Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 27

Thread: Possibly unsafe semi-autos

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    2

    Post imported post

    Jennings Nine 9mm. Does anyone know about a bad experience with this model pistol. My grandson brought me one and said he heard they may be unsafe to fire ?? any one know. very old Ranger. Korea vet

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Shenandoah Valley, Virginia
    Posts
    3,806

    Post imported post

    Jennings/Jimenez/What-ever-other-names guns?

    It's a cheap handgun by a company with an apparently questionable past.

    All claims I've heard about it are typically second-hand accounts with little or no corroborating evidence to back up said claims.

    I did read one claim about a couple of people shooting themselves in the foot with one, but I've also SEEN a video of a DEA agent shooting himself in the leg with a Glock, so....


    I did find a short video of someone talking about one of their .22LR models.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_fDGT1bm-5A

    Short answer: If it's all you can afford, great. If it's not, I'd stick it in a closet or safe somewhere and leave it in favor of something else. That's just my opinion.
    Why open carry? Because 1911 > 911.

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    7

    Post imported post

    I actually own one. Local shops here (bucks county ) PA don't sell them any more.They recommend destroying them.Mine the slide cracked,don't know why.Never able to get through a magazine without jamming,or magazine falling out.Was $100 gun years ago, but not worth risking my life on. I carry a Kahr Arms CW 9mm.The jennings seemed to heavy, and a weak spring. But never any accidents.

    Good Luck

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Hodgenville, Kentucky, USA
    Posts
    1,261

    Post imported post

    A young boy was crippled by his sitter. Jennings was sued and lost. Out of business.

    Some were BAD, others were bad. Just don't trust it if it fires. Don't trust it if it doesn't fire.

  5. #5
    Newbie crisisweasel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Pima County, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    266

    Post imported post

    Jennings made what can only be described as infamous guns, collectable for their bad reputation and not much else.

    To those of limited means, I would always say the same thing: if you need a cheap gun, save up and buy a Ruger. From what I can tell, there is probably no better bang (price:quality ratio) for your buck than Ruger.

    If I encountered a Jennings or Lorcin or whatever, I'd buy it and make a piece of postmodern art with it. Possibly I'd make a papier mache sculpture of a zombified Owen Wilson in clown shoes posing with it in front of a Welsh flag.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Shenandoah Valley, Virginia
    Posts
    3,806

    Post imported post

    TheMrMitch wrote:
    A young boy was crippled by his sitter. Jennings was sued and lost. Out of business.
    Eh, that's not saying much. Someone was dumb enough to spill coffee on themselves and won money from McDonald's. Does that make Mickey D's a bad company?

    After all, we've seen plenty of stories around here about people with negligent discharges under suspicious circumstances.

    See also: That crazy lady in Alabama that shot up her work place. More specifically when her brother was killed.
    Why open carry? Because 1911 > 911.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    2

    Post imported post

    Recently I asked wether it was safe to fire a Jennings Nine 9mm. I got several replies but mostly hearsay,very few facts.I have very little money living on SS. and cant afford the prices being asked. Unfortunately I gave my 1911 45 auto to my grandson who lives in Detroit Mich.in a yery bad neigborhood and dont have the heart to ask. I never dreamed where I live in Md. would ever be dangerous for senior citizens. My next question would be are these new PLASTIC Pistols ok ??. I know Glock and other manufacturers have been making them for quite a while. Very old ranger. SS Md.

  8. #8
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766

    Post imported post

    AbNo wrote:
    TheMrMitch wrote:
    A young boy was crippled by his sitter. Jennings was sued and lost. Out of business.
    Eh, that's not saying much. Someone was dumb enough to spill coffee on themselves and won money from McDonald's. Does that make Mickey D's a bad company?

    After all, we've seen plenty of stories around here about people with negligent discharges under suspicious circumstances.
    The main idea here is that Jennings is no longer inbusiness.The rest is just backround info. The cause was losing the lawsuit.

    Basically, the babysitter's boyfriend came over. While visiting herifled dad's dresser drawers and found the gun. The kid saw the boyfriend with the gun, objected. Boyfriend, being a gun safety wizard, pointed the gun at the kid and said, "Its not loaded" while pulling the trigger. Gun went off with no magazine. Kid was hit in the neck and crippled. Jennings was sued for an unsafe product: no magazine disconnect.

