Interesting gun lock video

[Walter_Bowman]

No comment

http://www.cpsc.gov/vnr/asfroot/gunlock.asx

[papau]

1. I lock my guns away in a metal container - gunlock defect not a problem

but it is interesting that Ashcroft/Bush and team worry about trigger/gunlocks "safety".

[ArkDem]

3. The Consumer Product Safety Commission tests virtually

every product sold in the United States. I don't think their direction changes to much as administrations come and go.

[MrBenchley]

4. All except guns

which get a pass, thanks to the industry's blood money...

[Walter_Bowman]

7. Please point out

One currently developed safety feature which will save people from violations of gun safety rules.

[MrBenchley]

8. So in other words

guns are exempt from CPSC regulations, for no other reason than the industry's blood money and the corruption of conservatives.

http://www.gunlawsuits.org/reform/design.asp

[slackmaster]

12. Here's a list of other things the CPSC doesn't test

automobiles
other on-road vehicles
tires
boats
alcohol
tobacco
food
drugs
cosmetics
pesticides
medical devices

I guess these all "get a pass" too, eh?

[MrBenchley]

13. Funny thing about your list...

First thing I check...

"CPSC, Calvin Klein Cosmetics Co. Announce Recall"

www.safetyalerts.com/rcls/cpsc/pr/99/99096.htm


"CPSC Eyes Child-Resistant Caps for Some Cosmetics "

http://www.imra.org/public/pages/index.cfm?pageid=2632


"PRIMERS FOR ARTIFICIAL NAILS:
Safety Concerns Lead to Special Packaging Requirements
In response to cases of poisoning and injury, the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) has issued a regulation requiring child-resistant packaging for household products containing methacrylic acid (MAA). "

http://vm.cfsan.fda.gov/~dms/cos-prim.html

However, some cosmetics questions fall under the Food and Drug Administration Office of Consumer Affairs.

As for automobiles and the like, I'm sure the rest of us have heard about the NTSB and the frequent safety recalls...

[slackmaster]

16. My source was the CPSC's Web site

http://www.cpsc.gov/about/faq.html

Gun manufacturers recall their products for safety defects from time to time, e.g. Sturm, Ruger & Co's single-action revolver.

Defective firearms are very rare. There is no need to regulate them in the same way childrens' toys are regulated. Children aren't choking on guns. The industry is regulating itself quite effectively in order to avoid liability losses.

[Spoonman]

20. Absolutely!!!!!!!!!

Last October I purchased a Winchester 1300 pump action 20 gauge ladies/youth model (shortened stock - panty twist preventer) for my 13 year old son. This was to be his first shotgun so that he could spend quality time with his dad in the generations old tradition od duck hunting.
After spending an afternoon at the skeet range, getting safety and shooting lessons from an instructor, we sat down in the living room to clean the gun.
Low and behold the choke tube looked like it had been put through a meat grinder.
To make a long story short, the gun was sent back to Winchester, where it was inspected and founed to be defective.
The bore had been done too short causing the choke tube to crimp in restricting the barrel.
This could have caused the end of the barrel to explode.
The gentleman that I dealt with informed me that they were recalling the 1499 others that were made during that production run, of which only 26 had been sold to individuals.

I was sent a brand new gun, which arrived in time for duck season, along with a lengthy letter expressing the sorrow of the company.

My son learned a valuable lesson - when your wrong admit it, and make it right.

[MrBenchley]

22. Yeah?

Here's Sturm's own website...there's no recall there.

http://www.ruger-firearms.com/Firearms/S-Announcements.html

But it sure does lokk like the Single Six is a disaster and a half...of course that's the one even the Wall Street Journal singled out as a public menace, having killed more than 600 owners accidentally....

[slackmaster]

24. Go sell another steaming pantload

To someone dumb enough to buy it.

http://www.ruger-firearms.com/Firearms/S-Announcements.html

...of course that's the one even the Wall Street Journal singled out as a public menace, having killed more than 600 owners accidentally....

Cite please. The Violence Policy Center has a footnote attributing the WSJ as stating "...more than 600 deaths and serious injuries..." to the Ruger Old Model single action, which has been recalled.

600 deaths my ass.

[MrBenchley]

29. The only one who's bought a pantload is you

Now what do you want? Are you disputing that the Wall Street Journal ran an article on this insanely dangerous gun and Ruger's inaction?

Are you pretending that Ruger had a recall? That's already been shown to be a lie.

[slackmaster]

I'm disputing YOUR deliberate misstatements

You said "...having killed more than 600 owners accidentally" which is not supported by facts.

