I’ve built my share of Tie Fighters, cars, and “guns” out of Legos with my kids – none of which could actually be used as the object it was modeled after. (I would have LOVED a working Tie Fighter!)
A company in Utah took it to the next level and made a working “Block 19” Lego gun. As a fan of Legos and firearms, I’m not sure the combination of the two was a great idea. Here’s a bit more on the recent “Lego Gun” Block 19:
What are your thoughts about combining the two?
I wish I’d gotten one before they stopped selling them
Fun idea philosophically, but not a good safety choice
I’m ok with firearms’ customization, but making real firearm looks like kid’s toy is too much.
Good idea from marketing perspective…but it should stop with single copy kept in factory, not for sale.
Copyright issues (if there are any) in using Lego appearance aside…
It is the responsibility of the gun owner to prevent unauthorized access regardless of what the firearm looks like. It doesn’t matter if it looks like a real glock or a bunch of legos… it is capable of launching a lethal projectile and you should keep it away from anyone (kids or adults) who think pointing it at people and pulling the trigger is a fun thing to do.
So it doesn’t make sense to me when folks say “it looks too much like a toy, a child will pick it up and shoot someone with it”. If you have secured your firearm properly, what it looks like is a non-issue. If you haven’t secured your firearm properly a child having access to it is a potentially lethal accident and what it looks like is a non-issue.
If you leave your firearm lying around where a child who doesn’t know the difference between a real firearm and a lego firearm and doesn’t know the firearm safety rules and doesn’t know to come get an adult to handle it… you’ve put that child in grave risk regardless of whether its covered in legos or not.
I have no qualms about them making this. The same people complaining, will hand a 16 year old kid the keys to a 400 horsepower sports car. It is the owners responsibility, to teach their kids to treat ALL guns as a real one.
Yes, it is.
But it is also something known as “common sense”.
We are always responsible for firearms and kids. And I’m sure we all do everything to BE a responsible… till the moment one of us makes mistake…
Responsibility just lower the risk. It never minimize it to ZERO. Making real firearm looks like toy rises the risk exponentially and responsibility might be not enough…
We have been talking all the time at this Community: “avoid, before you start the confrontation”. Why don’t we “avoid, before mistake happens” in this case?
The main issue I see with guns looking like toys is if criminals decide to start using them in an attempt to disguise the fact they are carrying guns. I don’t think this is a good idea for criminals since if they were smart they would just hide their firearms regardless how they look. And threatening people with a gun that looks like a toy is likely to be less effective. But many criminals are not very smart.
We now often encourage kids to play with guns that obviously look like toys so LEOs won’t mistake them for real guns. If criminals start carrying guns that look like toys then LEOs will have a harder time determining imminent threats.
I hear what you’re saying but I don’t agree. Maybe you can help me, but I can’t think of a single scenario where the appearance of the firearm makes a difference in the risk either when left unattended or properly secured.
Leave a plain Glock 19 on a coffee table. Child picks it up to play with it and there is an accident.
Leave a Lego Glock 19 on a coffee table. Child picks it up to play with it and there is an accident.
In both cases, the problem isn’t the firearm looked like Legos or not the problem is you left your child and a firearm unattended. Kids will play with anything. If you are hoping that your child is maybe less likely to play with a firearm because it doesn’t look like Legos, I’m afraid thats just not a good plan.
On the flip side, if you properly secure your firearm to prevent unauthorized access then it still doesn’t matter what it looks like. If it’s locked in a safe where a child can’t get to it, it doesn’t matter if its plain Glock or Lego colored because the child can’t get it.
Then, we need to call Umarex, tell them they are out of business. Many airsoft and bb/pellet guns look like the real thing, except for the orange tip. It has even led to officer involved shootings of children. It’s why Nerf guns look the way they do.
So, if a person buys a gun, that looks playful, it’s on them to make sure they don’t leave it, or any other working firearm where an accident can occur.
Case in point, is this a real gun, or a CO2 rifle
No, we do not.
Umarex doesn’t do their products to look like LEGO or any kid blocks
I’m glad you have mentioned NERF - that’s a great example how toy differ from real firearm.
I’m not talking about copying, I’m talking about designing danger tools to look like toys.
The LEGO covered gun would be a nonissue in another day and time, but not now. The Bloomberg herd jumped all over this and got plenty of anti gun press. I’m sure this will make its way thru the garbage (social) media that provides information so people no longer have to think. The Utah company said one of their objectives was to generate a 2A conversation and all it did was create more negative firearm press. This is clearly a case of “just because you can, doesn’t mean you should”.
I believe a weapon should look like a weapon and a toy a toy. To many accidental deaths have already happened in the past so if they can be avoided I believe they should.
Umerex makes toys that look like real guns.
And that’s my point. It doesn’t matter if we make toys that look like real guns, or guns that look like toys, either one sends the wrong message. So, either they both are irresponsible, or neither is irresponsible.
When you handle the toy which looks like real firearm you treat it like real firearm.
When you handle the real firearm which looks like a toy you may treat it like a toy…
It still boils down to the personal responsibility. If a person buys a gun, that looks like Lego, yet is a real gun, THEY are inviting trouble, if they have small children that would want to “play” with it. If a company wants to build it, no one is forced to buy it. Just like the company that did a working gun, that looked like a Nintendo Light Blaster for Shot Show a few years back. Or, the guns that are painted like a Milwaukee Cordless drill.
I agree with where you are coming from and don’t think these firearms should be legally banned just because of the way they look. Just like AR15s should not be banned simply because they look scary to some people. But guns that look like toys are a really dumb idea. I have tried teaching my now 6 year old son to recognize the difference between toy guns and real ones in case he ends up someplace with an improperly stored or handled firearm. Guns like this will make it harder for him to tell the difference.
@Jerzees , true but do you think if someone came toward me with a toy which looks real, I am going to wait and give them the first shot to find out if it’s real or not? Bang bang
Nope, that’s not what I meant.
My only concern is that your kid and even adult person may think it’s a toy during certain circumstances.
From parent’s perspective it is big no-no for me. Why I would use deadly tool that looks like my kids toy? Do you think 4 or 5 kid understands it’s not a LEGO? Maybe she / he will… but the same time kid’s curiosity rises up… and control is lost…
