When did Beretta Arms Corp. start defacing their otherwise beautiful guns with those Ruger style warning scrolls? I was at my local gun shop the other day looking to purchase another Beretta when I happened to notice these absurd warning labels scrolled right into the right side of the frame on most of their pistols. Being from the old school, like many, I decided to pass on the new modeled Berettas and opted for a used, older model 92FS in almost new condition. I also choose firearms on the basis of appearance as well as function and workmanship, and willingly, there are plenty of those out there!

I understand most gun owners favor these warnings, mistakenly thinking that this is what it takes to save our nation's gun companies from the gun grabbing socialists, as men seem to have been lapping up the new guns with great fervor while defending the new warnings as "good business sense," with those wild and argumentive eyes. They seemed to be tickled pink that a gun company at least cares about their personal well-being.

I don't want to get silly lectures on "lawyered guns," because I know Beretta does not have to place such labels on their guns, as some other gun companies I've noticed, still do not. Well, at least not yet anyway. Face it: No gun company, even Strum, Ruger, has ever been sued because of the lack of dumbed down warning labels or has avoided being sued because of them. If that be the case, ALL gun companies would maintain them.

I won't purchase a new gun from a company that's seemingly sliding down the slippery path towards appeasing the hook nosed politicians or greedy lawyers and those that seek to eventually put them out of business, albeit one step at a time. And I won't buy their contemporary guns, thereby casting an economic vote in favor of the PC weapons. So don't blame me if/when the gun industry starts going down the tubes in the future. Blame the companies themselves. I won't be convinced to buy the new Berettas, so forget that, as well as I promise not to condemn others that wish to do so.

At any rate, enough of my ranting. So when did Beretta start voluntarily placing warning scrolls on their beauties? I am thinking during the late Klinton era? Anyone have a year for the Beretta 92FS 9MM?

Don't know the year but I agree with you about the ugly.

The USA made guns I have seen all had the warning; except for the M9 model.

Yep they are UGLY. They should be on the inside of the grip panel. LOL

the 92inox i bought back in 2001 has it.

Quoted: I understand most gun owners favor these warnings,

Who ever told you this, is full of shit, IMO.

Quoted: Quoted: I understand most gun owners favor these warnings, Who ever told you this, is full of shit, IMO.

 I guess he hasn't been hanging around here much.  And he must be from the chitown area.

my 92FS has the ruger billboard warning on the right forward side of the frame.its a mid 90s model like 1996.being parkerized i never noticed it before.thanks for pointing it out and ruining my image of my beloved 92FS!THANKS~Q!

Quoted: my 92FS has the ruger billboard warning on the right forward side of the frame.its a mid 90s model like 1996.

Ditto my 92fs from 1994.

My 92FS bought in Jan 94 does NOT have the offensive markings.  My son bought one in July of 2002 and I'll have to ask him about his.  Sounds like it probably started in late 93 or early 94.

I have a Inox 92fs from 03 that has it... never really bothered me much, i would perfer it not being there but never bugged me very much. what does bother me is the new Inox models with the black parts.... glad i got mine when i did, only plastic part was the guide rod and that got replaced

Does anyone have any pics, haven't really noticed it the last time I shot a Beretta.