Are you pretending that Ruger had a recall? That's already been shown to be a lie.

Horseshit!

http://www.firearmsid.com/Recalls/FA_Recalls%204.htm#RUGER,%20“Old%20Model”%20(pre-1973)%20SINGLE-SIX,%20BLACKHAWK,%20&%20BEARCAT,%20REVOLVERS

(copy and paste link if it doesn't work)

RUGER
“Old Model” (pre-1973) SINGLE-SIX,
BLACKHAWK, & BEARCAT, REVOLVERS

RECALL: The patented Ruger Conversion Kit is an entirely new operating system for these old revolvers. It can help prevent accidental discharges caused by a drop or blow to the hammer if the user has failed to take the basic safety precaution of keeping the hammer down on an empty chamber. That's very important!

This mechanism can be factory installed without any further alteration. The frame and other major parts will not be affected by this Conversion. The value of the gun will not be impaired, and we will return your original parts for collector's purposes.

To receive a free factory safety conversion, write to us at:

Sturm, Ruger and Company, Inc.
Lacey Place
Department KC
Southport, CT 06490

We will provide you with a shipping container and instructions. You only pay initial shipping to our factory. We will cover all other charges including return shipping costs. Please write to us without delay if you have one of these guns, and tell your friends about the availability of this kit. Remember that the safest way to carry any older single-action revolver, regardless of manufacturer, is with the hammer down on an empty chamber.

If your revolver has the words "New Model" on the frame, this offer is not applicable. Please write to us at "Department C" for full details.

Source:

Company Notice 1980 & 1982

American Rifleman, November 1980; page 9

American Rifleman, February 1982; page 65

Handgun, February 1999; page 37

[MrBenchley]

54. Are you pretending that an ad is a recall?

Especially an ad run once two years apart, and once again 17 years later?

[slackmaster]

59. Ruger's was in every issue of every gun mag for years

They sent mail to every owner who had filled out the warranty registration card. And the literature that comes with every new Ruger firearm to this day has information about the single-action recall. It's printed prominently on the cover of the instruction manual for the Mark II target pistol I bought two years ago:

"Do you own a RUGER Blackhawk, Single-Six, or BEARCAT revolver like this? If so, Ruger wants to give you and install FREE a unique new improvement. See other side of the card for full details." (With pictures) The back of the card has a lot more information about the problem and asks owners "Please tell your friends about the availability of this kit.", and there is a postage-paid postcard to get the process started.

What more do you expect them to do? There is no gun registry, so manufacturers have no way of knowing who owns their products except for people who have voluntarily turned in the warranty cards.

A recall occurs when a manufacturer preemptively offers to correct a defect before they get sued by someone who has been injured because of it. How would YOU define due diligence in making owners aware of the offer when there is no list of owners available?

I have to give you a little credit here. At least you are no longer denying outright that Ruger recalled their pistol.

[MrBenchley]

67. And are you STILL pretending an ad is a recall?

"How would YOU define due diligence in making owners aware of the offer when there is no list of owners available?"
I would describe due diligence as making every effort to be sure that list of owners IS available.

[slackmaster]

68. Are you still pretending all Ruger did was post an ad?

I would describe due diligence as making every effort to be sure that list of owners IS available.

They have. Every Ruger firearm comes with a warranty registration card.

[MrBenchley]

72. All Ruger did was post an ad

"Every Ruger firearm comes with a warranty registration card."
Gee, it's a comfort to know that when you drop it and it goes off and kills you, your grieving heirs can get the purchase price refunded...

[slackmaster]

You are mistaken

Information has already been posted to refute your statement. Go back and read the thread. Ruger posted numerous ads in multiple publications over a period of about 10 years. Ruger also sent at least one letter to every registered owner of one of the affected pistols. Even today Ruger continues to inform the buyer of every new Ruger firearm about the recall. The recall is clearly posted on Ruger's Web site.

Your posts reek of disingenuousness.

[Spoonman]

26. Hello

If they can locate every gun, they don't have to publicly announce a recall.

[MrBenchley]

30. Yeah?

Tell us how they do that?

[Spoonman]

35. It's too simple

for some people, but I'll attempt it anyway.

Winchester sells X number to each store.
Each store tells Winchester how many they have left, and sends them back.
Using the information from ATF Form 4473 or the waranty registration info the dealer and or Winchester contacts the individuals who purchased the firearms to inform them of the defect.

and they tell two friends, and so on, and so on, and so on.........

[Name removed]

37. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Romulus]

2. old news

the Masterlock trigger locks had a recall in the late 1990's supposedly because they could be bashed open like as is shown in the video.

[greenwow]

5. And the NRA

wants to protect these idiots from lawsuits! Just say no to exempting these death makers from the law.

[Walter_Bowman]

6. one making a defective product

wouldn't be protected, besides, gun makers and lock makers...

[MrBenchley]

9. Sounds good to me....

Let the victims of the corrupt gun industry have their day in court.....

[Spoonman]

11. I agree,

Let them sue the people or person that committed the crime, or the police force that failed to protect them.

[Spoonman]

10. OK,

then lets also just say no to exempting these death makers from the law.

McDonalds
Burger King
Wendy's
Jack in the Box
Pillsbury
Pizza Hut
Pizza Inn
Taco Bell
Coca cola
Pepsi
Frito Lay
Etc.

Although already accountable for defects we need to hold the following totally accountable for death caused by their products.

Ford
GM
Chevy
Mercedes Benz
Volvo
Volkswagon
Lexus
Acura
Hyundai
Honda
Isuzu
Yamaha
Kawasaki
Suzuki
Polaris
Arctic Cat
etc.

Oh, let's not forget

Jim Beam
Jack Daniel's
The Pierre Smirnoff Company
Anheuser-Busch Companies
E&J Gallo Winery
Robert Mondavi
Beringer Vineyard
Kendall-Jackson Wine Estates
Johnny Walker
Miller Breweries
Etc.

Yea let's just hold every company out there "accountable" for the actions of individuals. Individuals that know the dangers or hazards associated with that product, but don't care.

Now, before anyone starts preaching the crap about "the manufactures make it appealing to the criminals". Ask yourself, have I EVER seen a billboard advertising any gun? How about an ad in a magazine other than a hunting/fishing type magazine? How about on TV other than a hunting/fishing type show (and by the way the advertisements you do see aren't for AK-47s).

Every company I've listed above has massive marketing schemes that permeate billboards and every magazine and television station in the country.

Every company I've listed above have absolutely no "safety devices" built into their products to prevent misuse.

Yea let's start allowing anyone without morals or self control hold someone else accountable for their actions.

Yea let's allow the distribution of wealth get even worse by allowing lawyers make millions off civil lawsuits.

Yea let's open the flood gates and force all of these companies out of business due to "their accountability", and really fuck our economy.

Yea sounds like a great plan, count me in. :eyes:

[MrBenchley]

14. Gee, spoon, all of those ARE liable

"Now, before anyone starts preaching the crap about "the manufactures make it appealing to the criminals". Ask yourself, have I EVER seen a billboard advertising any gun?"
Gee, I not only seen gun ads... I seen gun ads in Soldier of Fortune that advertise a "fingerprint proof finish".

"Every company I've listed above have absolutely no "safety devices" built into their products to prevent misuse. "
Ford has no safety devices in its cars? That's news to the rest of us.

Meanwhile, speaking of real news...

"Ford Motor Co. is recalling 1.68 million SUVs and a smaller number of its controversial Crown Victoria police cars for a variety of potentially dangerous defects. "

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/trib/20030809/lo_newsday/fordrecalls168msuvs

[slackmaster]

17. Yes, they are liable for defects and so are gun makers

I seen gun ads in Soldier of Fortune that advertise a "fingerprint proof finish".

I seen it too. Do you understand the purpose of a fingerprint resistant finish? Probably not. It's to resist rust. It has nothing to do with keeping law enforcement from retrieving LATENT fingerprints. Those can be recovered even from non-stick cookware.

[Spoonman]

19. Thank you slack

it saved me some time.

[MrBenchley]

21. Really? When was the last gun recall?

"Do you understand the purpose of a fingerprint resistant finish? Probably not. It's to resist rust."
Yeah, surrrrrrre...that's why they said rust-proof, er, fingerprint proof. That's the ticket!

[slackmaster]

25. Have you ever tried a Web search engine?

Here's the first hit for "Firearm product recalls" on Yahoo!:

http://www.firearmsid.com/Recalls/Firearm%20Recall%20Index.htm

And here's another one you might find interesting.

http://www.masterlock.com/pdf/RECALL.pdf

[MrBenchley]

31. Jeepers

There sure is a lot of defective crap being turned out by the corrupt gun industry....

What I see here are warning notices for those who might be idly scanning the web...what I don't see here is a recall..


And lookee here on the Masterlock recall notice...

"Recall conducted in cooperation with the U.S.Consumer Product Safety Commission."

[Name removed]

34. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[MrBenchley]

50. Not me...there's no recalls there

Still waiting to see a gun recall similar to this one...

"Ford Motor Co. is recalling 1.68 million SUVs and a smaller number of its controversial Crown Victoria police cars for a variety of potentially dangerous defects. "

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/trib/20030809/lo_newsday/fordrecalls168msuvs

[Name removed]

51. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[MrBenchley]

56. I see that the website has that crap

Now tell us how a notice on the website amounts to a recall.....

[slackmaster]

60. How would you implement a recall for something like that?

Gun manufacturers have no way of knowing who owns their products except for buyers who have voluntarily turned in their warranty registration cards. Unlike automobiles, people generally don't take firearms back to the dealer for routine service. They do notify their authorized dealers, but even they cannot reach every customer with the ease a car dealer can.

I've written many times that I would support a voluntary national gun registry that could be used to trace recovered stolen guns back to their rightful owners. It could also be used to disseminate product safety recall information.

Ruger is well known for customer service and standing by their products, but Ruger is one of the larger and more profitable firearms manufacturers. Smaller companies may lack the resources to pay for ads in multiple issues of American Rifleman, Guns and Ammo, etc. when they have a defect that they want to correct.

[MrBenchley]

63. Too too funny, even for an RKBA enthusiast....

"Gun manufacturers have no way of knowing who owns their products"
Oh, please tell us why that is.

"Ruger is well known for customer service"
Certainly to anyone who read the article in the Wall Street Journal...

[Name removed]

69. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[slackmaster]

75. Information has already been posted to answer your question

But in case you missed it here it is again:

Not everyone bothers to fill out their warranty registration cards.

[demsrule4life]

58. There have been recalls

http://www.remington.com/Safety_Modification_Program/600_660.htm
http://www.firearmsid.com/Recalls/Firearm%20Recall%20Index.htm

Firearm companies don't know who buys their firearms unless the customer sends in the warranty card. I never have and I'am sure many other gun buyers don't either. Most firearm recalls are posted in gun mags, and since I'am preatty sure you never buy those you never see the recalls.

[MrBenchley]

66. Surrrrrrrre, there have...

"Firearm companies don't know who buys their firearms"
Please please tell us why that is....and who's been fighting to make sure that's the case.

[Spoonman]

18. I'll do it again

Reeeeeaaaaal slow this time.

Every company I've listed above have absolutely no "safety devices" built into their products to prevent misuse.

Re-read all of it, then reply.

[MrBenchley]

23. And it's still HOOEY

no matter how slowly you say it.

[slackmaster]

27. Prove it, Benchley

You remind me of the infamous Milt Shook of Usenet, who insisted that as a result of lawsuits power tools had secret safety devices installed to prevent children from using them.

http://www.allmax.com/MILT/

[MrBenchley]

32. Prove what?

That your silly post is hooey?

That Ford is liable for lawsuits?

[slackmaster]

36. No, prove that spoonman's statement is not correct

i.e. "Every company I've listed above have absolutely no "safety devices" built into their products to prevent misuse."

spoonman is right.

[MrBenchley]

40. Gee....

You mean Ford hasn't put airbags in its cars? For that matter ignition keys are systems designed, among other things, to keep children who might be in the car unsupervised from starting the engine.

As I recall, companies such as Budweiser and Jim Beam spend considerable amounts of money training bartenders about not over-serving inebriated customers, and even more educating consuemrs of the virtue of "designated drivers". Of course, bartenders would be liable under law if they over-served, and a liquor company that encouraged it would probably also be liable.

But this is common knnowledge and hardly needed to be "proved."

[slackmaster]

41. Airbags have nothing to do with deliberate misuse

And every kid I've seen is capable of using keys by age 3.

Spin like a Dervish and you're still wrong.

[MrBenchley]

44. You mean someone who deliberately rams a tree

is not protected by an airbag the way an accident victim is?

"And every kid I've seen is capable of using keys by age 3."
Is the point you are deperately and laboriously trying to make that if keys are left in the ignition at all time the car can always be started, even by people who shouldn't start it?? If so, it hardly seems worth the making.

Please tell me that bit of simple-mindedness is not what you have been making such a fuss about all afternoon.

[Name removed]

45. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[CO Liberal]

46. Sounds Like the "Wayne LaPierre Two-Step"

:-)

[MrBenchley]

48. And never forget...

"An airbag does not prevent you from deliberately running a car into a tree."

I'm convinced now all right! (snicker)

[MrBenchley]

47. Yup...I see that's what you're doing

"An airbag does not prevent you from deliberately running a car into a tree."
THERE'S a profound thought. Please go up to General Discussion and share it with the whole board so we can all partake of that bit of genius.

