New Heller Commemorative S&W


PDA






Guntalk
July 20, 2008, 03:59 PM
Special Revolver Commemorates Landmark Heller Decision

Sometimes things work out, and in this case, it's a home run! Three weeks ago on my Gun Talk Radio Show, I offered the idea of a presentation gun to be given to the six original plaintiffs in what started off as the "Parker" case, and then became the Heller case. That's the case where the U. S. Supreme Court ruled on July 26 that the Second Amendment is, in fact, an individual right, and the court threw out the total handgun ban in Washington, DC.

I'd love to say it was my idea, but I got the suggestion from a listener and Truth Squad member. I liked it, so I picked up the ball and ran with it.

Now, only three weeks later, it's reality. Even better, you can buy one.

On Sunday, July 20, I'll announce on the radio the new "D.C. vs. Heller" revolver from Smith & Wesson. It's the alloy frame model 442, which is a hammerless J-frame (the small frame) in .38 Special. It's very lightweight, with rubber grips. It's a perfect self-defense revolver.

Before I get into the details, let me tell you how it came about. I initially thought that a revolver was the way to go because Fenty, the mayor of D.C., has stated that the city will not allow anyone to register semi-auto handguns. The city classifies autoloaders as machine guns, which tells you how much they know about guns. Clearly, semi-autos are the most popular type of handgun being sold, so there is nothing unusual about them. Of course, this means is that the District will be sued...again...and will lose. Fenty should be impeached for wasting public money. But, I didn't want the six people who stood up to claim their Second Amendment rights to have to wait, so we went with a revolver.

I began the conversation with Smith & Wesson, and they immediately said yes. They didn't even know what they were committing to, but they liked the idea. A week ago my son, Ryan, and I were shooting video at the S&W plant for Gun Talk TV, and we met with Tom Taylor and Paul Pluff to discuss it. Tom suggested that rather than making just six of the guns, that they make a special gun and offer it for sale to everyone. A share of the revenue would be used to fund the lawsuits which are ongoing right now.

So, that's what we are doing. A portion of the sales will go to the Second Amendment Foundation, which has been instrumental in not only the Heller case, but in funding legal scholarship on the Second Amendment over the last 20 years. SAF filed suit against the city of Chicago (which has a ban just like D.C.'s) within minutes of the Supreme Court decision on Heller.

Click Here (http://www.guntalk.com/site88.php) to view photos of the special Model 442. You can see the neat laser engraving with the scales of justice, the date of the decision (June 26, 2008), and the words "D.C. vs Heller" on the scale. Note that the side of the scale holding "Heller" is weighted down -- the winner! There's also an engraving saying "The Right to Keep and Bear Arms" on the revolver.

The black finish on this gun takes laser engraving very well, and the engraved parts show up in a satin-silver finish. It looks great!

The revolver will be available for sale in early fall -- right around the corner. Honestly, I can't think of a better gift for yourself or someone in your family to note this critically-important blow for gun rights. I wouldn't claim that this will be a collector's item -- I don't think it will -- but it's going to be something special to have in future years.

I'm happy to have been able to push this through. Here's a big attaboy to the men and women who worked on this case for so long, and to the six D.C. residents who put their names on the lawsuit. Talk about having the "no shrug" attitude we talk about on the radio! They wouldn't take it anymore.

Listen in to Gun Talk for more information. We'll have Tom Taylor from Smith & Wesson and Alan Gottlieb from the Second Amendment Foundation on at 2:10pm Eastern time, July 20.

As we get more information about ordering this special revolver (expect a street price in the $450 range), I'll put it out on the air. You can buy a special gun and help continue the fight for gun rights. Not bad, indeed.

If you enjoyed reading about "New Heller Commemorative S&W" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Boulder
July 20, 2008, 06:34 PM
Will it have the lock? Just kidding :)

I like the idea.

Having been a Chicago resident for a large portion of my adult life, I'm curious what will happen in the next few years.

Dienekes
July 20, 2008, 10:49 PM
Sounds good. It should come with a little accessory kit of tar and feathers for the city fathers if they continue to defy SCOTUS and the people.

Will there be a Barrett .50 version, too?

MartinS
July 20, 2008, 11:11 PM
Most excellent, a part of our secular religion is made manifest in metal. Thank you for your part in this, and thanks to our friend Smith&Wesson.

only1asterisk
July 21, 2008, 01:23 AM
Seriously, will it have the stupid lock?

David

Matt-J2
July 21, 2008, 01:28 AM
I can't see why it wouldn't.

only1asterisk
July 21, 2008, 02:01 AM
Matt-J2: I can't see why it wouldn't.

