Guns and envy

[John Ross]

This is a bit of a rant. I have lately started seeing much more of something that bothers me, namely supposed gun enthusiasts taking swipes at various guns and/or preferences.

I have been frequenting several gun boards recently and am seeing this more and more. Example: the .17 HMR.

I have seen a number of posts saying things like "You're crazy to want one, a .223 is cheaper to shoot and much better" and "This cartridge is all hype. If the .22WMR didn't exist, and they introduced it tomorrow, it would kill off the .17 HMR right away."

I do not yet own a .17HMR nor have I fired one. Here is what many others have reported about it: It has a much flatter trajectory than the .22WMR. It is extremely accurate in a variety of factory guns. Under 150 yards it blows up crows etc. like a Swift. Recoil is so slight you can *always* see the bullet strike through the scope. THIS IS A NOT INSIGNIFICANT COMBINATION OF VIRTUES.

I keep seeing negative posts on new products from people who have no experience with them. Why are they posting? Why take the time to type in your theorectical distaste? Lately I have seen this also with the new S&W .500 and Ti/Scan revolvers. Both have been called "Answers to nonexistant problems." (I disagree 100% here.) One poster was mad that the new 329 was in .44 Mag instead of .44 Special! Hunh? It *IS* in .44 Special, just .44 Mag also!

The reason this bothers me is that I have always felt the gun culture was a "big tent," and given the fact that we're always under assault, it makes NO sense to badmouth parts of it.

One of my favorite people is famous (retired) benchrest gunsmith and recordholder Art Freund. Art made the action for my first full custom .50 BMG rifle. When I got interested in machine guns, I was always getting Art to make heavier bolts for subguns to slow down the cyclic rate, or reline a barrel on a rare gun to make it shootable with available ammo, or put scope mounts on MGs. He also made a swage die for me to make jacketed 1" slugs for my 4-bore. Art's attitude was always "Hey, this is an interesting new project John's dreamed up. I can't wait to see him try it out." He once told me I was his favorite customer. My affinity for big-bore rifles led him to build for himself *his own* .510 Wells at age 81(!)

This attitude is sorely lacking among many people who frequent the boards, and I don't understand it. We should all be excited that the factories and custom shops are responding with so many great new products! The fact that I have little interest in semiauto handguns does not make me blind to the fact that S&W's introduction of a 1911 has many people turning handsprings (I feel the same way about the .500). Seeing a Shiloh Sharps custom rifle in .40-65 or a $3000 racegun warms my heart, even though I'll never own either.

This isn't a time of *rationing,* people! The brass companies aren't *discontinuing* .357 mag production to tool up for the .500 S&W or .17 HMR! They're making *everything,* and at great prices!

Is it envy that makes some people be so negative? That makes no sense to me. Say the gun in question, with all accessories (like components, scope, dies, holster, whatever) costs $2000 (most are a lot less.) I think a $2000 object is an attainable goal for 99.9% of the people out there. How? Well, for starters, how many drive late-model cars? If you really want the gun, try owning a car worth $2000 less. Exercise at home and save the gym membership, if you have one. Sell some stuff you don't really want any more. Do some part-time work, like writing magazine articles, or casting bullets for someone who shoots a lot, whatever. If you *don't* want the gun badly enough to do any of those things, fine, but why does it bother you that other people do?

I've always known that there are people in this world who dislike seeing others happy. Up until now I thought these types were conspicuously absent from the ranks of shooters.

JR

 

[Keith]

It's less about guns and more about the anonymity granted by the Internet. People feel free to post an opinion on a subject they know little about. If they stated the same opinion in person they'd actually see the rolled eyes and grins, etc, that denote when you're saying something stupid... and in most cases, they'd cut short their "thesis" before they got too far out on the limb.
So, instead of writing an entire thesis on how "bad" the .17 HMR is, they'd end up cutting it off short with a more reasonable; "I don't quite trust that round, yet."
It is such non-verbal feedback that directs normal conversation in constructive directions, and does so without the need to verbally point out the gaffe and humiliate the speaker.

It's all different here. Everything you say is "on the record" and many feel they must defend their position of record even when it's soundly deflated by the next guy to make a post.

