Ruger's ugly embossed barrel warning WHY?
- Thread starter FLChinook
- Start date
stuckinCali
Inactive
kcub
hahaha! "ALTO"
..running as fast as you can, head first into a brick wall is dangerous.. they should stamp brick walls with warnings
hahaha! "ALTO"
..running as fast as you can, head first into a brick wall is dangerous.. they should stamp brick walls with warnings
Stressfire
New member
Nicely done, but how? Assume I do not have a machine shop in my garage, which I do not. I do have the SS version though, so no bluing to worry about
According to "Ruger and His Guns" by R.L. Wilson in July 1976 Sturm Ruger and Co. was found liable in an Alaskan courtroom for injuries sustained by a man named Day who was using a Ruger Blackhawk. The court ordered Ruger to pay 2.3 million dollars to Day. The case was remanded for a new trial and settled out of court I believe. But the publicity opened a floodgate of new lawsuits against Ruger.
When Ruger went to the New Model Blackhawk with the transfer bar safety lawyers saw that as "proof" that something was wrong with the original Colt like action on the Old Models and used that to sue.
In response Ruger went on an aggressive marketing campaign to promote safety which resulted in, among other things, the warning on the barrels.
This type of litigation reached it's peak in 1979 and has been declining since then. In reality less than 6/100ths of 1 percent of the 1.5 million Old Models made were ever involved in any claim of accidental injury from the 1950s when they began till 1996 when Wilson's book was published.
The number of suits against the manufacturers of any firearm has been declining for about 20 years now. Mostly because they lose and courts are not friendly to them. That does not stop the threat of them though. Mayors threaten it at times.
Bill Ruger acted proactively with their safety campaign. No one mandated the warning on the barrels. This was voluntary to ward off lawsuits.
Ruger supported the Clinton ban on magazines holding more than 10 rounds for the same reason. While he ran the company no Ruger firearm was made for sale to civilians with more than a 10 round mag.
Ruger once said..."firearms accidents used to be limited to those occasional lapses of common sense for which there is no real protection. Now, some people thing that guns, like electric toasters, are meant to be foolproof. That kind of thinking has no place around firearms. There is no such thing as a foolproof gun."
tipoc
When Ruger went to the New Model Blackhawk with the transfer bar safety lawyers saw that as "proof" that something was wrong with the original Colt like action on the Old Models and used that to sue.
In response Ruger went on an aggressive marketing campaign to promote safety which resulted in, among other things, the warning on the barrels.
This type of litigation reached it's peak in 1979 and has been declining since then. In reality less than 6/100ths of 1 percent of the 1.5 million Old Models made were ever involved in any claim of accidental injury from the 1950s when they began till 1996 when Wilson's book was published.
The number of suits against the manufacturers of any firearm has been declining for about 20 years now. Mostly because they lose and courts are not friendly to them. That does not stop the threat of them though. Mayors threaten it at times.
Bill Ruger acted proactively with their safety campaign. No one mandated the warning on the barrels. This was voluntary to ward off lawsuits.
Ruger supported the Clinton ban on magazines holding more than 10 rounds for the same reason. While he ran the company no Ruger firearm was made for sale to civilians with more than a 10 round mag.
Ruger once said..."firearms accidents used to be limited to those occasional lapses of common sense for which there is no real protection. Now, some people thing that guns, like electric toasters, are meant to be foolproof. That kind of thinking has no place around firearms. There is no such thing as a foolproof gun."
tipoc
In reality you can make most things "foolproof" but there isn't anything on the planet that you can make "idiot-proof".
It is the ramifications of the escalation of this type of lawyer/bureaucrat lunacy that really worries me.
How about signs put up on beaches saying "Swimming can cause death by drowning".
We don't need warnings on everything we buy, 99.99% of us are more than intelligent enough to know what is dangerous and what is not and I take these multitude of warnings as a total insult to my intelligence, as for the other 0.01%... well if they decide to remove their DNA from the gene pool by whatever means then so be it... the population of the planet will reap benefits from such action, although there wouldn't be as many lawyers and politicians around.
just what type of warnings should (by the same standards) be stamped all over a car?
The best warning anyone can have is "don't eat yellow snow".
Cheers
G
It is the ramifications of the escalation of this type of lawyer/bureaucrat lunacy that really worries me.
How about signs put up on beaches saying "Swimming can cause death by drowning".
We don't need warnings on everything we buy, 99.99% of us are more than intelligent enough to know what is dangerous and what is not and I take these multitude of warnings as a total insult to my intelligence, as for the other 0.01%... well if they decide to remove their DNA from the gene pool by whatever means then so be it... the population of the planet will reap benefits from such action, although there wouldn't be as many lawyers and politicians around.
just what type of warnings should (by the same standards) be stamped all over a car?
