One way or another they are going to melt down Bryco.
- Thread starter Bruce H
- Start date
- Status
Testing...
David,
While it might be technically be possible to design a safety that allows you do unload a firearm without taking it off safe, it's not a simple process. Some revolvers have safeties, some autoloaders don't. My CZ's, while not expensive firearms, are considered good quality, and you can't cycle the action on them with the safety on.
It would add a considerable amount of complexity to a firearm, making the Bryco cost more. Remember, the Bryco .380 would be a gun for a lower income person. Every dollar makes a difference. It might be the difference between this gun and no gun. Lower income people also tend to drive cheap older cars, without all the safety features of newer or more expensive cars. It's a fact of life.
Take a look at how a semi-auto operates. to unload you have to remove the magazine, then cycle the action. On my CZ40, cycling the action moves the hammer and firing pin assembly, and interacts with the trigger assembly. I'm not sure, but it looks like there's even a firing pin block. My CZ75BD has one, but I don't remember if the 40 does.
Anyways,
1) Ability to unload with safety on is a nitpick, as you should keep your fingers off the trigger and the gun pointed in a safe direction when unloading
2) Manufacturing a firearm with the ability to be unloaded with the safety on adds complexity and expense
3) The safety might not be as reliable as the other ones. Otherwise, why would so many expensive guns exhibit the same features?
4) You're not supposed to depend on the safety in the first place!
I messed around with my CZ40 for a little bit playing the babysitter. Safety on, trying to rack the slide. After I noticed my finger staying firmly off the trigger, I placed it on the trigger for a 'better grip'. I found that I tended to point it sideways, to my left, pointing about 10 degrees behind me, slightly downward. I had some trouble firing the gun, as I kept tending to take my finger off the trigger. I found that when I had a nice firm grip on the gun, including the trigger, and operated the safety, the gun did fire(not really, I had unloaded it first, but the hammer did drop).
Extreme negligence/Stupidity. I mean, if she didn't know that much about guns, how did she know how to cycle the action in the first place?
I'd vote for mandatory teaching of the four rules in school. I mean, they mandate sex ed, so why not this?
David,
While it might be technically be possible to design a safety that allows you do unload a firearm without taking it off safe, it's not a simple process. Some revolvers have safeties, some autoloaders don't. My CZ's, while not expensive firearms, are considered good quality, and you can't cycle the action on them with the safety on.
It would add a considerable amount of complexity to a firearm, making the Bryco cost more. Remember, the Bryco .380 would be a gun for a lower income person. Every dollar makes a difference. It might be the difference between this gun and no gun. Lower income people also tend to drive cheap older cars, without all the safety features of newer or more expensive cars. It's a fact of life.
Take a look at how a semi-auto operates. to unload you have to remove the magazine, then cycle the action. On my CZ40, cycling the action moves the hammer and firing pin assembly, and interacts with the trigger assembly. I'm not sure, but it looks like there's even a firing pin block. My CZ75BD has one, but I don't remember if the 40 does.
Anyways,
1) Ability to unload with safety on is a nitpick, as you should keep your fingers off the trigger and the gun pointed in a safe direction when unloading
2) Manufacturing a firearm with the ability to be unloaded with the safety on adds complexity and expense
3) The safety might not be as reliable as the other ones. Otherwise, why would so many expensive guns exhibit the same features?
4) You're not supposed to depend on the safety in the first place!
I messed around with my CZ40 for a little bit playing the babysitter. Safety on, trying to rack the slide. After I noticed my finger staying firmly off the trigger, I placed it on the trigger for a 'better grip'. I found that I tended to point it sideways, to my left, pointing about 10 degrees behind me, slightly downward. I had some trouble firing the gun, as I kept tending to take my finger off the trigger. I found that when I had a nice firm grip on the gun, including the trigger, and operated the safety, the gun did fire(not really, I had unloaded it first, but the hammer did drop).
Extreme negligence/Stupidity. I mean, if she didn't know that much about guns, how did she know how to cycle the action in the first place?
I'd vote for mandatory teaching of the four rules in school. I mean, they mandate sex ed, so why not this?
TV, I'm sure she watch acters rack the slide back on autos, or seen poeple do it.
Nowdays people get more shooked up about guns then thier teenaged(or preteen) kids having sex. I think we need to add two more rules, the 5th rule is: "do not depend on safetys, they are mechnial device and can wear out. 6th rule: "If you don't know how to handle a partical gun then don't mess with it".
-Bill
P95Carry
Moderator Emeritus
Sorry whm .. had to have fun with that typo.
Of course Partical guns are best left to the physicists who designed them!
P95Carry
Moderator Emeritus
No probs Bill .... and sure wasn't trying to be demeaning ... just my warped sense of humor!!
The_Antibubba
Member
http://www.brandonsarms.org
Halvey,
If I bought the company, I'd still consider melting down their stock-those guns are crap.
But then I'd turn around and sell 50,000 melted gun lumps to some Antis, and use the proceeds to buy a real gun company.
Halvey,
If I bought the company, I'd still consider melting down their stock-those guns are crap.
But then I'd turn around and sell 50,000 melted gun lumps to some Antis, and use the proceeds to buy a real gun company.
I think a point that needs to be made is that AG Lockyer's logic, removing standing to buy the company because Paul Jiminez lacks the requisite state and federal licensing, also precludes purchase by Brandon Maxfield on the same grounds. And since Brandon is a minor, he is unable to get the requisite permits. He will have to find a surrogate to get the permits.
