Is it just me, or...

[Eagleks]

They should have 2 sections to every manual :

1. Operating manual of XXX firearm.
2. All the other junk the Atty's and State require us to put in.

It would be a lot clearer. Their "organization" of manuals now is terrible.

 

[Hog Buster]

The instruction manuals that come with firearms and most other products should be called “Warning Manuals”. Fifty percent of the information contained in them is just common sense safety, which most people already practice. Reading them can be tedious.

They’re written for the 10 percenters. Those who don’t have the intelligence not to put body parts under a running lawnmower, clean the floor near a gas water heater with gasoline, eat spackling compound, gargle with shoe polish, or be allowed to have sharp objects, much less firearms.

While safety warnings are fine, to a point, maybe none should be printed at all. This could be the shot of chlorine that our gene pool sorely needs.

 

[LockedBreech]

While you see it as "giving in", they see it as "staying in business".

Ruger lost a big lawsuit in the early 70s, that's why there is a New Model Blackhawk. Some idiot was trying to load/unload his Ruger in the cab of a moving pickup, and shot himself in the leg. He sued. Ruger lost.

Based on the details I heard, it should never have happened, but it did. The jury found in favor of the idiot. Part of the settlement included the redesign of the Blackhawk.

Which is also why Ruger will convert old model (three screw) Blackhawks to the modern configuration. In fact, if you send an old model in for any work at all, it will be converted. Even if you don't want it converted. Ruger has to do it, per the legal settlement.

Another result is that Ruger is just a bit enthusiastic about hedging their bets against another lawsuit. NOBODY can claim "I wasn't told..." with a Ruger firearm anymore. Its all through the manual and its marked ON THE GUN! And all because some foolish jury could only see "big business vs the little guy". You should be blaiming them, not Ruger.

If Ruger really "caved" to the gun haters, they would close their doors and walk away. Or produce a different product and drop guns entirely.

I'm a first year law student, and we actually read that case in Torts. I go to law school with a former Army sergeant and a former Marine sergeant. All three of us are shooters, conservatives, and were quite vocal in our irritation at this case. It was only meant to illustrate a theory of liability, but to me especially it represented legal warfare against my hobby and our American rights.

If I'm not incorrect, this case involved "fanning" of the hammer. the safety notch wasn't perfect, and excessive fanning to shoot could wear the safety notch and make it function poorly. Ruger explicitly warned not to fan. Some idiot fanned enough to wear the safety notch, shot himself as you said, and sued. And won. Ruger's explicit "Don't fan it" apparently not enough for the jury.

In Ruger's position, I would do the exact same. I'd be obnoxious about it, too because if paying a massive settlement for an idiot doing what you explicitly said not to is possible, anything is possible and you want every possible warning to have been shown if anyone ever drags you to the courtroom.

 

[JohnKSa]

The suit that really pushed Ruger over the edge involved a stolen single action revolver. The person who stole the gun was carrying it with a live round under the hammer. He dropped it and shot himself in the leg and then claimed the gun was defective because it went off when dropped. The jury awarded him about $400K of Ruger's money. That's why Ruger marks the warning about reading the manual on most of their guns and provides free manuals to anyone who asks.

http://ftp.resource.org/courts.gov/c/F2/964/964.F2d.376.90-6036.html

 

[BlueTrain]

They teach in business school that the object of a corporation is "to increase the wealth of the residual owners," or in other words, to make a profit. But with a little real world experience, you realize that (among other things) the object is to stay in business. You don't make a profit one year? Maybe things will be better next year. However, I agree with the original post. For Rugers, there's only one line about dry firing in the whole manual and it's not easy to find. But I don't think the warnings on Ruger pistols are as bad as all that. On my own Ruger P345, which I went to look at before making this post, the warnings are about as easy to read as the checkering on the grips. I don't think the warnings on the gun spoil the looks; the accessory rail does that.

But I also think others who are not lawyers are a little guilty of this attitude towards the consumer with regards to firearms, though it has nothing to do with how the manuals are written. It might be perhaps that in our grandfather's day, much more was assumed about basic knowledge about guns than is now. Gun manuals were brief and presumably at one time, guns did not come with manuals. At any rate, there is a line of thinking that says gun owners need to have extra training in order to be trusted with their guns. It isn't such a new thing and books written fifty years ago were saying that in so many words. It seems to be part of a greater world of certificates, degrees, special courses and ticket punching. Essentially a trend towards professionalization and specialization of everything, it would seem. In a way, permits (and all the associated fees) and licenses are just an extension of that thinking. It is ironic that the enthusiasm for home schooling in some quarters is coming along the same way.

 

[Yung.gunr]

Eagleks- I totally agree, they should have the warnings separate from the actual instructions of the gun.

I hate that in the instructions at the end of every paragraph there are three paragraphs of warnings regarding the previous paragraph. Maybe if they put something like "refer to appendix 6C for safety warnings". See that way they could cover their ass but we can still actually read the manual.

I think I am one of the few who reads the manuals on my new guns. I don't want to strip it then reassemble it and break something before even shooting it. It has never happened, but I am a little paranoid and would rather be safe then sorry when it comes to a gun. See, there I am using my critical thinking skills when it comes to the proper usage of a gun. Contrary to what the Brady Bunch and lawyers think, gun owners can read and think for themselves.

Don P- that is one slick looking revolver. I like how you got all the legalese off the barrel. Did you do that yourself or have it done?

 

[ltc444]

i got a ruger MKIII recently. It took me thirty minutes to figure out how to deactivate the arcain pen lock safety. I hope I never loose the wierd key.

I think the lawyers and antigun people want to make guns so safe that they are impossible to use.