MidwayUSA just released a bunch of their own firearms safety videos.

I appreciate what they did. It’s a bunch of short videos that cover specific safety topics.

I will take them to task for their basic safety video, because Larry Potterfield provides his own take on “the rules” instead of adopting established rulesets like the NRA’s 3 fundamental rules. You might want to nitpick about it all, but there’s much careful crafting behind that ruleset, its ordering, its word choice, every subtle detail. Minding that ruleset and all it means leaves no room for error or “well what if” or other wiggle-room situations. The way Larry phrases things, it leaves something to be desired. But, I’ll take my instructor-hat off now.

I like that he covers non-typical topics like “what not to shoot at”, “know your target”, and dealing with 12 vs. 20 gauge shotgun shells. The videos are well-produced. Introduction, small overview, detailed discussion using the power of video to illustrate and reinforce, summarize, and that’s the way it is. Very digestible.

I think the best part is the tagline they’re using: “Firearm safety is YOUR responsibility.” Because it’s not about wacky devices, it’s about you.

I applaud MidwayUSA’s efforts here.

Improved Guns, Inc. is marketing a device aimed at making guns “safer”.

Port St. Lucie, Florida April 13, 2011 — Improved Guns Inc., a not for profit company, is founded to promote the US Pat 7,036,258, which is aimed at eliminating accidental shooting. The passive device is a pin that must be broken before the gun can be shot. Any firearm can be adapted by drilling a small hole in which to insert the appropriate pin. These pins are made with incremental breaking thresholds having a range of 11.5-15.5 lbs. Improved Guns, Inc. can easily retrofit all guns at our cost, although donations are appreciated. Hopefully, new guns will soon include this device.

The Firearm Blog has some more pictures of the device, as installed on some handguns.

Now on the one hand, this sort of solution is better than things like the so-called “Safety Bullet“. This pin-device strives to make it harder for the trigger to be pressed, but not impossible, and the gun is ultimately still operable. So I’ll give the inventor some credit towards trying to find a solution that attempts to address an issue but doesn’t negate the usefulness of the tool.

But I still have problems with it.

What’s the most important shot? The first shot. You’ve now made your first shot exponentially difficult to make reasonably and accurately. Heavy triggers like that are not an aid for fast, accurate shooting. As well, you’ve now taken a gun that likely has one very consistent trigger press (e.g. the 1911 showcased in TFB’s pictures) and now you’ve given it 2 vastly different presses… so now you’ve made a good gun into a crappy gun with the equivalent of a DA/SA action. Bad bad bad. If your life is on the line and every second matters, why do this to yourself?

And let’s not forget, if this is all in the name of safety and preserving innocent life well… 1. best to ensure that first hit is a good hit on the intended target (e.g. the bad guy) as that betters your chances of preserving your innocent life, 2. if that first shot misses because of that trigger press, where did that bullet go? could it hit an innocent person? How does that make this a better solution?

The inventor, Lanny Lee says, “The only thing that makes this invention seem like a safety is that curious little children can’t shoot themselves or their buddies when they find the gun.” Mr. Lee added, “What the world needs least is another gun lock; what it needs are safer guns, and this device has surpassed all expectations in field trials.”

Oh yes they still can shoot themselves. Kids are amazingly strong, and with some kids if you give them a challenge they’re more apt to do ugly things to overcome that challenge. The wording presented throughout the website makes it as if children can’t shoot themselves with this device. So what happens when the first child does? Should make for an interesting lawsuit.

But the real question is: why are they finding the guns in the first place? If guns aren’t being stored properly well, how are you going to overcome that? Someone that’s going to be irresponsible with their storage and you expect them to be responsible by installing this device? Yes, we don’t need another gun lock, but we don’t need safer guns: we need safer people, we need responsible people. Guns are what they are and you can’t change that, so the impetus is on us to behave better. People should be storing their guns in a proper manner, as well as teaching their children proper handling and respect for firearms.

There is a rapidly growing problem of accidental shootings due to the growing purchase of automatic firearms. New owners are unlikely to store their guns safely, leading to guns falling into the wrong hands. The passive pin device prevents accidental discharge; in a stressful situation, the inexperienced will discharge the gun out of control if the trigger has too light pressure.”

Hrm… “automatic firearms”. You’d hope if the inventor “has handled and shot guns throughout his life” that he’d know that’s not the correct term. As well, yes, inexperienced shooters can yank/slap the trigger under stress, but the solution isn’t an administrative one (as was the whole reason for why DA/SA guns and Glock “New York II” triggers were invented), but one of education, instruction, and training. I also find a problem with his assumption that gun owners default to unsafe storage. But again, if they’re going to be irresponsible in storage, what makes you think they’d be so responsible to start using this device?

He gives us a clue!

“Despite owner’s demands, and overwhelming studies, Detroit refused to provide seat belts until the late 60’s, except as an expensive option. This continued to 1978 when the gov’t required them to be installed. One has only to look at the old 50’s cars to see how the industry spent vast amounts on useless things like padded dashboards. Only liability suits changed their attitude. Gun maker’s reception to this life saving device has ranged from contempt to cold indifference, while their attitude seems to convey they can stand in the rain and won’t get wet.”

I see. It sounds like he’s hoping to get his device adopted by use of governmental force. Hrm… I’m not really sure I like this. Assumption that people are irresponsible and must be cared for by someone who knows better. Wishes to use the power of government to force things upon us, which of course lead to a lot of revenue for him.

You know… you can argue the merits of the device all you want. But the mentality behind it? I think it stinks.

Updated: I just had Daughter and Youngest try the trigger press on a new, factory stock Smith & Wesson 640-3. I don’t have a trigger pull-weight gauge so I don’t know the exact amount, but I can tell you it’s heavy… probably in that 12-15 lbs. range. With one finger, neither could make the trigger budge even a millimeter. Using 2 fingers (both index fingers), no problem.

So you know… where there’s a will, there’s a way. This sort of device isn’t going to prevent irresponsible gun handling and storage, which is really the root problem. Let’s work to address the real root problem, not symptoms.

There’s always been something about the Scout Rifle concept that’s always struck a harmonious chord with me.

I’ve got an M1A Scout Squad and I love it. I’d love it a lot more if it wasn’t so heavy; which really isn’t too big a problem for me but… read on.

I have a Savage bolt-action rifle in .308 Winchester, and it’s been my go-to hunting rifle putting more meat on the table than anything else. It’s a solid performer. I have no qualms about buying another Savage, and their 10 FCM Scout of course has much appeal to me. Not sure how well it’d really hold up if it was put through a rigorous weekend of rifle training, but being a somewhat light and handy hunting rifle? More than adequate.

And when Ruger announced their Gunsite Scout Rifle well…. I groaned. Part of the price tag is of course the Gunsite logo, which adds nothing but money to their pockets, which is alright, but I’d rather be getting more gun than branding/marketing. I didn’t want to like it. But this month’s American Rifleman features the rifle and it’s made me look at it again. I think the reason I reconsider it? How well could my kids handle it? I saw how Oldest handled the Savage when he took his first hog, but if not for being able to fully rest it on the sill of the blind’s window, he wouldn’t have been able to hold it out there (just too long, too unbalanced for his size/frame).  But the Ruger? Hrm.

Yes I know… the whole reason I bought the 6.8 was for the kids. 🙂  But go with me… I’m trying to find excuses. 😉

I’m not saying it’s good, I’m not saying it’s bad. I’m saying I’d love to get my hands on one to give it a fair shake.

A short but great article by Julie Golob on how to shoot a pistol better.

This part stood out to me:

Q: What about your grip?

A: I like to get a high grip on the gun, gripping as strongly as I can with my strong hand, but not so much that my hand shakes. I also cant the wrist of my support hand down so that my thumb is pointing straight down range. I wrap my support hand fingers around my strong hand, with the fingers overlapping. My support hand thumb fits under my strong hand thumb like a puzzle piece. I don’t want any gap between my hands. I squeeze my support hand fingers toward my palm.  Last, I use my chest muscles to compress the palms of my hands together around the back of the grip.

Gripping the gun is a full-body exercise! It will be tiring.

This is the kind of stuff taught out at KR Training. Come on down!

Dave Re wrote an article about the ball & dummy drill. He challenges the notion that it’s a good drill for curing flinch, offering his critique as well as a better drill.

Give it a read. It’s good food for thought.

I still think ball & dummy is useful because, if nothing else, it helps to make a shooter aware of what they are doing. Most of us will never SEE ourselves yanking the trigger and be aware that we’re doing it, until we press the trigger, there’s no bang but there’s one hell of a dipping of the front sight. So if nothing else, to that end, it’s a useful drill towards helping identify and become aware of a problem, which is really the first stage of fixing the problem.

But no question his suggestion of a solution is useful. I think Karl called it “zen shooting” to me. It’s slightly different but the point remains the same: shooting into the berm with no specific target so that all you do is focus on the front sight and watch the front sight as it moves. You learn a lot.