Talk:Gunsmith

Metalworking C‑class Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Metalworking, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Metalworking on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MetalworkingWikipedia:WikiProject MetalworkingTemplate:WikiProject MetalworkingMetalworking articles
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Firearms Stub‑class

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Firearms, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of firearms on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FirearmsWikipedia:WikiProject FirearmsTemplate:WikiProject FirearmsFirearms articles
Stub	This article has been rated as Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

I agree, they are pretty much the same thing in comparison. Frekydelic 17:23, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, another vote that the Gun_Modification stub be merged with the Gunsmith article. People performing gun modification (beyond the addition of simple aftermarket items, such as sling swivels or recoil pads) should purport to be competent gunsmiths. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.37.59.70 (talk) 03:23, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I wonder how gunsmithing got to be under the jurisdiction of the federal government in the USA?? Thia was a complete surprise to me.

Somebody should add information about Navy Gunner's Mates (GM) We're in charge of everything that has to do with guns on the ship. I'd do it myself but I have no idea how to edit this stuff. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.56.129.196 (talk) 02:20, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

adding images ??

How do I add images to this article? I just took some photographs (.jpg), but I cannot figure out what to do after I click the image-icon-button. it inserts the exampleimage.jpg wiki format, but how do I upload my images and name them? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.37.59.70 (talk) 04:27, 26 November 2007 (UTC) i think they should be left seperate becouse they are two different subjects. yes they are similer but they are also different and helpful. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.127.113.202 (talk) 04:03, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV?

The majority of the world's firearms in civilian hands are located in the United States of America[citation needed]. By the law of Supply and Demand, the bulk of business for practicing gunsmiths is also in the United States of America, where, due to the nature of the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution, firearms ownership is not a privilege subject to the whims of the local Governments and Military, but a right guaranteed all law-abiding citizens. Likewise, hunting and sport shooting is not a privilege restricted to the "Wealthy and Privileged",

The first sentence is pure nonsense and should be removed. (Not even counting the Third World, where everything from flintlock fowling pieces to AK-47's abound without restriction, there are many developed nations with gun ownership rates on a par with the US). The rest of the quote, although not far off from my own opinion, is nevertheless opinion. This passage should be rewritten in a more neutral fashion, simply reflecting the plain fact that the USA has lots of guns and therefore lots of gunsmiths.Solicitr (talk) 13:38, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, I've removed it all. It has nothing to do with gunsmithing. -Verdatum (talk) 23:41, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Another concern with NPOV

I agree with the previous comment, although you must show where you get your information (citations and such). I had another problem with NPOV with the article. First of all, let me say that I am a firearms enthusiast, and have learned a lot about the subject on these very pages. But, despite my personal point of view, I must protest against certain parts of this article. In the first paragraph of the section on the United States, the first paragraph reads:

"...due to the nature of the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution, firearms ownership is not a privilege subject to the whims of the local Governments and Military, but a right guaranteed all law-abiding citizens."

In the interest of NPOV, I have changed "whims" to "authority and approval" and added "(and the current legal interpretation of that right)" after the mention of the Second Amendment. We must all admit that this is a controversial social and legal question, with two sides, and more complex than is fit to argue in its entirety here. Whether or not editors/readers/contibutors believe the Second Amendment gives an individual citizen the right to gun ownership in current society, outside a regulated military or militia, the fact that our current interpretation of this is paramount to its definition in the United States should be held in mind. I personally believe the Second Amendment does not expressly permit this right. I believe in this right, that this is a right that should be given to the people, just not that that right is permitted BY the Second Amendment. Despite my personal view, and all of yours, we must respect the guidelines of NPOV that Wikipedia enjoys. This is an important commitment to neutrality that we must abide by. My argument against the use of the word "whims" is identical to this, although it is more of a minor matter than the first addition.

I welcome anyone's thoughts on this. Please do not erase these changes and revert to the original (at least before we come to an agreement on this as a community).Joe Giorandino (talk) 00:29, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Again, I've removed the whole block. It was discussing the legal implications of owning a firearm, which has nothing to do with gunsmithing. It's needless controversy. -Verdatum (talk) 23:42, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

DIY section

I have problems with the DIY section. Assumptions are made about geographical regions, about causality, and about resources. While it's nice that there is proof that field manuals have been distributed, I'm not sure how much that really has to do with it's effect on gun-smithing. I'm thinking of exchanging the entire section with a discussion of the various educational resources that have been used to self-teach gunsmithing. Thoughts, opinions? -Verdatum (talk) 00:28, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What about the DIY gunsmithing done in the United States? Many Americans maintain and even build firearms for personal use. So long as this is done in accordance with the laws (e.g. not building a firearm with intent to sell or give it away) it is quite legal according to the BATF web site. Several forum type web sites are dedicated to discussing the techniques and legal compliance of the hobby. Why is this article worded in such a way as to imply that DIY gunsmithing is only done by criminals and citizens of third-world countries?