Parker Gun Collectors Association Forums - Let's define a "shooter"...

Parker Gun Collectors Association Forums (https://parkerguns.org/forums/index.php)

- General Parker Discussions (https://parkerguns.org/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=2)

- - Let's define a "shooter"... (https://parkerguns.org/forums/showthread.php?t=1461)

That is a great question and I think each of us have a unique "line" between shooter and collectible. For me it is a shooter if shooting it regularly will not diminish the value of the gun. I have a few Parkers that I shoot regularly, other high condition guns I shoot rarely because regular shooting will diminish their value and then a rare few that are rare and in high condition and shooting them could cause significant loss of value and also the "loss" of one of a diminishing number of such Parkers. I treasure my shooter as much ,if not more ,than my other Parker but love them all.
David

Dave Dwyer has posted the "collector's definition" of a shooter. It's all about condition and future value, not about damage or barrels blowing up. If I can shoot a gun or hunt a collector gun without changing the condition or value, it is a shooter, regardless of its monetary value. Some other posters came close, but Dave hit it on the head.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tim Sheldon (Post 13996)

To me a "shooter" is a gun that isn't too perfect or unsafe or rare to shoot.

An example of too rare, IMO, is say a gun that has a name hammered into the damascus pattern. Could you shoot it, yes. But if you blew the barrel, the loss would be to great to the collecting community.

To shoot a 120 year old mint gun is just selfish.

To shoot an unsafe gun is just foolish.

Tim

Tim, you raise some interesting philosophical questions here. I think we all agree that shooting an unsafe gun is foolish.

At what point in a 120 year mint gun's history does it become selfish to shoot it?

Can we agree that it is not the original purchaser's starting point, otherwise, there would be few examples of shooters and lots of NIBs. Shooters would then become the prized find:)

Let's assume an original purchaser died before using it and the widow(er) just stored it until s/he passed and it was inherited 40 years out from factory - still unfired. Is the heir selfish if it were pressed into service at that point? Hunting with Dad's gun that had all but been forgotten, would any of us consider that selfish and not use that gun?

Once it has been used from there on it matters not that it continues to get used.

Now let's assume that the first heir was not the least bit interested in guns and it passed to a grandson who is an enthusiastic hunter/shooter. He is wowed at the beautiful gun he just inherited, lets say 75 years out from the factory. Is he selfish to shoot it?? If he knows nothing about collecting, is he selfish? If he does know all about collecting but choses to use his Grand Dad's gun, is he selfish??

Where is that cut off point between the gun being a tool versus a need to preserve?

Let's assume the gun has remained in the family from the beginning and unfired until it recently became inherited. Is the shooting enthusiast of today selfish if s/he finally uses Great Grand daddy's gun?

Now, lets assume it went to auction rather than stayed in the family but did so at the same points as the example above. When does it become selfish to use the gun for it's intended purpose, as per Mr. Parker ("Much care is bestowed to make it what the Sportsman needs-a good gun"-Charles Parker )

Continuing in a philosophical vein. Is collecting mint/minty guns selfish? From the caretaker perspective are all collectors equipped to provide controlled conditions to preserve wood/metal without deterioration? If not, would the proper thing be to donate any mint gun acquired to somewhere like the Smithsonian or the NRA museums for controlled condition preservation. Even if a collector has the controlled environment, is it selfish to retain them for a select few to ever see or should they be donated for the masses to be able to enjoy as well??

I have had 3 NIBs in life. Winchester 1200 that has seen a lot of shooting. Savage O/U .22/.410 Has not seen a full box of .410 and maybe a box of .22. One Winchester '94 Commemorative which remains unfired.

The unfired NIB is closing in on 40 years out from factory. Is it selfish to decide one day to drop a whitetail with it?

Where is that line that some feel should not be crossed? Is it now or did it arrive decades ago?

These are philosophical questions not directed to anyone specifically.

I grew up with guns being tools, nothing more, even if they were pretty. I don't have answers to my own questions. They can be considered rhetorical or to open/continue debate.

Cheers,
Jack

Jack you bring up many good points, especially regarding cut off points. And when a gun is a tool vs. an antique.