This is going to boil down to a permit race. Whoever gets the permits first, gets the company.
This is going to boil down to a permit race. Whoever gets the permits first, gets the company.
armoredman
Member
Good gravy, I wanna see this kid go after Glock, a weapon that has NO safety whatsoever, and MUST be fired to dissassemble! C'mon, kid, 75% of American cops gotta be wrong!,(Sidebar, I don't like Glocks, but use one at work.)
My Mosin Nagant rifle cannot remove the bolt with the safety on, so it must be unsafe. My Witness pistols slides cannot be moved with the safety on, so they must be unsafe....
Aha, that's what it is - the next argument in the Cali court system over the "unsafe" gun they just recently created legislatively - if a court decisionstates any weapon that cannot be dissassembled with the safety applied is "unsafe", then owners fall into that new catagory of about-to-be-sued-by-every-idiot, and they congratulate themselves on ridding California of another class of horrible American. Of course, the cops are included in this too, so prepare to see every LE agency in Cali go back to revolvers very soon.....
My Mosin Nagant rifle cannot remove the bolt with the safety on, so it must be unsafe. My Witness pistols slides cannot be moved with the safety on, so they must be unsafe....
Aha, that's what it is - the next argument in the Cali court system over the "unsafe" gun they just recently created legislatively - if a court decisionstates any weapon that cannot be dissassembled with the safety applied is "unsafe", then owners fall into that new catagory of about-to-be-sued-by-every-idiot, and they congratulate themselves on ridding California of another class of horrible American. Of course, the cops are included in this too, so prepare to see every LE agency in Cali go back to revolvers very soon.....
Clarification for other posters
1. At the time of the shooting incident, the "babysitter" was a 20 year old man named Larry Morefold.
http://www.tlpj.org/News_HTM/bryco_05-08-03.htm
(I do acknowledge that the assumption that the babysitter was a "she" is well-nigh universal, and otherwise appropriate.)
1(a). The pistol under discussion here is a .380 caliber firearm.
(To be fair, this particular round suffers from an inordinate number of journalists dropping the zero when reporting on the same.)
2. The winning bidder won't need a firearms license to purchase the existing Bryco machinery and inventory, provided the purchaser does not intend to commence or resume production of firearms.
http://www.azcentral.com/offbeat/articles/0615gunbid-ON.html
3. The aforementioned pistol was not deficient in design or function. Although Mr. Maxfield suffered the after-effects of a negligent discharge, the pistol itself functioned correctly on that tragic day in April 1994.
http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?ID=2784
Keeping things honest,
TM
1. At the time of the shooting incident, the "babysitter" was a 20 year old man named Larry Morefold.
http://www.tlpj.org/News_HTM/bryco_05-08-03.htm
(I do acknowledge that the assumption that the babysitter was a "she" is well-nigh universal, and otherwise appropriate.)
1(a). The pistol under discussion here is a .380 caliber firearm.
(To be fair, this particular round suffers from an inordinate number of journalists dropping the zero when reporting on the same.)
2. The winning bidder won't need a firearms license to purchase the existing Bryco machinery and inventory, provided the purchaser does not intend to commence or resume production of firearms.
http://www.azcentral.com/offbeat/articles/0615gunbid-ON.html
3. The aforementioned pistol was not deficient in design or function. Although Mr. Maxfield suffered the after-effects of a negligent discharge, the pistol itself functioned correctly on that tragic day in April 1994.
http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?ID=2784
Keeping things honest,
TM
GunnySkox
Member
*Mutter* The world is full of idiots, and those idiots are fully competent to blame everyone and everything except who is truly responsible for their ailment.
Unfortunately, this kid and/or his lawyer obviously aren't idiots. Like many gun-controllers, they're very, very devious. They knew good and well they couldn't get eighteen hojillion dollars plus the left kidney of the scum-sucking jackwad that actually shot him, but hey, why not strike a blow at the gun industry AND make a crapton of money? And everyone's heartstrings are yanked with 40-tons of stomach-churning, mind-boggling BS, such that noone stops to ask "why was the babysitter pointing a gun at this kid, anyway?"
The world is full of scum. Unfortunately, it's the kind of scum that floats to the top of the pond, so none of us little fishies (IE: sheeple, joe schmuckatelli average) can see the light, so we can't even see the scum.
Ugh. I hate people.
~Slam_Fire
Teen angst is good as long as it's aimed at the reprehensible actions of a**h****.
Unfortunately, this kid and/or his lawyer obviously aren't idiots. Like many gun-controllers, they're very, very devious. They knew good and well they couldn't get eighteen hojillion dollars plus the left kidney of the scum-sucking jackwad that actually shot him, but hey, why not strike a blow at the gun industry AND make a crapton of money? And everyone's heartstrings are yanked with 40-tons of stomach-churning, mind-boggling BS, such that noone stops to ask "why was the babysitter pointing a gun at this kid, anyway?"
The world is full of scum. Unfortunately, it's the kind of scum that floats to the top of the pond, so none of us little fishies (IE: sheeple, joe schmuckatelli average) can see the light, so we can't even see the scum.
Ugh. I hate people.
~Slam_Fire
Teen angst is good as long as it's aimed at the reprehensible actions of a**h****.
TheOtherOne
Member
Of course not. There is always a LEO/Government exemption. What is deemed unsafe, suddenly becomes safe if it's in the hands of the Police.
Treylis
Member
Uh, that's not much of a safety in my neck of the woods. Give me a manual one (and, heck, a grip one too while we're at it) any day.
- Status