    It seems to me the Jennings owner started up again under a new name, or three, but I cannot recall.
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  9. #9
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    El Paso, TX
    Posts
    1,877

    Post imported post

    very old Ranger,

    I've only had one Jennings gun before,a J-22 back in the very late 1970s. Even when I bought it, I knew it was not a gun to shoot a whole lot (due to its metallurgy/construction) but it DID work even though I didn't fire it much. Eventually though, it developeda problem (too long ago to recall what exactly) andI got rid of it.IMO, it's a gun to carry a lot but not to USE a lot. Same story with the supposedly "better" NAA Mini-Revolvers (had2-3 of them).But if that's all you can afford, then you'll just have to use it, IF that becomes necessary...and despite its "marginal" reputation.

    Actually, the Jennings MIGHT be a bit better gun than other brands such as Lorcin (which seems to have REALLY bad press in comparison). And although Raven has has bad press also, I've seen several articles on it that say it was a pretty decent gun. And don't get people here started on how they feel about Hi-Points! ;-)

    But ALL of these brands -- due to their construction -- won't hold up long if they are shot regularly (frequent practice sessions) so just reserve them for only occasional practice (and keep that to a minimum).

    I look at this another way, too: If the gun I have happens to malfunction/fail on me at the very moment I need it (and even so-called "superior quality" guns can fail, like some Kimber 1911s I've seen, so it's not just the low-end guns) then that's my fate. IMO, it's an Act of God if you will and time for me to go. So personally, I'm not reallyconcerned about it whatsoever...it's the very least of any worries.

    Presently, my CC gun is an obscure Serbian (!) product, an all-steel compact 9mm. Got it for $250 plus shipping to my local FFL. So far, NO malfunctions whatsoever. Asidefrom the heavy trigger -- probably due to damn lawyers and legal liability issues (and needing a slight sight adjustment to bring the bullet impact a tad right) -- I don't see how you could get a better quality gun for $250.It's a basic no-frills tool, but being made of steel is very strong, robustand durable...so I can shoot it as much as I care to.

    Too bad we can't keep the weapons criminals have when they break into our cars/homes...as likely, they will have better guns than the Jenings (or Lorcin) and you could just keep THEIR gun(s). ;-)

    Whatever, if all one has is a Jennings, then they should keep it untilhe/she can get something moredurable and with a better reputation...then sell the Jennings or keep it as an "emergency backup gun" in the safe.

    As for the so-called "plastic guns" (a misnomer often used by clueless media people) such as Glocks, they are very good high-quality guns, so don't let that stop you (unless it's a "plastic" revolver like the Ruger LCR, which has shown gas-cutting problems). They're fine -- I just don't like their techno/boxy looks.

    I prefer military surplus (milsurp) guns myselfso I have a couple of Tokarevs and my "Tokarev clone" Zastava M88 compact 9mm I mentioned above. My 1911 Colt is in another state but I don't need it here...my 2 Tokarevs are battle proven (like the 1911) and as mentioned, my Zastava M88 (based on the Tokarev design) is 100% reliable so far.

    If you're looking for a more affordable but quality and reliable handgun for S-D purposes, why not look into getting some kind of milsurp pistol? There are some Makarovs around now (they come and go) and althoughof a weird caliber (NOT 9x19 Luger Parabellum, but 9x18mm Makarov) there's a lot of milsurp ammo also around now for it (stock up while it's available). With milsurp guns you'd be spending about as little as you can for a decent quality gun.

    Whatever, you don't have to pay $500-$1000 for a quality reliable handgun, so just do some research online. You could start by going togunsamerica.com for getting a sense of what's out there and pricing.

    Good luck,

    -- John D.

    P.S. IMO, "no magazine disconnect" is not a problem (and some of us don't like them anyway). MANY guns don't have a mag disconnect and they're fine -- the 1911 hasn't had one for what, 100 years now? My Tokarevs don't, either, and the only safetyTHEY have is the hammer at half-cock. Those guns are not "defective!"Besides, I think more people have been shot by their guns due to stupid handling of them than by some supposed "defect" the guns have...real or imagined.


