Sen. Schumer says “Allow me to be trolled by your CAD of a cell-phone gun”

When I was say 10 I blue-printed a small .22 auto-loading pistol on loose leaf notebook paper.  With gun design, the trigger engaging the hammer sear and holding it back against its spring tension… that’s kind of intuitive as a form, and for guns was figured out in like the 16th century.  The complex mechanical problem of a typical auto-loading pistol is figuring out a trigger mechanism that will actuate the hammer and go around the corners of the magazine to do it.  As a youngster I solved this in my head and drew it out.  Legos and rubber bands were helpful there in the process, both are truly remarkable that way.  Turns out my pistol was something like a Colt Junior or Beretta Tomcat, which I had no knowledge of at the time.  Good design, workable.

This is gun doodling, and it’s not that a unique thing.  It goes on among those so acclimated, young or old.  The formation of a lot of the great gun companies have a similar origin story… Colt, Browning, Ruger.  They began with a gun doodle.

http://bringmethenews.com/2016/04/04/a-mn-companys-phone-shaped-gun-now-has-the-attention-of-a-us-senator/

This notion ought to be obvious but going from gun doodler to Sam Colt or John Browning or Bill Ruger, that’s like a 1 in bazillion thing.

What “CEO” Kjellberg has got here … but ya know, done on CAD…is a gun doodle.  So disregard that its done on CAD, don’t let that make you think it adds some engineering credibility.   This design is actually obvious in its deficiencies for reasons expressed here and elsewhere, and is not a gun doodle that is going to become a gun enterprise….

Become?  Yes, let’s step back.

I doubt its right to understand this as a greatly meaningful enterprise now.  Assume “CEO” Kjellberg is the only employee of Ideal Conceal, and that his work there is secondary to how he makes a living during the day.  Assume that if it’s possible to get this thing from CAD to built, that he doesn’t find several hundred K$ to run 1000 of them or whatever.  Assume Cabela’s and Gander are never persuaded to devote shelf space to it.  Kjellberg may have earnest aspirations, but this is a nut that isn’t often cracked, and this thing is not going to do the trick.

Its vapor, alright, barely substantial momentarily and will blow off like a fart in the wind in time. Till then though, what people are reacting to is qualitatively analogous to that point in the process where an entrepreneur puts some fanciful stuff out on PRNews to test market sentiment.   Hell, this might literally be what happened rather than mere analogy.

Just saying lefties and reporters, firing up the outrage machine is not necessary, has some potential to make you look silly.  Or it ought to.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s