Snob guns
Yeah, I laugh at the jokers who don't realize that Brownings and Winchesters and Colts are overpriced, and pre-64 Wins are waaay overpriced (Brownings being least overpriced of those 3 however). Snobbery in all its forms is usually not justified, particularly the no-basis-just-on-principle snobbery against Taurus, Rossi - etc. But good for those of us with analytical skills - keeps the price down for us.
Still, the snob crowd actually has one good justifiable reason to pay "too much" for the snob stuff, and that is that it retains its value (artificially, in my book, due to a self-fulfilling prophecy type phenomenon, but nevertheless the Wins/Brownings/Colts/HKs/Walthers etc do retain a lot of their value over time). [I should note here that I think that the majority of HKs are *almost* worth the price, and in some cases are, so perhaps they don't belong in that class of makers.]
I'll take the value stuff anyday, cuz I can buy more of them on my limited budget (Savages, CZ pistols and rifles, Tauri, NEFs, Rossis, Springfield pistols, Howa/Vanguards, Izhmashs, Baikals, Kel-Tecs, Marlins, Mossbergs, Norincos, Milsurp bolt rifles, etc.). About the only thing I've willingly paid a name premium for, which isn't demonstrably justified by its performance relative to its peers, is a Sig pistol I bought. I just HAD to have a Sig. Great gun - still not *quite* worth the price new I paid. But I'm satisfied nevertheless. As for the snobs - please continue to be snobs, so the price stays down on the great value stuff, and thanks!
Most irritating types:
1. No-good-reason, I just won't own a Taurus, etc.
2. European O/U shotgun snobs
3. $1,000 optics snobs (anything under $750 is by definition, junk)
4. Pre-64 win turnbolt snobs (the poorer design only lasted til 66 or 67, at which time the design became BETTER than pre-64)
5. Prancing pony snobs (yeah right, I'm gonna pay MORE for an AR which won't swap out with other uppers/lowers)
Don't confuse the boycott mentality with any other type of snobbery. This is not about snobbery at all, it's about preserving freedom by rewarding the gun makers who support our rights. smut & weasal most definitely is still actively infringing your rights, rex, due to them still BEING IN the agreement. Ruger should die a painful death (but they won't). Actually, it's quite the opposite: those who DON'T boycott are in the same general category as the snobs, as both behaviors (showing unjust snobbery, and continuing to give money to companies that trample on your rights) embody a lack of logic & analytical reasoning - pure emotion instead. The two things go hand in hand. In fact, it would make much more sense to make a category of "refuse-to-boycott-in-the-face-of incontrovertable-evidence-of-rights-destruction-cuz-their-stuff-is-so-danged-good" snobbery. There's plenty of those snobs around. The non-snobs who do boycott are in the minority actually it would seem.