    (formerly of Colorado Springs, CO)

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    MILLERS CREEK N.C.
    Posts
    127

    Post imported post

    i was given a jennings 9mm ...i used the jennings as a paper weight on my desk at the gunshopfor 5 months before i even tried to shoot it...well the one i owned was the older bryco arms model jennings nine...more or less the same as the later jennings nine and the jimenez nine....all i can say on the gun is with the 12 rnd mag it will not feed even close to reliable with max cap..i found with 7-8 rds in it 70% of the time no failures...i had no success at all--as in failure to feed first rnd with any type of hollowpoint ammo..tried Efmj ammo--expanding fmj..would not feed...the only success i had was with ball ammo...and i never shot anything heavier then 115g..no 124 or 147....tried some sinterfire frangibles at 100gr...20% success rate on feeding the ugly thing...AND FOR NO REASON IN THE WORLD...SHORT OF ZOMBIE INVASION..EVEN THEN THINK TWICE...DO NOT EVER PUT ANYTHING THAT IS +P..+P+..OR 9MM NATO IN THE GUN...it might last a mag..very doubtful....

    when i washaving new sightsmy USPcput on... i was forced to carry the jennings as i did not wanna be unarmed...it weighs a ton...but it was better then good intentions...after i got the HK back i banished the jennings to under the bathroom sink detail as the darn things didnt really rust...and there is no rule in the world that says someone cant break in while your showering or catching up on your reading...

    i put maybe 100rds through the gun before i got rid of it...got40 bucks at a pawn shop...kinda feel bad about it...oh well...THE ONLY PROBLEMS I HAD WAS FAILURE TO FEED AND SOMETIMES WOULD NOT EXTRACT...NEVER HAD A LIGHT STRIKE ON IT...AND I NEVER CARRIED IT +1 IN THE CHAMBER...DONT TRUST THE SAFTEY...MINE MIGRATED LIKE A BIRD NORTH TO SOUTH AT WILL...

    point is...it will work and it is a hell of alot better then a big stick...oh if you manually load a cci 9mm shot shell in it..kinda fun for snakes...

    good luck

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    US
    Posts
    3,156

    Post imported post

    very old Ranger wrote:
    My next question would be are these new PLASTIC Pistols ok ??. I know Glock and other manufacturers have been making them for quite a while. Very old ranger. SS Md.
    As long as it is made by a reputable company (Glock, Springfield, Smith & Wesson, Ruger, etc.) they are more than OK. Glocks for example have been made since the early 1980s, and they've since built a reputation for durability.

    Good luck, Sir.

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    24

    Post imported post

    Fix it so it can't be fired, and save it for one of those gun buy-back programs.

    Then take the cash and buy a nice gun

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    379

    Post imported post

    AbNo wrote:
    TheMrMitch wrote:
    A young boy was crippled by his sitter. Jennings was sued and lost. Out of business.
    Eh, that's not saying much. Someone was dumb enough to spill coffee on themselves and won money from McDonald's. Does that make Mickey D's a bad company?

    After all, we've seen plenty of stories around here about people with negligent discharges under suspicious circumstances.

    See also: That crazy lady in Alabama that shot up her work place. More specifically when her brother was killed.
    Might want to get familiar with that McDonalds case.

  14. #14
    Regular Member KansasMustang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Herington, Kansas, USA
    Posts
    1,005

    Post imported post

    very old Ranger wrote:
    Recently I asked wether it was safe to fire a Jennings Nine 9mm. I got several replies but mostly hearsay,very few facts.I have very little money living on SS. and cant afford the prices being asked. Unfortunately I gave my 1911 45 auto to my grandson who lives in Detroit Mich.in a yery bad neigborhood and dont have the heart to ask. I never dreamed where I live in Md. would ever be dangerous for senior citizens. My next question would be are these new PLASTIC Pistols ok ??. I know Glock and other manufacturers have been making them for quite a while. Very old ranger. SS Md.
    I have no personal knowledge of Jennings weapons, never even heard of one til now. Yes the composite weapons are safe! I have two, a Springfield XD45 and Taurus PT140, and love em both. They both cost me about $400 (PT140 used) and the XD was $495. I would never fire a weapon I'd heard even heresy about.
    ‘‘Laws that forbid the carrying of arms... disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.’’ Thomas Jefferson

  15. #15
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063

    Post imported post

    CarryOpen wrote:
    AbNo wrote:
    TheMrMitch wrote:
    A young boy was crippled by his sitter. Jennings was sued and lost. Out of business.
    Eh, that's not saying much. Someone was dumb enough to spill coffee on themselves and won money from McDonald's. Does that make Mickey D's a bad company?

    After all, we've seen plenty of stories around here about people with negligent discharges under suspicious circumstances.

    See also: That crazy lady in Alabama that shot up her work place. More specifically when her brother was killed.
    Might want to get familiar with that McDonalds case.
    I don't know about the poster to whom you are replying, but I am familiar with the case. It is an example of jackpot justice.

    The fault clearly lies with the idiot woman who put a cup of, by definition, scalding coffee between her legs. The argument over the precise temperature of the coffee was silly. Coffee scalds at 160 or 180 degrees.

    Next thing you know, folks will sue because a knife was too sharp. The fact that one should not hold it between his or her legs while manipulating it will be considered irrelevant.

    Knives are dangerously sharp. Coffee is dangerously hot. Be careful with them.

    duh.

  16. #16
    Regular Member Alexcabbie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Alexandria, Virginia, United States
    Posts
    2,290

    Post imported post

    eye95 wrote:
    CarryOpen wrote:
    AbNo wrote:
    TheMrMitch wrote:
    A young boy was crippled by his sitter. Jennings was sued and lost. Out of business.
    Eh, that's not saying much. Someone was dumb enough to spill coffee on themselves and won money from McDonald's. Does that make Mickey D's a bad company?

    After all, we've seen plenty of stories around here about people with negligent discharges under suspicious circumstances.

    See also: That crazy lady in Alabama that shot up her work place. More specifically when her brother was killed.
    Might want to get familiar with that McDonalds case.
    I don't know about the poster to whom you are replying, but I am familiar with the case. It is an example of jackpot justice.

    The fault clearly lies with the idiot woman who put a cup of, by definition, scalding coffee between her legs. The argument over the precise temperature of the coffee was silly. Coffee scalds at 160 or 180 degrees.

    Next thing you know, folks will sue because a knife was too sharp. The fact that one should not hold it between his or her legs while manipulating it will be considered irrelevant.

    Knives are dangerously sharp. Coffee is dangerously hot. Be careful with them.

    duh.
    Oddly enough (and lots of things are plenty odd in this day and age) a DULL knife is loads more dangerous than an extremely sharp one. The more effortlessly the blade cuts, the less chance that force will be needed to be applied and the blade slipping off the work and into the flesh of the user.

    Coffee that is not hot enough can be dangerous too. Serve me a cup of lukewarm coffee and see if you get a tip. (you won't)

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    2,546

    Post imported post

    eye95 wrote:
    CarryOpen wrote:
    AbNo wrote:
    TheMrMitch wrote:
    A young boy was crippled by his sitter. Jennings was sued and lost. Out of business.
    Eh, that's not saying much. Someone was dumb enough to spill coffee on themselves and won money from McDonald's. Does that make Mickey D's a bad company?

    After all, we've seen plenty of stories around here about people with negligent discharges under suspicious circumstances.

    See also: That crazy lady in Alabama that shot up her work place. More specifically when her brother was killed.
    Might want to get familiar with that McDonalds case.
    I don't know about the poster to whom you are replying, but I am familiar with the case. It is an example of jackpot justice.

    The fault clearly lies with the idiot woman who put a cup of, by definition, scalding coffee between her legs. The argument over the precise temperature of the coffee was silly. Coffee scalds at 160 or 180 degrees.

    Next thing you know, folks will sue because a knife was too sharp. The fact that one should not hold it between his or her legs while manipulating it will be considered irrelevant.

    Knives are dangerously sharp. Coffee is dangerously hot. Be careful with them.

    duh.
    Is it an example of "jackpot justice"? Odd, you claimed to be familiar with the case.

    There are a ton of things that happened in the Liebeck case that you neglect to mention. The difference between 160 and 180 degrees is an exponential curve of danger in full thickness (third degree) burns, with the latter temperature causing a third degree burn in 2-5 seconds. Additionally, McDonald's had previously done research showing that customers often grabbed the coffee to drink on the go. There's a difference between thinking "I could get scalded/burned" and "I could get a third degree burn." Using your knife analogy, it's the difference between "I could cut myself and maybe cause a small scar on my finger" and "I could permanently disfigure a large part of my body during normal use and with ease." On top of that, the McDonald's where she was burned reduced their temperature immediately after the incident (admitting fault). Plus, McDonald's had a history of settling burn complaints (70/year) ranging up to $500,000. Offereing $800 for something on the upper end of the damage scale was deemed out of line. After all of that, though, and despite being found 80% liable for the incident, McDonald's total amount awarded was reduced (to less than medical costs for the burn - jackpot, my ass) and eventually was settled outside of court.
    "If we were to ever consider citizenship as the least bit matter of merit instead of birthright, imagine who should be selected as deserved representation of our democracy: someone who would risk their daily livelihood to cast an individually statistically insignificant vote, or those who wrap themselves in the flag against slightest slights." - agenthex

