And it's certainly not about the RESPONSIBILITIES of those who wish to.

I look at durability, reliability, safety and function.

A book about the history of a company need not include content lecturing on the duties of the consumers of the product.

And marketing and fashion are very much part of the discussion around here. Anti's bring them up all the time.

And I'm curious why you don't have a similar reply to Post #6, in which the poster specifically said they didn't?

The problem with gun worshipers is that they don't see that their devotions to their irrational passion affect anyone but themselves - in spite of the massive casualties.

1911
Winchester 1894
Kentucky (or Pennsylvania) flintlock
M1 Garand
M16
Thompson
Colt Single-action Army (and Navy) revolvers
and the list could go on ...

"Glock" seems to be THE handgun of the 1990's. And every black blocky gun is called a Glock by reporters, even if it's a S&W, Sig, etc. I liked the rumors about Glocks: They are invisible to metal detectors; they cannot hold a fingerprint.

My biggest complaint about Glock is the lack of a positive thumb lever safety. Yes, there's a sort of "safety" lever in the middle of the trigger, but that's just dumb. Other than that, it seems like a pretty good gun. Lighter than the 1911, too.

Iver Johnson patented such a revolver in 1881. Note the "trigger safety" existed a century before Glock claimed to have invented it.

It's gotta be double-action only, so a safety seems truly redundant.

Interesting info, thanks.

Last edited Thu Feb 23, 2012, 12:04 PM - Edit history (2)

this ad could run in the Ladies' Home Journal. Now the anti's would have an exploding head shit brain hemorrhage over an advertisement like this...



but in 1901 the idea was that a revolver that had a 12 pound trigger pull and the trigger safety could not be fired by a child. As the ad notes, "without intent to do so, Iver Johnson revolvers cannot be discharged."

The gun was drop safe, since the hammer was completely shrouded, it was impossible for it to fall or be struck in such a way for it to fire. A child's finger was not large enough to activate the safety and pull the trigger.

Iver Johnson is not as famous as Colt or Smith & Wesson, nor did they make the large caliber guns used by the military or frontiersmen. They made millions of .32 and .38 caliber revolvers that were the nightstand and sock drawer guns kept for protection in American homes between 1870 and 1940. They were an innovative company and produced good quality guns at reasonable prices. Iver Johnson also pioneered the transfer bar ignition system and marketed their hammer revolvers with a "Hammer the hammer," series of ads.



Again, this was decades ahead of Colt's positive lock or S&W's safety block. S&W first incorporated a passive hammer block in 1915 with .38 S&W Military & Police Model of 1905 (4th change). That was in response to Colt, which had upgraded their “New Police” revolver in 1907 with an internal hammer block safety, and renaming it the "Police Positive."

Doesn't fit in the SoP of the forum.

Maybe Non-Fiction Group would be a good place for it.

Regards,
Krispos42, Gungeon Host

...I've decided to unlock the thread, as it apparently contains extensive discussion of American gun-control laws and politics of the last 30 years or so.

Regards,
Krispos42, Gungeon Host

think it was anti-gun and many would read it and think it was pro-gun.

Maybe step outside your bias and read stuff you do not 100% agree with. You might learn something!

The book has many pro-gun stories also. If you want to base your decision on a small set of pages go ahead. The book is highly rated. Some people are confident enough to make their own decisions. Then there is you!

in your little world. If it is working for you then congrats!

Hmmm.....I know how you make book decisions. So I know something about you.

read something you disagree with. Like fox viewers. Or limbaugh fans.

Here is some smiley faces for you.

Like being hit by Lightning.
Doesn't mean I'm gonna go stand on the roof and hold up a golf club in a fucking thunderstorm...

And I'm not a fan of the Glock nor the 9mm Parabellum, either.

I won't give money to the anti's ever.

a lot of their Kindle books are free..

paranoia.

not MAIG, Businessweek, but the fact that he works for him ought to make you think..

but why would you ask that question?...I mean, do you send money to the Brady Bunch or MAIG?

same.

but I would be 100 times more likely to send money to the NRA than to Bloomburg or his clingers. Why would Bloomy allow his progeny to write or publish a book about guns which is unbiased? Maybe it is, I wouldn't spend my money to find out. There are too many other free books and books whose authors whose political positions I don't adamantly disagree with. The NRA OTOH spends a lot of money actually providing educational and life saving instruction to people ranging from school children through advanced law enforcement training. I happen to disagree with the politics of the leadership, yet appreciate the commitment to firearms safety and to defense of the 2nd amendment against prohibitionists like Bloominidiot.

is the need to dry fire the gun to disassemble. Should people check the chamber before dry firing? Of coarse. Do they? Usually. I would venture a guess that there have been more nd's with Glock during this step of disassembly than any other hand gun in history...it really is a serious, dangerous design flaw IMHO.