[slackmaster]

52. You can run but you can't hide your inability to admit error

Gasoline. Matches. You.

The courthouse steps await.

[MrBenchley]

55. What error?

Tell us, does the airbag go off whether or not the doofus runs into the tree accidentally OR deliberately?

I think the steps to another institution await you..

[slackmaster]

61. Of course the airbag goes off without regard to driver's motivation

But it does not PREVENT someone from deliberately misusing a car. There are no devices on cars to prevent deliberate misuse by anyone who has the ignition key. That was spoonman's issue, which you keep dodging.

[MrBenchley]

64. In other words...

The point spoon wanted to make was the insanely silly one I mentioned a few posts back.

"Of course the airbag goes off without regard to driver's motivation"
Thus being a safety device of exactly the sort Spoon claimed did not exist.

[Name removed]

70. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

73. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Spoonman]

76. Blatant Misquote

"Thus being a safety device of exactly the sort Spoon claimed did not exist."

This is not even within the same universe of what I wrote.

[Spoonman]

74. Geez B

Tell us, does the airbag go off whether or not the doofus runs into the tree accidentally OR deliberately?

If the air bag prevented misuse, it would have prevented the doofus from running into the tree in the first place!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Spoonman]

28. It's only hooey

cause you know it's right!
And if I'm wrong prove it!
Come on, you say it's hooey, so you must be able to disprove my statement.

[MrBenchley]

33. Been there done that.

In fact, I showed in detail that it was hooey..

"Now, before anyone starts preaching the crap about "the manufactures make it appealing to the criminals". Ask yourself, have I EVER seen a billboard advertising any gun?"
Gee, I not only seen gun ads... I seen gun ads in Soldier of Fortune that advertise a "fingerprint proof finish".
"Every company I've listed above have absolutely no "safety devices" built into their products to prevent misuse. "
Ford has no safety devices in its cars? That's news to the rest of us.
Meanwhile, speaking of real news...
"Ford Motor Co. is recalling 1.68 million SUVs and a smaller number of its controversial Crown Victoria police cars for a variety of potentially dangerous defects. "
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/trib/20030809/lo_newsday/fordrecalls168msuvs 
 Alert

[Spoonman]

38. Strike Two,

Here, I'll make even more of it bold so that you can ignore it again, in much the same way you ignore every fact you've ever been given.
"Every company I've listed above have absolutely no "safety devices" built into their products to prevent misuse. "

Hell, I going to make it even easier

built into their products to prevent misuse.

Let me clarify this I have not stated that Ford or any other manufacturer does not have safety devices in its cars.

I never stated that Ford or any other manufacturer does not perform recalls for defective products.

Re-read the original statement FIVE times before you reply

After this, if you still do not understand the statement, I will assume that you just cannot, or refuse to, comprehend a simple statement.

[slackmaster]

39. I can explain MrBenchley's issue

Benchley can read just fine, but is incapable of admitting error.

[MrBenchley]

43. BZZZZZT!!!

Sorry. But thanks for playing "What's my RKBA fantasy?" Now take your turtle wax and go.

[MrBenchley]

42. Sorry it's out of the park

But keep trying to pretend that there's some actual point to your silliness.

It adds to the general air of desperation that always accompanies RKBA enthusaiasts beating some obscure and irrelevant point to death...

[Tinfoil]

15. He shoots! He scores!!

Excellent post Spoonman.

[MrBenchley]

49. The crowd goes wild...

with laughter.

And don't forget: "An airbag does not prevent you from deliberately running a car into a tree."

[slackmaster]

53. Gasoline, matches, and you

The courthouse steps await.

"You mean Ford hasn't put airbags in its cars? For that matter ignition keys are systems designed, among other things, to keep children who might be in the car unsupervised from starting the engine."

- MrBenchley

[MrBenchley]

57. Glad you pulled out that quote

So we all can see just how silly an RKBA enthusiast can be....

Yes, there's a quote that will live in infamy: "You mean Ford hasn't put airbags in its cars? For that matter ignition keys are systems designed, among other things, to keep children who might be in the car unsupervised from starting the engine."

Tell me, slack, do you REALLY think there's a sane person in the world who can or would bother to dispute either sentence?

[slackmaster]

62. You still haven't answered spoonman's question

[MrBenchley]

65. Cry me a river.....

Or funnier yet, tell us, please, why that quote of mine struck you as some sort of outrageous staement.

[slackmaster]

71. Why should I bother replying to you?

Everything you have posted here seems to be an attempt to distract attention from your inability to address Spoon's legitimate question, so that's all I have to say about it. I give up.