Saturday Night Special Myth
I would like to once and for all dispel the myth about Saturday night specials being dangerous to their users. I'm asking for the help of any lawyers or a person with some form of insight out there in cyber space to point me in the direction of any product liability cases where a Saturday night special manufacturer was held liable for a design defect, or manufacturing defect where the gun hurt the person who was operating the gun while in the normal course of discharging a round. All of the Jennings, Bryco, Davis ... operate from a proven design that was perfected over 100 years ago by the Master, John Mosses Browning.
Please don't send me links or webpage where some a-hole pointed a loaded gun at another person or himself and pulled the trigger claiming they did not know the gun was loaded then turns around and claims the gun had a design defect because he shot someone. This to me and any other sane operators of firearms should know that this form of conduct breaks the first law of gun safety, (DON'T POINT A GUN AT A PERSON UNLESS YOU INTEND TO KILL THAT PERSON). Come on everybody, intentional torts break the chain of causation. I have yet to see a gun that was idiot proof. We all remember the ATF agent climbing the ladder at WACO who shot himself in the leg because the dumb SOB kept his finger on the trigger. Would any one say his SIG was a Saturday night special and had some form of latent defect?
For the question of a manufacturing defect I would like to remind everyone old enough to remember, when the Army first started to adopt the Beretta 92F there was a problem with the slides cracking. Berettas may not be your cup of tea but can anyone really claim they are pieces of snot.
For those of you who start crying any gun made of tin / zinc is dangerous please send me a link where the pot metal failed. As I wrote above we're talking about a group of pistols that operate on the blowback principle. They shoot cartridges that operate with very little pressure .25, .32, .380.
The main defect I've seen with these pistols is a design defect in the trigger group. The trigger bar needs downward pressure from the grip in order to stay aligned with the sear much like the old Automags did. This friction could become a problem after awhile and stop the gun from functioning. This could be dangerous if you need the gun to kill someone but in no way does it cause the gun to explode in the hand of its operator.
I'm not saying any person should trust their life to any gun for that matter. I know there is always a question of quality. I'm just asking if anyone out there could prove to me, as Sara Brady claims, low end guns.(Saturday Night Specials) are more dangerous to their owner / operators then the bad guy stalking in the night.
Dean Cascio[:p]
If they don't trust us with guns, how can we trust them with the government?
Please don't send me links or webpage where some a-hole pointed a loaded gun at another person or himself and pulled the trigger claiming they did not know the gun was loaded then turns around and claims the gun had a design defect because he shot someone. This to me and any other sane operators of firearms should know that this form of conduct breaks the first law of gun safety, (DON'T POINT A GUN AT A PERSON UNLESS YOU INTEND TO KILL THAT PERSON). Come on everybody, intentional torts break the chain of causation. I have yet to see a gun that was idiot proof. We all remember the ATF agent climbing the ladder at WACO who shot himself in the leg because the dumb SOB kept his finger on the trigger. Would any one say his SIG was a Saturday night special and had some form of latent defect?
For the question of a manufacturing defect I would like to remind everyone old enough to remember, when the Army first started to adopt the Beretta 92F there was a problem with the slides cracking. Berettas may not be your cup of tea but can anyone really claim they are pieces of snot.
For those of you who start crying any gun made of tin / zinc is dangerous please send me a link where the pot metal failed. As I wrote above we're talking about a group of pistols that operate on the blowback principle. They shoot cartridges that operate with very little pressure .25, .32, .380.
The main defect I've seen with these pistols is a design defect in the trigger group. The trigger bar needs downward pressure from the grip in order to stay aligned with the sear much like the old Automags did. This friction could become a problem after awhile and stop the gun from functioning. This could be dangerous if you need the gun to kill someone but in no way does it cause the gun to explode in the hand of its operator.
I'm not saying any person should trust their life to any gun for that matter. I know there is always a question of quality. I'm just asking if anyone out there could prove to me, as Sara Brady claims, low end guns.(Saturday Night Specials) are more dangerous to their owner / operators then the bad guy stalking in the night.
Dean Cascio[:p]
If they don't trust us with guns, how can we trust them with the government?
0
-
quote:All of the Jennings, Bryco, Davis ... operate from a proven design that was perfected over 100 years ago by the Master, John Mosses Browning.
Lets start with this statement of yours.
That may be the designer. But when combined with cheap sheet* (*ms) materials.
You still got a nice Sat. Night Spl. AKA piece of crap0 -
quote:Originally posted by 22WRF
quote:All of the Jennings, Bryco, Davis ... operate from a proven design that was perfected over 100 years ago by the Master, John Mosses Browning.
Lets start with this statement of yours.
That may be the designer. But when combined with cheap sheet* (*ms) materials.
You still got a nice Sat. Night Spl. AKA piece of crap
Lets start with your statement. As far as my research has taken me I can not find one case where the metal (tin/zinc) has fail with a low pressure cartridge. Could you please provide me with some form of proof, not just your opinion.
Dean
If they don't trust us with guns, how can we trust them with the government?0 -
Please I'm asking for facts not opnions.
Dean
If they don't trust us with guns, how can we trust them with the government?0 -
Here is a Web-Site that specializes in the ( 3 ) L's pertaining to firearms. If you want reference material supporting your theories about "SNS" it would be here. I hope you have a lot of free time and patience, most of this stuff is legalize, gobbledgook that only a bottom feeding lawyer would love.
http://www-2.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs/usr/wbardwel/public/nfalist/index.html0 -
You will find on this link personal experiences with these POS's
http://www.packing.org/news/article.jsp/76180 -
quote:Originally posted by 22WRF
You will find on this link personal experiences with these POS's
http://www.packing.org/news/article.jsp/7618
Hmmm, I checked it out of curiosity. Nothing on there about what he asked about. One dealer gave them a thumbs up saying out of thousands he's sold only two returned, and the factory warranty covered them. After a year its a $25.00 flat fee. I know they're not top of the line, but isn't it a matter of personal opinion (that's what that whole page was about) and finaces?
