Home Forums Miscellaneous Topics Second Amendment CCW and Dropped Guns

Norm;
<br>
<br>I gave you my suggestion, but you are so focused on your own thoughts, you musta missed it.
<br>
<br>
<br>Let the market take care of it self.

Norm, You are correct about SOME of the lower quality handguns (i.e. Davis semi's, Lorcins, Jennings/Bryco,etc.)in that they have a marginaly effective safety. The Davis derringer has a crossbolt hammer block and a halfcock "safety" , but it seems that many owners elect not to use them because of the time factor to make the gun usable in time of need. You have seen me time after time, explain safety operation and maintenance procedures to customers, but it is up to them to use that knowledge. The burden of blame in these Inept Discharges is on the owner more than on the device.

Norm, why do you think they are making guns safer these days? It's because they get sued when they don't. That is the solution. It's the same dynamic that results in safer and safer power saws and chain saws, and the like. If you pass legislation, then what about all the antique guns? Will they be confiscated? In a free society we need to stand up against legislation that restricts our freedom, or by gradualism we lose that freedom. Holding individuals responsible for their individual negligences is the answer that preserves both relative safety (you cannot have perfect safety) and liberty.
<br>
<br>P.S. Norm, what did the doc say?

TRH,
<br>
<br>Ticker OK thanks.
<br>
<br>I am abandoning this thread to spend time rethinking the situation. I have some up with a pretty solid wall of resistence to forcing manufacturers to make safe guns.
<br>
<br>And since I started to be called names on some quarters I have decided to stand down.
<br>
<br>This is supposed to be fun but when I get called a "liberal" it is serious. Other names (SOB, etc.) I can take with a smile but "liberal" that's a fighting word.
<br>
<br>Norm
<br>
<br>

Don't blame ya a bit on the "liberal" tag. Them's fightin' words in my estimation. I save that one for people I REALLY dislike!
<br>
<br>I don't think you are a liberal by any streatch of the imagination. We just seem to disagree on who's responsable for safety, I say the operator, you say the machine. Let's leave it at that. Everybody is entitled to their take on an issue like this one.
<br>
<br>My biggest problem is, I MISS the days when people were responsable and good to their word, a world lost to time, sad, very sad when we have to try to engineer a tool to be smarter than the operator. Very sad indeed!

T LEE,
<br>
<br>I can't remember a time when I wasn't a "cowboy" and I also can't remember a time when I didn't know that you carried a Single Action with the hammer over an empty chamber. I didn't come from a gunowning family but I knew about SAA's.
<br>
<br>Must have been TV or the movies or some such that taught me the basics of carrying a SAA safely. Now that I think about it it might have been Hoppy.
<br>
<br>Years later a friend showed me his Old Model Ruger Superblack Hawk .44 Mag. He had the darned thing stoked with six rounds. I got him to understand that the Ruger was unsafe with six rounds in it.
<br>
<br>More years later he was showing me a like new Colt Cobra 2" that he had recently bought. He had it loaded too but with only five rounds. I told him he could put six in the Cobra safely if he wanted but if he was going to error his error was in the right direction.
<br>
<br>I haven't seen Fred for many years. I wonder if he is still loading his Cobra one round light.

Funny the things that stay with you, one of our officers in Will county always carried 1 round lite also. He had grown up on SAA's and couldn't shake the habit, just was not comfortable with one under the hammer no matter how hard we tried to convince him hoe safe the newer Colt and S & W double actions were.
<br>
<br>I was very fortunate to grow up in farm country and have access to many different types of firearms. Learned at an early age (got my first .22 at 6) how to safely handle all types of them.
<br>Under the tuteledge of my Dad and Grandad and a couple of Uncles, all hunters, shooters and all also involved in Lawman work at one time or another.
<br>
<br>Too bad that more kids nowdays can't be exposed as I was. There would be a whole lot less mischief and stupidity evident I am sure. The movies, violent cartoons and TV just don't teach right and wrong like family, heck even TV then, showed good over evil and doing the right thing was normal!

