I would give you that statement if it were in reference to a M700 trigger, but used in reference to a M70 that might be one of the most steeped in horseshit statements I’ve ever read on here.
It was called the Rifleman’s Rifle for good reason. It got, and still has, that solid reputation from avid “gun enthusiasts”. That safety is one of the exact reasons why the M70 is so highly praised. SMH!
I knew this type of response was coming. M70 fans are reliable in their disdain for statements that don't include the M70 being the best action in every way, evah!
I should add that I'm not a M70 hater. They make a fine action. Further, I'm not saying that a 3 way safety is not usable, is unreliable, or that it's a foregone conclusion that they'll cost you opportunities at game. I do stand by my statement of opinion that there are better designed safeties, depending on your use expectations.
I only shared my thoughts on the matter. I didn't say that anyone else should feel the same. We all have different hunting styles and hunt different topography, cover, game etc. My very first rifle was a Ruger 77 mk II with a three way safety; the next rifle I bought was a M70. While still hunting, doing drives and pushes, and tracking game in the snow, I found the 3 way safeties to be, in comparison to other safety configurations, less intuitive and more cumbersome to move them all the way around the bolt shroud from full on to full off when trying to make quick shots on jumped game in heavy cover. They were also sometimes noisy if you couldn't devote 2 fingers to moving the lever all the way around, which isn't always ideal for hunting in heavy cover wherein game would have to be very close before presenting a shot opportunity. As my uncle commented on the subject many years ago, "Those are safeties for the deer."
If you hunt more open cover that rarely includes close shots at flushed game, or predominately hunt stands with greater visibility, etc, etc, I can see how my concerns with 3 way safeties wouldn't be valid at all.
