J
Jose
Wrong answer. You just opened another door for destroying the gun industry.
-
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
Is SIG abandoning MA?
- Thread starter WillyJP
- Start date
J
Jose
The market will decide that. Not the legislature. If you want a gun with internal and drop safeties, buy one. But don't tell me what to buy.
Did you know that hardly any shotgun or rifle sold in the US has a drop safety?
J
Jose
![[angry]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/008.gif "Angry [angry]")
Government mandates aside, what happened to American roadways when seatbelts were mandated? Traffic deaths spiked dramatically upward.
+1. All you need the gun to do is go "bang" when you pull the trigger. Anything more is totally unnecessary and compromises the intended purpose of the pistol: To be used to repel an attack.
Actually, you're probably more likely to get into an accident if you're car has many safety features. Seatbelts, air bags and all the rest of the safety equipment reduces risk, so humans tend to compensate; That is, take more risk.
I think it was a good post. You just had the question phrased backwards.
![[wink]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/002.gif "Wink [wink]")
All we need guns to do is go bang when the trigger is pulled and nothing more. Any of these so-called "safety enhancements" could jeopardize a firearm's mission: That is, to simply shoot a bullet.
Of course, if bullets discharged without a trigger being pulled, that would be a problem. But if some gun manufacturer had a reputation for making guns that did this, they'd be quickly out of business. Market forces work.
![[smile]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/001.gif "Smile [smile]")
- Joined
- May 17, 2008
- Messages
- 16,975
- Likes
- 2,820
I think it was a good post. You just had the question phrased backwards.
All we need guns to do is go bang when the trigger is pulled and nothing more. Any of these so-called "safety enhancements" could jeopardize a firearm's mission: That is, to simply shoot a bullet.
Of course, if bullets discharged without a trigger being pulled, that would be a problem. But if some gun manufacturer had a reputation for making guns that did this, they'd be quickly out of business. Market forces work.
Red, post more not less. As for guns that go boom when dropped, colt still makes the SAA as a direct hammer firing mechanism. Drop it and it will go boom. Who would carry it is another story.
in concept i like the idea of consumer protection laws; i kind of want it to be illegal to sell kids toys covered in lead paint. unfortunately often times, and virtually all the time in relation to firearms, the people making the laws are not familiar with the products they are regulating. this leads to confused ideas like mandatory loaded chamber indicators.
and even when it's proven that certain steps will make things safer, i'm not comfortable with it being forced on me. i wouldn't ride a motorcycle without a helmet, but i don't want the state to tell me that i have to because it's too dangerous otherwise. that's a slippery slope to motorcycles are inheriently too dangerous, as well as skydiving, SCUBA, cooking your own food, reading without proper lighting, and getting a liberal arts degree.
and even when it's proven that certain steps will make things safer, i'm not comfortable with it being forced on me. i wouldn't ride a motorcycle without a helmet, but i don't want the state to tell me that i have to because it's too dangerous otherwise. that's a slippery slope to motorcycles are inheriently too dangerous, as well as skydiving, SCUBA, cooking your own food, reading without proper lighting, and getting a liberal arts degree.
He's pissed he can't get an M&P Pro or 9L.![[rolleyes]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/042.gif "Roll Eyes [rolleyes]")
I am, too. But I'm not going to blame S&W for it.
Except Glocks
![[laugh]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/012.gif "Laugh [laugh]")
Well, what would you recommend? I'm open to other points of view.
J
Jose
How about you fix your state? The rest of us don't need mandated anything in our firearms.
J
Jose
Those who would carry it would know to carry it with the hammer resting on an empty chamber, the way it has been done since 1873.
But back then people tended to live with the results of their stupidity or ignorance instead of trying to blame others and collect money.
J
Jose
You got data that back this up?
Jose, how about you drop the attitude? I opened things up to suggestions and you act like an a$$
![[rofl]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/013.gif "ROFL [rofl]")
J
Jose
I'll drop the attitude when you drop your insistence that the rest of the country be brought down to your state's level of tyranny and when you drop the attitude that it is OK to ask permission from the .gov (in the form of a license) for me to exercise my right to keep and bear arms.
At what point did I say one should ask for permission? Furthermore, you can disagree with someone without disrespecting them.
J
Jose
Do you really want me to find and list here the several posts of yours where you state it is OK to be subjected to licensing to own firearms?
Have you even read the Second Amendment?
I have read the second ammendment completely. Yes, I don't have an issue with licensing, but there is a difference with HOW the licensing process occurs. Our current process is BS. Do you think anyone, regardless of criminal past, should be able to buy and CCW a handgun???
Yes, sometimes it is the principle of the thing. If no firearms manufacturers bent over for MA laws, then people would have been MUCH louder in their opposition to them years ago. Maybe it would have been changed by now, or challenged in court somehow. You deserve what you accept and go along with.
There are probably only a handful of cases in history where falling handguns have killed people. But MA regulation makers would have you believe the streets were running red with blood from guns going off by themselves. Ridiculous.
Last edited:
Pretty much all guns are now made with different safeties, including drop safeties. MY POINT was that the certification is a stupid and corrupt process. A company submits a letter certifying that they have said safeties and that should be good enough. If they lie, they are liable just like a car company. Also, they need to ditch the load indicator, if you want to know it is loaded then open the slide.
They shouldn't even need to do that. Your mindset is in the wrong place- you really think this is about safety- it's not- it's about politics and banning/blocking the sale of handguns by any means possible.
-Mike
Me too.
Mike, you are absolutely right that this is one more avenue in clamping down on gun ownership. I am saying I don't have an issue with some of the safeties for SAFETY sake. We all know the license process, the AG list, the AW ban, the mag ban, no shipping of ammo...etc...etc....it's all part of clamping down from every angle. A full on frontal assault on handgun ownership would be met with huge opposition. Soooo...clip clip here....clip clip there
Could you tell me please how licensing prevents people from doing criminal things? What would be your thoughts on needing a license to vote (not to be confused with registering to vote, so don't throw that red herring in), or needing one to express an opinion? Seems ludicrous, doesn't it? But the concept of "testing," or "licensing," for voting was exactly how some Southern states, post-Reconstruction, tried to eliminate voting for a certain segment of the population. And that's exactly what licensing can and will do for firearms.
Scott, I'm just trying to move the bar forward here. There are certain things I will accept for the time being to get rid of the other rediculous stuff. If we go to the MA liberals and try to move to a VT type of gun laws we will be laughed out of Beacon Hill. Fight the fights you can. Then we try to move the bar again later.
See, here's where the whole opinion thing comes in. I like and seek out weapons with well-designed loaded chamber indicators, as I think they have a tactical (as well as tactile) advantage. I like the fact I can slide my hand over the top of my XD in the dark and immediately know if there is a round chambered. You don't like them. Cool. If there are more of you than me, they will disappear from the market. If there are more of me, then they will be on every gun. This is the whole argument for letting the market decide this, not the .gov.
If that's true, then you are not expressing the idea well. You said, "I don't have an issue with licensing," which is a whole lot different than saying, "One thing at a time." When you say, "I don't have an issue with licensing," it sounds like you don't have an issue with licensing.
No, actually I love the XD. Unfortunately Springfield won't pay the dirty money to MA, so they're illegal here. The load indicator on the XD actually makes sense. The guns that are MA approved have a pinhole, maybe a little larger, which is completely unreliable. That pop-up on the XD is a great design!