Keith

 

[Tamara]

I think a lot of people confuse "I have no use for..." with "Nobody has a use for...". For instance, I have no use for an X-frame; the longest tube in my S&W collection is a 5" N-frame. I sold my 8 3/8" 586 because I really had no use for it. Does this mean I think nobody has a use for one? Obviously not. I'd love to shoot one, I just have no particular desire to buy one. (As far as the riboflavin-framed 329 goes, I'm all about that! With the right loads and a bobbed hammer, it could replace my 296 as the ultimate purse howitzer... )

To those folks who say "Nobody needs a ______", remember that it sounds suspiciously like the crowd that claims "Nobody needs an 'assault weapon'/handgun/sniper rifle/machine gun/whatever." Once you appoint yourself as the arbiter of what other folks need or want, the difference between you and HCI is just a matter of degree.

 

[Bobarino]

i tend to agree. but it will never go away. its just like like cars, motorcycles, or just about anything else that people are interested in or collect. chevy vs. ford, 9mm vs. .45ACP, Glock vs. 1911 etc, etc, ad nauseum.

i'd like to see people say stuff like," hey thats pretty cool!. that type of (fill in the blank) isn't really my cup of tea, but i'm glad you like yours, good on ya!"

but that won't likely happen, because we're men. and men are teritorial and love that mine-is-better-than-yours stuff. one-upmanship and all that stuff.

it is really irritating when someone puts down your choice of firearm/cartridge/holster/whatever even though they have never tried one. and if they have tried it, and have formed an opinion, what then, makes it so hard to believe that anyone would want one if you didn't like it? sheesh.

all that being said, my H&K is the BEST!!

Bobby

p.s. please find a sorry attempt at ironic humor in that last line.

 

[braindead0]

About the only thing I'll 'badmouth' is junk guns, others seem to think Jennings/bryco..etc fill a niche market for those with smaller pocketbooks, but from my experience with these brands they are useless and no better than having no gun at all. Particularly when there are so many good inexpensive firearms to be had (Makarov for example).

Just my 2cents, good post!

 

[Mark Tyson]

I agree that people should not badmouth firearms simply because they are new and unique. Innovation and invention of new firearms, cartridges, accessories is a good thing. Just because a certain gun/gun accessory/cartridge isn't right for me doesn't mean that I will demean it. Different strokes for different folks.

I also get upset at people who get so into a particular firearm (such as in the AK vs AR debate) that they go out of their way to knock down someone else's gun, to say that it's a piece of junk. If someone enjoys his AR-15/AK-47/98 Mauser then so what? Let them enjoy it! This is not a zero sum game.

 

[Moparmike]

Lots of people dont need lots of things, some of which they do have and most they dont.

I personally have no use or need for a S & W 500 (.500 Mag), but when I saw one I had this DeeDee (from Dexter's Lab, try to keep up ) "Oooooooooooo" thing going. I also thought of drawing it in a CCW situation (supposing I could hide the damned thing) and watching the perp's eyes center on that half-inch hole and crap themselves.

Before anyone flames me, please note that I realize the large amt of responsibility in CCW and that a gun should not be drawn unless necessary. That responsibility is not a thing to be taken lightly. However, the responsibility does not negate the fun in watching someone look down a hand-fired Howitzer pointed at their head.

 

[4v50 Gary]

What has "use" got to do with anything? It almost goes back to the same argument of why do we want guns? Like many others here and elsewhere, I have things I don't need, guns and otherwise. But I enjoy owning them and I'm not hurting others (other than keeping them for my greedy self ).

Certainly the internet with its anonymity has made us more vocal (or is that literal?) about our views. In some ways this is good and in others, well, you just have to have your own filtering system. It's like a salad bar, you pick & choose what you want.

 

[Beav]

I think some people are just insecure, they feel that they need to degrade other people's decisions to justify their own.

 

[braindead0]

I think some people are just insecure, they feel that they need to degrade other people's decisions to justify their own.

I think some people put down others firearms because it didn't cost as much as theirs.. so they must demean it in order to not feel like they've overpaid.

 

[Mike Irwin]

"It has a much flatter trajectory than the .22WMR. It is extremely accurate in a variety of factory guns. Under 150 yards it blows up crows etc. like a Swift. Recoil is so slight you can *always* see the bullet strike through the scope. THIS IS A NOT INSIGNIFICANT COMBINATION OF VIRTUES."

The same once could be said about the Remington 5mm Rimfire Magnum.

Best damed thing since the Winchester Rifle, S&W Revolver, Ford's Car, Willis Carrier's air conditioning, Nylon, Penicillin, etc. etc. etc.

Only now, those people who bought 5mms are spending upwards $100 a box for ammo, IF they can find it, or spending a couple hundred dollars to have their guns converted to a centerfire 5mm cartridge.

