUED, RECHAMBERED, REBEDDED, and TOTALLY REBUILT. Basically every trace of the previous builder, which may or may not have been TR, the video doesn’t say, has been removed.

  • Walt February 24, 2014, 6:17 am

    This discussion serves to prove the value of our reputation on the internet. My two cents here is only provided in the hope that some mutually agreeable redress of the grievances provided by both parties can be constructively be resolved prior to the advent of litigation. Overall, as a society, I think we have allowed ourselves to drift away from consideration for one another, especially when we are not physically present.

    Thanks for providing David Rooney’s article on gun control in the U.K.. I think we as a people need to be constantly aware of the subtle methods which are employed against us in all attempts to curtail our freedoms. Trusting that our leaders will make decisions which uphold our founding father’s intentions has so often proven to be incorrect.

    A bigger stick does not prove righteousness. Too often, only exasperation and the unrelenting drain, brought about as a result conflict, are required to bring parties together to seek resolution. But look how much destruction remains in the wake of the conflict. Look how much waste each party must endure. Examine the loss.

    Through mutual respect, consideration and general “good manners”, both combatants may see and accept that the entire blame does not rest with the other. Sometimes, the situation itself was mostly at fault. Backing off some, giving the benefit of doubt to the other and dropping the projection of intentions may help to provide a way beyond the impasse.

    I bet if these two really took the time to know one another they would be best friends…

  • Pete February 24, 2014, 7:10 am

    Actually, as a nobody, who just happened to read this article because it was linked to via GA’s email, I find this whole thing stupid. I’ll never go to “snipers hide”, I’ll never buy from “tactical rifles” and now I mean leave Guns America for good.

    Person headed to Gun Broker.

    • Pete (number 2) February 24, 2014, 10:50 am

      Ill still patron snipers hide. But I will never even entertain a “tactical riles” product. What a whiney, petty, little loser you are. Make a good product, stand behind it, service, and shut your hole. You Sue someone because they think you suck, and say it in public forum? You SIR, DESERVE to be out of business. Also, if you’re wearing a “nifty” operators beard, and have never served, you’re a COMPLETE CHUMP. Just play Army on the Xbox, and let those who got dirty look the part. Pansy.

  • Allen February 24, 2014, 7:35 am

    your article was written as if you were a friend of someone defending them. That is NOT Journalism. That is the same as OBAMA politics. Get a life and get out of someone elses business.

  • JFSebastian February 24, 2014, 7:39 am

    Sorry Guns America,

    But for the average shooter, this comes down to trust and integrity. Frank and Sniper’s Hide have acted with trust and integrity throughout this affair. Tactical Rifles has not. Now it appears that Guns America is taking a side in this issue, and you are supporting those who have not acted with honor.

    Your loss. This Internet of things rests on information, and the accuracy and honesty of such. I do not trust TR at all to produce a quality rifle, nor back up their claims with deeds. You force me to put the GA blog in the same category.

  • Jay February 24, 2014, 7:44 am

    Very Interesting! I’ll have to admit that many forums are indeed the bulling type and I’ve read and been apart of being bullied myself as a newbie to a few. So I take my knowledge elsewhere! The out come of this will tell the tale as they say! May the right one be the victor and all be worked out in the end!

  • Dr Marc Williams February 24, 2014, 8:03 am

    I’m not exactly sure why GunsAmerica would want to jump both feet into this internet mess but here we are. First, I have known Frank for many years now and call him friend and in all that time have found him to always be an honest and no “bullshit” kind of guy. I find it interesting your article immediately paints Frank as an “internet bully” and industry “parasite” then wraps TacticalRifles in the patriotic flag of the 2nd Amendment. I suppose this ” Blogger” has already divined the future, seen the results of this lawsuit and feels comfortable casting their own aspersions. While I’m not privy to the particular points in this mess and I do not have knowledge of TacticalRifles as a business entity or rifle maker I can comment on the general theme because we have all seen it before. Almost every time a business cries foul over an “internet slander” they have let a substandard product get out of their shop. After the inevitable internet pile-on the the business gets a little butt hurt and starts crying foul instead of going to the source of the complaint and trying to rectify it immediately. Human nature, pride and anonymity steps in and the saga continues to no ones benefit. To be perfectly blunt trying to run and police an internet forum is like trying to herd feral cats. I follow and use GA and am very disappointed you have chosen sides in this matter. I suspect this post will not make it on the comments section but I did want you to know my thoughts.

    Dr Marc Williams

  • Wes February 24, 2014, 8:22 am

    These tactics are commonplace to every Internet forum. Forum owners are out to make a profit. To sell advertising. The moderators play “God” and can stifle “free speech” with a simple single click and the account is deleted. In a few short minutes a moderator can drastically alter topics.

  • 0311 Hesco February 24, 2014, 8:44 am

    I wonder if GA’s position would be different if Sniper’s Hide rolled over for TR? Or would this be a non-issue and no reason to bring it up? The scare tactics and “polly wants a cracker” is sad to see. You would think that an “administrator ” of such a broad and magnificent site like GA, with all 300,000 users and millions upon millions of tons of crap here by “firearm enthusiasts”, you would be a little more reserved and non-partisan in your comments. It’s hard to respect a column that is so one sided. You would expect those antics from a little ol’ “blogger site” like Sniper’s Hide with a dude at the helm claiming to be a USMC counter-sniper, right? Did you see how long it took for all of us brainwashed shill parrots to donate the complete start-up bill for SH? By my calculations, it was less than three days. Where is TR’s support? I believe they blew-off all their support in poor workmanship and empty promises. My point is that people desire righteousness, and this is why it only took the little blogger-spot less that a week to donate close to $10,000 to their cause. You throw around the number of people using your site like that has weight. Well, put up, I say.
    In reality, the great thing about freedom of speech, is that it doesn’t have to go thru moderation like this comment has to. Why is that? If SH is in the sterilizing and covering up business, why is it then my comments on there immediately go up and, here, where you are “trying to give the poor little TR company a place to fight their good fight….”, have to filter comments?

    • Knifefighter February 24, 2014, 12:30 pm

      Hi Hesco, I believe your point about unfiltered comments is exactly what is at issue with the snipers hide (Frank) accused of methodically taking down Pro tactical comments. If you read the above Frank (Unless he was misrepresented by an internet hacker) specifically says he did just that.

      I think funding of the sniper’s hide site is really not germane to the issue.

      It is not surprising at all that a group of enthusiasts whose members would spend up to $10k on a single weapon could also fund a forum.

      • ed February 24, 2014, 6:33 pm

        Frank deleted the “pro-tactical” comments when Rooney demanded he delete the anti-tactical comments. Not going to show only one side, it’s not GunsAmerica over there.

      • 0311Hesco February 24, 2014, 8:14 pm

        There was an earlier issue and he took down the negative comments upon request rom Tragic Rifles, in doing so, he took the positive down too. Don’t see how you could be more fair with that. Read the whole issue or don’t read it at all.

        • Knifefighter February 24, 2014, 10:51 pm

          Yeah, I saw frank was trying to hang his hat on that weak sauce. Not impressed considering his comnents about tracking down pro tactical posters and deciding they did not meet his standards. Bad thing to admit to during legal orocedings. And what about that login no one can find? Frank conveniently lose the backups? I would hope not because they would tell the tale.

          Knife

  • Jim February 24, 2014, 9:08 am

    I stopped reading when coming across the words First Amendment.

  • Joe February 24, 2014, 9:13 am

    No winners here. Work it out, guys.

  • PD Kirby February 24, 2014, 9:17 am

    After reading this article and comments I can honestly say I have never seen a bigger waste of time and Bandwidth. I am a member of the Hide and many other Forums dealing with Long Range Shooting. I mostly read these sites but from time to time post a question or comment on a subject. I can honestly say I have never seen an orchestrated effort to smear TR as a company or it’s owner. I have read both good and bad reviews on many different builders not just on the Hide but on other sites as well. I thought that was the point of forums? People from the world over sharing experiences and making recommendations some good some not so much. I have been involved in Competitive Shooting for over 40 years, Long Range Rifle for 20+, F Class and F Class Open. I am relatively new to the internet forums mostly because I spent the last 40 years working for my Boss and myself building gun barrels and ordnance as a Master Machinist so I build my own guns. But I digress, as a community we are currently faced with the biggest attack on our 2nd Amendment Rights and these are the kinds of Lawsuits we choose to talk about? I’m sorry if someone said something that hurt someone else s feelings, welcome to America. If more people got this passionate over the Anti-Gun Lobby we would be winning instead of wondering which Right we will loose tomorrow!

    If this lawsuit has any merit it will make it to a docket in one or the other States and it will be resolved by a Judge/Jury or a backroom agreement. That’s when you report on it! Trying to settle it here is tantamount to two fleas arguing over who owns the dog. I have only been a reader of Guns America for a few months but if this is what you guy’s see as newsworthy subject matter I think I will just add your address to my spam filter. When you pick sides in an argument before you write about it and speak for the party who remains silent how is this journalism? I could care either way about lawsuits like this, I came here to read about new products and God forbid, what are we doing to fight the good fight to keep the 2nd amendment alive and well. I suspect this will get deleted but seriously if you want to be a Journalist then be one. If you just want to be a biased hack you’re headed in the right direction. Even if this guy is your best friend this is not the place to show your support. If you own this newsletter then I guess you can do what you please. If you don’t I hope your partners are paying attention to what you are doing to their publication.

    • D. Bruce February 24, 2014, 10:18 am

      Well said Mr Kirby

    • Knifefighter February 24, 2014, 1:35 pm

      We can and should fight for second amendment rights.

      But do not think for a second that we can “win” that war. Instead we will have to continually strive to win battles and skirmishes.

      The anti-gunners are working from a position of immense wealth and rock solid assurance that they need to take our guns, and until they win they will simply not stop.

      Upon reflection all they need to do to win is “educate” (Indoctrinate) our children for one generation to win.

      That being said, what are we doing to educate the city children on the benefits of gun ownership as a tool?

      Working that our is beyond my aptitude, but if you seriously want to ensure the 2nd amendment means anything at all that is where a lot of our funding needs to go.

      (Which of course has nothing to do with this thread, but I thank you for straying into a subject we can all agree on.)

      Knife

  • Themike February 24, 2014, 9:17 am

    TR, SH, and GA sound like a group of little girls crying over Beiber tickets. That being said, anyone who spends 8 to 10 thousand on a rifle chambered in .308 to .338 to chase sub-MOA groups is an idiot with too much money. Allow me to enlighten the masses. It’s not the rifle, it’s YOU! Your reloads suck, your position sucks, and your trigger pull sucks. Lock it in a bench rest if you want to shoot sub-MOA. In summation, TR is the winner hands down for getting you suckers to shell out that much in the first place.

    • Themike February 24, 2014, 10:59 am

      EDIT!: Just saw the pictures. Almost 3 grand for a 6.5 creedmore? Come on man. Those groups looked fine. Its called shooter error. 3 shots touching, 2 a little to the side. Did you let your barrel cool between shots? I put 5 rounds in paper you could cover with a nickel at 100yd with my bone stock savage 110HS .338LM topped with an SWFA fixed 10x scope. I just take a 5 minute break after each shot. (handloads of course). I also noticed the pictures of the rifle on the bench at the range. Please, please tell me you weren’t shooting with a deployed bipod on a concrete bench?!? If so, that’s part of your problem. Take the bipod off, put it in a proper rest or sand bag the hell out of it, then try again.

  • Craig DIBBS February 24, 2014, 9:21 am

    It will be interesting to see the Administrator on this site apologizes to Frank and Marc & eat crow when this frivolous lawsuit is tossed out of court. The initial article/blog here is pretty one sided & slanted(hatchet job), and based on the exchange Paul never bothered to contact the owner of Snipers Hide for his side of the story.

    It appears that GA has an ulterior motive-did you get a free rifle out of the deal??) and I still wonder why there was the delay(censorship for sure!) in accepting posts and comments here”till Monday”.

    GA &TR has pissed a bunch of gun owners off because of the lawsuit and I cant wait for all the facts to be presented.

    • Beacon of Sanity February 24, 2014, 9:54 am

      Craig DIBBS February 24, 2014 at 9:21 am said the following …

      “GA &TR has pissed a bunch of gun owners off because of the lawsuit and I cant wait for all the facts to be presented.”

      Can you substantiate this “bunch of gun owners” or are you just tooting your own horn to make yourself sound impotent and that you represent some mass of people. Do you yourself have some sort of inferior motive?

  • Tom Curtin February 24, 2014, 9:30 am

    This sounds very much like the “Now Generations” spoiled children’s fight that forums seem to be full of today. Time for me to drop GA and look for a site for grown ups. This really is silly ladies.

    • Administrator February 24, 2014, 9:45 am

      It wouldn’t be silly if it was your business that was attacked Tom.

      • Mike Oksolarge February 24, 2014, 10:32 am

        Does Guns America have a financial interest in Tactical Rifles?

        • Administrator February 24, 2014, 10:39 am

          None. David advertised with us about 4 years ago and is not contemplating it in the future.

  • Beacon of Sanity February 24, 2014, 9:33 am

    WooHoo … lets all get some PoppyCorn and sit back and enjoy the girlie fight that is going on.

    I feel truly sad for TR.net if any bad evil words on a joke site like SH.com actually hurts there business. Come on folks, SH.com is the land of wannabe snipers who actually portray themselves as long range shooters but in truth are more like those who run around with paintball guns playing war because they are not qualified to join the military.

    Personally I cant wait for this drama to continue so I can have some good laughable fodder to read. She said He said is all this is about. SH.con and TR.not should both be laughed out of assistance. TR.not because they actually think the bad words on SH.con has hurt there business and SH.com for allowing themselves to get into an argument with TR.not. This is all like a little girl school yard fight where all that happens is a bunch of lip flapping and everyone just laughs while they watch it all happen.

    So who is with me? Who is leaving now to go to WallyWorld to stock up on PoppyCorn to enjoy while the rest of the saga of TR.not vs. SH.con plays out for all the world to see.

    • 0311Hesco February 24, 2014, 11:49 am

      That would be “laughed out of existence”…careful with those big words.

      • Beacon of Sanity February 24, 2014, 12:34 pm

        I beg to differ, both can exist but neither is qualified to assist anyone.

  • dallas sharp February 24, 2014, 9:39 am

    I am 70 plus years old with cataracts and doubt I could shoot 2 MOA; so here is my challenges to bullies (marine scoutsniper): you shoot a TR rifle with ammo of your choice (probably be anything you fine) and I’ll shoot your fancy sniper rifle and your ammo that you know shoots, what cup winner under half MOA. Now if you can not beat me, I’ll be first one to blame who you or the TR rifle? But first let’s switch back rifles and see if I can beat or match my score with TR rifle. If I match or beat my score without your rifle, you buy me the TR rifle. GA can be the referee! Up to the challenge? Then we will see who is blowing smoke.

    • James Isaac February 24, 2014, 2:07 pm

      By your logic, we need to fight WWII again to see who won. We can easily examine the past.

      You do not need a dedicated competition to see what is proven, there are already competitions that have proved what works.

      I am not saying that TR.net does or does not work, I am just saying look at the rifles that won the competitions.

      Lastly, the problem would not lie with the cherry picked rifles from TR.net. If there was a problem, it would be the ones that was sub-quaility.

  • not the first time February 24, 2014, 9:50 am

    I had an issue with “The Hide”. When I tried to get in contact and explain what was going on I was slammed so I dropped my account and haven’t been back since. This was years ago before they became so big. All I can say is good luck and I hope you get somewhere with this.

  • Whiskey8 February 24, 2014, 9:52 am

    I don’t know either party personally. I’ve read enough on SH to know I wouldn’t care for the community but other than that have no opinion on them. That said, Frank already said why he deleted the positive posts. In the 2010 suit filed by TR there was a request that all negative (maybe all period) posts about TR be deleted. If TR doesn’t want the negative posts, he shouldn’t be allowed to have the positive.

    Also the video speaks for itself. I read where you said that no one knows how many rounds were put though the rifle, while that may be true anyone that knows guns can see how little use that rifle has seen. Not to mention that a lot of the issues shown aren’t things that would have been effected by time or round count. For the price of that rifle and the wait time involved, the workmanship in that video is unacceptable.

    My last point is how disappointed I am in this article and GA. Your first couple of responses to Frank seem to claim some journalistic impartiality but the initial article and subsequent posts do more than just give TR a voice, your bias couldn’t be more apparent.

    SUA SPONTE

  • Rattlerjake February 24, 2014, 9:56 am

    I see that the Hatfields and McCoys are still alive and well!

  • Trenace February 24, 2014, 10:29 am

    Any claim that it’s a “First Amendment right” that other people not say things about you you don’t like, is not correct.

    There would be only one potential legitimate beef here. That would be libel. Nowhere in here do I see evidence of libel, and the plaintiff fails even to claim libel.

    Freedom means if you have a forum and you have an issue or your decision for WHATEVER reason is to not allow given posts, that’s your freedom.

    The only bullying I see is using the Federal court system to deal with this issue, forcing the forum to expend huge amounts of money to defend themselves.

    • 0311Hesco February 24, 2014, 11:52 am

      Don’t worry about the money, the SH members donated enough to cover the start-up costs in less than a couple days, for all parties involved.

  • Jason February 24, 2014, 10:52 am

    I would like to know the credentials of the administrator. Have you purchased a rifle from TR? If so would you be willing to post a review of that rifle compared to rifles of similar cost?

    • Administrator February 24, 2014, 11:03 am

      There is a link to our review of David’s gun in the article.

  • DarryH February 24, 2014, 11:03 am

    I will watch how all this plays out. No matter what….it seems like we all lose.

    I have been the victim of an internet bully.
    This person threatened my job, called a business I was doing business with and tried to turn them against me, and
    slandered me on a couple internet forums where I even had 100% feedback. I watched as people I had
    done good business deal with, people who I had considered friends, all suddenly turned on me and backed the internet bully.

    I was horribly hurt on a personal level, and it also hurt me financially. I actually retreated from those forums for almost two years.
    I was finally able to prove I had done nothing wrong, and the bully got banned. I had no real problem at my job, but it was hard to sit there in front of a boss that trusted me with hundreds of thousands of dollars, and show him all the damage this bully was doing, and how he was trying get me in trouble so I would be fired.
    The boss was great……but once ANY seed of distrust is sown…..who knows what might happen later??
    Will I get a raise, will it be smaller, will my boss still trust me as much?????
    The business he called was very upset. It caused them a lot of problems with their dealers. They were mad at me, and I was the buyer for a major account for them. I was able to prove to them I had done no wrong.
    The bully was removed from their dealer network. Again…..how does that affect future business dealings??????

    I had saved every E-mail between the bully and myself. I copied all the on-line post. I had a huge body of proof to back my side……but still, even though I was found no be of no fault…….does this have effects on a person or their business even if years down the road?

    I know I never got an apology from even 1 person on any of the forums, even after the forum administrators posted notes stating that I had been vindicated.
    I DID take notes. I have never done any business for any of those individuals and business’ who turned against me.

    I do wonder my Guns America bothered with any of this.
    They should have waited until it played out in court.

    Like I said……we all lose!

    • Administrator February 24, 2014, 11:07 am

      +1 on that. We got involved because David was not allowed to have a voice and the “bloggers” had already stacked up against him without even asking his side of it.

  • Brian February 24, 2014, 11:07 am

    Dear Administrator:

    Re: February 21, 2014 at 5:54 pm
    “That is an old rifle and who knows what has gone on with it since the buyer received it.”
    I have seen mention of “old rifle” in here a few times. What does age have to do with the quality of a product? Don’t quality products stand the test of time? I have some old firearms and they seem to function as well as they did many many years ago. Those firearms that are used show the signs of wear accordingly. Does this “old rifle” show excessive wear? Hate to break it to you I know a large portion of gun owners don’t put many rounds through their weapons so something that is “old” might be so in years but not so much in useful life of the firearm. I personally believe age has no bearing on this particular issue. Yet it seems to be brought up more than once.
    “who knows what has gone on with it since the buyer received it.”
    What is the point of this statement? So are you making an ambiguous statement that the purchaser of this firearm has possibly done something to alter the firearm since the purchase date? Or you throwing it out there to put that possibility in others minds? Should we all think about all aspects of something.. yes we should but it seems you are throwing lots of “what if” type things out there. Seems both Tactical Rifles, the owner of the rifle, and the Snipers Hide owner are all bring facts to the table while you keep adding the facts mixed with personal thoughts, ambiguous statements, and other random quasi legal jargon etc…
    So Mr. Administrator you seem to have chosen a side in this discussion and are using this form of media to support it which is certainly fine. Just state your side clearly and don’t claim to be presenting facts when you only brought 1 side of the story to the table originally. We all know the old adage of there is 3 sides to every story… what you think, what they think, and the truth.
    Lastly thought I would address your other statement:
    Snipers Hide statement that proceeded your comment
    “We have chosen a law firm in Florida to represent us in the Federal Case brought on by TacticalRifles.net against the site and it’s members. They are looking to effect your ability to post your reviews and opinions, so we are fighting this case in case in court. The cost is significant but we feel this is the right thing to do. We set up a defense fund thread on the site. “
    Guns’s America statement or Tactical rifles not sure which based on your site layout.
    “Frank Galli is building his legal defense on the premise that the forum members are being sued. A few have even called TR to ask about what they have to do.”
    His members are being sued aren’t they? Isn’t Tactical Rifles suing the person who bought the rifle which is also a Snipers Hide Member? So isn’t that suing its members? Snipers Hide doesn’t have a annual subscription fee and they didn’t require your to contribute to keep your account or the site going. I highly doubt this is also Snipers Hide “legal defense” meaning if they don’t raise money to cover cost they are going under. You also enjoyed your claim that “Internet bullies” are at work isn’t that the same thing you are becoming here with your negative comments about Snipers Hide and indirectly the rifle owner? Facts are one things and personal opinion are another. If you want to claim to be factual then gather all possible facts and report without opinion. I guess I was under the understanding that blogs and forum pages are places to express thoughts, opinions, feels (if want to go there) and things of that nature which is certainly what you present in this blog yet you defame others for doing just that in other digital social forms.
    I wish all parties in this well as they have lots of hours to put in and many days of work ahead of them. Seem to me there is minimal facts presented here which mean a court of law will most likely have decipher fact from fiction.

  • Veer_g February 24, 2014, 11:18 am

    I am a proud TR owner. It shoots minute of cheeto when I do my part. Mr. Rooney is a class act. Snipershide is full of internet snipers, and google commandos. I think most are fat guys wearing turbans in their mom’s basement. I challenge anyone on the hide to a shoot off with my TR built cheeto cannon.

    • Howie Feltersnatch February 24, 2014, 12:30 pm

      Challenge Accepted.. I have always wanted to buttstroke a towelhead with his own frogsticker.

    • Wesley Rogers February 24, 2014, 1:24 pm

      So go on over to SH and sign up for their shoot, put your TR up against some AI, Sako, GAP, AO, Tac Ops, etc and see how well it really does.

      • Veer_g February 24, 2014, 1:45 pm

        Wesley I am on snipershide. I will be in the shoutbox if you wanna come run your suck..

        • Maser February 24, 2014, 7:26 pm

          Wesley, I would not advise challenging Veer_g. He is already on Sniper’s Hide calling you out and laughing at you.

          • Wesley Rogers February 24, 2014, 11:46 pm

            Please post what he has said since I have already talked to him and he said that this was not him. So either back it up with proof or stop lying. The decision is yours.

        • Wesley Rogers February 24, 2014, 10:37 pm

          To the Admin please allow this to be posted.

          After being told to come over to SH and run my suck, I did in fact go to SH (as I frequent it to read about new products from the manufactures) and I was told that Veer_g on GA is not Veer_g from SH. This is Veer_g’s quote from SH “And no, just so everyone can calm down a notch, that wasn’t me over there spouting off.” So maybe it would be wise to remove this person who is obviously trying to cause conflict with people who have opposing views. To allow this person to continue to use another person’s known internet ID is promoting conflict.

  • Jeff February 24, 2014, 11:19 am

    I take no side in the legal aspects of this argument because I don’t know the real specifics, nor do I have any experiences with, or opinions of either party, but did I read right? $8000.00+ for a SR! I cannot see how any new rifle, regardless of it’s “precision”, “MOA value” or overall quality, could possibly cost even 1/16 of that amount to manufacture. I’m surprised that any LRS would spend that much on one single rifle. For those $’s, it should come with ammunition for life and a $4000.00 cash rebate! (lol) I’ll have to stick with my Savages. I have nothing against TacticalRifles.net (except for the $8000.00 price tag). Those kind of prices effectively rule me and about 95% of the average shooting population, out of ever owning one! If 8 grand is a normal price for a sniper rifle, then please forgive my ignorance, I am not, nor do I claim to be an experienced sniper of anything past 500 yards. On another note, based solely on what GA has written, I see no real reason this scuffle should go to our corrupt governments courtrooms! IMHO both parties should simply sign a written agreement to never discuss each other again. Keep their dollars in their own pockets, instead of handing them over in the form of court & “bottom feeders” fees.

  • Chad February 24, 2014, 11:42 am

    The lack of journalist integrate is astounding. To pick sides without speaking to both parties is a sure sign of bias. Are all your articles so bias? Before I ordered my latest custom rifle, I did my research. I eliminated TR from that list not because of the negative reviews, but because of their Better Business Bureau rating. At the time it was a “F”. It is now up to a “C”. I am sure that TR has made some good rifles, that is not the issue. As it has been mentioned other customer rifle builds have had problems as well. What is the issue is how those problems are addressed. Have you read Dave Rooney’s emails to the customer? You speak of bullies in your title, and yet your are defending one.

    Paul, the way in which you have presented this lawsuit, and defended your position, has been disturbing. In 2012 you claimed to be a true blog journalist, and other bloggers were just amateurs with a keyboard. Your current article, and rebuttals, are as amateurish as I have seen in a long time. I would expect more from GA. There are always two sides to every story, and you only presented one. You claim facts not in evidence and make accusations based on those “facts”. How is that journalism? It has been tried before, but it did not end well for those involved.

    • Administrator February 24, 2014, 11:56 am

      The same parasites who claimed that about me in 2012 reported on this case without contacting David. They expect you and people like you to repeat their opinions because you can’t formulate your own. You proved it back then that you were just a sheep in wolf’s clothing, and you are proving it now.

      Do you know what it takes to get a BBB F rating? One negative letter from someone that you fail to answer. The BB is just a business like everyone else. They pay their salaries by using those negative letters from people who have a bug up their buts to recruit BBB members. The people who send those letters are the rainmakers for the their business. Comforting huh!

      Journalism is about getting the truth. Frank’s position is very clear on his website. You know, the one that he admits to shutting people out of after he decides to blackball them. He was given the first comment on the story, and lots of subsequent comments. David was not afforded the same on his website.

      • Chad February 24, 2014, 1:32 pm

        Paul,

        “Parasites”, “wolf in sheep’s clothing”, “can’t form my own opinion” I thought you were against name calling? As to the BBB. If they are useless, as you suggest, and negative forum member reviews are just belling aching, unhappy customers that can’t be satisfied, then where do consumers go to research companies before spending large sums of money on a custom product? From your articles? If your bias, in this matter is, any indication of the quality of your equipment reviews, then your readers would have to doubt all your positive reviews as mere pandering to those paying you, and the negative reviews as your platform to punish those who displease you.

        Your accusation of me being a wolf in sheep’s clothing is probably correct at some level. Perhaps this wolf should use its teeth by exercising it buying power an not support your sponsors. And I have definitely “formed my own opinion” with regards to you and by extension GA. That opinion has nothing to do with Snipers Hide, David Rooney or the lawsuit. It has everything to do with how you are handling this situation.

      • JSF February 24, 2014, 2:41 pm

        “You know, the one that he admits to shutting people out of after he decides to blackball them. He was given the first comment on the story, and lots of subsequent comments. David was not afforded the same on his website.”

        You keep saying this, but in the response from Frank at the top of the comments he states David never has created an account on SnipersHide. After reading some of the links it seems that David was encouraged to join SnipersHide to respond which he has failed to do. Are you just Davids parrot with no mind of your own?

        If you would do just a small google search on TaciticalRifles you would discover many unhappy customers. From the video and photo evidence presented you can clearly see their work leaves a lot to be desired. The way you have defended TR leads to believe you have a financial interest in TR, they are giving you a free rifle, or you know very little about quality workmanship of a precision rifle of similar cost.I have rifles from respected gunsmiths and I would be absolutely disgusted if I received one similar to the TR rifles in the video.

        GA should be ashamed that they are defending a company that is taking advantage of their customers. Throwing out that TR donates to defend the 2nd amendment is laughable when one stops to think that the money they donated was made from screwing gun owners. I have to believe most of their customers will never pull the barreled action and see the bedding job that looks like my one year old did with playdough, used action screws on a brand new rifle, and spray paint on a rifle that cost $8,000. I thought GunsAmerica was for the little guy? You guys have sure shown where your allegiance lies, whoever is offering you something.

  • MKlos February 24, 2014, 11:59 am

    The issue should still be focused on if the guns are good or bad, not how much the manufacturer spends on advertising or supporting the 1st or 2nd amendment. Being a big advertiser does not mean his products are good. If I got an expensive rifle that was poor quality, and got no recourse, you bet I’d let people know about it. If it turns out that is the case, then the real bully is the manufacturer trying to silence the bad (legitimate) reviews of his product. If it is bogus and not provable, then the only thing the fellows posting bad reviews will understand is financial penalty. I disagree with the statement “you are always going to have disgruntled customers” I work for a large company and our policy is to “make it right” even with the customers who seem to never be satisfied. It CAN be done, we do it.

    • Administrator February 24, 2014, 12:12 pm

      But you didn’t make that decision and you won’t make the decision to stop doing that. The issue has nothing to do with the guns themselves of the customer service of TR. It is about a bully abusing his bully pulpit for personal gain.

      • invalid username February 24, 2014, 9:50 pm

        Any evidence of said “personal gain”?

  • noel p. mellen February 24, 2014, 12:02 pm

    I’ve come to be a fan of your reviews. While in the Army I held a then class III permit to manufacture automatic weapons and others. After being retired for wounds and tiring of post 10PM visits to talk guns and supply drinks, let alone check out their own weapons, I gave up on it. I’ve regretted this decision and I understand what TR is going through. Back in the day people like P. O. Ackley and Bill Brophy were often in my area and had opinions on almost anything, but they were in the way of personal experience or conversation. They never went public or tried to hurt anyone’s business and were respected for that. It is a shame that this has come to what it is. I have a very high opinion of Marine snipers. At Benning’s school for boys we made some of their rifles and I’ve seen some of the misreporting of who shot what weapon. Mostly wrong but not anything that would harm anyone. Sometimes parties that are in these professions create images and abilities of themselves that are beyond reality and are more related to self image. I don’t doubt that Frank could outshoot me at any time and I doubt that I was ever as good as he is but I would wish that he and TR could step back a moment and reach some mutual agreement that would help rather than hurt our love for firearms.

  • Turbo February 24, 2014, 12:03 pm

    TR builds an obscenely overpriced POS rifle, and Frank is indeed an internet bully. A private web forum is well within its right to allow or disallow whomsomever they like from participating, in addition to speaking positively or negatively of whomsoever they like. No one is guaranteed any right whatsoever on the private website.

    I am enthusiastically watching this “Day of Our Lives” saga unfold, as it is hugely entertaining to watch both entities self-destruct.

  • Mike Hunt February 24, 2014, 12:10 pm

    Anyone that drops 8,000 on a rifle from a company with a BBB rating as low a tacticalrifles kinda had it coming. It is a shame anyone would buy off a positive article at all. Do your research people. Any internet forum would tell you to stay away..

    http://www.bbb.org/west-florida/business-reviews/gun-dealers/tactical-rifles-in-zephyrhills-fl-90035661

    • Dr Marc Williams February 24, 2014, 5:13 pm

      Those are some interesting BBB complaints that for the most part revolve around a central theme. After reading them it’s not hard to see why this company doesn’t pass the preliminary smell test. When a custom rifle builder promises certain build times and then doubles them during production claiming “unavailable parts from 3rd party vendors” then pushing completion times out to 24 to 30 months there’s a problem. We’ve seen it before, the first thing to suffer when over extending yourself is quality….JM2C

      Bottom line is this lawsuit does no one any favors, especially TacticalRifles.

  • Gary B. February 24, 2014, 12:11 pm

    Well,

    There are so many social issues at play with this whole non-sense.

    – People gladly tend to trash talk in forums.

    – People also have a long memory for bad experiences and a poorer memory for good ones.

    – Companies tend to go after people for posting things that paint them in a bad light; some companies like to BULLY people / web forum operators into submission.

    (I had this happen when I told a car dealer I was going to post the entire experience online, and had to tell them that I was “loaded” and had a great attorney.)

    – Abusive usage of public forums: specifically both multiple accounts and getting people to post for you…

    – Forums (like email) allow for the easy misunderstanding of the tone of what someone else was saying.

    Anyway, I have to agree with many folks here: It does come across the GA is the vendors side here. If the article was neutral and only the facts as reported from the court transcripts and general details about interviews, I would have found this credible.

    This article causes me to wonder about GA’s neutrality in reporting, Tactical Rifles as a company, and Sniper’s Hide.