  18. #18
    Regular Member Alexcabbie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Alexandria, Virginia, United States
    Posts
    2,290

    Post imported post

    Here in Virginia, we have the "negligence" rule. Any amount of negligence on the part of the injured party constitutes a complete bar to ANY recovery. In the MickeyD's case, the lady neglected to secure the hot liquid adequately in a cup-holder, so she would be outta luck in the Commonwealth.

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    2,546

    Post imported post

    Alexcabbie wrote:
    Here in Virginia, we have the "negligence" rule. Any amount of negligence on the part of the injured party constitutes a complete bar to ANY recovery. In the MickeyD's case, the lady neglected to secure the hot liquid adequately in a cup-holder, so she would be outta luck in the Commonwealth.
    I wouldn't say that proudly. Virginia and three other states (plus DC) are the only ones that still use that antiquated system.
    "If we were to ever consider citizenship as the least bit matter of merit instead of birthright, imagine who should be selected as deserved representation of our democracy: someone who would risk their daily livelihood to cast an individually statistically insignificant vote, or those who wrap themselves in the flag against slightest slights." - agenthex

  20. #20
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063

    Post imported post

    Tawnos wrote:
    eye95 wrote:
    CarryOpen wrote:
    AbNo wrote:
    TheMrMitch wrote:
    A young boy was crippled by his sitter. Jennings was sued and lost. Out of business.
    Eh, that's not saying much. Someone was dumb enough to spill coffee on themselves and won money from McDonald's. Does that make Mickey D's a bad company?

    After all, we've seen plenty of stories around here about people with negligent discharges under suspicious circumstances.

    See also: That crazy lady in Alabama that shot up her work place. More specifically when her brother was killed.
    Might want to get familiar with that McDonalds case.
    I don't know about the poster to whom you are replying, but I am familiar with the case. It is an example of jackpot justice.

    The fault clearly lies with the idiot woman who put a cup of, by definition, scalding coffee between her legs. The argument over the precise temperature of the coffee was silly. Coffee scalds at 160 or 180 degrees.

    Next thing you know, folks will sue because a knife was too sharp. The fact that one should not hold it between his or her legs while manipulating it will be considered irrelevant.

    Knives are dangerously sharp. Coffee is dangerously hot. Be careful with them.

    duh.
    Is it an example of "jackpot justice"? Odd, you claimed to be familiar with the case.

    There are a ton of things that happened in the Liebeck case that you neglect to mention. The difference between 160 and 180 degrees is an exponential curve of danger in full thickness (third degree) burns, with the latter temperature causing a third degree burn in 2-5 seconds. Additionally, McDonald's had previously done research showing that customers often grabbed the coffee to drink on the go. There's a difference between thinking "I could get scalded/burned" and "I could get a third degree burn." Using your knife analogy, it's the difference between "I could cut myself and maybe cause a small scar on my finger" and "I could permanently disfigure a large part of my body during normal use and with ease." On top of that, the McDonald's where she was burned reduced their temperature immediately after the incident (admitting fault). Plus, McDonald's had a history of settling burn complaints (70/year) ranging up to $500,000. Offereing $800 for something on the upper end of the damage scale was deemed out of line. After all of that, though, and despite being found 80% liable for the incident, McDonald's total amount awarded was reduced (to less than medical costs for the burn - jackpot, my ass) and eventually was settled outside of court.
    Right. Like an ordinary person is knowledgeable about the precise amount of damage water of a certain temperature against the skin for a certain amount of time will do.

    Putting the cup between her legs was negligence on her part and the proximate cause of her injuries. Again, the knife analogy: Would a company who makes a sharper knife be liable for the sharpness of a knife is somebody does something stupid with the knife and injures themselves more because the knife was sharper? Of course not.

    This was jackpot justice.

    Oh, and I resent your implication that I am not thoroughly knowledgeable on this case. I have read on it extensively. I will say again, it was jackpot justice at its worst and an example of why we need tort reform.

