More Anti-Gun “Smart Gun” Love

Found this stupidity:

Lemon Squeezer Lies

The “Lemon Squeezer” safety was very popular for small carry revolvers in the 19th and 20th Century. You don’t see much of them anymore. The antis seem to think it’s a conspiracy against “Safe” guns. Certainly this design was difficult for a child to fire, but like all “Safe” designs it likely isn’t impossible. I’d say the big factor for this design disappearing was the invention and widespread use of the pocket holster. Back in those days it was fairly common for somebody to simply drop a small revolver or semi-auto into a coat or pants pocket before going about their business, and back in those days a concealed revolver was no different than a pocket knife.

Of course this is a false dichotomy, as while Smith was making the Safety Hammerless, and the later incarnations, they were making and selling more traditional revolvers without the squeeze safety.

See it was all about Choice. If you were going to pocket carry the gun, or were concerned about small children getting their hands on your bedside revolver, maybe these nice little guns were for you. Still the name “Lemon Squeezer” was not a friendly description. These guns did indeed need a fair amount of pressure to squeeze the backstrap, and then even more pressure to pull the DAO trigger. Some found this to be tedious, and elected to buy guns with exposed hammers and no safety for ease of shooting.

Today is no different, you can buy a S&W M&P with no safety devices besides the internal passive devices that keep the gun safe when properly used, to the same gun that has a manual safety and a magazine disconnect that offers many options for the gun to be inoperable when in the wrong hands.

The choice is all personal preference, but that’s not what the makers of this image are all about. See the anti-gun proponents of “Smart Guns” don’t just want them to be MADE, but MANDATED on everybody buying a gun, and while they appear to praise S&W for making the safety hammerless, there are no proposed “Smart Gun” legislation that would allow a design like this to continue production.

Also the Antis love to say the NRA is “Against Smart Guns”, they aren’t. They are all for every gun the industry wants to make being made, they just don’t want laws that ONLY mandate certain guns.

Further, the claim that XYZ gun would “End Child Shootings Tomorrow” is a blatant lie. #1. No technology is foolproof, and further some people become complacent with technology when training and respect are the true solutions, and #2. Anti-Gunners often define “Children” up to the ages of 19-25, because it includes gang killings with stolen or straw-purchased guns. No technology will fix this, this needs to be tackled by law enforcement, culture, and what laws are enforced or not enforced.

I’ll take this moment to get on my soap box and point out that nearly ALL youth shootings are A) Happening in the inner cities of America, and B) Are happening due to some relationship with the trafficking of illegal recreational drugs. We saw a lot of similar shootings, murders, and bombings in relation to the prohibition of alcohol and it’s illegal trafficking by bootleggers, moonshiners, and the Mafia. We don’t see these attacks anymore because of the 21st Amendment.

Maybe we need a 28th Amendment…I’m just saying…

This entry was posted in Freedom, Guns, Safety. Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to More Anti-Gun “Smart Gun” Love

  1. Joe in PNG says:

    I’ve got a 3rd gen “Safety Hammerless” in .38S&W. The grip safety’s function isn’t all that different from that on a 1911, in that a proper, and not too heavy shooting grip will engage the safety without too much trouble.

    In fact, the grip dimensions are roughly that of a modern J frame- I replaced the cracked hard rubber originals with a set of “splinter” grips from a model 36, and they (mostly) fit.

    I suspect that it was included more for those late 19th century shooters weirded out by the lack of an external hammer, as the gun is DAO.

    • Weerd Beard says:

      The only one I ever shot was an early. 38 S&W top break, and the grip safety on that feels a bit like the grip lever on an H&K P7. Stiff and deliberate, but not unreasonable.

  2. The_Jack says:

    There’s also the gigantic bait and switch. As the Anti’s aren’t demanding grip safeties when they demand for Smart Guns. What they’re demanding is mandatory biometrics or RFID style interlocks.

    But this is to be expected. As the truth is immaterial for ’em

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *