>The other really kind of gets my goat with an intensity out of all
>proportion to how consequential it is. They added a Loaded Chamber
>Indicator, which is to say, a little flag that pokes out if there's a
>round in the chamber to tell you there's a round in the chamber.
>Which seems reasonable enough on its face, except that anyone with
>even rudimentary firearms training shouldn't need it. If you have an
>LCI and pay any attention to it at all, that means you're relying on a
>mechanical gadget to tell you whether there's a round chambered
>instead of opening the damn action and looking, which is what
>you should always do if in doubt. So adding a widget to keep
>track of that for you, in my opinion, actually encourages neglect of
>safe practice. Nice work, guys!

Yeah, that does sound like a Lawyer Thing to do, especially for Lawyers That Have Never Actually Handled The Articles. "Oh, we can't actually rely on people to be properly trained to be instinctively safe and follow good, sound procedure when using the gun, so we need to add something so they don't need to remember to do it," while forgetting that such instinctual safety does need to be encouraged (if not mandated, but that's not a subject to get into here) with something that can kill someone by accident because someone wasn't. Especially since anyone with that same training will not only not trust that sort of helper (because it can and will fail, probably when it would actually be needed, which is why you train to manually check anyway), they may actively dislike it to the point they may not buy the gun just on that basis.

Oh, and your reaction to it does say you can actually be trusted to follow the procedures, because you recognize the exact scope of the problem that they've introduced.