    As a direct result of this article:

    – I don’t trust GA’s reporting

    – I will not purchase a anything from Tactical Rifles (not worth the risk)

    – Be suspicious of SH and disappearing posts, though I have no reason to suspect anything

    • Administrator February 24, 2014, 12:31 pm

      There are no transcripts Gary. Frank appears to want to keep this out of going under oath at all costs from what we read here. This is an editorial and written as such. You are supposed to take sides. But no, I am not anti-capitalist since escaping the US educational system’s brainwashing and learning how to think for myself. You?

  • Muhjesbude February 24, 2014, 12:29 pm

    This situation has shamefully deteriorated into a useless, wasteful, caricature of potentially everything that’s wrong in an overly ‘trigger happy’ litigation driven society mired in flawed emotional content and further pumped up by the individual participants’ now in defensive/attack mode for a testosterone induced ego war!

    This is reminiscent of the irrationality sometimes a product of the temper of the so-called weaker sex of the human species at certain ‘intervals’ throughout the year?

    but it is nothing new in the history of ‘man’.

    Out of respect for Paul’s noble efforts to preserve a sense of egalitarianism as in the ‘republic’ — that we wish the government would replicate as it should–on a public forum which is fortunate to maintain a modicum of intellectual discourse from some very wise participants, compared to most others, I will attempt to donate my rather expensive consultation time in the form of a solution proposal to provide satisfactory resolution in the spirit of preservation of what’s left of our sanity.

    But first one must prepare one’s mind by eliminating the ‘flak’ and comprehending the following aphorisms.

    ‘Almost nothing is ever as it seems because the truth,at first observation, rarely complies with reality’ –Mahatma
    Muhjesbude.

    ‘After all is said and done, there will always be more ‘said’, than ‘done’. ‘ –?

    ‘War does not determine who is ‘right’…only who is left.’ –?

    While opinion impartiality regarding the debate is virtually impossible to achieve in something like this due to the nature of the beast, Wayne set the correct ‘tone’ for the logic that needs to be applied by both sides in order to properly ‘dope’ the wind drift to the target. But let me first put his case analysis in concise ‘layman’s terms’ for libel/slander criteria for those of us who might ever consider doing lawsuits like this.

    Very basically, to win a lawsuit like this for damages, you must prove two things: That the information put out concerning your business or actions or statements was, in fact, NOT true, and that it was KNOWN to be not true by the defendant. In other words it was an intentional lie. If you can prove pernicious or malicious aggravation, then that would help your case, somewhat.

    But here’s the ‘misfire’ when you lock and load and pull the trigger. In order to collect a monetary compensation even if you win the claim, you must prove the damages! In this case TR would have to show the court exactly how much he lost by all the ‘lies’ put forth by Snipers Hide’s causality, potential future ‘damages’ notwithstanding.

    So here’s the reality: Assuming TR wins the suit, he has to document actual losses due to the false information put forth against his company. If he, as so many other established builders with a good reputation, is still producing at ‘speed’ and even back ordered, he would likely not get a dime in compensation. Where’s the loss of revenue? In fact, a sharp attorney could even okey doke that up front by saying that all the publicity caused others to check out TR’s products and even potentially increased his business, instead, by all the free advertising?!

    And the caveat to this is that in a gun world where as Paul or someone above said almost all builders occasionally produce a lemon, just like Mercedes or Ford does once in a while, and if TR can’t honestly say that they never ever did a ‘not that perfect’ of a build, then the entire issue of people commenting or making videos showing such an occasional lemon gun by TR would likely be cited as ‘moot’ by the judge in this case, and therefore no ‘untruths’ or lies could be absolutely ‘proven’, because the particular example would be subjective in most if not all cases. As in the barrel wear ‘accuracy’ issue, for instance. As long as the weapon is not obviously flawed in production by part mechanism and functions, quality and levels of ‘perfection’ cannot support a presumption of falsehood.

    And of course it works the other way. Just because you make a mistake and produce a bad product, to any ‘subjective’ degree once in a while doesn’t mean you will be sued out of business for it. There are already ‘lemon’ laws in place, and most reputable manufacturers have a no questions asked return or repair policy or specific warranty requirements in the purchase agreement.

    As far as who deleted what and why and such is also none of anybody’s business on an open website. Happens all the time at the discretion and of the ‘administrator’. Your free speech is protected, but so is the website’s. It’s like the ‘freedom ‘of’ and also ‘from’ religion’ in the Constitution.

    The spirit and letter of the law here might not support personal perceptions of pernicious damage for personal gratifications when it gets right down to a trial. Especially in view of the comparative facts of companies like Blackthorne, formerly Vulcan, i think, or something like that, being the all out punching bag on the web for years for everyone who ever thought they could put together their own AR kit and failed, and no doubt suffered untold badmouthing but guess what? They still run a full page ad in SGN and are doing quite well, considering?

    TR’s case doesn’t look too ‘promising’ to me in my rather extensive experience in these things. Remember, self righteous perception of being ‘hurt’ is not always the same as the statutory reality and actual remedy.

    Plus, Snipers Hide was smart enough to put the ‘business’ in an LLC which likely precludes going after Frank’s (or whomever is the ‘evile propagandist’s’ personal assets. And I don’t know how much tangible assets an internet blog site would have for any recoverable monetary value, in any decision? And since a civil litigation is concluded by a preponderance of evidence, or lack of it, and not ‘reasonable doubt’, as a criminal case, This whole thing is looks like a huge waste of valuable time for everyone concerned? If they won the case, TR might now even be able to be reimbursed in a trial decision for the costs because they set up a legal defense fund?

    The only ones benefiting monetarily from this will be the lawyers. Everybody else loses.

    If it’s not too late the best solution is for both parties to drop their ‘weapons’ and both agree to a mutual statement regretting the ‘misunderstanding’, lamenting unanticipated issues blown out of proportion, and immediately ending an out of control momentum of animosity that nobody ever really wanted.

    As someone already said, but is worth repeating, Our ‘brotherhood in arms’ has too many outside fascist enemies to worry about to be fighting so bitterly among ourselves.

    Paul, If you’re talking to both these guys, you’d come out a real hero if you helped ‘settle’ this in a reasonably objective manner. These are two men who might be standing besides each other, and maybe you and me, passing the ammo, someday…?

    • Administrator February 24, 2014, 12:34 pm

      I’ve tried, including a lengthy conversation with Frank on Facebook. He can’t let down his fans now. Manning up and saying sorry for what he already admitted here isn’t within his perview.

      • Frank February 24, 2014, 12:51 pm

        Paul,
        Like you, David NEVER ONCE, attempted to contact me regarding this issue.

        Yes we spoke via Facebook and you told me to “apologize” to David, for what ? I never started any of the posts, I had nothing do with the video but seeing it like everyone else. Despite yours & his false allegation of me being in it.

        You only spoke to me, because I reached out, just like I reached out to David back in 2008… David went right to the attorney’s twice now… not once but TWICE now, he has made zero effort to reach out and get it fixed.

        Hell my online battles with Larue are well documented and even he and I have spoken at SHOT over it. He is at least man enough to step up and talk. A clue there.

        David went to lawyers, filed the suit without making any rational attempt to settle this before.

        Also as noted, his fan base comments are present on SH, unlike you we have not deleted this posts. You can find them right now and within every negative thread on SH regarding TR… they are there would you like me to starting linking them ? If you bothered to look you will see them, shill, and amazingly dishonest as they are.

        Read the 2010 reply, David wanted the posts off SH “OR ELSE” so we removed them… him sending shills to come back after that to try and slide positive reviews in doesn’t change the fact he burned the SH Bridge, not I.

        I have nothing to apologize for, and he knows it. Which is why he filed an blatantly frivolous lawsuit to pressure us in removing the negative posts, while at the same time wanting nothing but the glowing reviews from his hand picked supporters to stand. No one has prevented him from using any other site to promote his product, including this one.

        • Administrator February 24, 2014, 1:07 pm

          Oh come on Frank. You just posted a reply to his complaints going back to 2010. As I have said many times here already, your position is very clear on your own website. I assumed, and was correct, that you would reply to the post and it was up several days before we emailed it to our list. Satisfied customers are not shills Frank. You have been beating people up for years and none of us know what your true motives are. David could have handled this better, but we can all handle emotional situations better. You have an ethical responsibility to not abuse your position as a respected leader and world class shooter. I could just as easily say, like your minions here are doing to me, “oh you just attacked him because he didn’t advertise with you!” Your fans believe in you and I hope you don’t let them down when you have to keep track of everything you did and why under oath.

          • Frank February 24, 2014, 1:28 pm

            So Paul,

            If I gave you links to positive posts from his supporters on SH what would his argument be, instead he likes to play the victim. The posts are there, and still standing. Do you want examples ?

            We bring up the shills because, 1, he sends them you admitted that, 2. they claim things that are untrue,like 50,000 rounds through is his and still shooting haji’s, 3. we have pictures of them working his booth at SHOT, so what more do you need ? Above you said, you don’t allow the free flow of ideas on here, why am I held to a different standard ?

            These posts are present, both good and bad, it is not my problem that members of SH dismiss these positive posts as pure propaganda from hand picked supporters of TR with an agenda. Just like your blatant agenda here… it’s not rocket science.

            If he never filed this suit, on any given day we can give two shits about Tactical Rifles and David Rooney he is non-issue. We don’t use his rifles, we don’t care about them, as I have said on my site, I chase quality, I am a well know gun whore, if you make a product worth owning I want it, doesn’t get any simpler than that. I buy rifles from many places, TR is not one. That is my right.

            You continue to confuse slander laws with our opinion and those of his unhappy customers who were put out for months and months, yelled at, threatened, dismissed, and wait, “Bullied” because they expected more for $8k.

            He tried advertising through Tactical Republic on my Site, I turned it down and told them no. Why because he threatened to sue me… I didn’t want his money. That is documented too, Tactical Republic asked specifically why, the threat was why. I would hope you would be honest and say if a company threatened to sue you and a year later wanted to advertise you would turn that money down.

            How honest do you want to be here… would you allow articles and ads from a company that threatened to sue you ?

          • Administrator February 24, 2014, 1:39 pm

            I don’t know Frank. Some of my best friends started as fights.

          • Dwesson February 24, 2014, 2:37 pm

            I don’t know how someone who purports to be a firearms expert, heck even passing hobbyist, could possibly defend TacticalRifles.net from an objective viewpoint. The price point of their products alone scream rip-off in their own right. Even if you think the quality of their work is being unfairly maligned, you can’t deny that tacking on an extra YEAR or MORE of quoted lead time to build a rifle is simply unacceptable, unless your entire shop burned straight to the ground. If someone is willing to pay those prices and is happy with what they got, then they simply didn’t do their homework, ignorance is bliss, a fool and his money soon parted etc. The reality is that doing some simple homework you can find the absolute best in the business as far as reliability, customer service, and accuracy for a fraction of what TacticalRifles charges for a rifle. I saw them at SHOT and just chuckled as I walked on. Frankly I have no idea who would buy a rifle from them, period, when there are so many better/best options out there for so much less.

          • 0311Hesco February 25, 2014, 7:15 am

            …I doubt this will be one of those…

      • Steve February 24, 2014, 1:25 pm

        Mr. Helinski,

        You didn’t seek both sides of this story before publishing your hit-piece, and subsequent posts have made it abundantly clear to all you’re not an honest broker, but someone bent on telling 1/2 the story.

        To date, you have YET to contact Mr. Galli, even when he’s urged you to pick up the phone and get his side of the story.

        That oversight speaks VOLUMES about your genuine concern for seeking the truth, but a “blogger” like yourself is obviously not bound by normal journalistic standards.

        Interjecting yourself into this situation without possession of all the facts is proof positive that you’ve FIRMLY planted your flag already.

        I’d suggest brushing up on the term “PILLORIED” you and your buddy are a putting on a World Class example of the Streisand Effect.

  • Lance Wickum February 24, 2014, 12:58 pm

    I used to get on SH a fair amount. Still do occasionally. Frank is a short man with a huge case short man syndrome. He is also a very smart man and good at making himself look good on the net. I don’t think we would get along in person after some private messaging we have had over spin drift. I like bringing it up on occasion just to keep the fire going. It has become a fire many can sit around and laugh at now. That is the way I like it. tactical rifles, never dealt with them in person. My experience is the one who fights back over an internet forum issue is the looser in the long run. I wouldn’t be surprised if he doesn’t have a business in 2 years after all of this.
    As for gunsamerica, after reading this administrator’s comments he needs to grow up. First time I remember being on this site is because of this article. I would have hard time taking anything from here serious for a very long time.

  • Wesley Rogers February 24, 2014, 1:38 pm

    So, Paul where is your open attack on Sniper Central? They too have an ongoing thread about this company and the negatives that are attached and so members on there have even warned others to stay away from TR or you will regret it in the end. Come on step up and defend TR from those terrible attacks on SC. Or maybe that negative comments on both sites are true and shows the work of TR. Yes you got to shoot one (most likely cherry picked over to ensure positive reviews) but one does not accurately portray the quality of work on puts out. Remember even a broke clock is right twice a day, but that does not make it good to go. After reading this openly biased attack on SH, thus siding with a poorly operated business you can take me off of your email list as I want nothing to do with this site anymore.

    • Administrator February 24, 2014, 2:13 pm

      You are missing the whole point Wesley. We review guns negatively a lot and nobody is trying to suppress anyone’s opinions about David’s or anyone else’s products. This about about someone being on a mission to tear down someone’s business.

  • Peter Franks February 24, 2014, 2:23 pm

    ” I am still a member there but rarely if ever post because if you don’t fall in line with the clique off internet experts who consider themselves to be ….. well lets just say there are a few there that are actually intelligent and knowledgeable but the rest are wannabe shooters who I honestly do not think own anything more than a Ruger 10/22 all decked out with a tactical looking stock which of course we all know now makes them an expert in the eyes of the SH.con community.”

    Beacon – I noticed the same thing a few years back when some one there stared dogging on the ACOG saying what a nothing POS it is, etc. The ACOG is, of course, NOT a precision, long range optic, it is designed specifically for minute of bad guy in close combat conditions. I don’t own an ACOG and don’t work for Trijicon or own stock in the company if it is publicly held, but I know the difference between a 4x ACOG and the S&B 5-25×56. Seems I recall hearing that the DOD bought few of them so they must not be all bad.

    Then there is the people who dog the Horus Vision H-58, H-59 and now TREMR2 reticules. If you don’t like it, don’t buy it, easy right?

    I don’t go SH anymore either.

  • Bryan February 24, 2014, 2:49 pm

    I think getting both sides will shed more light on the matter. Getting one side is easy to do if you are defending that side. There are two sides to every story! Keep it far!

  • Brad February 24, 2014, 2:53 pm

    Most people are willing to listen. However short of the lawsuit, what has Mr. Rooney had to say? There are some good reviews on Sniper’s Hide as well as other forums that anyone can find (if *I* can find them, anyone can, haha) with a Google search.

    The issue is that I see is Mr. Rooney has neglected to address these publicly. Yes I know he claims he can not generate an account on Sniper’s Hide, but what about the other forums? Calguns.net, thefiringline.com, sniperforums.com, m4carbine.net, Better Business Bureau, etc. all have either separate end-user complaints of Tactical Rifles or reference one. Surely, at the very least, Mr. Rooney could have addressed these allegations through one of these competing sites.

    That is what frustrates me. I understand his silence with the pending lawsuit and all, however in my opinion it should have never gotten to this point. Customer service (e.g. communication and delay updates for even the most difficult customers) is paramount. When I, as a consumer in this niche industry, am about to plop 2, 3, 4, 5 thousand dollars for a rifle/scope/suppressor/setup/etc., I don’t only look for supreme accuracy. I also look for customer service when something goes wrong and I’ll pay high dollar for it.

    I currently am working on getting the components together for a 6mm build (can’t decide between Creedmore or x47 Lapua). I’ve looked high and low for someone to true my R700 action (picked Gre-Tan), buy bottom metal (Badger Ordnance M5), Stock (Manners TF-4A), Barrel (Krieger MTU), and assemble it all (Robert Gradous). All of these manufacturers have had sub-par components or rifles come out of their shops and all of them have made it right on their dime in an extremely expedited fashion. Same reason I buy Vortex, Nightforce, Seekins, Schmidt & Bender, Desert Tech, Triad, B&T Industries, etc. products- Customer Service is paramount.

    For all of these industry leaders, you can find independent forum posts from customers praising their Customer Service. I can’t find any for Tactical Rifles. I’m sorry but I don’t believe anyone’s QC is 100% every time. I sure as hell am not perfect and don’t expect anyone else to be.

    Mr. Rooney appears (I use this term because I have not read any official rebuttal other than a regurgitation of the lawsuit above) to be willing to sue people shedding the light on his apparent QC and Customer Service issues rather than addressing it. I don’t expect Mr. Rooney, Tactical Rifles, or anyone to be perfect and blameless. We’re all human. However I do expect people to admit their mistakes when they’re made and correct them. That is what makes this industry great and that is what will ensure success for years to come.

  • michael B February 24, 2014, 3:03 pm

    I just wanted to chime in in this. I have been an instructor on my Department for 17 years. While at a local range here in CNY last summer, I noticed a member having problems with his new TR rifle. I didnt ask anything about it at the time, for I was unfamiliar with the builder.
    I have know this member for 12 years, and consider him a good friend. After the range, we met over his house for some coffee where he asked me to look at the new rifle he bought.
    I was amazed on the poor workman ship I saw. Im not going into details here, but In my opinion.. this was a very poorly build gun..
    My friend contacted Dave several times and was told it was his shooting skills that was sub-par, for TR”s rifles were of the highest quality. Never offering to take a look at it or repair and defects.
    As a outsider in this feud, I can see how there could be a constant trail of unhappy customers , who received sub-par rifles, and no costumer service for there hard earned money from TR.

  • Dennis Howard February 24, 2014, 3:46 pm

    Here is a screenshot of a failed username login. As you can see, the username is “TurdFerguson”…. Does this mean Frank banned me? No… THIS MEANS I MADE UP A USERNAME….AND TURDFERGUSON DOESNT EXIST… Surely, being an blog/forum admin, you understand how easy this is to fake…

    [URL=http://s202.photobucket.com/user/greenmachine00/media/GunsAmericaIsDumb.png.html][IMG]http://i202.photobucket.com/albums/aa31/greenmachine00/GunsAmericaIsDumb.png[/IMG][/URL]

  • Robert Mullan February 24, 2014, 6:26 pm

    Great! Since David now has a forum, maybe he can answer why his customer service is so horrible. Why is it order are talking years to complete and and asking for money to finish projects still months off (unknown to the buyer)..

    The internet works both ways. Take care of your customers and they will take care of you. File a lawsuit just because of a bad review, be prepared for the storm to follow.

    Dave did reply on SH….under some assumed name and was trollish at best…ndnboy or whatever his moniker on twitter is. He took his ball and went home.

    Robert Mullan
    (not a future TR customer because of this)

  • ed February 24, 2014, 6:46 pm

    Somebody call HLN quick! This is the trial I want to see on TV!

  • Don Dineen February 24, 2014, 6:50 pm

    Wow, Until today I had never heard any of this feud. It made for a fun read, and a waste of time. From the images used, I would say people are overpaying for TR rifles. The workmanship appears crude. Function does matter, but for $8000 I’d expect more. Over 40 years ago I bought two Remington rifles. One was a M722 re-chambered from .300 Savage to .308 the other a M700 ADL in .22-250. They were topped with a 4x and 6x Weaver scopes respectively. Crap scopes but the M722 was $100 and the M700 under $200. Both shot under MOA.
    If people have an extra $8000 they certainly are allowed to waste it on whatever they like. I certainly wouldn’t spend it on a TR rifle – or any other “sniper rifle”.
    Seriously, no one needs a 1/4 MOA sniper rifle if engaged in civilian law enforcement. They are nice to have if you shoot them in competition or for fun. On the street, I have never heard of a shot being taken on a suspect that needed under 1MOA to get the job done.
    This lawsuit business just seems silly. Someone needs to grow up. It appears that TR needs to improve CQ and customer service. I don’t blame the customer for complaining over a shoddy looking rifle. But it does seem to shoot and it appears that he never made a serious attempt to get TR to fix it. No company is going to take control for repairs after a third party played with it.
    Gentlemen, There isn’t a sniper rifle on this earth worth that kind of money. “Lives depend on this rifle performing”, is BS. If you can’t take the shot with a rifle producing 2 MOA then the shot is too risky to take. Do any of these rifles actually get used as sniper rifles, or are they simply toys? If they are in real use, who paid the money? If you are a police officer you wouldn’t want to take a shot as your personal rifle will go into evidence for years if you are lucky. Departments buying rifles at those prices are wasting taxpayer dollars.
    Being able to sell rifles and kit for $20K (like the US Army) doesn’t mean it should be spent.

  • John R. February 24, 2014, 8:20 pm

    I know nothing about “Tactical Rifles” and I haven’t read many man forums, well not for 10 years or so; this forum being an exception. I quit reading them when it appeared that a lot of the commenters were opinionated, elitist, and disparaging to new posters who simply trying to gain a little knowledge which is odd because it’s my thought that these forums were for sharing knowledge.
    I’ve had problems with some of the firearms I’ve brought but I didn’t take to the internet and post negative comments I simply contacted customer service for the appropriate manufacturer to see how to resolve the problem. I can’t say enough about Sig Sauer, Smith and Wesson, Kimber, Springfield Armory and Colt’s customer service. These companies resolved all my issues with little or no cost to me. Kimber recently resolved an issue with a 20 year old pistol when they could have just as easily said tough luck.
    So I can’t help but to be somewhat confused about this article. Did the owner contact TR to try to resolve the issue? Did TR respond? Or did the owner of this allegedly defective rifle just decide to do a hit piece without giving TR a chance to resolve the issue? If TR was never given the opportunity to resolve the issue I wold think the video is slanderous in nature. Anyone can make a video but the content can be tuned to whatever the maker wants it to say and really doesn’t prove or disprove anything.
    I remember an unwarranted internet smear about Counter Sniper scopes from a few years ago that probably cost the company a ton of money and there was no absolutely no justification for slamming a very good line of scopes. Who knows why, but even one bad apple doesn’t spoil the whole basket.
    Finally, one of the business models Gaston Glock set in place was to settle disputes at a base level, regardless of who is right or wrong, in order to avoid negative publicity, I think it worked and you don’t have to be a Glock fan to appreciate that.
    Curious to see how this turns out but for as much information about this article was printed I can’t help but think just as much has been left out.

    • Haywood Jablome February 25, 2014, 2:48 am

      Sooooooooooo Countersnipers don’t suck?

    • haywood jablome February 25, 2014, 2:53 am

      Soooooo Countersipers dont suck?

    • Clayton Bigsby February 25, 2014, 9:15 am

      “I remember an unwarranted internet smear about Counter Sniper scopes from a few years ago that probably cost the company a ton of money and there was no absolutely no justification for slamming a very good line of scopes.”

      Oh lawd!!! I know what the “R.” stands for now.

  • bob February 24, 2014, 8:22 pm

    whole thing is lame

  • Wayne February 25, 2014, 2:42 am

    I’m going to keep my comments about who is right or wrong to myself. This is a perfect example of whats wrong with our community as gun owners. Gun owners are the biggest threat to gun owners. We spend so much time fighting each other on the small uses about types or carry, or actions that we lose sight of what is important. Protection of all 2A rights for everyone. Not just the ones we pick and choose work for us as individuals. I hope this gets worked out in court soon so that we can move on with more important battles.

  • Mattbo February 25, 2014, 2:59 am

    I hope that my comment will be of some value to all involved over this dispute.I not long ago contemplated having a long range tactical rifle built.While doing some homework on the matter,I did speak to someone from TacticalRifles.net and received a followup call on the possible build.In the meantime,as I indicated,I did a lot of homework checking on TacticalRifles over the internet forums and on their website as I did with some other long range rifle builders.At this time,I had not been familiar with snipers Hide or any of the other forums as again I was new at this.I did come across the video and I read some positive and negative reviews of TacticalRifle builds and must say that I came away somewhat confused as the video convinced me that I probably should seek another builder and on the other hand,I read some pretty impressive reviews on the performance of TacticalRIfles long range builds.In the end however,I felt I was taking a risk and decided against using TacticalRifles.The point that I am trying to make is that I thought the purpose of following forums was to learn about the sport and give and receive information that would be vital to your participation in the sport and also to receive help as to who would be best able to provide you with the services you require to participate in the sport and at a reasonable price.After reading these comments and about the suit,I am in so many ways disgusted at the behavior of everyone involved for the most part.I feel that if a builder( of anything) performs at a substandard level(I am in no way judging anyone here because I do not have that right and know too little about this issue),then that business will eventually suffer buy it’s own poor workmanship or standards and will also eventually suffer by word of mouth.This happens in any business,especially the food industry.In this business,hopefully negative publicity will drive that business to make changes that will improve their workmanship and correct the negative publicity.On the other hand,we all know that there are people in this world who will do whatever necessary to get what they want no matter who it hurts.I again am not saying that this is the case.What bothers me so much is that I have read one comment after another here and this issue is being tried here when all parties should take a step back and act like adults.Save the sparring back and forth for the courts.Afterwards when all is said and done,publish whatever,wherever .I do not believe that what is being said here benefits anyone right now.I personally started to find valuable information on this and other sites in regards to the long range rifle builds,ammo, calibers,and other info but I really did not bargain for this back and forth sparring.We have seen enough of this with our government and as we all have seen,nothing really gets accomplished and people always get hurt.This world has too much of that already.Thanks for allowing me to comment.Not sure if there was anything valuable but hopefully gentlemen,time and clear heads will allow you to reach a compromise that works in the best interest of everyone concerned.

  • 9times February 25, 2014, 2:38 pm

    Regarding Tactical rifles.
    Own one of their sticks in 300wsm.
    One hole shooter for sure.
    Now I see this garbage about their rifles.
    Enough already guys, we get it.
    You probably have never seen or picked up one of his rifles.

    So why don’t you get out of mummy’s basement and off the computer.
    Unless your agenda just won’t allow it.
    Cowards you are, throwing out lies with the rest of the cool kids.
    Karma is a bitch.
    Snipershide, you days are numbered.

  • Dennis Howard February 25, 2014, 3:30 pm

    “Beacon of Sanity” seems pretty upset. He must have bought a Remington 770 thinking he could turn it in to a factory 1,000yd tack-driver. If you honestly are a member, and think the site is made up of uneducated wannabes you obviously just sit and look at The Bear Pit all day, and read nothing.

    By clique, do you mean the group of people who actually spend money on quality merchandise, optics, rifles, etc., and not throw money away on TR chicom toys? If so, then you might be right, because people should understand that super sweet BSA scope with the dual red/green illumination is no where near the product of NF, S&B, USO, etc. It could also mean that you probably wont get the accuracy you desire with that Hogue stock versus a MCM, HS, AI, or other brand stock or chassis.

    Sorry if the truth hurts, but precision shooting with precision equipment, is not achievable with a food-stamp budget…

  • Haywood Jablome February 26, 2014, 3:38 am

    (edited comment after not making it through moderation, toned down my choice of words)

    let me get this right, TR is suing a private web forum for negative reviews and claiming he wasnt allowed to tell his story? I get that right?

    Look around, there are negative reviews of TR on almost every gun related forum on the internet! Has he claimed his side of the story on ANY of them? Is the entire internet part of a massive conglomerate conspiracy to bring down tactical rifles? If you think so ya better tighten up the ole tinfoil hat cause it’s all downhill from here.

    If his product was so great then it should speak for itself and overwelm any negative feedback out there. For example, has there been any negative comments about, lets say GAP, yes there have been. The difference is how GAP took care of the issue, quickly and efficiently and ensuring the customer was satisfied. Add that customer service with the fact that they are turning out hundreds upon hundreds of beautifully built precision rifles and you get a trend, one that says you can ask any random joe on any random range and they are gonna say they have heard nothing but great things about GAP. Ask the same about TR and see what they say. Oh and look at what rifles are winning precision rifle matches, it isn’t TR.

    Anyone can watch that video and see that that’s a rifle that was born inferior, time and bullets didnt do any of that shown on the video. To sue a smith for fixing an inferior product is comical, note he NEVER even said who built the rifle. Is the owner of the rifle being sued?

    to try and blame one man and one websight for a bad reputation is a joke. Subjectively take at look at why there is that stigma. To illustrate this point lets take a field trip shall we, this is a rifle on gunbroker, right now, being sold as “like new”(granted that could be a false claim buy the seller and no fault of TR). Take a look at the crown, the banged up scope base. Ok so your not sold as those could of been done by the current owner, ok, take a look at the bolt knob to handle fit, anyone knows that for a 4500(asking price) rifle that fit looks like it was done by my buddy in his garage. I wont address other things wrong in the pics I think you get the idea.

    http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=395935162

  • Truther February 26, 2014, 9:07 am

    Here’s a typical TR customer. He’s a liar and doesn’t know his rifles. This is an M40A5 and I’m the king of England.

    http://youtu.be/yz4841szbHo

  • xsmbuc February 26, 2014, 10:44 am

    Why did the comments stop? Is the admin not allowing new posts? I was really enjoying this cat fight.

  • Gregg M March 3, 2014, 3:54 pm

    All this for an internet mugging of sorts, but that IS the culture at Snipershide is it not? So much energy has been wasted when this should have been handled between the buyer and seller.

    I am not for the new political correctness about bullying, it happens, it will always happen, its part of life and we should all learn to deal with it. I don’t like the way Snipers Hide is run, but its his party so its his rules. I left the site myself, asking Frank to delete my account, and he did so with his usual kick in the ars on the way out the door to me.

    That said, there also appears to be some issues with TR’s lack of customer service, but than again, in the last few years the gun makers have held all of the cards, and the buying public has been forced to take what we can get, and we have got a lot of junk. TR is not the only company which has let a few bad rifles slip from the back door, and they won’t be the last.

    We have all had a nice front row seat to two inflexible ego’s at work here, and how you can land your butt into federal court over some stupid issue you shouldn’t be involved with anyway. Hopefully these two parties will resolve the issue and stop supplying further ammo for our outside anti gun observers who are just loving the fact we are ripping each other apart…which is what they do for sport at SH, is it not?

    I hope both parties come away from this with some enlightenment.

  • DownrangeFuture March 7, 2014, 10:33 am

    I had planned on buying a rifle from tacticalrifles.net on a recommendation from a friend. His rifle shot well. But when they quoted me almost 19 months to get my rifle I started to look around. I can get the same quality rifle from other people, with better lead times for much less than half the price. SniperCentral.com for instance. An $1125 rifle, with scope that shoots 1/2moa or better. 6-9 months lead time on average. Got it in 8 months. Dave wanted almost 3k for his rifle without any scope.

    So I bought my rifle at SC. Not to say that Dave wasn’t a pleasure to deal with over the phone. After I told him what I had made up my mind to do, he offered to send me an already built rifle with scope (much better scope) for just over $2k. Part of that being a military discount. I just liked the stock and barrel options better at snipercentral. I can’t comment overmuch on the quality of the tacticalrifles’ rifles other than to say my buddies rifle that I shot all of 5 rounds through shot very well.

    But I have to say, I had never heard of snipershide or seen many bad reviews (credible bad reviews anyway) until after this whole lawsuit mess. Perhaps suing someone for slander (over things that OTHER PEOPLE said in a PUBLIC FORUM) wasn’t the best course of action.

  • Brian March 7, 2014, 10:09 pm

    Wow. Good to know that Tacticalrifles.net and Gunsamerica are ANTI-1st Amendment.
    I hope you fascists do not have children.

  • Linette July 29, 2014, 10:23 am

    It’s really very complex in this busy life to listen news on Television, thus I only use the web for that purpose,
    and take the most recent news.

  • Steve August 8, 2014, 5:03 pm

    Just look at what the Pro’s use. Jon Beanland, AI AE/AW, Spartan, GAP, etc. I have many custom rifles, and a friend who has a TR rifle, and wonders why it shoots 1 moa @ 100yds, and my Beanland shoots .3″. I just tell him to let Jon build his rifle. He also asks ?’s about why his gun was $6500, and mine was $3200. What do I tell him??? It’s the same thing except mine has higher $ parts on it. When I see a car that’s given a lot of trouble over the years, I’m not gonna buy one. POINT BLANK. When I see one that’s been a good one… I may buy one. Too many good Smiths out there to pay 8K

  • Thomas Ryan November 27, 2014, 9:47 am

    So here it is Nov, 2014 and TR still has a website running, and Frank still has Little Man syndrome, talking down to his website followers.

    Actually, I don’t care about TR or SH….I do browse thru SH on occasion and its like many have posted…Frank is arrogant and demeaning to people who frequent his forum. He has a very high opinion of himself for sure. Whenever you have to shout out to the world how well-respected you are…well, you are probably not respected all that well.

    TR? Well, like someone else said…if you pay 8K for a custom rifle, you are an idiot in the first degree, as their are tons of great builders out there willing to assemble parts (and at the end of the day…thats what they are doing- assembling PARTS) to make a top notch gun.

    So what have I learned here today? The lawsuit is stupid, Frank Galli doesn’t impress me, and TR’s guns are overpriced. Happy Thanksgiving everyone.

Leave a Comment