I like safeties!

Post by **Old Savage** » Wed Dec 09, 2009 8:47 pm

You don't like them???? I even like the one on my new 92.

Nate Kiowa Jones · Post by **Nate Kiowa Jones** » Wed Dec 09, 2009 8:55 pm

Oh I luv em. Makes for a good place to put my Peep sights.

AJMD429 · Post by **AJMD429** » Wed Dec 09, 2009 9:02 pm

I like the Marlin ones, because they are solid, definite, and hard to bump on or off accidentally. For those reasons, they are easy to just leave 'off' if you want, although I use mine.

The ones on the Pumas are NOT solid, NOT definite, and EASY to bump on or off accidentally. To me, that is worse than no safety at all.

They may indeed be 'redundant' for the most part on an exposed-hammer gun, but I really don't mind the ones on the Marlin - they are merely an extra 'layer' of safety I use in some situations (as when cycling the action to unload indoors).

piller · Post by **piller** » Wed Dec 09, 2009 9:14 pm

The safety on my Puma somehow got a drop of loctite in it and does not move anymore. That particular safety seems useless to me.

Post by **Chuck 100 yd** » Wed Dec 09, 2009 9:23 pm

I don`t love them but have no plans to defeat any that I have. Most of my levers that have a safety are Marlins. I only have one Winchester 94 AE that has one.

markinalpine · Post by **markinalpine** » Wed Dec 09, 2009 9:30 pm

I like your peep sight safety, Mr. Jones!

In fact, I've lurked on this board a few times, and just joined today, because I have a lot of questions about the various modern leverguns. One of them is about the various safeties used by different manufacturers.

Could anyone give me their ideas about the strengths and weaknesses of the differing kinds of safeties, or any thing I need to know about different manufacturers ways of implementing them.

Hope to be hearing from you,
Mark

BenT · Post by **BenT** » Wed Dec 09, 2009 9:39 pm

I don't mind the Marlin safety because it still has a half cock position. I never use the safety except for when I unload the gun.

gimdandy · Post by **gimdandy** » Wed Dec 09, 2009 9:41 pm

WELCOME MARK
What BenT said .........and......IMHO Marlin safeties are ok , have some without though and actually prefer those. Have a wenchester with one (cross bolt ) and have disabled and plugged it.Their top tang is just barely ok . Savage 99 safeties top tang is ok as is the lever safety. Someone else will have to tell you about the imports
all the best

piller · Post by **piller** » Wed Dec 09, 2009 9:42 pm

I think that the Rossi Puma safety is too easily moved to safe from fire by accident. If you are hunting anything dangerous, or where anything dangerous might be, it might cause you to get hurt. If it were more positive, such as if the ball detent were stronger and the safety hard enough to move that you had to do it deliberately, then it might be OK. I like the Marlin safety, but a very small O-ring will make them stay in the fire position unless you push VERY hard. I haven't done it as the Marlin safety works to my satisfaction. This is my opinion.

Nate Kiowa Jones · Post by **Nate Kiowa Jones** » Wed Dec 09, 2009 9:51 pm

markinalpine wrote:I like your peep sight safety, Mr. Jones!

In fact, I've lurked on this board a few times, and just joined today, because I have a lot of questions about the various modern leverguns. One of them is about the various safeties used by different manufacturers.

Could anyone give me their ideas about the strengths and weaknesses of the differing kinds of safeties, or any thing I need to know about different manufacturers ways of implementing them.

