Dude.. have some self respect.
If you forgot why Plaxico Burress spent two years in jail for some gun related stupidity, check my past post – HERE
Considering Plaxico’s time in jail wasn’t related to “gun violence” I don’t see how this really relates to the Brady campaign. Oh right, their endgame is actually to ban all guns PERIOD, so they will find any excuse to make them look bad.
Comments
9 responses to “Plaxico Burress Teams Up With The Brady Campaign”
Kids accidentally shooting their friends while playing with daddy’s gun isn’t gun-related violence either, but you can certainly imagine that it a case against guns can be made from it. Plaxico Burris should sign up to do advertising for another pistol maker. He could tout the dangers of a single-action only pistol with no external safeties! If he’d have been carrying a Sig or a Beretta with the hammer forward, I’ll bet the never would have shot himself. I guess a Sig wouldn’t be “gangsta” enough though.
Dude seriously needs a press agent to write that stuff down. If that is the extent of his public speaking skills I’m thrilled he’s on the Brady campaign.
Also he was carrying a glock: a double action only pistol with a trigger safety.
True though, a 1911 with hammer down would have been safer for what happened to him.
You misunderstand DAO. A Glock is most definitely not a double action only pistol. A double action only pistol (or a double action pistol with the hammer or striker in the decocked position) performs two actions when you pull the trigger – its cocks the hammer or striker, and fires the weapon. This doesn’t happen with a Glock. Don’t believe me? Try dry firing one twice in a row – it won’t “fire” the second time, because the firing pin needs to be charged by the action of the slide moving back.
My point about the double action being safer is that DA pistols – like a Sig P226, Beretta 92F, Walther P99, etc. – have mechanisms for decocking the weapon so that the first round is fired double action. This requires a heavy and long trigger pull compared to a single action pistol, or a DA pistol that is already cocked. Ergo, it would be much safer for carrying around stuffed in your pants.
When I said it lacks an external safety, it’s because I don’t consider that “trigger safety” to be much of a safety. I meant that it lacks a safety, such as a lever or button that either prevents the trigger from being pulled or blocks the hammer or striker from hitting the firing pin. In other words, it lacks a safety that prevents the weapon from firing when the trigger is pulled. That’s what I would consider a safety.
That should have said “striker,” not “firing pin.”
I just looked at a diagram of a Glock. I guess the striker and firing pin are the same thing? I thought there was a striker mechanism that acted as a hammer (like the internal hammer in an M-4). I see that’s not the case. In any event, doesn’t change the rest of my comment. Just wanted to correct myself (before someone else did!). :)
You do not carry a 1911 with the hammer down. You carry it cocked and locked (safety on).
The new political correct term for Mexican carry is “NFL Carry,” e.g., “It’s totally safe to NFL carry my Sig when I go to the strip club.”
Probably angling for a pardon from an anti-gun governor.
So now the Brady Campaign is getting more people who don’t know anything about firearms to join them? It seems like they prefer to have their members to have no knowledge of that which they oppose.