The best warning anyone can have is "don't eat yellow snow".
Cheers
G
orionengnr
New member
I seem to recall that Shakespeare had something to say about lawyers...
silvermane_1
New member
quote
"I think the warnings are inadequate. You can still kill yourself if you aren't careful. Further, there are an increasingly number of Spanish speaking people so we need a Spanish version as well."
i think that reason that laywer hasn't jump on the "warnings in Spanish" would probably due to the fact that whom they're representing probably
has "alien resident" issues IMHO.
"I think the warnings are inadequate. You can still kill yourself if you aren't careful. Further, there are an increasingly number of Spanish speaking people so we need a Spanish version as well."
i think that reason that laywer hasn't jump on the "warnings in Spanish" would probably due to the fact that whom they're representing probably
has "alien resident" issues IMHO.
Guess I'm fortunate with what I have in my garage. Gun disassembled. I used a file to remove the warning from the barrel and sand paper. I then bead blasted the frame. I then put my buffing wheels in my drill press and polished the cylinder so it shined. I like the look and the contrast of the bead blast and polished cylinder. By no means is my garage a machine shop. Air compressor, bead blast cabinet, grinder, drill press, work bench, vise and a 6' ft. tall tool box. I am a former auto mechanic.
No not much accomplished, I'm not sure anyone intended that there be.
The OP sounded as if he just realized the warnings were there so it may have been useful to some to see how the warnings got there and to know they've been there a couple of decades on Rugers. (Fear of lawsuits prompt gun makers to put that stuff on.) So some if that was accomplished.
Folks who didn't know learned that there is more than one way to remove them, so some of that was accomplished.
Lawyers were cussed a lot and that's par for the course. Folks like cussin the hired guns and not the folks that do the hiring or the system that promotes it. There not much new.
We can say again for the zillionth time that gun safety is taught and passed on person to person. A label on a gun does not make a gun safer. Neither do various added on gizmos.
Like a lot of forum discussions some silliness and some nuggets of learning.
tipoc
The OP sounded as if he just realized the warnings were there so it may have been useful to some to see how the warnings got there and to know they've been there a couple of decades on Rugers. (Fear of lawsuits prompt gun makers to put that stuff on.) So some if that was accomplished.
Folks who didn't know learned that there is more than one way to remove them, so some of that was accomplished.
Lawyers were cussed a lot and that's par for the course. Folks like cussin the hired guns and not the folks that do the hiring or the system that promotes it. There not much new.
We can say again for the zillionth time that gun safety is taught and passed on person to person. A label on a gun does not make a gun safer. Neither do various added on gizmos.
Like a lot of forum discussions some silliness and some nuggets of learning.
tipoc
thibaultfelix40
New member
Maybe this move to legal responsibility ain't so new. I read that H&R put stiff
trigger springs in handguns after a tradegy involving a child BEFORE 1900. During this time Iver Johnson started the " hammer the hammer " system and the safety trigger that glock and others use today. Grip safeties on SA pistols and the lever safety on lever actions also date from this era. Could it be that gun manufacters feel an obligation to protect the public from themselves? I bought a new Taurus 94 that had a trigger pull from hell. It is breaking in nicely to a smooth but stiff trigger. I like this. Stiff guns may be more child proof than those with trigger locks. The barrel warnings don't bother me a bit.
trigger springs in handguns after a tradegy involving a child BEFORE 1900. During this time Iver Johnson started the " hammer the hammer " system and the safety trigger that glock and others use today. Grip safeties on SA pistols and the lever safety on lever actions also date from this era. Could it be that gun manufacters feel an obligation to protect the public from themselves? I bought a new Taurus 94 that had a trigger pull from hell. It is breaking in nicely to a smooth but stiff trigger. I like this. Stiff guns may be more child proof than those with trigger locks. The barrel warnings don't bother me a bit.
Winchester_73
New member
Am I the only guy who sent back all of my pre warning rugers to have the warning labels applied? I guess I am 
freebird72
New member
Winchester73 surely you jest?
Sharpsdressed Man
Moderator
You say this has accomplished nothing? I say we all got to sound off, and sometimes gun companies DO listen. The warnings are now smaller, and one might even say "hidden". Also, I like that Ruger put the "lock" under the grips of the single actions, so you can use it, or ignore it, if you want. And, for all who might use it, the file and sandpaper solution is out there for everyone who might be inclined.