Hope to be hearing from you,
Mark

Thanks Mark,
You do know that up until about 20 years ago none of the popular leverguns we and discuss here had these add-on safety's. As for the add-on safety on the Rossi 92's, they showed up about 2000. The best I can tell they only come on the Rossi's destined for the USA. I do know the Guns currently sent to Canada and Australia don't have it.
That's not to say they don't have a safety. The Rossi still has the original style 1/4 cock safety on the hammer and the passive safety on the lever that prevents the firing pin to reach the primer until the lever and locking bolts are all the way up.

dbateman · Post by **dbateman** » Wed Dec 09, 2009 10:17 pm

I have 2 win 94 with safety's that have been removed because i chased a micky bull into
a creek on foot and then he charged me i went to shoot him only to here a deferning click cycle click
before i figured out the safety was on must have bumped it running threw the scrub
I don't think safety's belong on leverguns

J Miller · Post by **J Miller** » Wed Dec 09, 2009 10:22 pm

Old Savage, stirring the pot again huh........ cabin fever must be setting in early this year.

I like safeties!

On lever action rifles I do not.

Joe

Barcelona Rick · Post by **Barcelona Rick** » Wed Dec 09, 2009 10:38 pm

Mr. Young do you make a peep like that for the 1894C Marlin utilizing the exsisting tapped holes ?? I know the shank/threaded area would be very small but....

jumbeaux

Nate Kiowa Jones · Post by **Nate Kiowa Jones** » Wed Dec 09, 2009 11:20 pm

jumbeaux wrote:Mr. Young do you make a peep like that for the 1894C Marlin utilizing the exsisting tapped holes ?? I know the shank/threaded area would be very small but....

jumbeaux

No, But Doctor Tim does.

Skinner Sights for Marlin Rifles

JerryB · Post by **JerryB** » Wed Dec 09, 2009 11:28 pm

Mark welcome to Leverguns, you'll get plenty of good honest talk here.

adirondakjack · Post by **adirondakjack** » Wed Dec 09, 2009 11:39 pm

I like the Marlin safety because Mr Ludwig has devised such an innocuous replacement "dummy screw" for them. My '70s vintage .357 didn't have one. I didn't miss it because that's how leverguns always were. Ya got a hammer, ya got the ability to open the lever a bit and activate the trigger safety, what more do ya need

Now my kid was trained with safety-equipped rifles, and he uses em religeously afield, so the .44 Marlin has it's safety so he can use it.

For us old timers, ya don't miss what ya never had

Post by **Old Savage** » Thu Dec 10, 2009 1:08 am

Joe, the deal is it is just easier to use them than be at all concerned or change them.

86er · Post by **86er** » Thu Dec 10, 2009 1:58 am

I use rifles with tang safeties - Win 1886, Ruger 77 old model, Savage 99, Mauser. This way the safety is in the same place as my shotguns, which I shot tens of thousands of rounds through every year. Some rifles like my 30AS, 94 and muzzleloader are just cock-the-hammer deals, no safety. I like having one but I can live without one on the hammerguns.

horsesoldier03 · Post by **horsesoldier03** » Thu Dec 10, 2009 3:41 am

I honestly dont like the Safety on the Marlins! The Tang Safety on some of the other leverguns I have seen appear to be decent and egronomic. Having a young daughter that I am trying to teach about guns, they can be viewed both ways. My personal beleif for me is that the only safety on a gun that works everytime is the one between your ears! However, that frequently only comes with experiance and training! There is no substitue for proper gun handling and poor gun handling will get you every time! That being said, KIDS and ADULTS CAN MAKE MISTAKES! A gun with a Safety can be forgiving!

TRUE STORY, and one I am a bit embarrased over.

I once went deer hunting when I was a kid (19) while on Christmas leave after my basic and AIT training. It was an unplanned event for the most part and I had no tree stand placed. While I was out, I decided that my best bet was to climb into a large tree and sit in a natural crook that would allow me a bit of comfort.

While climbing the tree I was unsure what exactly to do with my gun. I did have the presence of mind to remove the round from the chamber and placed the round back into the side loading gate into the mag tube. After climbing to a difficult spot on the tree, I decided that it would be easier if I hung the gun by the lever on a short but solid tree limb that was sticking out along the trunk of the tree. (SEEMED INNOCENT ENOUGH, RIGHT) Well, far from it!

I had no more hung that lever up on that limb stub than the weight of the rifle caused the gun to tilt which in turn opened the ACTION. The fact that I had failed to remove all the bullets from the tube was definately on my mind! Then for some strange reason, the gun all of a sudden rebalanced which caused the action to close which inadvertantly loaded the chamber of the rifle which was now pointed straight in my face.

This couldnt have occured at a more diffucult time while climbing! I can't exactly recall how I got out of the tree without being shot but I did make it down and without a negligent discharge from my rifle!

I promised myself from that day on..... NO MORE CLIMBING TREES UNLESS 1. I have a dedicated stand, 2. a rope to bring my rifle up after I have arrived safely in the stand and secured my harness to the tree, and 3) the rifle is completely unloaded prior to climbing the tree.

This story can be looked at as humorous but for me it was enlightning! I am not sure if a safety would have saved me from my ignorance or not!

Hobie, it might be a good idea to dedicate a Sticky for GUN SAFETY!

Rexster · Post by **Rexster** » Thu Dec 10, 2009 3:43 am

I like the Browning BLR folding hammer; when the hammer is at half-cock, the spur can be folded forward for an extra margin of safety. The act of cocking the hammer, to full-cock, puts the spur back into ready-to-fire mode. No extra motions; no separate act to remember.

I have mixed feelings about the Marlins' safeties. I worry about the thick Texas brush putting a safety button into safe mode when I don't want it to be on safe. I plan to try E-clips on the safeties, or perhaps replacing the crossbolt safety with the kit that leaves a dummy screw/bolt in place.

Swampman · Post by **Swampman** » Thu Dec 10, 2009 6:01 am

They don't bother me much either way. I'd as soon not have them on a levergun or revolver. I'm gonna replace the safties on my Marlins with those faux screws.

El Chivo · Post by **El Chivo** » Thu Dec 10, 2009 11:09 am

I think they're handy at times. Mine are usually off, either the gun is unloaded or discharging.

Savage, how about a rifle with every type of safety on it - crossbolt, tang, trigger guard, etc. That thing will never go off!

O.S.O.K. · Post by **O.S.O.K.** » Thu Dec 10, 2009 11:24 am

I prefer my leverguns sans redundant safeties. The "half cock" safety is great and does the trick quite well.

My Marlin's with the safeties either are left as-is or get a little o-ring around the safety to keep it on "fire".

The Rossi M92 that I just got received one of Nate KJ's excellent safety banishment devices ( http://www.levergunscommunity.com/viewt ... =1&t=23070 ) along with a new stainless mag tube cap. With those adn the new sights I have acheived one step below Rossi M92 nirvana. Only an action job would take it all the way

Modoc ED · Post by **Modoc ED** » Thu Dec 10, 2009 11:30 am

Who cares. I mean really -- if the rifle functions and shoots like it should, the fact that it has a cross-bolt or tang safety shouldn't matter one wit. None of the Winchesters or Marlins that are considered historical (pre-WWII/pre-64) had safetys except the half-cock safety so the fact that the modern ones have non-traditional/original safeties doesn't matter.

Just shoot the dang things and enjoy them.

Post by **Old Savage** » Thu Dec 10, 2009 11:34 am

M Ed - all the Winchesters are now historical because they aren't making them. As are Camillus knives.

alnitak · Post by **alnitak** » Thu Dec 10, 2009 11:42 am

Modoc ED wrote:Who cares. I mean really -- if the rifle functions and shoots like it should, the fact that it has a cross-bolt or tang safety shouldn't matter one wit. None of the Winchesters or Marlins that are considered historical (pre-WWII/pre-64) had safetys except the half-cock safety so the fact that the modern ones have non-traditional/original safeties doesn't matter.

Just shoot the dang things and enjoy them.

For the most part, I agree. However, with the cross-bolt safety, I've had it engage when I don't want it to, Not good. I have no issue with the tang safety, but I believe it is superfluous. No need for extra items, when the half-cock works just as well.

76/444 · Post by **76/444** » Thu Dec 10, 2009 11:47 am

I use them, if it has one,.... and don't, if it doesn't. I don't find " safeties " to be rocket science. But I do prefer Marlin CB safeties to others.

nemhed · Post by **nemhed** » Thu Dec 10, 2009 11:51 am

My first rifle and the one that gets shot the most is my pre-safety Marlin 39a. For consistency sake and because the cross bolt is also redundant IMHO, I have gone the faux screw route on my other Marlins. My Win 94 was made in '58 so is therefore "correct" as is. That doohickey on the top of the Brazilian 92's is just an abomination and is worse than no safety at all!

J Miller · Post by **J Miller** » Thu Dec 10, 2009 11:57 am

Old Savage wrote:Joe, the deal is it is just easier to use them than be at all concerned or change them.

Well, I can see how that could be true for some, but for me I'd rather just not have them. Especially that silly lever on the bolt of the Rossi 92s. Obnoxious thing it is. Were I to purchase a rifle so equipped I'd never use it. So since I'd never use it, and I consider them an insult to shooters, it would go the way the rebounding hammer action did in my Win 94AE and the CB safety did in my Marlin 1894 Cowboy.

That is: it would go ..... bye bye.

I can see the point that if you are raised on these gadgets and widgets instead of common sense then it's better to leave them alone. But I was raised and trained on the old fashioned original John Moses Browning / John Marlin half cock designs and I have NO DESIRE or compulsion to change.

Joe

vancelw · Post by **vancelw** » Thu Dec 10, 2009 12:07 pm

I have a centennial (sp?) model 94 Trapper in .30-30 Win that has a cross bolt safety. It has gotten "bumped-on" before causing the rifle not to fire. I figure if it can get "bumped-on" it can get "bumped-off," so what's the point?

I have no issue with safeties in general. I use the tang safeties and trigger guard safeties on my other guns without even thinking, but the cross-bolt afterthought on the Winchester's is a pain.

When I bought my 1st Glock, I was nervous about carrying it as I was so programed to want a manual safety on a handgun. When I finally wrapped my brain around the fact that it was no more dangerous than a revolver (and much safer than a revolver with no transfer bar) I was okay with it. Now I prefer not to own a auto-loading handgun with a manual safety. (I'm still looking for a .22 LR like that-guess I'll have to buy a Glock conversion kit)

Does anybody have a neat way to cover up the cross-bolt safety on a Winchester after it's removed?

Modoc ED · Post by **Modoc ED** » Thu Dec 10, 2009 4:27 pm

Old Savage wrote:M Ed - all the Winchesters are now historical because they aren't making them. As are Camillus knives.

Well now, that could be true but if you go by that standard, you and I -- heck, even Joe Miller would be considered historical as there will never be another one of us.

Dang!!! Imagine that. Joe Miller -- "Historical". Who'd a thunk it.

Post by **Old Savage** » Thu Dec 10, 2009 4:37 pm

Sorry M but the standard for humans - dead, famous or infamous.

alnitak · Post by **alnitak** » Thu Dec 10, 2009 4:38 pm

vancelw wrote:Does anybody have a neat way to cover up the cross-bolt safety on a Winchester after it's removed?

You might check out the One Sticky, as I think there is a thread there on this.[Yep...found it here -- http://onesticky.levergunscommunity.org ... adios.html and here -- http://onesticky.levergunscommunity.org ... -bolt.html]

I know a number of people use a brass case bottom. It's beyond my metal working capability to grind a bolt, blue it and attach the case, but I do have the parts to change out the cross-bolt on my Trapper:

Also, here's other references:
http://www.chuckhawks.com/win94_safety.htm
http://www.gunblast.com/LFCombs-Win94.htm

O.S.O.K. · Post by **O.S.O.K.** » Thu Dec 10, 2009 5:15 pm

One thing not mentioned yet (I think) is that if you "fix" the leverguns with safeties, you can then ignore them and operate all of your leverguns the same exact way - 1/2 cock for safety - cock to fire. That way, doesn't matter which one you've got in your mitts.

That's my thing.

And this started for me back when I shot cas - the first time that I picked up my Marlin Cowboy and pulled the trigger and it whent "click" instead of boom... because the safety buttom got pushed in when it was laying on the table...

76/444 · Post by **76/444** » Thu Dec 10, 2009 5:41 pm

Personally, I think a weapon handler is responsible to familiarize themselves with any weapon they pick up by, checking to see if loaded, whether the chamber is clear, any debris or objects in the bore, ... and, how the safety works(or doesn't) and whether the safety is on or off, before , during, and after shooting. I just call it standard weapon handling.

I just can't seem to relate to any emotional distress over a tools function.

I understand there are weapons with less than friendly safeties, but, throwing the baby out with the bath water usually results (at some point) with the weapon owner wishing he hadn't redesigned the wheel. Just fix it to your liking!

just on man's opinion.

salvo · Post by **salvo** » Thu Dec 10, 2009 5:59 pm

I have no use for a safety on a Lever Gun.

jnyork · Post by **jnyork** » Thu Dec 10, 2009 6:30 pm

I know I am probably a committee of one, but I have no use for a safety period. I have never in my life carried a rifle with a round in the chamber and have no idea why anyone would want to do such a thing. Safeties are mechanical devices which can and do fail. If you are hunting and dont have time to operate the bolt/lever/slide whatever and jack in a cartridge, you dont have time to aim carefully and shoot. I run into guys out at the range who seem to think because a rifle has the safety on, it can be considered to be unloaded, like when someone wants to go downrange they just want to put the safety on instead of clearing the weapon, dropping the mag and putting the rifle in the rack. Really chaps my chubby cheeks. IMHO, only time you need a round in the chamber and safety on is in a self-defense situation such as police officer, CCW, etc. Flame suit on.

vancelw · Post by **vancelw** » Thu Dec 10, 2009 6:42 pm

76/444 wrote:Personally, I think a weapon handler is responsible to familiarize themselves with any weapon they pick up by, checking to see if loaded, whether the chamber is clear, any debris or objects in the bore, ... and, how the safety works(or doesn't) and whether the safety is on or off, before , during, and after shooting. I just call it standard weapon handling.

I just can't seem to relate to any emotional distress over a tools function.

I understand there are weapons with less than friendly safeties, but, throwing the baby out with the bath water usually results (at some point) with the weapon owner wishing he hadn't redesigned the wheel. Just fix it to your liking!

just on man's opinion.

God grant me the serenity
to accept the things I cannot change;
courage to change the things I can;
and wisdom to know the difference.

This, I can change

Now the wisdom point will be determined later.

My 1894 (manuf. 1906) has no cross-bolt safety and it has never injured or killed anyone (well-unless Grandpa wasn't tellin' -I guess I should say "accidentally")

I have gobs of guns with and without safeties and the cross-bolt Winchester is the only one I abhor. I'm not real fond of the P22 I have, but I think it's going to find a new home soon. There have been many times I considered taking that rifle afield and decided to use something else, because of the one time the safety got bumped on. At the range, it doesn't matter, but in the field it does.
I appreciate alnitak's links and I think I will do a little southern engineering this weekend to move that rifle back to favored status.

Funny note on this rifle. I offered to sell it dirt cheap to a friend a few years back...he couldn't make up his mind. Then Winchester stopped making them and he asked if it was still for sale. You should have seen my grin when I said, "Nope."

vancelw · Post by **vancelw** » Thu Dec 10, 2009 6:48 pm

jnyork wrote:I know I am probably a committee of one, but I have no use for a safety period. I have never in my life carried a rifle with a round in the chamber and have no idea why anyone would want to do such a thing. Safeties are mechanical devices which can and do fail. If you are hunting and dont have time to operate the bolt/lever/slide whatever and jack in a cartridge, you dont have time to aim carefully and shoot. I run into guys out at the range who seem to think because a rifle has the safety on, it can be considered to be unloaded, like when someone wants to go downrange they just want to put the safety on instead of clearing the weapon, dropping the mag and putting the rifle in the rack. Really chaps my chubby cheeks. IMHO, only time you need a round in the chamber and safety on is in a self-defense situation such as police officer, CCW, etc. Flame suit on.

I agree with you whole-heartedly,

but would add the instance of grouse hunting (or other similar need for a speedy shot.)

I have a Ruger Mark II that I absolutely will not carry with a round in the chamber. If you sling the rifle, the safety lever sometimes hangs on things (like belt or coat) and will find it's way to "on." The round goes in when I'm ready to shoot and comes out when I decide against shooting. I have missed a few chances at shots, but that's why we call it hunting and not shooting.

Lastmohecken · Post by **Lastmohecken** » Thu Dec 10, 2009 7:30 pm

I have no use for a safety on a levergun, unless it's a Savage 99, because does not have an external hammer. I have gotten rid of all of my leveractions that had safetys, except for one Winchester 357 Trapper, which has been plugged.

I have been lucky enough be able to buy older pre safety leveractions, like original Winchesters, per 64 mostly, and later Brownings without safetys. I have tried several of the newer guns with safetys, but always hated the rebounding hammers, which sometimes missfired, and espacally the crossbolt safetys, that I would often place on safe, then forget and get a click, when I went to shoot.

I guess I have bought my last new leveraction, because, I refuse to purchase anymore with a safety. Never again, espacally with a rebounding hammer, to boot. These companies have lost me as a customer. I will pay twice as much, or more, for an older Browning, or older Winchester, before buying new. I don't have to, and won't put up with that new politically correct stuff on my guns. I also, pretty much won't buy guns with internal gun locks either, as I have seen those malfuction too. I need to quite wasting money on new guns, anyway.

Modoc ED · Post by **Modoc ED** » Thu Dec 10, 2009 7:34 pm

Old Savage wrote:Sorry M but the standard for humans - dead, famous or infamous.

Nawwww, you don't have to be dead to be famous or infamous. I still say Joe Miller is "Historical".

And, so as not to tread on this thread, I still say a safety is no big deal no matter what gun it is on although I do go along with "jnyork" in that -- Who in the heck does carry/walk around with a rifle with a round chambered?.

LeverBob · Post by **LeverBob** » Thu Dec 10, 2009 7:43 pm

It is my sincere wish that the word "drill procedure" would be seared into every riflemans mind. I like the safeties. There...I said it!

Reorient the drill & you're "in like Flint"! Smarter people than me thought them up & by the way...not all attorneys are dumb, nor unethical. I've had several attorneys as parishioners who had a whole carload of smart... a lot more than me.

Learn the drill & be safe pards...

LB

Post by **Ysabel Kid** » Thu Dec 10, 2009 8:21 pm

Nate Kiowa Jones wrote:Oh I luv em. Makes for a good place to put my Peep sights.

That's the ONLY thing that worthless lawyer-add-on is good for!

NonPCnraRN · Post by **NonPCnraRN** » Thu Dec 10, 2009 8:38 pm

The good and bad of the Marlin safety is that it allows you to cycle the action to unload the gun while on safe, but it also allows the hammer to fall from full cock and go click instead of bang if you are shooting at game and the safety is on. If the safety locked the hammer so it wouldn't fall when you pulled the trigger you could quickly take the gun off safe and then fire the gun. As it is now, the hammer falls, the prey is alerted to your presence and off it goes while you are trying to determine if you left the safety on or if it is a hangfire. I have heard of hunters who levered a new round into the action thinking the first round was a dud and the hammer would fall again with a click instead of a bang. I would use the O-ring trick until the end of the hunt and remove it when unloading the gun for the day.
The Rossi bolt safety is in the way of where I want the XS peep sight mounted so that cinches that. The other problem is that is moves too easily and can inadvertantly be moved from safe to fire or fire to safe. It should take a fair amount of effort to move the safety. But it should also not make any noise when changing position. Of course if you have your gun on 1/4 cock and you have to pull it all the way back or operate the lever or manipulate the bolt of a bolt action to chamber a round, those operations will make more noise than moving a safety. As I sit here with my 1911, I observed that flipping the safety off (condition 1) makes less noise than pulling the hammer back (condition 2) which is less noisy than racking the slide (condition 3). So in some cases a safety is better. On a bolt gun I like a 3 position safety which locks any bolt movement in one position or allows the bolt to move but still be on safe for unloading.