Virtues don't ensure success.

Personally, I've counseled a couple of people to avoid the .17. For now. For the reasons I've listed above. Let someone else ensure that it's a success. If it's a failure, you're not caught with an expensive paperweight.


So is it envy?

Or practicality?

 

[El Tejon]

Funny, we had an argument/discussion in boxing club just last night. Several of the young lions were debating the various merits of various weapons.

The instructor shut everyone up with: "The weapon is just wood and metal. It has no kung fu. That is up to you."

People are free to be as unhappy or as happy as they so choose and to possess any opinion they wish. As long as no one interferes with my right to own a .17 GunRagDrivenHype round.

 

[bogie]

The gun culture has MANY facets, and most of 'em don't seem to like the other folks all that much. Trap/skeet shooters look down their nose at duck hunters, who sneer at deer hunters, etc...

If it goes bang, I like it.

And don't even get me started about how CMP and benchrest shooters feel about folks who shoot at moving clay pigeons with subguns... (grin)

If it goes bang, I like it.

John, you can hit clays better with single shots than I can with full magazines out of a friend's Spas-12 (it _is_ possible to fire six times at a target before it hits the ground... I've proven that...), but I still like the occasional time I hit one. It's fun. This coming weekend, I'm leaving the 6PPC in the safe, and taking out several folks who want to "learn about guns." We're taking a 10/22, an AR, a 1911 (with one of Jon's uppers) and a .357 Python (and a boatload of .38 specials). May even pop a few out of a black powder revolver...

If it goes bang, I like it.

 

[Keith]

Mike,

I don't think anyone is being critical of an honest debate on the pro's and con's of a particular gun, cartridge, etc.
I think the issue is the sweeping (and stupid) generalizations like "9mm's are C&@&", etc.


Keith

 

[waynzwld]

Whenever there is something new in the gun world, I always think "Wow, I wonder what people will do with that and how popular it will become? I never think, "why would anyone want that".

Some people who shoot the 17HMR give the new cartridge "Mystical Powers" and others them down as "useless" or "just a fad" and have never shot one.
It is what it is, and it does fill a niche in the rimfire lineup.

It always amazes me all the people that are bad mouthing the S&W 500 that haven't even shot it yet, let alone even seen one. I like heavy recoiling pistols!

For all those people that are afraid to buy a 17HMR because it might be a fad, you can always buy another barrel in 22Mag and have something more than a "paper weight". The actions are the same, 22Mag or 17HMR.

 

[BerettaNut92]

I think a lot of people just want everyone else to know they're too smart to get sucked into a marketing ploy so they have to diss every new thing that comes around even if the new product addresses the legitimate needs of people out there.

 

[braindead0]

The worst ones are those who diss something because they don't sell it.. had a guy tell me that Fobus holsters are garbage and only blade-tech are any good..of course he sells blade-tech and nothing else..

Funny, I've been using Fobus holsters for several years..and never have had any problems....I guess they'll fall apart tomorrow ;-)

 

[Mike Irwin]

"For all those people that are afraid to buy a 17HMR because it might be a fad, you can always buy another barrel in 22Mag and have something more than a "paper weight". The actions are the same, 22Mag or 17HMR."

Say what?

Taurus is making a swap barrel .17 HRFM revolver?

There are more than rifles chambering this cartridge.

Just having an "action that's the same" isn't a panacea to the possibility that the .17 will go out of production. And simply buying "another barrel" isn't an option with most of these firearms. Having the barrel & chamber reamed if the .17 goes out of existence maybe.....

I'd be more inclined to buy a .500 Magnum, even though it's equally unproven, simply because it's a centerfire cartridge, not a rimfire.

If a rimfire cartridge goes out of production, you're pretty much screwed. Making your own rimfire cartridges is pretty much an impossibility.

Centerfire cartridges are a LOT more forgiving in that sense, though.

 

[BigG]

Point Well Taken, Mr. Ross.

People like to line up on different sides. That's why there are sports teams and horse races.

Over the years, one of my favorite gunwriters was Elmer Keith. He waxed poetic over certain things and had utterly no use for other gun related thngs. And he didn't mind telling you. I think a lot of us here cut our gun teeth on old Elmer Keith articles!

 

[John Ross]

Mike Irwin: "Say what? Taurus is making a swap barrel .17 HRFM revolver?
There are more than rifles chambering this cartridge."

Yes, but the factory (Taurus, Ruger, or S&W) could convert a .17 revolver to .22 WMR. The 5mm shot a LITTLE flatter than the .22WMR. It was chambered in two Remington rifles and nothing else (besides the Contender.)

I think the .17 HMR is here to stay if only because there are over a dozen good guns made for it already. Maybe this will brand me as a rich dillettante, but I can't see worrying that a gun I paid $300-$600 for today *might* be unfeedable 30 years from now (when I'm 76) unless I get a new barrel and maybe a cylinder for it.

BigG: "Over the years, one of my favorite gunwriters was Elmer Keith. He waxed poetic over certain things and had utterly no use for other gun related thngs. And he didn't mind telling you. I think a lot of us here cut our gun teeth on old Elmer Keith articles!"

Very true. But I spent a good bit of time with Elmer and he was eager to shoot *anything.* Remember when he called the 7mm Mag "a good pest rifle"? Point was, he said it was GOOD for that, not "Remington shouldn't have brought it out and no one should buy it, it's junk." He reserved his true scorn for guns that didn't do what they promised (like not break.)

Bogie: "The gun culture has MANY facets, and most of 'em don't seem to like the other folks all that much. Trap/skeet shooters look down their nose at duck hunters, who sneer at deer hunters, etc...
If it goes bang, I like it."

Yours is the attitude we all should have. I once asked Britt Robinson (champion trapshooter and the only man EVER to go 30 straight at crazy quail at NILO Farms) about my shooting clays with a rifle. I told him I'd like to see what he could do with a rifle and asked him if it would screw up his technique with a trap gun (I assumed it would). His response:

"Hell, no! You got a place to shoot clays with a BAR and not kill anybody in some subdivision a mile away? How do I get there?"

JR

 

[bogie]

Heh - I used to date a girl who lived within BAR distance of NILO...

 

[nextjoe]

What REALLY bothers me, personally, is that a lot of the "new and exciting" stuff we're getting are just gimmicks.

Smith & Wesson coming out with the .500 has no interest to me. There's already the .500 Linebaugh in two lengths, and the .50 AE. BUT if they announced tomorrow that they were publicly renouncing the agreement, dropping MIM parts, and ditching the internal lock, I'd be VERY interested.

Winchester coming out with two new lines of short magnum cartridges has no interest to me. They don't offer any real benefits (to me) over existing, widely available cartridges. We've already got plenty of good cartridges to choose from. If they just built the models they already have with better quality control and better materials, I'd be interested.

Kimber coming out with a new "Tactical" (oooooh! tactical! ) limited edition every week has no interest to me. Dropping MIM and the Series II safety and making quality more consistent would get my interest.

I don't WANT the "caliber of the week," limited edition, "tactical" gimmicky stuff. I ESPECIALLY don't want any politically correct internal safeties. I want QUALITY. Unfortunately, what this particular consumer wants and what the majority of the firearms industry wants to sell me are very different things.:banghead:

Best,
Joe

 

[Mike Irwin]

"Yes, but the factory (Taurus, Ruger, or S&W) could convert a .17 revolver to .22 WMR."

They could also convert a .22 Mag. to .17 if the occasion ever arises.

The simple fact remains that I'm never very receptive to people (whether consumers or the magazines, etc.), when talking about the newest cartridge, gun, item, etc., doing the basic equivilent of running in circles, flopping around on the ground and undergoing paroxysms of ecstasy that this supposed new development is the greatest thing since the First Coming of Christ.

Sometimes the hype is well placed, and the item actually catches on.

Sometimes, however, all of the hype is nothing more than a flash in the pan -- the 8mm Remington Magnum springs to mind... As does the .244 Remington...

Envy has nothing to do with my position. Practicality does.

If that's not nearly dilitante for you, could you buy me a new .223? A Remington? And then we'll both be happy?

 

[Tamara]

Mike,

I see your curmudgeon-do training is coming along nicely. What belt are you at now?

 

[bogie]

At the same time, I see a bit of what JR is talking about at this forum...

There are folks who see firearms as _only_ for defense, or _only_ for preservation of constitutional rights, and have a very hard time understanding beyond that... To them, a day at the range is serious - hard work, practice for when it hits the fan... I think that it's sad that they're missing out on so much else that's in the gun culture. Those folks are as lacking as the duck hunters who agree that one doesn't need an AK-47 to hunt ducks with...

Yeah, y'all know who you are. Lighten up.

When something is fun, you do it more. And you do it better.