Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

Comment Re:Extra mechanics are rejected (Score 1) 375

Well, that's a fairly generic term, safety. If you mean the kill-switch style of safety, then I think that was somewhat welcomed due to the benefit of being about to carry with a chambered round. Those moving parts also tend to be much simpler, such as a blockage moving out of the way of the mechanics. But there are tons of safeties on modern firearms. Drop safeties, the trigger safety, the grip safety, etc. The complexity and speed of turning them off for proper function is key in how welcome they will be on the market.

Comment Extra mechanics are rejected (Score 3, Insightful) 375

Many people don't even like the concept of the lock added to the S&W revolvers, or the magazine drop safety, simply because any extra moving parts on a firearm could mean the difference in a failure that could save your family's life, or not. Firearms are supposed to have simplistic controls, and be as readily available as possible. The videos I've seen at gas pumps or convenience stores tend to show a guy waiting for a fraction of a second for the armed robber to look away before drawing. Holding your hand on the fingerprint reader long enough for it to register would get innocent people killed.

Slashdot Top Deals

I'm always looking for a new idea that will be more productive than its cost. -- David Rockefeller