In God We Trust… To See Our Enemy

There is currently a growing controversy surrounding the acquisition of high quality military rifle sights for the Army and Marines.  It seems the manufacturer, Trijion, has since it’s earliest days, included a biblical verse in the serial number of their products.  The verse, inscribed in what “ABC News” refers to as “code” is a sort of model number.  Each model has a different verse attached to it.

The “code” is that the verse actually doesn’t appear on the rifle site.  The code for their high in special ops sight is JN8:12.   That’s all the sight says… at the end of the serial number.  In the example shown on ABC news, the whole inscription is AC064X32JN8:12.

Now ABC News, and others that have latched onto this growing controversy, want to claim that this biblical message violates the anti-proselytization law.  To avoid the appearance of a crusade, US Troops are barred from attempting to spread their own religious views in theater.

What I’d really like someone to explain to me is how that serial number, which for point one is so small that they had to magnify it significantly to show it on TV, is spreading anything?  Prior to this news story, the US Army was unaware that the ending codes on the serial number meant anything other than the model number.  Not to mention you have to have some understanding of what the “code” is to know what bible verse the serial number even refers to.

Putting aside the obvious ethical issues of putting bible verses on sights designed to help people kill people, saying that the sights are designed to convert our enemies to Christianity is a bit silly.  It is hardly the first time “secret” messages have been hidden in plain sight.  One other example that leaps to mind is Apple Computer’s first alert “tone” on the Macintosh.  After Apple settled with Apple Music over the use of the name by agreeing to not let the computer play music (and in 1975, who thought a computer would ever play music?) Apple changed its mind in 1984 with the Macintosh.  The alert tone, one of several available, was quite musical and was called “sosumi.”  Years later it was revealed it was a open taunt to Apple Music (which held the rights to the music of The Beatles) to sue Apple Computer over the change.  (sosumi= So, Sue Me.)

There have even been less veiled religious icons used in the military for far longer than the Trijion sights.  Anyone know what the symbol worn by every doctor in the Military is?  Oh yea, the symbol of a Greek God.

I’m sorry, but ABCNews and the anti-war crowd have created a controversy with this one.  This should be a non-issue.  The army bought the JN8:12 sight because it is the best.  Not to let the person on the receiving end of the bullet know that God loves them.

A geek, a freak, and a force of nature, I'm everything and nothing all at once. I'm your worst nightmare and your most insignificant thought.


  1. When I first saw that in Yahoo!’s “Odd News,” with NZ taking umbrage, I thought, “OK, silly people out there.” But, I also find it very disturbing that a company that makes a device to help kill people (“just war” or not) puts a bible verse on it.

    Yes, I had to look that one up. (You all did, that’s why it’s unquoted. Bible drill!)

    It’s the “I am the light of the world.” statement.

    A comforting verse.

    If it’s on a FLASHLIGHT!

    That it’s on a gun sight, and that at night they use tracer bullets to make sure they hit what they shot… disturbing, very disturbing.

    Me, I’m still apologizing for the Crusades & the Inquisition.

    1. I’m not disagreeing with that, but it is completely separated from the issue of legality or the idea that it turns these rifles into “Jesus Rifles.”

      Not that it’s any less disturbing, but the biblical quotes actually relates to the function of the device. The “light of the world” quote is on the rifle sight that has a night illumination function.

  2. Scripture doesn’t belong on or with weapons. The two are mutually exclusive and should exist in separate realms.

    Having said this again (and having read your response), you’re right that it’s a silly legal issue, but as I often argue on FB, we have laws that occasionally restrict freedoms in order to protect other freedoms. Complex: sure, but so is life.

Comments are closed.