Talk:Kel-Tec SUB-2000

"Users" to "Uses"

I changed the category title of "Users" to "Uses" because it didn't really give any hard facts as to who uses the gun, just who might. --DOHC Holiday 01:23, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

In spirit of this, evidence of Ukrainian military usage (at least 1 example) has been documented by a news media source. As such, I believe we now can saw we know this gun was used in a conflict, and so I introduced a service history section to the infobox Arcchipelago (talk) 03:03, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

• And I reverted it. Just because a guy used it, that doesn't become a "service history". In cases like that, whatever is available in a battle zone gets used. There are plenty of instances of personally owned weapons getting used by US military members but they aren't considered service weapons either. This would be little different than assigning a "service history" to the random pocket knife that was carried by some soldier. Look, I like the Sub2K. I have one. Let's not try to make this gun into something it's not. When a government starts buying them in quantity and issuing them, then we have a service weapon. Niteshift36 (talk) 19:08, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

• The defense minister is a random user in this case. Here's a great example: George Patton is a much more notable person in the history of warfare. At a point near the end of WW2, he carried the Remington Model 51. He was a general, in a war, but that didn't make it a "service weapon". Same case with the S&W .357 magnum he carried at times. Based on your criteria, if that defense minister took a bicycle and rode it to a place to meet a unit, it would have a service history. You've shown no evidence of the S2K being purchased by the govt and used as an issued weapon. Niteshift36 (talk) 12:03, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

• Keltec already had a shipment in-country for a buyer who stopped responding to them so they donated the ones in the shipment. Take a look at what the definition of service rifle or service pistol is. It always involved the government buying them, then issuing them. Niteshift36 (talk) 16:53, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

  You win. Despite proving that at least one example of one of these government possessed rifles (hundreds of them, provided by Adrian Kellgren himself) made it into the hands of people on the ground, you win and I will refrain from editing Wikipedia ever again. Thank you for this lesson. I recommend removing the service history completely as the current page doesn't follow your position here. Arcchipelago (talk) 17:05, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

  I also want to point out that Ukraine hasn't purchased most of what it is using right now. MLAWs, Javelins, RPGs, and soon fighter jets. They were all donated and by your definition, don't qualify for a service history because they weren't bought. I recommended editing associated articles as well. Arcchipelago (talk) 17:08, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

• If the US government gives them to the Ukraine government, it's no different than a purchase. You're totally missing the point here. The fact that a few (and a couple of hundred is a few) managed to get into the hands of someone fighting, that doesn't equate to a service history. Like I said, I have a S2K and love it. Let's not pretend it's something it's not. Niteshift36 (talk) 18:32, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

  It is also entirely possible that the Ukrainian government decides they have no use for a 9x19 pistol carbine and just sell them on, in order to buy something that makes more sense with the money. We would have to see a specific unit (e.g. a police force) being orderly equipped with it to call them a "user".--OBrian (talk) 12:20, 2 April 2022 (UTC)

Photos

I uploaded a couple photos of my carbine. They are okay, but not great. If anyone has better pictures, by all means replace these. --DOHC Holiday 01:41, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

How is Faisal Shazad a "controversy" for KelTec? He didn't use the gun. Is it relevant? What about the brand of shoes he wears? What about the vehicle used? The propane purchased and the fertilizer? I'm going to look for comments, but unless there's something substantive, I'm going to pull that reference. It's irrelevant.Mzmadmike (talk) 17:52, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Agree that there may be a better title. I, for one, find it of interest. --Epeefleche (talk) 21:40, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Removed this because there is no controversy. No one disputes he bought one; no one claims he used the rifle against anyone. Doesn't have anything to do with this article. Probably relevant in *his* article though, even though he wasn't charged with anything related to the rifle. Clearly a non-issue. 72.152.102.30 (talk) 14:52, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

2011 Cleanup

I've added cleaning up this article to my todo list.

• Infobox
• More Photos
• More in-line citations

This all in mind, I know as per WP:DEADLINK we aren't supposed to arbitrarily delete reference links, however this one was "hacked" or something, and is no longer relevant, nor has it been updated in some time. The list of external links at the end is all fine and dandy, but we really need more <ref> citations in the article to maybe bump it to a B-Class eventually. The addition of an infobox will help, but we should also see to it that we follow the structure set forth by Wikiproject: Guns too. -Deathsythe (talk) 20:08, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Extra information?

Would it be worth it to include certain details about the sub-2000 in regards to the Canadian market? Or would this be superfluous to the article? There is a Canadian version of the rifle that sports an 18.5 inch barrel in keeping with Canadian firearm legislation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Olegs69 (talk • contribs) 03:23, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

Width

There is a height and a length. Anyone know the width? — Preceding unsigned comment added by CycloneSteve (talk • contribs) 02:12, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

New Version of Sub 2000 ('Gen 2')

For anyone who cares to research and update this article Kel-Tec has introduced a improved version of their Sub 2000 light rifle called the 'Gen 2'. It's had several improvements and looks quite different.65.49.176.54 (talk) 02:46, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Kel-Tec SUB-2000. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121215045904/http://www.keltecweapons.com/our-guns/rifles/sub-2000 to http://www.keltecweapons.com/our-guns/rifles/sub-2000/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:40, 3 May 2017 (UTC)