“On December 30, 1912, at the age of twelve, Stevenson accidentally killed Ruth Merwin, a 16-year-old friend, while demonstrating drill technique with a rifle, inadvertently left loaded, during a party at the Stevenson home.”

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adlai_Stevenson_II

When I was old enough to hold a cap pistol, I got one -- a very good copy of a Colt SAA,  with cartridges capable of being loaded with circular paper caps, held in place by a cast metal "bullet". The assembly looked remarkably like a .45 Colt round, except the base of the case was free of a primer cap.  There were six of them and they were loaded through a gate. The hammer had a half-cock position. The set included a tooled, strong-side holster and a wide buscadero style belt. With this rig, I defended myself against marauding bands of Comanche and slew many bad guys, among whom were numbered several Chicoms - the Korean War was ongoing at the time. And some Germans and Japanese combatants as well. 

One day, a neighborhood boy whose father was half-Apache, introduced me to his father's weapons closet, while all the adults were elsewhere. It consisted of a 32/20 caliber Winchester 1892 carbine that was fully loaded and on half-cock; and a Colt SAA 38/40, loaded with five rounds. Because both of us knew the difference between a toy and a loaded weapon, nothing untoward occurred. 

At the time, weapons were in most, although not all, homes in my working-class neighborhood. Not in some country hamlet, but a polluted Gulf Coast industrial exurb. 

The prevailing attitude in the early to mid-Fifties, at least among my father and his friends and fellow employees, most of whom were World War Ii veterans employed in the petrochemical industry as skilled craftsmen, was that play with toy guns was healthy and good preparation for further training with, first, BB or pellet guns, them real guns -- a .22 rifle or a .410 shotgun. From an early age, my father expected me to know the difference between a gun and a toy. As far as I know, my peers were similarly constrained. 

My own sons were similarly trained and as adults are flawless in their safe handling of firearms, at home and in the field. 

I think children of normal intelligence are capable of distinguishing between toy and weapons if properly taught and it serves no useful purpose to forbid them the former in ord,er to train them to be safe with the latter. But I had a demanding father and was very much a hands-on father to my own sons.

Perhaps that mode of child-rearing has gone out of style. It had one advantage for the child. If he knew he could rely on my word as Immutable and Consistent Law -- and that I would treat him with dignity and praise his accomplishments -- there was little need for any sort of punishment. Every boy hungers for his father's approval. And that is a powerful tool. 

There is more than one way to do most things. I disagree that allowing a child to play with toy guns is irresponsible parenting per se. 

TXGunNut said
Old safety habits die hard and I'm OK with that. I remember one LE in-service felony stop class when I purposely did not draw my (unloaded) service weapon because our "suspects" were instructors or other students. I don't need any practice pointing a handgun so I was more interested in the mechanics and proper commands. I also won't call for a bird on a skeet or trap field with my finger on the trigger. If some kid wants to play with Nerf guns I'll set up some targets. I have no problem addressing a threat with a loaded weapon but I have too much respect for them to point a weapon of any type at something I am not willing to destroy. That principle was driven home to me over 50 years ago and I still remember it. Call it KISS, call it old school. I call it common sense.
Mike
  

Common sense seems to be less common these days.  There’s a big difference between kids playing army or cowboys and indians in the yard and hunting or range time. Just my opinion but knowing the difference between a toy and a real firearm is where it starts.  There’s several videos you can see online where people talk about such accidents.  My children play with toys and respect my tools.  They have toy hammers and screw drivers.  When they use real hammers and screw driver’s it’s completely different.  

It's got stories like they all do I'm sure!

Mike

I'm going to show my age, and probably my closet Puritan demeanor here...  But I agree (more than 100%) with Nevada Paul...

Firearms are SERIOUS business...  They can HURT people...  ANYTHING that minimizes that, whether it be cap guns, paint ball, air soft, or (worst of all) VIDEO GAMES, is NOT a good thing... 

If you want to learn how to use a firearm against human targets, join the US Military, not the local paintball club...  Pretty sure their rules are strict and penalties for slipping up are UNFORGIVING!!!

Gun safety comes FIRST...  ALL guns are loaded until you have determined they are not.  You NEVER point a gun (even one you "know" is unloaded) at anyone/anything you don't want (or at least wouldn't mind seeing) DEAD.  Any knowledgeable gun person would/should (at best) be "uncomfortable" if I were to (even inadvertantly or briefly) point the muzzle of a firearm in his/her direction...