When you wrestle a 'gator, there ain't no good end!!
"Molon Labe!" Spartan General-King Leonidas
http://www.whyemier.1accesshost.com/0 -
Interesting ramble ...
The term "Saturday Night Special" was coined to describe readily available, low cost guns, many of which were imported, that often found their way to low end criminals, gang bangers, etc. However, a lot of honest, hard working people bought them too as it was all they could afford.
The "anti's" recognizing that there were some crime stats. that they could bend toward their cause of at least getting some guns banned, jumped on the S-N-S and so they were "banned".
Now we come to your "product liability" view point ... complete with exclusions. OK, that's a perspective, but there wouldn't be much if any case law specific to injuries in the area that you've not excluded.
Is the illegal user going to sue because their gun failed?
Is the store clerk going to sue because the punk robbing them tried to shoot them and the gun failed to fire ... don't think so!
Is the legal owner, who tried to use one of these guns and the gun failed going to sue? Maybe ... if they are still living, and could scrape together the money to pay an attorney and the mfg. was a US based company that was still in business, or a US based importer that was still in business ... and forget going after the foriegn mfg. as that ain't gonna happen even if they are still in business.
Next is the "John Browning" thing ... S-N-S come in a number of "flavors" and not all of the base designs are attribuitable to Mr. Browning.
The reality of the S-N-S, if your into such things, is that cheap guns are cheaply made, often from low grade metals that really are questionable for firearms use. These guns do often fail to fire, and if they were loaded with modern +P or +P+ ammo they just might come apart, and at the minimum their demise due to component failure would certainly be hastened.
In closing, there are a number of US based mfg. of low cost guns, but these guns are not in the same class as the original S-N-S, they are just no frills pieces that with reasonable maintenance will function 98% of the time or better ... If that's all you can afford and you need a gun for personal defense, buy it. However, if at all possible save up a few dollars more and buy one of a little better quality.
Gang bangers, unless they are really at the bottom of the pecking order, tend to buy the better guns as they want more than 98% assurance that it is going to go bang.
So I think your going to be hard pressed to come up with something on your product liability angle ... maybe you should purse other things that are poorly made that maim and kill people ... like cars! Lot's of case law there[}:)]
If you only have time to do two things so-so, or one thing well ... do the one thing!0 -
I dont have a web site to give you but I do have personal experence with a jennings going to pieces.I had taken a jennings .380 in part of a trade,it was new in the box and never fired.we run somewhere around a 100rds of the white box winchester stuff from wal-mart when the slide splintered,I still have a scar between my thumb and first finger where a 1" sliver went in.You yourself talked about the Beretta 92's slide failing and they are made from good metal.I have seen the slides off of 1911's that have failed so why would you trust a gun made out of pot metal. 0 -
I believe that you are pursuing undomesticated waterfowl.
In the 1960's Congress hired HP White Laboratories to do (for several million dollars) destruction testing on a large number of handguns in order to enable them to identify "Saturday night specials". Congress wanted to define them, obviously, so that they could outlaw them. HP White looked at many factors (foreign vs domestic, steel vs pot metal, big vs little, expensive vs cheap, etc). While they were able to destroy a substantial number of guns, they were unable to name any characteristics of poorly made handguns that were consistent throughout the range of currently available handguns.
So, Congress gave up on the idea of identifying SNS's, & proceeded to develop a point system for imported handguns that became part of GCA 68.
That really didn't work too well, as the sellers of poorly made guns quickly figured out that they could legally import the parts, & assemble the completed guns in the US. Subsequent changes in import laws, increased legal problems, & the willingness of some US companies to make poor quality handguns eventually ended that practice.
Neal0 -
I wouldn't touch one of those cheap pieces of scrap metal. (Not that I could anyway, since they are illegal in MA).
The "danger to the user" isn't (necessarily) that they blow up in your hand, its that the guns are notoriously unreliable. Also, they don't stand up to prolonged shooting. Broken slides, frames, triggers, safeties, and firing pins not being uncoommon.
These guns are intrinsically inaccurate. No one would ever use one for serious target shooting, or for hunting. The only reaason to buy one is for self-defense. But for self-defense, the number one most important feature of any gun is that it goes "bang" when you pull the trigger.
A failure to fire may not, by iteself, engender any legal liability, but I tell you, I wouldn't take a chance with my LIFE on a gun like this jamming. So why buy one, particularly when for not a lot more money you can get a decent used GOOD gun that is more reliable and will give a lifetime of service?0 -
I believe the reason these guns have a reputation of being unreliable is more the cause of the owners,not the guns themselves. The average gunowner wouldn't buy one of these because he prefers to own nice guns. These so-called SNS's are bought by people with very little or no firearm experience at all. They think all guns are the same so when they decide they need a gun for self-defense they buy the cheapest one they can find. Then they load it and stick it in a drawer for 10 years and never clean it. When they finally do need it, it is so gummed up with old oil,dust,and rust it won't function.Then they blame the gun manufacturer,not themselves. I was taught that even if you haven't used it, every gun should be taken out and cleaned at least every other month. A lot of people who buy these guns never even fire them much less clean them. 0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
11 comments