From: hays@ssd.intel.com (Kirk Hays)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Re: Glock 21
Date: 16 Apr 92 17:56:00 GMT
Organization: Intel Supercomputer Systems Division

In article <53305@mimsy.umd.edu>, sybok@m4-035-2.MIT.EDU (The Terminator) writes:
|> #I agree with every word here.  I was prejudiced against .45 after shooting
|> #Springfield which handled like a piece of junk, unbalanced and throwing
|> #bullets at whichever direction. 
|> 
|> The Springfield Armory 1911 is the greatest autoloading pistol ever created,
|> and the 45ACP cartridge is the greatest load.  Not only is the stock SA1911 the
|> base gun for professional shooters across the country, it also has the
|> widest availability of parts and accessories.  The Glock looks like a toy gun
|> made from cheap plastic, while the 1911's handsome appearance is legendary.

OK, that does it.  I tried to be nice about this, but I guess it's
time for a public flogging.

Terminator, as many of us know, just bought his *first* pistol - a
SA M1911A1.  He's had it a month or so.

Less than a month ago, in this very newsgroup, he asked how to lube
it, how to clean it, how to load the magazine, etc., all questions
appropriate to his status as a novice.  I would guess that he's
fired less than 1,000 rounds, possibly fewer than 100, quite
possibly *none*, in his entire life.

For someone with his level of experience to trash, without
qualification, a pistol which he's never owned, and possibly never
handled nor shot is irresponsible.

Reading magazines (or this newsgroup), no matter the volume of
material, is no substitute for experience.  Once Terminator has
fired 10,000 rounds through his first pistol, he *might* be
qualified to comment on that pistol make and that particular load,
but nothing else.

If nothing else, rank novices giving "pro" advice to others is
dangerous, and dilutes the effectiveness of this newsgroup.  Rather
than requiring some sort of odious "qualification" for posting, I'd
ask people to *think* about what they're doing, and, if you really
must write something, please qualify with simple phrases like "I
think.." or "I've read..", or "I've heard.." so the more alert
members of the audience can at least consider the source of the
information.

Despite Terminator's indicating to me in email, paraphrased,
"anyone who is stupid enough to follow my advice deserves what
happens to them," we really do have a moral and ethical
responsibility to our fellow shooters to attempt to be factual and
correct.

Anything less is a disservice to the sport of shooting.

And those are my opinions.

[I want to thank everyone who responded to my "Caveat Emptor"
posting - I've never received more than 100 pieces of email in a
day, before!  For the 97 who said "Bravo!", etc., thanks, for the
five who asked "are you talking about me?", yes, and for the single
idiot who flamed me, your mother couldn't pick your father out of
the line up, so who's the bastard?]

--
Kirk Hays - NRA Life.
"You are getting hung up unnecessarily by the use of the words (and
their associated meanings).  What you should be doing is _ignoring_
the actual words...the words themselves are completely unimportant."
--brian@coombs.anu.edu.au