My Kids (now all adults) were taught like Paul said above...  I'm pretty sure they understand "range safety", between me, my Dad, and the NRA Hunter/Firearms safety courses they took.  I have very few (one) gun in my house that's loaded (a M1911 pistol in condition 3), but with Kids I think you have to instill the NRA "Eddie the Eagle" thing...  ALL guns are loaded ALL the time and potentially deadly if you or your compadres do not know what to do with it.  If you don't know (which is a very common thing these days) then DON'T touch it.  Find someone who does or call the Cops...

Remember the late Jon Eric Hexum (or even Alec Baldwin)...  Ignorance is FAR from bliss!!!  

Just my unsolicited take...

Lou

When I was a kid, I wasn’t allowed to have toy guns, my father said that when I was old enough I could have the real thing.  The trouble is, I didn’t know when that was, and he decided that would be when I was 12 or 13 years old.  In hindsight, when I see some of these 7 or 8 years old old kids harvesting deer, I wish that could have been me, but I also think maybe that’s too young to have a real firearm and handle it safely at ALL times.

I also appreciate my father purchased a used .22 rifle as my first firearm, and, since then I’ve never looked at a new firearm.  That’s like driving a new car off the lot plus you sacrifice a lot in the way of quality as well.

tim tomlinson said
Steve and Eric,  Often 1895 muskets when found are in pretty poor shape.  For several years there was a US musket offered at Cody and it was made up of about half parts from other muskets and even maybe non US muskets.  Another was sold several times at RIA and I just couldn't stand to spend anything on it as it would not hold cock, or half cock, let alone look decent.  Finally got a nice US Musket but it wasn't cheap.  I've yet to see a musket in .303 Brit, so one in any kind of original condition is rare, even if it has a couple of replacement parts and is rode hard and put away wet.  Unless sales price was stupid, it would make a place holder should a better one come along.  For me, rarity trumps condition.  Others subscribe to "Condition is everything!".  Tim
  

Tim -

I've seen some 1895 muskets over the years and the condition has been, as you suggested, quite poor.

When it comes to 1895's, a name that should be mentioned is Mark Douglas.  Here's a video from him on the topic of '95 muskets:

t=387s

Mark also has a video specifically on Russian muskets:

More of interest from Mark:

And of course when Mark opened the vault at the Cinnabar, there's some real 1895 eye candy:

While I'm at it (for the new members), I can again post a couple photos of the special order '95 musket I had with a 32 inch barrel.  Of added interest was that it had been a one time set up for heel-sighted targeted shooting:

View post on imgur.com

View post on imgur.com

View post on imgur.com

View post on imgur.com

tsbccut said
Gentlemen,
I'm trying to become more educated, and I couldn't find any reference to this on the Forum. Is the "WRA" stamp on the receiver of the
pictured Model 1892 of any significance? It's a lousy photo and a bit hard to see, but it's there. It's where the serial number should be......
Thanks,
Tom

Hello Tom,

Your rifle does appears to differ slightly from most Winchester that have a similar stamp on the underside of the receiver where the serial number would typically be found.  On others the "background area" has a stippled imprint and then the WRACO stamp applied over that as shown in the attached images.  There is no confirmed explanation for why these guns are marked as such and several theories are proposed.  To me they have holes in them that do not make much sense.  This is one of the items that I am trying to research in my spare time.

Can you please send me more detailed photos of the WRA stamp, the upper tang just below the hammer, and the stamped writing on the barrel.

Michael

Jeremy P said
Bob, why though do you think they wanted the musket sight in the first place? It's all conjecture, but what gains would it have gotten...better set up for distance shooting?
You're probably on to something with the elevator wear, hadn't paid attention to that before. Was the original likely a 22B w/ elevator?
  

I checked the Bill West book and according to it at 102,000 they moved the sight dovetail forward and used the short sporting rear. Before 102,000 they used the Musket sight with the external spring and did use them on rifles. You might not know which dovetail was the original unless you remove the sight and plug  and see if one was added later. I would think the flip up staff type would be good for distant shooting but it would be hindrance when hunting in woods and brush, it would be getting caught and could get bent or broken. That is probably why they put the sporting sight on it but later replaced the musket sight when sold. The gun is close enough to that transitional range you could have mixed features. It also could be the barrel was replaced with a earlier one. 

The sight I think would of been on before was the Early Sporting Rear like one of these with the flat elevator.

Bob