How sad. How very sad and ironic.

David

Matt-J2
July 21, 2008, 02:15 AM
Considering that the IL does absolutely nothing to hinder our 2nd amendment rights, you've lost me.
Also, trying to think of how irony would apply here, and I just can't see it. Please, enlighten me.

only1asterisk
July 21, 2008, 02:18 AM
Use the search function and enlighten yourself. Enough has already been written on the subject.

David

Cosmoline
July 21, 2008, 02:22 AM
the date of the decision (June 26, 2008), and the words "D.C. vs Heller" on the scale

Tom,

Not to pick nits, but even in abbreviated form it should be styled "D.C. v. Heller." Not "vs." The "v." styling is always used for the Supreme Court. The "vs." would imply a trial court level decision. Take a gander at the opinion or the briefs to see what I'm talking about, or any citation to a U.S. Supreme Court case.

Matt-J2
July 21, 2008, 02:26 AM
I'm sure the search function will fail to mention proper irony.

And also, no. You brought it up, you lay out the logic. I'm not going to do the research to explain your point. If you think it's worth telling, then explain. Otherwise, can't be all that important to you.

only1asterisk
July 21, 2008, 02:36 AM
I never said that it was important. Why should waste my time explaining?

David

ugaarguy
July 21, 2008, 02:47 AM
Please leave the lock / no lock banter out. Open another thread for it.

It probably will have a lock, and that's just how S&W builds revolvers now. If you want a new J Frame without the lock get one of the upcoming no lock 642s or 37s mentioned in another thread here. If you want the Heller Commemorative S&W deal with the lock. For many this will be a collection piece that's never fired anyway.

All that aside I'm very happy that S&W is commemorating this historic event, and I'm happy that the street price is set to be in line with current 442s. Last, I'm very that they're doing all that and donating part of the proceeds to the SAF. Thank you for running with this Mr. Gresham, and thank you for making this revolver S&W.

22-rimfire
July 21, 2008, 09:06 AM
Sounds like a great gun raffle piece.

Drgong
July 21, 2008, 11:52 AM
Was thinking the same thing, would be a good gun for a Lodge or Church group to raffle off.

Psywarrior13
July 21, 2008, 11:59 AM
Every resident of DC should buy one and register it:D

Guillermo
July 21, 2008, 12:41 PM
Please leave the lock / no lock banter out. Open another thread for it.

Respectfully disagree. We should not allow any S&W thread not have something about the repugnant lock.

The squeeky wheel gets the grease.

Matt-J2
July 21, 2008, 01:06 PM
Posting on an internet forum completely fails at qualifying as a squeaky wheel in the eyes of a company like S&W.

I wouldn't even bet my belly button lint that the decision makers at S&W even know this forum exists, let alone read anything here.

Guillermo
July 21, 2008, 01:17 PM
I wouldn't even bet my belly button lint that the decision makers at S&W even know this forum exists, let alone read anything here.


This is the best forum for gun people on the internet.

With this in mind, your opinion speaks to your underlying belief that the decision makers at S&W are not gun people.

It is very sad that you are probably right.

Matt-J2
July 21, 2008, 01:44 PM
There is that, yes.
I've also learned from other hobbies of mine that the powers that be get tired of having to wade through all the nonsense posts in order to find that gold nugget of a good post, so they stop bothering with net forums on the whole.

For instance, one post explaining, in a well thought out, well written and logical manner, why one dislikes the IL, is worth vastly more than 37,000 posts that simply state the lock is disliked. Sure, those 37,000 posts let someone know here may be an issue, but they why is the important part. Otherwise, it's equal to little more than disliking the color blue, purely an emotional/irrational reaction.

What's worth even more is a hand written(or typed) letter that is physically mailed in. Thirty-seven thousand of those would be even better. ;)

Tom Servo
July 21, 2008, 04:05 PM
This is a really nice idea, and I'm glad it's S&W doing it.

I'm not concerned with the lock so much as I am the choice of gun. Granted, there's nothing wrong with the 442 (I have one), but we're talking about a gun that celebrates a major 2nd Amendment victory.

That clearly calls for an N-Frame :)

For residents of the District, handguns are exclusively home-defense guns by law, so let's get S&W to do a commemorative .44.

Even better, since it's been just over 100 years, how about making a commemorative .44 Special Hand Ejector, maybe even a triple lock?

Guillermo
July 21, 2008, 04:36 PM
Matt,

I say keep the fire stoked.

You say that it is pointless and inhibits the enjoyment of related conversations

While I have no evidence to suggest that you are incorrect, I subscribe to the theory that even though it is an inefficient, and probably losing effort, we have to keep sweeping back at the dirty tide. For giving up is worse than losing.

Let us agree to respectfully disagree.

Cougfan2
July 21, 2008, 04:40 PM
They should make a LadySmith version and send one to Sarah Brady. Upon receipt her head will promptly explode!!! :D

Guillermo
July 21, 2008, 08:43 PM
They should make a LadySmith version and send one to Sarah Brady

Can't agree with anything called "lady" be associated with Sarah Brady.

I might go along with sending her something in a "bullpup" configuration.

KBintheSLC
July 21, 2008, 08:53 PM
Sometimes things work out, and in this case, it's a home run!

I am as happy about Heller as anyone here, but comments like this concern me. We only won by a single vote, and the weasel gungrabbers are seething with animosity. It is only a matter of time until they attack the constitution again. We cannot allow ourselves to become arrogant over this marginal decision. Who knows, a few years down the road the SCOTUS could swing the other way.

Now back on topic... I think a commemorative revolver is fine and good so long as we remember that the fight to preserve our rights in life is never over.

"It's a journey, not a destination."

Guillermo
July 21, 2008, 10:08 PM
We only won by a single vote

That is absolutely right, 4 members of the court either have distain for the Constitution or are unable to read plain English.

Either way, there is a lot of work left to do

EddieCoyle
July 21, 2008, 10:10 PM
As a career marketing guy, I have to say that this commemorative is just one more indication that S&W really knows what they're doing.

and oh yeah.. locks suck.

ArfinGreebly
July 22, 2008, 01:21 AM
. . . or anything . . .

The lock is abhorrent for two primary reasons:
1) It is often seen as lawyers solving a problem that didn't exist so as to avoid blame for accidents ("Well, we GAVE you a lock; all you had to do was USE it!), hence the "lawyer lock" epithet.
2) It adds another point of failure; a lock that malfunctions is more likely to cause a Failure To Fire and render the gun inoperable than it is to permit unwanted firing when it fails.
3) Oh, one other thing, it's seen as a blemish, an unnecessary interruption of the otherwise clean lines of a fine piece of machinery.

The supposed convenience (obviating the external trigger lock) is overshadowed by the discomforting fact that this lock is -- unlike an external device -- always present, since it's part of the gun, meaning that -- unlike the external device -- you can't leave the lock and key at home. You must now carry the key to the gun lock at all times when carrying said gun because, should the lock ever engage unbidden, the absence of the key awards you a pistol-shaped paperweight.

Actually, shouldn't we have seat belt locks? I mean, what if little Johnny disconnects his seat belt while riding in the back seat. Suddenly, he's at risk (remember, you're going to have an accident) and you can't reach him to fasten it. But wait! Our legal team has the answer! An integrated seat belt lock to prevent unwanted and unexpected opening of the belt.

Gawd, we are SO brilliant.

Guillermo
July 22, 2008, 01:25 AM
amen Arfin
amen

FCFC
July 24, 2008, 01:52 AM
Second Amendment Foundation and Smith & Wesson Partner on Commemorative Revolver

The Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) and Smith & Wesson have partnered to create a commemorative revolver designed to recognize the historical significance of the District of Columbia vs. Heller decision and to acknowledge the six original plaintiffs that united to challenge the gun ban in Washington, D.C.

As part of the project, an engraved Smith & Wesson Model 442 revolver will be presented to each of the six plaintiffs - Shelly Parker, Tom Palmer, Gillian St. Lawrence, Tracey Ambeau, George Lyon and Dick Heller - for their key roles in working to protect the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms. The commemorative revolver is available for consumer purchase and Smith & Wesson will direct a portion of the proceeds to the Second Amendment Foundation to acknowledge the organization's pivotal role in the Heller case and its ongoing efforts to preserve the Second Amendment rights of U.S. citizens.

The Smith & Wesson Model 442 will be laser engraved with an insignia to commemorate the ruling by the Supreme Court. On the right side plate of the revolver, the scale of justice is depicted with the wording "D.C. vs. Heller" across the scale. The balance is in favor of the "Heller" name with the court date of "June 26, 2008" positioned across the top. Underneath the scale, the side plate reads "Second Amendment" and "The right to keep and bear arms" in white lettering.

Product Number: 150505

MSRP: $575.00

Guntalk
July 24, 2008, 09:17 AM
Ooops. See below.

Guntalk
July 24, 2008, 09:23 AM
S&W tells me the actual selling price will be under $500.

That "affordable" price was a big reason for choosing this model.

