Rings? As in "10?"
Irradiated by Stingray
The last day or two has seen a spark or two of debate about fugly guns vs. the pricy and pretty custom jobs from Big Names. Words such as reliability, pretentiousness, function, and I’m pretty sure bling have been bandied about. What about sentiment though?
Say hello to Papa Baer and Mama Baer.
LabRat and I don’t wear wedding rings. Besides the fact that we prefer our jewlery to be permanently attached, why on earth should we spend a few thousand dollars on a chunk of over-glorified Au-197 with a hunk of polished C-12 when all that’ll do is just sit there, and maybe get lost somewhere? Custom 1911s on the other hand will actually do some nifty stuff. And they feed and cycle just fine, thankyewverymuch.
Me, I like the bling-bling bang-bangs, but there’s a chance I’m slightly biased.
July 21st, 2008 at 2:34 pm
Suh-weet!
(And “Aww, how sweet!”, too.
)
July 21st, 2008 at 2:57 pm
Oh you guys! That’s so adorable!
The only thing missing is interlocking “atom swirl” illustrations on the grips.
July 21st, 2008 at 4:07 pm
Very pretty, no doubt about it. I envy you the ability to buy nice stuff. In contrast, my tastes run toward the purely utilitarian. My guns show all the wear and tear of time in the field. My answer to ugly is called camo tape. But it’s a free country (as of today anyway), so far be it for me to criticize how someone else spends their money. As for jewelry . . . I think I have a watch in the bottom of my sock drawer. Even my ideal vehicle would be a 1940’s vintage Willy’s if I could find one. Eh, to each his own.
July 21st, 2008 at 4:50 pm
It’s pretty much purely a straight luxury-swap: we didn’t spend on the traditional symbol for marriage, but did on one that suits us better and is more enjoyable for us.
The rest of the collection is pretty workaday.
July 21st, 2008 at 4:52 pm
A lot of it is esthetic but that can include efficiency. I have VERY fancy shotguns for a poor man. My handguns lean more to the Nerds and Tam kind- good to start with, some custom work. But my rifles are purely pragmatic though of good quality, reliable function, and accuracy.
You are well served by buying the best quality you can afford- as my late partner Betsy used to say “we are too poor to buy shit!” (Which is NOT to confuse quality with flashiness.)
July 21st, 2008 at 5:30 pm
Eh. I have an inexpensive ring around my neck.
No, not from failure to wash.
Anyway, nice set.
July 22nd, 2008 at 2:09 am
I like the stainless 1911 better; the other is too boxy for my taste. When I bought my gun, I had to consider my budget first, so I settled for a standard second-hand Tanfoglio 9mm.
And recently I have lost my engagement ring. In a river. I’ve never been so upset in ages.
July 22nd, 2008 at 8:00 am
A range/gunstore I frequent had a hardly-used Les Baer that was a trade-in. The guy who’d ordered it couldn’t figure out how to field strip it, and thought it was the gun’s fault he couldn’t keep the holes on the paper. Guess what, genius, the guarantee that the gun will shoot a certain size group at a certain distance is only effective if YOU can shoot that well.
He traded it in on a Glock.
Me, I’m waiting for a custom Wilson Combat. Since April. Whimper.
November 10th, 2009 at 1:24 pm
Papa Baer was giving me fits this weekend. Wonder why that was?
Probably knew I wasn’t part of the family.