Lastmohecken · Post by **Lastmohecken** » Thu Dec 10, 2009 11:30 pm

I think maybe if one, started on leveractions with a safety, then it would be second nature, but someone like me, who has been shooting leveractions, for 40 years, without safetys, it's a nusance. However, for new shooters, it's probably a good idea, but I am not going to put up with them.

Other guns, like boltactions, and non external hammer guns, sure I want a safety. And of course I want a safety on guns like the Colt 1911, Browning highpower, etc. But I also like the Glock, however, I often carry all three in condtion 3. But I also carry cocked and locked if I feel the need, but for some reason I have never felt confortable with the Glock, but with a good holster that covers the trigger guard, I have been known to carry it, loaded, with one in the barrel.

But I would probably feel more confortable with a single action colt with the hammer down on an empty chamber.

76/444 · Post by **76/444** » Fri Dec 11, 2009 9:48 am

NonPCnraRN wrote:The good and bad of the Marlin safety is that it allows you to cycle the action to unload the gun while on safe, but it also allows the hammer to fall from full cock and go click instead of bang if you are shooting at game and the safety is on. If the safety locked the hammer so it wouldn't fall when you pulled the trigger you could quickly take the gun off safe and then fire the gun. As it is now, the hammer falls, the prey is alerted to your presence and off it goes while you are trying to determine if you left the safety on or if it is a hangfire. I have heard of hunters who levered a new round into the action thinking the first round was a dud and the hammer would fall again with a click instead of a bang. ........ Of course if you have your gun on 1/4 cock and you have to pull it all the way back or operate the lever or manipulate the bolt of a bolt action to chamber a round, those operations will make more noise than moving a safety. .......

Would you classify the above, as a poor manufacturer design,.... or, operator error?

Post by **Old Savage** » Fri Dec 11, 2009 4:37 pm

First things I shot hunting were shotguns, with safties of course, shooting at fast fleeing game. Now if you couldn't operate that successfully you would certainly get a laugh and someone might wonder if you ought to be using a gun at all.

vancelw · Post by **vancelw** » Fri Dec 11, 2009 7:39 pm

Old Savage wrote:First things I shot hunting were shotguns, with safties of course, shooting at fast fleeing game. Now if you couldn't operate that successfully you would certainly get a laugh and someone might wonder if you ought to be using a gun at all.

My first guns were a shotgun and an Ithaca single-shot lever action .22. Both had safeties....a hammer you cocked when you wanted to shoot and let down with your thumb if you decided not to shoot. Neat system that worked great with no extra parts. Oh...and there were no "lawyer-inspired" paragraphs on the barrel or receiver of either.

Every gun I have that has a safety, has it in an "normal" place, like on the trigger guard, on the tang, or at the thumb. The Winchester cross-bolt afterthought is in none of those locations...and soon will not be on the gun at all. I'll save the parts in case I ever sell it to a dim bulb who looks like he needs hand-holding. For the right price, I'll throw in an air-bag, a seat belt, and a life preserver.

All in good, healthy, open-discussion fun.

jlchucker · Post by **jlchucker** » Fri Dec 11, 2009 8:24 pm

let's get to the core of it. I DON'T LIKE TORT LAWYERS!!!!

Post by **Old Savage** » Fri Dec 11, 2009 11:54 pm

Let's get to the real core of it - you don't like juries who make the awards.