this post was submitted on 14 Mar 2024
881 points (98.8% liked)

Political Memes

5455 readers
2702 users here now

Welcome to politcal memes!

These are our rules:

Be civilJokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.

No misinformationDon’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.

Posts should be memesRandom pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.

No bots, spam or self-promotionFollow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] AlDente@sh.itjust.works 10 points 8 months ago (3 children)

Since these are not revolvers, they don't add to the point of carrying on an empty cylinder.

Outside of the revolver discussion, it's important to note that both of these examples were the result of QA issues that have since been corrected.

[–] Liz@midwest.social 7 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

Revolvers aren't designed that way anymore.

Counters with design problems in auto-loaders and shotguns.

Welcome to arguing on the internet!

[–] Cryophilia@lemmy.world 2 points 8 months ago

Especially about guns in a liberal space.

[–] CharlieActual@lemmy.zip 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

note t

But since you have a fixation with revolvers .. here ya go: https://www.guns.com/news/2018/09/17/rossi-safety-warning-some-revolvers-may-fire-if-dropped

Like I said. drop-firing still a problem.

[–] AlDente@sh.itjust.works 6 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Firstly, I don't have an obsession with revolvers; it's just that you responded to a conversation specifically about design changes in revolvers that mitigated the need to carry on empty cylinder.

Secondly, this is another example of a limited QA issue that has since been corrected with a recall. It doesn't seem to indicate that a modern revolver with properly functioning parts would be dangerous to carry with all cylinders loaded. Otherwise, are you to say all airbags are dangerous just because of the Takata/Honda issue that killed some people when the airbags exploded?

[–] CharlieActual@lemmy.zip 0 points 8 months ago

bsession with revolvers; it’s just that you responded to a conversation specifically about design changes in revolvers that mitigated the need to carry on empty cylinder.

Secondly, this is another example of a limited QA issue that

.... Whatever. Information free positions are impossible to discuss, you have a great evening and good luck with that stuff.

[–] Gabu@lemmy.world -1 points 8 months ago

All airbags are dangerous, and this has been known for decades. It's a literal explosive box sitting right besides your thumbs. The fact they save lives doesn't make them any less dangerous. Now, if that's valid for an item developed exclusively to save lives, imagine what we can say about a weapon intended solely for killing and maiming.

[–] CharlieActual@lemmy.zip -3 points 8 months ago

That's not the statement I was replying to. The "this only happened to revolvers like 100 years ago" was the focus, which is just factually wrong. Still happens, sooo.. great? I guess. Have a nice day