quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

Which is why, O Insult-Prone One, I'm looking at better training and addressing the design flaw.

You are guys who keep bringing up "well, it's already illegal to leave the loaded weapon unattended," but you've got no way to enforce it. So stop hiding behind that, and lets look at approaches that will actually help.

We can charge the dead mom after the fact. Not sure that will help a lot.

I asked you before and you never answered how do you enforce it?
And you just said that just because it is part of of the training doesn't mean it gets to the students, so that makes (according to you) useless.
Of course flaws should be fixed, but that is covered under product law.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

From Kirata's description, seems fixing this flaw would indeed stand a good chance of preventing unsafe toddler gun-handling.

Since it clearly needs to be addressed anyway, it's a place to start -- and given the manufacturer refuses to acknowledge the flaw, it will take legal action of some sort.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

quote:

ORIGINAL: igor2003

One safety feature, already available on all guns, is to simply leave the firing chamber empty. That, alone, would virtually eliminate all accidental shootings where a toddler discharges the weapon, and would definitely (in my opinion) drastically reduce accidental shootings by older children. Getting the adult owners of said weapons to actually do this would be the real trick, since it reduces the available firepower by one round.

It would also reduce the number of gun owners. A firearm without a round in the chamber is called a "paperweight," and people without one in the pipe when they need to shoot are called "dead" (like this guy).

K.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata


Here's a modified M&P for Lucy...
[image]local://upfiles/235229/192B9D303E1E4767866591BEE0C8A864.jpg[/image]

It don't get safer than that. [:)]

K.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

Which is why, O Insult-Prone One, I'm looking at better training and addressing the design flaw.

You are guys who keep bringing up "well, it's already illegal to leave the loaded weapon unattended," but you've got no way to enforce it. So stop hiding behind that, and lets look at approaches that will actually help.

We can charge the dead mom after the fact. Not sure that will help a lot.

I asked you before and you never answered how do you enforce it?
And you just said that just because it is part of of the training doesn't mean it gets to the students, so that makes (according to you) useless.
Of course flaws should be fixed, but that is covered under product law.

No, it's not. The manufacturer denies the flaw.

That will take legal action -- unless you mean "suing the company to force the change" as "covered under product law."

Guess that's the next step.

As for training -- Jesus Christ. Like any training program, you assess, and when it's not happening, you address it, and measure the results.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

Then why didn't you simply suggest suing the manufacturer 20 pages ago?

[8|]

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

quote:

ORIGINAL: lovmuffin

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

From Kirata's description, seems fixing this flaw would indeed stand a good chance of preventing unsafe toddler gun-handling.

Since it clearly needs to be addressed anyway, it's a place to start -- and given the manufacturer refuses to acknowledge the flaw, it will take legal action of some sort.

It would stand a chance from an accidental toddler discharge, (ATD) [8D] I don't know what the probability is but it certainly wouldn't be toddler proof.

When you say it's a start, is that code for adding more safeties to all handguns is next ? [;)]

But yes, design flaws and defects should clearly be addressed.

And that's how you got included in the gun-nutter-defensive-no-matter-what crowd. Any reasonable change triggers your paranoia. Hopefully you're simply joking here.

Your last sentence gives me hope.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

But on revolvers (although most cheap ones are implemented with a hex head, you can have a mechanism (usually an eccentric cam with slide that prevents the hammer from moving from the "closed" position.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

I'd suggest reading what I *actually* write instead of inferring what you choose to refute instead.

See reply to Bama. If the shoe fits.

And again. Toddler. A TODDLER.

quote:

ORIGINAL: lovmuffin

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

But on revolvers (although most cheap ones are implemented with a hex head, you can have a mechanism (usually an eccentric cam with slide that prevents the hammer from moving from the "closed" position.

So........how would you move the hammer in order to fire it ?