Echo40
Member
- Joined
- Sep 25, 2017
- Messages
- 4,040
- Reaction score
- 7,860
I'm seen the statement thrown around; "It's not a heirloom." or something to that effect when discussing firearms, most often when referring to modern, polymer-framed, ultilitarian firearms, but that's got me to thinking, what exactly qualifies a firearm as heirloom material?
I mean, let's face it, most of the firearms folks possess today which are family heirlooms aren't exactly barbecue guns. Heck, more often than not, they aren't really fancy at all, many are old service pistols with worn finishes or hunting rifles/shotguns.
Honestly, we often look at old firearms as heirlooms, but in their day they weren't considered luxurious, nor works of art, and they most certainly considered precious artifacts of a bygone era, they were merely tools, no different in essence to firearms of today.
Sure, they were arguably built to a higher standard of quality, with greater attention to detail, but at the time, that's simply how things were done. They didn't have CNC Machining or other such things to aid them in the process, so they had to be more hands-on, more involved, and without a huge reputation for quality already attributed to their name, they had to make their firearms to the highest standard of quality, even if it resulted in them selling it at a loss.
That's something a lot of folks often take for granted, just how many of the now household names in firearms like Smith & Wesson, began with a lot of financial troubles, multiple instances of bankruptcy, and often times the temporary foreclosure of their businesses. It wasn't because they made poor quality firearms or charged too much or necessarily did anything wrong, it was merely a result of the fact that business was tough and they couldn't always make enough sales to keep their heads above water, but I digress...
The point I'm trying to make here is that the firearms which have been passed down as heirlooms weren't necessarily anything special to the ancestor who originally purchased them, they weren't intended as heirlooms, I doubt that whoever bought them originally ever even put much thought into them ever being passed on to their next of kin. They were most likely purchased to fulfill an immediate need, the same as any firearm you may purchase today.
I think that in many cases folks look at older firearms through nostalgia googles or with romanticized ideas of the history behind it. Because while some heirloom firearms are extremely well preserved, with gorgeous bluing and walnut grips, others have a worn parkerized finish with plastic grips, yet folks still can appreciate them.
So, objectively speaking, who is to say that a current production firearm couldn't be seen the same way by the eyes of your grandchildren and beyond? To you it's just a G43, or an M&P Shield, or an LCP. Nothing special, just your everyday carry gun, but to your grandchildren it's Grandpa's cool old gun that he carried every single day. See what I mean?
You might not see it that way, but what was for instance the Walther PPK if not the Ruger LCP of decades passed? What is the Colt 1911 if not the SIG P320 of decades passed? What is the Smith & Wesson Model 10 but the M&P9 of decades passed?
So next time you go making the statement, "It's not a heirloom." about your current carry gun, think of this thread for a moment, consider what was said, and whether the family heirloom you may possess was of any greater significance to your ancestor when he carried it.
I mean, let's face it, most of the firearms folks possess today which are family heirlooms aren't exactly barbecue guns. Heck, more often than not, they aren't really fancy at all, many are old service pistols with worn finishes or hunting rifles/shotguns.
Honestly, we often look at old firearms as heirlooms, but in their day they weren't considered luxurious, nor works of art, and they most certainly considered precious artifacts of a bygone era, they were merely tools, no different in essence to firearms of today.
Sure, they were arguably built to a higher standard of quality, with greater attention to detail, but at the time, that's simply how things were done. They didn't have CNC Machining or other such things to aid them in the process, so they had to be more hands-on, more involved, and without a huge reputation for quality already attributed to their name, they had to make their firearms to the highest standard of quality, even if it resulted in them selling it at a loss.
That's something a lot of folks often take for granted, just how many of the now household names in firearms like Smith & Wesson, began with a lot of financial troubles, multiple instances of bankruptcy, and often times the temporary foreclosure of their businesses. It wasn't because they made poor quality firearms or charged too much or necessarily did anything wrong, it was merely a result of the fact that business was tough and they couldn't always make enough sales to keep their heads above water, but I digress...
The point I'm trying to make here is that the firearms which have been passed down as heirlooms weren't necessarily anything special to the ancestor who originally purchased them, they weren't intended as heirlooms, I doubt that whoever bought them originally ever even put much thought into them ever being passed on to their next of kin. They were most likely purchased to fulfill an immediate need, the same as any firearm you may purchase today.
I think that in many cases folks look at older firearms through nostalgia googles or with romanticized ideas of the history behind it. Because while some heirloom firearms are extremely well preserved, with gorgeous bluing and walnut grips, others have a worn parkerized finish with plastic grips, yet folks still can appreciate them.
So, objectively speaking, who is to say that a current production firearm couldn't be seen the same way by the eyes of your grandchildren and beyond? To you it's just a G43, or an M&P Shield, or an LCP. Nothing special, just your everyday carry gun, but to your grandchildren it's Grandpa's cool old gun that he carried every single day. See what I mean?
You might not see it that way, but what was for instance the Walther PPK if not the Ruger LCP of decades passed? What is the Colt 1911 if not the SIG P320 of decades passed? What is the Smith & Wesson Model 10 but the M&P9 of decades passed?
So next time you go making the statement, "It's not a heirloom." about your current carry gun, think of this thread for a moment, consider what was said, and whether the family heirloom you may possess was of any greater significance to your ancestor when he carried it.