    BTW, discuss this with someone else. I don't take kindly to personal insults and end discussions when they rear their ugly heads. Moving on.

  21. #21
    Regular Member Alexcabbie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Alexandria, Virginia, United States
    Posts
    2,290

    Post imported post

    Tawnos wrote:
    Alexcabbie wrote:
    Here in Virginia, we have the "negligence" rule. Any amount of negligence on the part of the injured party constitutes a complete bar to ANY recovery. In the MickeyD's case, the lady neglected to secure the hot liquid adequately in a cup-holder, so she would be outta luck in the Commonwealth.
    I wouldn't say that proudly. Virginia and three other states (plus DC) are the only ones that still use that antiquated system.
    If everybody else jumped off a cliff, would I be stupid to be one of three people who did not?? "everybody else does otherwise" is NOT a valid reason for changing things. Need I remind you that one thing the antis cite in opposing us is that "every other industrial nation" controls private access to firearms much more stringently?

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Caldwell, Idaho, USA
    Posts
    59

    Post imported post

    I used to have a Bryco/Jennings 59 9mm. I was at my Dads shooting 1 day when I went to fire the second shot. Click, nothing. Lookes at the gun and the slide was hanging off the back about 1/4 inch. Didn't look right, so I unloaded it and took it inside. THe takedown button (which is a very light, soft aluminum) was cracking. The tang on the bottom was starting to shear off. If it had fired that second time, I would probably of had the slide in my face. I took it to the dealer and he sent it back. They replaced the part with one of hte exact same material. I traded it in that day for a Ruger P89. This was back in 92 or 93. Still have the Ruger and not a problem 1 with it. I am now trading it in on a SR9C when they have them in stock again.

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    137

    Post imported post

    Jennings was one of the so called ring of fire guns out of California. The gun is made out of zink, very heavy trigger pull. Raven, Jennings,Bryco,Lorcin, Davis, Sundancewere all made by the same companyowned bygeorge jennings.The company was sued out of business by the state of california. Most people that purchased the guns were not serious shooters. Most of the their owners placed their guns in a sock drawer where they collected more dust than anything else. Guns cost anywhere between $50 and $120. These firearms were the target of the anti-gun zealots who demonized these guns. California overplayed the use of these guns in crime. Many were sold even to the point of outselling many much better made guns. Considering the shear number of these guns that were out there, it was only naturual that many landed up in the hands of criminals. Well Mr. Jenning's company is long gone and California is still a crime pit.

  24. #24
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Battle Creek, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    396

    Post imported post

    The Jennings' guns are unsafe due to the quality (or, rather, the lack of quality) of the metals used to manufactor them.

    The chambers and the mechanical functions of the weapons would often crack, or outright fail.

    I would recommend finding out when your local governmental organization is holding a "gun buyback", and take advantage of this waste of tax dollars to actually do some good. The funds obtained could be applied towards the purchase of a quality firearm.

    If you are have a very limited budget, Hi-Point sidearms cost appx. $150, and have a reputation as a decent to good quality sidearm. Ugly as sin, and handles like an angry hooker on Two-Dollar Tuesday, but will go bang if you need it too.

    Glocks and Springfield XD can be found in the $350-$700 range, very common and reliable weapon.

  25. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    So Portland, Maine, USA
    Posts
    16

    Post imported post

    very old Ranger wrote:
    Recently I asked wether it was safe to fire a Jennings Nine 9mm. I got several replies but mostly hearsay,very few facts.I have very little money living on SS. and cant afford the prices being asked. Unfortunately I gave my 1911 45 auto to my grandson who lives in Detroit Mich.in a yery bad neigborhood and dont have the heart to ask. I never dreamed where I live in Md. would ever be dangerous for senior citizens. My next question would be are these new PLASTIC Pistols ok ??. I know Glock and other manufacturers have been making them for quite a while. Very old ranger. SS Md.
    There are deals to be made almost anywhere you go to buy guns. From your post, it seems that you prefer pistol rather than revolver. The polymer frame guns are durable, precise, and high performance all the way. You might be able to find something in your price range if you take your time and shop around a little. There are also some perfectly serviceable steel frame .45s to be had for reasonable cost, like the Rock Island Armory ones built in the Philippines. There is even an officer's model a lot like a Colt Commanderin the same range. Those are all mil. spec. 1911s.My regular FFL guy had a Spanish made Star .45 last week for real cheaplast week. I hope you find something that suits you.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •