Saturday, September 5, 2009

Gun manufacturers and safety.

One of the many anti-gun canards is that gun manufacturers need the federal government to set design standards and recall dangerous products.

It seems like the gun and ammo manufacturers do a pretty good job of it themselves. I mean, when is the last time a car manufacturer reimbursed the buyer of a flawed car 100% without being taken to court?


Anonymous said...

Yep, There have also been safety recalls from Ruger and S&W/Walther in recent years.

I know from people who sent back SR9 and LCP pistols back to the factory for improved drop safety (I strongly suspect the drop safety on the guns were adequate, but probably not to modern high standards) the customer got a pre-paid box, the gun came back inside of a Month, and with it was an aditional magazine and ball hat.

So nothing paid out of pocket, some decent time lost without the gun, and a free mag and hat.

Meanwhile every car Magazine on the PLANET advises people to wait one model year on a new car, as the first run of a new model are almost always buggy.

Anonymous said...

Also one just needs to look at the numbers. How many gun accidents happen because of a design flaw from a current production gun?

Gun Accidents themselves are VERY rare, and only getting rarer now that guns are becoming more mainstream and people are seeking out training, and to engage in the shooting sports that require safety competence. Still the numbers are small of unintentional gun injuries, of that subset the majority are through negligent activites, and failure to follow the 4 rules of gun safety. Of that the remainder are true gun accidents, but how many are from new guns?

Hell in Maine and Vermont where a lot of my family is from the favorite deer rifle are .30-30 lever guns because the dense brush doesn't lend well to long shots with scopes, nor to rifles and shotguns with long barrels.

How often have I heard people complain about the cross-bolt safety put on .30-30s these days? Essentially these guys grew up hunting with a rifle with a round chambered and the hammer RESTING ON THE FIRING pin!! This meant that if the trigger got tangled by brush, or the hunter accidentally pulled the trigger (rule 3 is relatively recent in the shooting culture) the gun wouldn't go off...but god forbid something bump that hammer!! And of course to "take the safety off" on these old guns one just needed to thumb the hammer back. I haven't handled a classic .30-30, but I wonder if it would be possible to slip and release the hammer before it engages the cock notch and drop the hammer on the firing pin...

needless to say its a pittance of accidents where it's actually the fault of the gun, and not the operator, and of that, I suspect a huge chunk are guns from the old days where that Sergei Mosin joke came from:

Russian Defense Minister asked Sergei Mosin: Hey Sergei, where is the safety on this new rifle you just made with Leon Nagant?"

Sergei Mosin: "Safe? Is Rifle! No Safe!"

AztecRed said...

If anything, the problem with the automobile industry is that it's been over regulated. As the government mandated more safety equipment, it seems people just drive even more irresponsibly.

You make a good point with the Mosin joke. People tend to handle dangerous objects more responsibly. If you try to make them "safe", it just encourages some people to handle them irresponsibly.

That's why I think "smart guns" will have the opposite effect of reducing gun accidents. I believe "smart guns" will just encourage more people to mishandle guns and have more accidents.

Anonymous said...

Huge +1 That's why I'll never own a firearm with a magazine disconnect for anything but collector's reasons (I have a 1917 Colt 1908 pocket .25 that has a disconnector on it. That feature is junk, but as a collector's piece it would lower the value to have it modified or removed)

#1 is because Disconnects can fail and turn a defensive firearm into a very poor club, but

#2 it means that a firearm that is loaded, and otherwise ready to fire can be rendered "Safe" by simply removing the magazine. I can see why some pointy-head thought that MIGHT be a useful feature, except that the gun will again fire with just the presentation of an EMPTY magazine. That's non-intuitive and dangerous, and without properly following the 4 rules this "Safety Feature" can VERY easily get somebody killed

Post a Comment