Ruger's ugly embossed barrel warning WHY?

F

FLChinook

New member
Has there been a discussion here on the ugly warning that Ruger puts on it's pistol barrels? I mean really, "Before using...", once you've used the gun once, it's no longer "before using" and having a beautiful barrel cluttered forever with enough verbiage even a lawyer would be happy is, well, stupid. It actually makes me tend toward a different manufacturer for my gun.

I'm not aware of anyone else who does this. Why can't they hang a tag on the gun that you can take off. The warnings are all in the instruction manual...

Does this bother anyone besides me?

Thanks
 
I think most folks agree with you. They are putting it on the bottom on a lot of their new models. You can't hardly see it on the bottom.
 
My M&P 40c advises me it is capable of firing with the magazine removed, but I haven't witnessed it doing this so far...it only seems to fire when I pull the trigger.

Funny how that works, ain't it? ;)


"A People that values its privileges above its principles soon loses both"
Dwight D. Eisenhower
 
Why can't they hang a tag on the gun that you can take off. The warnings are all in the instruction manual...
Click to expand...
They were sued for around $400,000 after a minor stole one of their revolvers and accidentally shot himself with it because he didn't know how to use it safely.

He didn't know how to use it safely because he didn't have a manual because he didn't bother to steal the manual.

Now it says, right on the gun, to read the manual before you use it so it's harder for someone to claim that Ruger is at fault for their own boneheadedness.
 
Anyone that stupid probably couldn't have read the manual anyway. Why is Ruger the only one to knuckle under...??
 
Other than the obvious--they were the ones sued while other gun companies haven't faced exactly the same type of suit--I don't know.

I suppose different companies have different priorities and thoughts on how to deal with various issues, based on their corporate pasts and company philosophies.
 
For whatever reason Sturm Ruger and Co. have been the target of many absurd lawsuits for many years. I'm sure they hate lawyers as much as I do but they have to try to cover their butts. It's just like the moron who bought a big bore S&W that came with a huge warning in the owner's manual (who reads that, right?) to not place your finger next to the cylinder gap. So he proceeds to remove most of his finger anyway by laying it next to the cyl. gap and then hires a lawyer. People are not really too bright anymore or responsible for their actions. Everything you buy has warning stickers and liability costs built in. When you buy a new ladder it comes completely covered in warning stickers and I have read that up to one third of the price goes for legal defense costs. It is truly sad what has happened to our legal system.
 
Last edited:
here is a warning i like to see,"our company is not liable for any damages /injuries due to someone's stupidity when using our product."
 
Anyone that stupid probably couldn't have read the manual anyway. Why is Ruger the only one to knuckle under...??
Click to expand...

While I agree with you, Ruger isn't the only one. I'd owned a Marlin 39A, 22 rifle made in the early 80's, for years before I noticed Marlin had almost the exact same warning on the barrel of that rifle. I guess it's just not as noticable on a rifle.

Does it bother me? Not a bit. It's just something I expect to see on a Ruger gun. It probably wouldn't look right without it to me. I've owned several of the older ones with no warning barrels and sold them all off. The ones I kept, all have the warning.
 
Last edited:
There are people who don't like to have the names of the car dealer on their car and some who don't even like to have the manufacturer's name on the car either, or so it would appear. Likewise, there are those who never read the owner's manual and there are some who do read it and ignore everything they just read because "they just say that to protect themselves." Presumably from people like themselves.

My favorite kind of person is like my late father-in-law (an engineer, to be sure), who would carefully read the manual and make copious marginal notes, not all of which were complimentary. My boss is also an engineer and he is exactly the same way.

I'm not an engineer. I'm probably in the "read the manual as a last resort" camp. Partly because of my work, I tend to see most things as puzzles to be worked out and the answers are never in the back of the book. I'm also a minimalist and the ideal reloading manual should be wallet sized. In my case, there's plenty of room in my wallet anyway. Come to think of it, the instructions that come with the little Lee die sets are just about that size.
 
At least they've shortened it in recent years. Though it's not the most flattering, if it keeps lawsuits off Ruger's back and allows them to continue to put out the quality guns they put out, at the generally low prices they are sold for, then I am fine with it.
 
In my many years in the IT business one of our catch phrases was "When all else fails, RTFM"..........Read The.........you get the idea..........
 
Ruger was sued by a guy who dropped an early single action revolver, made before the mods, and shot himself. It was shown that he knew of the recall and also not to carry a round under the hammer. Ruger won and then paid him something not to appeal.
 
What's involved in removing such a deep embossment? Shop grinder (just joking :))? Gunsmith? Removal of barrel to turn in lathe?

Still seems like a lot of trouble for something that shouldn't be necessary.

I know lots of folks are only interested in functionality and aren't bothered by this permanent label; I just don't like it. Surely there are other ways that a lawyer would accept. Since locks are now a part of every gun sale, how about a larger key with the warning embossed on the key?

Just not on my barrel!!
 
A skilled refinisher can pretty easily polish out the warning, and then refinish if necessary. We did a bit of that work, though people weren't quite as strident about it back then.
 
Lawyer inspired vandalism of firearms is now common. Look at the hideous crossbolt safety on Winchester levers. Look at the stupid locks found on most guns. Look at the ten pound gritty triggger pulls. The gun companies are running scared because of "Lawfare". Thats a form of warfare waged on gun companies by gun hating law firms. Since they've been unable to overturn the second amendment they are trying to destroy the companies economically with lawsuits.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top