Creature said:
HKGuns said:
Creature said:
HKGuns said:
best two stage fighting trigger
That statement right there makes absolutely zero sense to me.
Most fighting rifles have two stage triggers. Period, end of story. If you don't understand then that is your problem.
Since the OP didn't state his intended use or preference a two stage might not be appropriate.
Move along if you still don't understand.
I have been a member of this forum for a long time. It's a shame that long time member like yourself as well as newer members have fallen into the trap of incivility that so permeates and defines the digital generation.
Perhaps you think you are entitled.
How about you actually explain why most "fighting rifles have 2-stage triggers" and why it makes sense that they do...instead of chest thumping?
Tinman357 said:
But I have to comment on your condescending post and refusal to explain it.
Sir, we as gun owners are in a battle to protect what 2nd rights we have left. We don't need somebody that drives away new gunnies. We need all the numbers we can get. Your comment was uncivil, rude, and condescending. IMHO completely inappropriate.
Creature said:
A two-stage is not really needed for a battle rifle.
Guys, look, it is imperative on each member to be as civil as their communication skills allow. (And to become MORE so as practice with written communication, here for example, improves those skills.)
That being said, there's a cart-before-horse effect that goes on on forums a lot, as threads get longer and folks don't look back at who said what, when, and why.
This is a classic example of the a fundamental mis-step we get a lot. Someone (Creature in this case) makes a claim: that someone else's statement "makes no sense..." and later that "A two-stage trigger is really not needed for a battle rifle."
He's making the claim. The other poster (HKGuns) pointed out (a bit too curtly) that most fighting rifles have been built that way, and another member pointed out a long (in fact an unbroken!) string of US fighting rifles so equipped.
Creature then rebuts with, "
How about you actually explain why most "fighting rifles have 2-stage triggers" and why it makes sense that they do"?
And there's the cart-before-horse problem. It is always the burden of the person making a claim to come up with supporting points (examples, logic, opinion, ...something) to explain why he's making that claim.
It is not appropriate to say, essentially, "I've made a claim (esp. one that flies in the face of tradition and current practice) and YOU have to prove ME wrong."
So while there have been too many examples of cutsie and flippant incivility in this thread, the burden of proof is actually on Creature to explain why he interjected with the claims he did. And, going a step further,
why his comment was informative to the OP's initial inquiry.