Of course . . . . if you really hate the lock, order a Model 40 and pay for them to laser engrave the same info on it. I have no idea if they would do it, but it's worth asking.

Cosmoline: Thanks for the catch on "V" rather than "VS" in the case name. I passed that along to S&W. This whole thing was done in a matter of days, which is unheard of. A new model usually takes 6 to 12 months at S&W. It was frantic, to say the least.

Guillermo
July 24, 2008, 10:20 AM
Wow Tom,

It must be nice to have the ear of gun manufacturers. We civilians canít even get them to answer an email. I sent a very respectful letter to your buddies at Smith & Clinton asking a legitimate question and nothing back.

Of course they count on you guys to promote them. They obviously could not care less about the dumb-mass customers. It is especially such now that they have virtually no competition in the upper end of the revolver market.

Thaddeus Jones
July 24, 2008, 10:28 AM
Guntalk - Since you "have their ear", how about pointing out to them how fast the lock free 642's they released sold out, and how much their lock is despised. :barf:

Ask them to give us a choice, and make some money for themselves.

rino451
July 24, 2008, 12:13 PM
My wife get's the deals for S&W via e-mail ans she sent me this one. The first thing I said to her was that the darn lock will probably be a deal killer. There are a lot of Pro-2nd/anti-lock people who speak/vote with their $'s.

ETA I think it'd make a sweet carry piece if not for the lock. I've been eyeing my wife's 640 for a while now.

researchdoc
July 24, 2008, 12:25 PM
Good thing this is in a revolver.. otherwise no one in DC would be able to have it.

Guntalk
July 24, 2008, 06:11 PM
Guillermo: What is your legitimate question for S&W?

Thaddeus: I "have the ear" only because these are my friends and people I work with in this industry. I sure don't tell them what to do, and they don't ask me what they should do.

I don't have to fight with lawyers on every decision (though there was some of that on this project), and I don't have to worry about the tight restrictions on a publicly-traded company.

I'm just guessing that it would be a mistake to imagine that S&W does not know how some people feel about the locks. That opinion has been expressed.

Only they will be able to make decisions on what they will do relative to that issue.

BTW, I know for a fact that 150 of the "Second Amendment Foundation" 442 revolvers just shipped!

Cosmoline
July 24, 2008, 06:12 PM
Cosmoline: Thanks for the catch on "V" rather than "VS" in the case name. I passed that along to S&W. This whole thing was done in a matter of days, which is unheard of. A new model usually takes 6 to 12 months at S&W. It was frantic, to say the least.

Thanks!

bulbboy
July 24, 2008, 07:12 PM
Thanks Tom!

Thanks for getting this going - I don't see the other naysayers doing anything but complaining

W.E.G.
July 24, 2008, 07:26 PM
Sounds like a great idea, but with poor execution.

That snubby .38 in the picture is the quintessential carry piece.

The Heller decision stands far in the distance from anything having to do with the right to carry.

Further, Heller filed his suit based on being denied his attempt at registering a 9-shot .22 buntline revolver.

Call me a spoil-sport, but geez - talk about casting a starlet to play the role of a real-life plain-jane!

JCMAG
July 24, 2008, 08:32 PM
Man! I just bought a 442 a month ago! Where is my time machine??

Guillermo
July 24, 2008, 11:58 PM
Tom,

The way you asked it sounds as though you would consider forwarding my query. What a nice gentlemanly offer. I thank you.

I will respectfully decline. Over the last month I have changed my mind and will not be making the purchase that I was contemplating.

Once again, I am appreciative of your kindness.

Guntalk
July 25, 2008, 12:04 AM
Yeah, I know it's not the perfect home defense gun. I know it's a carry piece.

But . . . it's a gun many people want and will buy. It's a gun that's affordable. It's actually a gun many people will carry. It's a gun which will generate money for the upcoming court battles.

And don't think for a minute that the decision has nothing to do with carry. It has to do with every aspect of gun rights and gun laws, as everyone will see over the coming years.

All the talk of "well it didn't do much" is so silly and uninformed as to be laughable. Want to ban "assault weapons?" I don't think that will be possible on the national level, because of this decision. Want to ban "Saturday Night Specials?" Same thing.

And on, and on, and on.

Of course, it's going to take 10 years to get a handle on it, and 20 years to really lock it down, but that's what happened with Brown v. Board of Education.

Me? I think it's a neat gun, and a wonderful expression of approval. I'm going to buy a couple.

Old School
July 25, 2008, 12:33 AM
GunTalk says:
Me? I think it's a neat gun, and a wonderful expression of approval.
+1

If you enjoyed reading about "New Heller Commemorative S&W" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!