It is bad enough that in the US people are killed by police when they have toy guns or toys that look like guns but do not fire anything or guns that are less lethal, like BB guns. They have even been killed when they had a cell phone or a wallet in their hand that the police claim they mistook for a gun. What is one to make of a company that markets real guns that look like toys?
A Utah company has stopped selling a kit that encases Glock handguns in Lego blocks, amid uproar and after the Danish toymaker demanded it cease and desist.
Marketing the “Block19” as a “a childhood dream come to life”, Culper Precision introduced it on Instagram, saying: “We wanted the second amendment to simply be too painful to tread on, so there was only one logical solution.”
Red, yellow and blue blocks made the original weapon barely visible, disguising it as a child’s toy.
What caused the company to stop selling it was not because they realized that it was a dangerous idea but because they got a cease-and-desist’ letter from the Lego toy company who naturally did not want their toy being associated with weaponry.
But the company doesn’t appear to be apologetic. In a Tuesday Instagram post, Culper Precision said “our business is taking a firearm of known value” and transforming it into a “personalized invaluable treasure for a fair price”.
It added that people “have the right to customize their property to make it look like whatever they want”.
Guns are dangerous things. Blurring the distinction between guns and toys is just madness.
Yes. They ARE trying to get people killed.
@ 1 WMDKitty
I think you are crediting with more intelligence than they have.
I doubt if they care. Just another way to make a buck.
A handgun is a tool with only one use: killing humans. So as WMDKitty accurately says -- yes, they ARE trying to get people killed. As is every manufacturer of handguns or ammunition for handguns. These are not hunting weapons or target pistols or toys. People have reasons to own shotguns (pest control) or rifles (also pest control, if the “pest” is a deer, which in some environments they absolutely are). Nobody outside military and a small subset of law enforcement should have access to handguns.
Aside: Lego can’t get all moralistic, not in 2021. When I was a kid, there was no such thing as a Lego gun. No Lego set had one. No minifig could wield one. It was a deliberate policy. Then came the 90s… and Lego wasn’t doing so well financially. And Star Wars came a knocking. And Lego saw an opportunity to make ALL the money. But they said “of course, we have a ‘no guns’ policy for our Lego sets”, and the Star Wars people went “ahahahahahahahaahahAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!” and started to pack away their chequebooks. And Lego caved, and now there are guns in Lego sets. Thanks, George Lucas!
An individual person has that right with their own property, and call it “art” or “parody”, but if they try to sell it for profit, different rules apply.
Culper Precision has only scratched the tip of the lethal-toy iceberg!
Their future product line will include:
• the skipping-rope garotte
• poison-tipped jacks
• bomb balls of all sizes
• stiletto dolls
• and the ever-popular Mr Potato Head silencer.
@ 4 sonofrojblake
A handgun is a tool with only one use: killing humans.
You can actually make an argument that a handgun could be considered useful if it was some “huge” hand cannon for a very few people doing certain jobs where there is a good chance of encountering a grizzly bear, a cougar or something similar. There are probably 100+ people with such jobs in the world.
Otherwise a handgun is more likely to get someone killed, the owner, a family member, or passing stranger.
L actually OL. I mean -- “you can actually make an argument” that a junior hacksaw could be considered useful for felling redwoods, if you’re on that particular kick. Meanwhile, in the real world, literally nobody who worries about running into bears just carries a handgun, for reasons anyone who’s ever held (much less fired) a handgun would find laughably obvious. Since you evidently don’t find it laughably obvious: muzzle velocity (i.e. range -- you don’t want to have to be able to smell its breath before you shoot it), available size and weight of rounds (i.e. stopping power -- you really need it to hit HARD) and barrel length (i.e. accuracy -- you really need it to hit) are all comedically inadequate in any handgun no matter how cartoonishly “hand-cannon”y.
sonofrojblake #4
Just an FYI -- in my country the ONLY reason a person is permitted to carry a handgun in public IS to hunt.
Because hunting wild boar among dense undergrowth can result in one surprising a hunter by rushing them -- a rifle may be too cumbersome to wield in the ensuing fracas and a handgun become necessary.
So while in context I think you are right, as a matter of detail handguns are sometimes useful/used when hunting.
@8 sonofrojblake
A guide book to Spitzbergen -- a place where you are very likely to encounter polar bears -- recommended taking a weapon. A carbine might be suitable, but a better choice would be a semi-automatic rifle like a Kalashnikov.
At that point I abandoned any thoughts of a camping trip to the arctic north.
There is a tiny bit of good news about this. Culper agreed to comply with Lego’s “cease and desist”.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-07-14/lego-demands-stop-to-us-company-toy-gun/100291810
@1 -- 4: yup, they ARE trying to get people killed, exactly because they DON’T care and are intelligent enough to understand how to make a few bucks.
But companies do not have the right to use the product, or likeness of a product, from another company without that company’s permission. You may not profit of others’ work.
___
#4 sonof:
…Because now they have guns in their sets? Yeah, that’s just like making an actual gun that looks like a toy.
/eyeroll
@fentex: interesting stuff, thanks.
But also, worth respect, boar != bear…