But for my mind, to try to keep things simple, lets use Dean Romig's 16ga hammer gun. It is a very early gun in high condition. Say Dean lost his mind and sold that gun to me, I went out and used it and wore 65% of the original finish off of that thing, put a couple of big old dings in the stock, I think that would be selfish. Future generations would not have the fortune to see that gun. Do these guns have to go to museums, I don't think so, but if one of us are so fortunate as to own one or two of these guns, I feel we owe it to future generations to preserve this type of quality in our realm of collecting.
That is just my opinion, I know there are some who say it's a gun and it was made to shoot, and I'm going to shoot her. Well there are plenty of "shooters" out there.
Tim

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tim Sheldon (Post 14047)

Say Dean lost his mind and sold that gun to me, ...Tim

I admit I have come to the point where should I have such a gun, it would probably just become eye candy for a while. I don't think Dean would have lost his mind if he sold it to you, but if he "gave" it to you that would be a pretty good indicator. I always liked a bumper sticker I saw years ago "Of all the things I've lost, I miss my mind the most".

Cheers,
Jack

Quote:

Originally Posted by Francis Morin (Post 14021)

And as this thread asks the ?- shooter and to my way of reading this, maybe not restricted to just Parkers. Yesterday at the area gun show- as always, lotsa overpriced junk, tee shirts, older ammo and such- a real sleeper, but just as if Gina L. walked into a Biker bar full of "biker babes" would catch your eye-

AH Fox 16 CE Grade fully optioned- later Phila gun I would guess, Chromox barrels- either no 2 or no 3 weight range- I wish I knew more about the Fox guns- Kautsky single selective trigger, ejectors, straight hand grip with very long trigger guard tail, field style beavertail- flawless wood to metal fit, not refinished about 80% case colors, checkered buttstock with my dims. to a T- 28" barrels and a brass galazan's leaf chamber and choke feeler gauge showed 2.75" chambers and mod. and full on the chokes-about as nice a Fox as I have ever seen- just didn't have the 5K in my pocket- Is this shotgun a shooter? I don't know, but I would not want to be the one to get the first scratch on the stock or let dried pheasant blood collect on the barrels--

We are all 'custodians in the passage of time' on our possessions, whether they be Parkers or Patek Phillipe or Porche- no matter how many we gather and study and treasure, our life span is limited, and we can only hope what TNB called the "come-afters" in our families will also treasure same, and NOT pawn them for drug $--:crying::duck::eek::duck:

Since I'm mostly a Fox guy, who dabbles in Parkers, I'd say that (if condition was original) was a very good buy at that price. I can't afford it, but it would be high on the list. What would that gun bring if it was a DHE in similar condition in the same gauge. I'll bet a lot more then 5K.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tim Sheldon (Post 14047)

...there are plenty of "shooters" out there.
Tim

True and then I just had a look at John Dunkle's shooter and see that there are pretty fine looking shooters as well, at least to my tri-focal assisted eyeballs staring at a monitor screen.

Nice shooter

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tim Sheldon (Post 14047)

But for my mind, to try to keep things simple, lets use Dean Romig's 16ga hammer gun. It is a very early gun in high condition. Say Dean lost his mind and sold that gun to me, I went out and used it and wore 65% of the original finish off of that thing, put a couple of big old dings in the stock, I think that would be selfish. Future generations would not have the fortune to see that gun. Do these guns have to go to museums, I don't think so, but if one of us are so fortunate as to own one or two of these guns, I feel we owe it to future generations to preserve this type of quality in our realm of collecting.
That is just my opinion, I know there are some who say it's a gun and it was made to shoot, and I'm going to shoot her. Well there are plenty of "shooters" out there.
Tim

I'm okay now... I'm okay... (after continuous resurgent waves of nausea since first reading Tim's post) :eek:

I would never presume to tell anyone what to do with his or her guns - even in the case of extremely high condition guns. And in the case, as Tim brought up, of my hammer gun being sold at some point - which certainly will happen - I would not stipulate as a condition of sale or even as a suggestion how that Parker be kept and maintained. If the next custodian of that gun chose to shoot it, full-well knowing it may never have been fired since originally sold, I believe that person will have knowingly and willfully deprived the firearms collectors community of one more pristine factory-fresh relic. And this act, I believe, would certainly be one of selfish disregard. Like Tim said, "there are plenty of shooters out there."