T LEE,
<br>
<br>Back about 35 years ago the Marion County Indiana SD required deputies to carry their Colt Trooper .38 Special revolvers with an empty chamber under the hammer.
<br>
<br>Two jail deputies were horsing around on the roof of the jail and one of the Troopers went off. The deputy swore (to save his job) that it just went off. The official (Sheriff or Deputy Chief) made an arbitrary decision about 5 rounds vs 6.
<br>
<br>The rule was completely ignored except when on station. Funny to see guys in squad cars removing one bullet to on on station and then put it back in when going on patrol.
<br>
<br>The silliness was put to bed by cooler heads after a couple of weeks.
<br>
<br>N.

Norm: Since we spoke this p.m. another "sniper" hit has occurred. The media hype on the caliber and suspect weapon is obviously designed to demonize their ownership by AMERICAN CITIZENS, which will send thrills of joy thru Democratic (Socialist) Party ranks if typical firearms are banned from our possession, as that will put us closer to becoming unarmed, compliant, submissive U.N. Socialist subjects. Stripped of all civilian firearms and personal freedoms, the Democratic Socialists will have kept their promise to the League of Nations in the 1930's and the United Nations (Socialist) organization that we, as a Socialist Nation, would take our place as a fellow leader in The New World Order.

Me,again with an afterthought; This "sniper" has picked an area where the majority of population has already lost their 2nd Amendment right and are now sheep in the presence of wolves. If their Political Masters had not disarmed them or if they had not become so dependent on so limited a police presence to show up after an event and make a report, the end result would have been a hail of return fire from multiple sources from which there would be no chance of the sniper's survival. That would also have deprived a Judge,two lawers and a Bailbondsman of several paychecks by elimination of a lengthy court circus of prosecution and defense.

What if it ain't a sniper, what if its some idiot with a "non-dropable" gun, and he keeps dropping it?
<br>
<br>Norms right, the government will have to force the manufacture of dropable guns to stop these heinous acts and "protect us from ourselves"

Glockbuster, I agree that if responsible people armed themselves, the chance of neutralizing this sniper would be higher, but he is a very smart sniper, unfortunately, and knows to take only one shot per day, and then change his location. This is rule number one in sniper school. When this is held to, it is very difficult to even know where the shot came from, so how could anyone return fire. If he keeps this up, I'm afraid he will never be caught, no matter how many people are armed. Really a bad situation, but it is the price of liberty. I'd rather remain free with a little danger than lose my freedom and reduce the danger from random snipers. When freedom is gone there will arise a much greater threat to our safety, and that will be the knock on the door in the middle of the night from our friendly Federal Government representatives. Under tyranny, death comes to your door in a policeman's uniform and a badge, not necessarily in sniper garb. Governments have murdered far more of their own citizens in the 20th Century than all the random murderers put together from the beginning of time. This is why I believe in every man being armed, and that the right to keep and bear arms is the linch-pin of all our other rights. Remove it, and the rest are out the window before you know what hit you.

T R H ,
<br> Glockblaster, not Glockbuster. Sometimes I forget that sheep run hystericaly away from the wolves as that is alien to my instinct to run towards the threat and make it wish it had never seen me.
<br> If the people in the "sniper's" area had been armed as other American CITIZENS in non-socialist controlled areas have the right to be, more of them would have taken the responsibility to protect their comunity and locate/ eliminate the "sniper" instead of hysterical flight for cover,leaving it to the police to show up later and investigate.
<br> Alas, it would not bode well for the brave citizen that would take the initiave to neutralize the sniper, as that would deprive a Judge, two lawyers and a bailbondsman of several big paychhecks in a long, long court circus of legal trickery and shyster lawer showcasing designed to produce yet another corrupt politician. Don't forget that politicians are usually just lawyers that have been corrupted by money and power, ultimately degtenerating even further than their already despicable position in our society.

Glockblaster, I'm not sure if you are responding to what I said, or to someone else. You seem, in any event, to have missed my point entirely. I believe that every man aught to be armed, and that the Federal Government aught not interfere with this, but in this case we have a sniper who knows what the heck he is doing, apparently. He doesn't stick around for good citizens to send a hail of bullets his way. You may not be aware of this fact, but if you fire just one shot from 200 or 300 yards away, and then leave, there is no way in hell you are going to have any idea from which direction the shot was fired. Even if you are armed with a counter sniper weapon, you will not be able to neutralized the sniper 99 times out of 100. It is almost impossible to locate the direction of one single shot fired, when you are not ready for it.

Sorry guys, guess the debate has ended. Normie sent me a nasty-gram and says he's tired of me slamming him. (for the record Norm, I never slammed "you", I just pointed out how ludicris and illogical you position was . Attack the arguement, not the person - the first rule of debate)
<br>
<br>Norm, wasn't you who started the topic? Do you always debate this way? Lose the debate, get mad, pick up your marbles and go home in a huff.
<br>
<br>Lighten up Norm, its not like were curing cancer here. Its just a stupid message board.
<br>

RAM, maybe you should take your own advice and stick to real arguments, instead of mixing in the insults, both implied and overt. Wasn't it you that called Norm a Troll?

Things that make you go Hhmmmmm!
<br>
<br>Suit targets gun as overly dangerous - Washington Post 10/15
<br>
<br> WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. (AP) � Last year, Nathaniel Brazill was sentenced to 28 years behind bars for killing his teacher. Now the gun he used in the murder is the centerpiece of a lawsuit that seeks to get cheap guns off the streets.
<br> The design of the .25-caliber Raven handgun will be on trial this week as the widow of Brazill's victim pushes her case against its distributor, saying the gun is unreasonably dangerous and lacks safety devices that would prevent a minor from using it.
<br> The case, brought by Pam Grunow, has drawn national attention because it is the first to address both the pistol's absence of a gun lock and the flaws associated with a cheap, easily concealable weapon.
<br> Valor Corp., the gun's distributor with 14,000 licensed firearms dealers nationwide, maintains the gun did what it was designed to do when it fired a bullet.
<br> "With any gun, if you pull the trigger, it will go off," said Valor attorney John Renzulli. "You set this gun on a table and it doesn't go off. You don't pull the trigger and it doesn't go off."
<br> Mrs. Grunow's attorney compared their case with lawsuits against large tobacco companies. Initially, they said, the public believed a similar premise: People who bought cigarettes knew they were dangerous.
<br> "But the more people learned about what the tobacco industry did and about how they could have done things to make cigarettes safer, the tide turned," said Allen Rostron, an attorney for the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence.
<br> Brazill was 13 when he killed 35-year-old English teacher Barry Grunow in Lake Worth Middle School on May 26, 2000. Brazill was convicted last year of second-degree murder.
<br>
<br>

RAM - You are really a prick. If this is a stupid message board it's people like you who make it that way.
<br>
<br>Mitch, Hawk, T LEE, and the other. It's been real.
<br>
<br>Adios.
<br>
<br>N

Why don't they sentence the gun to a life term too. In old English common law, if a tree dropped a branch and it fell on someone, killing them, they would sentence the tree for murder and burn it down. Seems like this is the quality of thought behind some of the laws the leftists are persuing.
<br>
<br>Norm, I'm not referring to you when I say leftist above. The above statement relates to those who want to outlaw this or that gun because someone aimed it, and pulled the trigger on it. Has nothing to do with the issue of guns going off when dropped, which I happen to think should be resolved in the civil court system, rather than by national legislation. Hope you decide to come back.

Why slam anybody? Offer intelliget counter arguments and let any and all make up their own mind. I believe one way, somebody believes another. That does not mean one is right and one is wrong, all it means is there are different view points and both CAN be right in their own way.
<br>
<br>I'll never believe the tool should be smarter than the operator, there may be cases where it is a good idea, as some are not overly bright and still have rights.