How Much is YOUR Life Worth?

L

LinuxHack3r

New member
Today I went to the range. Saw a very peculiar guy that was there a very long time. I decided to talk to him. We started taking pistols, and I mentioned CZ.

"CZ? How much is your life worth? I've been a gunsmith for 20 years and I've worked on so many of those."

(No offense to Glock owners)
He was wearing a Glock USA hat, and I almost told him something like:
"Yeah I agree with you, but there are no guns as bad as those toys that Glock put out."

But I didn't. The point is:
How many times have you heard "How much is your life worth" and about which gun? It always comes from the type that cannot be wrong and only own the best guns. Like this same guy today:

"You could offer me $1000 for this .380 but I wouldn't take it, it shoots that well."

Sometimes it is the people, not the guns, at the range that are the most entertaining.
 
I hate it when people say stuff like that. If price is no object then why bother with a gun at all? Just hire an elite security team to protect you and your family 24/7.
 
I never bought into the "cost = quality" nonsense or "you get what you pay for".

I'm more of a believer in "You get what you inspect, not what you expect." Buy the gun you like and test it with what you want to carry. In the end, I don't think 3 rounds of $1.25 per shot wonder bullets from a custom maker's $3000 1911 are going to end an altercation any faster than 3 rounds of white-box JHP's of the same cartridge from a $300 used gun.
 
I know a few people that are like that; not only with guns but with everything. I call them one uppers because they just can not help them selfs to tell ya how much there item is better than yours. There is no debating with them either. I simply go uh huh and nod my head. they are in the same boat as the embellishers. your more than likely going to be at the range when the gun fails rather then the couple shots you shoot in self defense so the odds of it failing on you in a bad situation is pretty low for any gun.
 
Ask him if he only flies the safest airline, only drives the safest car, only buys the best tires, only has the best mechanic in town work on his vehicles, only goes to the doctor with the best malpractice record in the city, only buys the highest quality food and medication available, has the best alarm system and best monitoring company for his house, only buys the best, most secure locks, doors and windows for his house, only lives in the safest part of town, etc., etc.,

When income is limited, spending must also ultimately be limited too. A few people can afford to buy the best of everything--the rest of us have to compromise.
I never bought into the "cost = quality" nonsense or "you get what you pay for".
Click to expand...
This is taking things to the opposite extreme.

It's not always true that cost = quality or that you get what you pay for, but it's a good place to start, and is generally true.

A more reasonable statement would be to say something along the lines of:

It's possible to get good functionality and reliability at reasonable cost if you don't mind compromising in other areas.

For example, I'm a fan of Ruger P95 pistols. They're functional, durable and reliable. But that said, they are not, in my experience, as accurate or ergonomic as some of the other, more expensive, pistols I own and have shot. That's because, in general, you get what you pay for. In the case of the Ruger P95, you get functionality, durability and reliablity at a reasonable cost. You don't get exemplary accuracy, outstanding appearance or impressive ergonomics. That's the compromise.
 
If I may change the subject ever so slightly, whenever someone says something like, "I'd love to attend training at [big-name shooting school inserted here], but it's just so expensive", the same exact line is usually heard in response.
 
My two most reliable pistols are complete opposite ends of the spectrum cost-wise. The Kel Tec P11 has NEVER had a FTF or FTE, but then neither has the HK USP .45 tactical. Go figure... Accuracy wise, there is no comparison but then again the P11 was intended and designed to be only a CCW or backup gun.
 
Yeah, I try to be kind and friendly to everyone. Before I left, I had to walk over the the guy that showed up with one of those 45LC/.410 Judges. He had a gallon of water he was going to shoot at. He was using birdshot. It was much less than exciting at the 15 yards he shot it at.

He also had a Hi-Point 9mm. I told him his Judge was pretty neat, and asked him how he liked his Ho-Point. I also told him it is neat how they have the lifetime warranty.

Neither of his guns would I personally consider buying, but he liked them. I thought he was the coolest guy I met today. He was just there to enjoy his time and firearms.

THE funniest fact is the Mr. lifesaver kept firing his handguns as fast as he could pull the trigger, not hitting anything. Why?

SO HIS WIFE COULD TAKE A REALLY COOL PICTURE WITH SOME MUZZLE FLASH.

People that have such a huge desire to post cool pictures just to show others they have a gun...
:D
 
Reliability and durability are what matter. Sometimes there is a price correlation and sometimes there is not.
 
How odd, 10 CZ firearms so far, not one required a single trip to any gunsmith, though I will need to get night sights put on my Phantom soon.
I get far more than my money's worth.
 
I often hear this same kind of logic in a different context, specifically motorcycle helmets - the "how much is your head worth?" line frequently comes out when you hear a rider trying to justify a $700 helmet. By design, the DOT and Snell safety certifications for helmets are both pass/fail - there's no "Super-DOT" or "Snell++" safety rating. The extra money may get you a lighter helmet, or one with a face shield that's easier to replace, or a quieter helmet, or fancier graphics, but you can't assume that it will buy you a safer helmet.

Likewise with guns, there are a lot of areas where the extra money can go that have nothing to do with reliability or functionality. You may be paying for a fancier finish, nicer grips, or exotic materials where more-mundane ones would do the job just as well. You might even just be paying a "limited availability surcharge" on a hard-to-find model, or you may be paying a premium solely for the name.
 
A few of years ago my employer had 10k of "dead peasant" insurance on me. I think that puts me in the .25 cal Raven league.:(

I asked my wife and she says it depends on how much they offer her. That probably down grades me to pointed stick.:o

But my dog thinks I'm worth a million treats and if he could he'd set me up with a Korth.:D
 
Hehe, thanks Buzzcook. :)

My worth is what I think it is, and then some. It's all about reliability and function when it comes to guns, and what one trusts.

The snobbery in the gun world can be pretty amazing at times. Carry what you are comfortable with and trust, and what other people think doesn't matter too much.
 
So...this guy feels that every pistol is supposed to be for the purpose of self-defense? And he also feels that every pistol has a direct correlation between cost, quality, and reliability?

You should find this man and thank him. You learned never to use his professional services, without having to go through the hassle of bringing a gun to his shop.
 
How much is your life worth?
Click to expand...

I can't afford me. I am not sure that anyone makes a gun that costs as much as my life is worth.

If the guy in the OP carries a Glock, then his life must be worth somewhere between $459 and $559? Does that sound about right (sorry, not up on Glock values).

If you carry a gun that is worth what you are worth, which do you try to protect in a fight? What if your gun is worth more than you are?

A buddy of mine at College 20 years ago was funny when it came to wearing motorcycle helmets. When he felt smart, he wore his $350 Bell full face helmet. When he did poorly on an exam, he wore his $10 garage sale helmet because he figured that was about all his head was worth. No use ruining a good helmet protecting a cheap head, he said.
 
I don't believe there is any direct correlation between the cost of a gun and its reliability. Many years ago I wanted a 45 auto and knew very little about guns. I went into my local gunshop and ended up buying the LEAST expensive 45 they were selling. the Ruger P97DC. I still own this gun which has never, never had a single problem of any kind, regardless of the brand or type ammo I have fed through it. Its accuracy is excellent, at least for me with my limited skill and eyesight. If I recall I paid about $350 for this gun NIB and while I value my life far more than this, I have no trouble entrusting my safety to this excellent firearm.
 
I have found that generally snobs like that are hiding some low self esteme issues and don't pay much attention to them.
As a general rule I think you get what you pay for, if you are lucky. Even the top of the line products can have problems.
 
I don't believe there is any direct correlation between the cost of a gun and its reliability.
Click to expand...

I believe this too. At least to a point, but CZ's have been by far the least reliable handguns I've ever owned. I'd use one as a range toy, but never trust my life to one. I do trust Glocks more, but not because of price. Glocks and CZ's are essentially the same price. I'd take a Ruger any day and trust my life to it if I wanted to spend less money.

I realize there are a lot of CZ fanboys here. But there is a reason you never see anyone who actually gets paid to use a gun for a living use one. Gunsmiths see what comes in and what does not. Considering how few CZ's are actually sold vs how many end up in for repairs means a high percentage are causing problems.
 
"How much do you value your life?" is a ridiculous a rude thing to ask.

I believe, based on my limited experience so far, that there is some qualitative difference as you go up in price, but that it becomes increasingly inconsequential as you go up in value.

Imagine a slope which gradually becomes more of a plane as it advances.

It is true that at the "bottom of the barrel" there are some especially bad gun manufacturer's who lack decent quality control and may fail you if you need them to save your life.
But apart from that... is there really difference that matters between a Glock and a high end 1911? Will be BG care if you shoot a sub MOA group into his liver or if it's a 2' group all over his chest?

More than likely it won't make a difference.
 
"How much do you value your life?" is a ridiculous a rude thing to ask.

I believe, based on my limited experience so far, that there is some qualitative difference as you go up in price, but that it becomes increasingly inconsequential as you go up in value.

Imagine a slope which gradually becomes more of a plane as it advances.

It is true that at the "bottom of the barrel" there are some especially bad gun manufacturer's who lack decent quality control and may fail you if you need them to save your life.
But apart from that... is there really difference that matters between a Glock and a high end 1911? Will be BG care if you shoot a sub MOA group into his liver or if it's a 2' group all over his chest?

More than likely it won't make a difference.
Click to expand...

With any consumer commodity, there is a point at which the only increase is price. Packaging toilet paper in a gold box doesn't make the toilet paper any better! Take for example two identical steel pistols. They are of excellent quality. One is 1000 dollars, and one is 1500 dollars. The more expensive one has scrollwork on the metal.

The scrollwork did nothing but add cost, in terms of function. But the dollar value is demonstrably higher.

If I had platinum grips made for my Auto-Ordnance 1911, I'm betting that the pistol would still jam on occasion ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top