S&W defense of the 2A

bdickens said:

And of course you've never made any poor decisions....

30 years ago.

Click to expand...

I have made a great many, what tells you about the person, or company in this case is how you answer for those decisions. Do you stand tall admit your screw up, or run and hide and hope no one ever finds out.

S&W is hoping no one remembers that huge error 30 years ago and is hiding from their screw up. That speaks volumes to me.

Everyone knows I am no real fan of Ruger. I think their QC is garbage. I would by a Ruger over a S&W for one reason, Ruger will admit the screw up, and do what they can to make it correct. S&W is hoping you forget about their mistake and are saying.....hay look at us we are so pro 2A.....now. In a few years when it is clear there will never be a strong person in the WH again, and people have forgotten this entire "America First" thing, what will they do....when pushed it is clear they will bend and not stand tall.

Going with the flow is easy, going against it is where you see the true self.

Obturation said:

That was refreshing to see.
I've been critical of S&W for several years but this makes me want to give them some business . wish all manufacturers would stand up to these demons and tell them like it is.

Click to expand...

And that is why they did it. Not because it is right, but because money. When the left leans on them again what will the do then? Will they stand up to these demons, or will they do what they did before and bend the knee.

I really would like to have been a fly on the wall when this decision was made, I bet they looked real hard at UPS, saw what they won and what they lost with their decision, and went with the money, pure and simple.....it was just one more grain of sand on the scale of stand up or bend that they sold guns. That is really what they do and all they do. UPS moves boxes, so a few fewer boxes no real big deal, how many fewer boxes, don't know, but trust me those numbers exist, I had worked in corp america long enough to know that. With S&W it was a fist full of sand, and the scale moved and the decision was made, UPS was a grain of sand and the scale moved the other way.

I think I am done here, looks like time will tell what the bottom line is. Not real sure your vote matters anymore, but that is all us little people have, so you better do it.

Need to procure customers!

And satisfy both the bottom line and loyal shareholders

bdickens said:

Yep. And Whataburger put mayonnaise on my dad's hamburger back in the 80s....

Click to expand...

I believe there is a difference between accidental mayo on a burger and forcing everyone to have mayo on a burger.

Here is another question that I haven’t seen asked or answered; are the same people who ran S&W then when those decisions were made the same people who are running it now?

If so, they are windsocks blowing whichever way the wind blows.

If not, maybe they are trying to right a past wrong and take a stance others chose not to take nearly thirty years ago?

Again, I’m not in the boardroom, so I don’t know the answer. Maybe someone here does.

Stay safe.

Good for Smith & Wesson, it isn't easy to take a stance against some of your big government customers in anti rkba states.

So please remind me; when we boycott all of the Firearm manufacturers who have complied with anti-second amendment laws, or sell guns to law enforcement in anti-rkba states like California, New York etc, and they go out of business... who will be left to sell civilians firearms?

Firearms are a very small business sector that faces huge numbers or regulations and laws that vary from One state to another, in addition to federal laws.

tarosean said:

I believe there is a difference between accidental mayo on a burger and forcing everyone to have mayo on a burger.

Click to expand...

No one has forced anything. You can just as well choose not to use that stupid lock
like 99.9% of everyone else or you can continue to carry a grudge against a company for decades - long after the people who you think did you dirty are gone.

You people are amazing. Here comes Congress issuing subpoenas and demanding that firearms manufacturers answer for the problems that politicians cause but S&W's current management tells them to go pound sand and throws it back in Congress' face where it belongs.

But you people would rather cling tightly to your precious 30-year-old grudge.

Taurus has the very same kind of internal lock gizmo. But somehow theirs is not a threat to the Second Amendment but Smith and Wesson's is. Meanwhile, there are actual threats to the 2A.

I know that logic and clear thinking is hard, but y'all really ought to try it out some time. Trust me, it gets easier with practice.

Oh, and the link referenced early about all the horrible, terrible, no good things that S&W "bowed down to the Clinton Administration" over? Anyone with critical thinking skills can read that and see that what S&W agreed to was basically a laundry list of nothing. Typical idiot political talking point nonsense with no meaning.

bdickens said:

You people are amazing.

But you people

Click to expand...

Wowza. Perhaps you need to take a breath, count to ten and look up what Devils Advocate means.

For the record. I have Zero interest in any gun with an internal lock as it's extra parts that can effect the reliability. No political slants.

tarosean said:

Wowza. Perhaps you need to take a breath, count to ten and look up what Devils Advocate means.

For the record. I have Zero interest in any gun with an internal lock as it's extra parts that can effect the reliability. No political slants.

Click to expand...

I own a couple of S&W revolvers with the locks because these models weren't made until after the lock came about. I plugged the H' hole and moved on...and I've had no "grudge" as some would assume.
Some people just don't get the gist that S&W can easily correct a past mistake by simply removing a lock that is not required or needed. And now would be the perfect time to do it.

mope540 said:

Some people just don't get the gist that S&W can easily correct a past mistake by simply removing a lock that is not required or needed.

Click to expand...

Maybe, but 30 years from now, some people on a message board on some kind of futuristic social media might still be whining about S&Ws having "H' holes" once upon a time.

I've always liked S&W and believe that their revolvers are of the quality I desire. I own two S&W revolvers, a nickel Model 19 with 4 inch barrel (which is my only gun that I feel has sentimental value for me) and a much newer 642 airweight. I would not part with either gun even if I were forced to drastically reduce my gun possessions. My only gripe with S&W is with their unaffiliated S&W forum that kicked me off for life for supposedly violating their prohibition on making political remarks.

Riomouse911 said:

I have, literally, a pile of gun locks at home. Every new gun I buy comes with one. Even if I buy a used gun without a factory-supplied lock and bring one in when I pick it up, some dealers make you buy another one anyway. Now I go home with a gun and two locks.

Click to expand...

I discovered quite sometime ago that those locks fit fine in the trash container. Is it against the law to throw away a useless lock In Kali?

I like S&W revolvers but for some reason there are only two in my safe. If I could find a nice one in 22 rimfire there would be three, lock or no lock.

doubleh said:

I discovered quite sometime ago that those locks fit fine in the trash container. Is it against the law to throw away a useless lock In Kali?

I like S&W revolvers but for some reason there are only two in my safe. If I could find a nice one in 22 rimfire there would be three, lock or no lock.

Click to expand...

I use them as trailer tongue locks, bike locks, the larger Ruger locks fit great on the cables I lock my fuel cans up at races, I gave several of them away, and I still have a pile left over. Maybe some will head to the great round file in the side yard.

Stay safe.

tarosean said:

Wowza. Perhaps you need to take a breath, count to ten and look up what Devils Advocate means.

For the record. I have Zero interest in any gun with an internal lock as it's extra parts that can effect the reliability. No political slants.

Click to expand...

Since their warranty and customer service blows ass at this point, do what I did. Remove it and service it yourself. As an aside, I do hear many commercials by them on radio, and do appreciate them.

Riomouse911 said:

Maybe some will head to the great round file in the side yard.

Click to expand...

Sometimes I wish I was more like that. I'm more than a bit of a "hoarder" though. Consequently, we have gun padlocks stored in the tops of closets in the boxes they came in in the first place, desk drawers and gun safes - just in case we might "need" them someday. That's the way us "hoarders" look at things.

Riomouse911 said:

I use them as trailer tongue locks, bike locks, the larger Ruger locks fit great on the cables I lock my fuel cans up at races, I gave several of them away, and I still have a pile left over. Maybe some will head to the great round file in the side yard.

Stay safe.

Click to expand...

Good ideas that I hadn't thought of before. Thank you, sir.

jmorris said:

Not really but I also remember when they got in bed with Bill Clinton and Andrew Cuomo.

Click to expand...

We gots short memories. S&W was reviled.

DustyGmt said:

I would be willing to bet there are different folks running the show at S&W now as opposed to almost 3 decades ago.... I'm pretty sure Bill Ruger hadn't even been embalmed by the time Ruger decided to sell 20-30 rd magazines and completely disregard his whole philosophy of "no honest man needing more than 10rds" and distance themselves from his anti remarks, etc.....

I think S&W's current management and handling of the situation is favorable to us in the pro 2A community, whatever happened 30 years ago is pretty much irrelevant, no? I think whether a company is acting out of pure self interest (they are) is also irrelevant, it's either beneficial to our cause or isn't, this time it was.

Click to expand...

Could very well be, I hope it is. But until I see it a time or two I will hold my current views.

tarosean said:

Wowza. Perhaps you need to take a breath, count to ten and look up what Devils Advocate means.

For the record. I have Zero interest in any gun with an internal lock as it's extra parts that can effect the reliability. No political slants.

Click to expand...

Devils Advocate, a movie with Al Pachino and charlize theron....that is the real WOWZA.

I like the stance they took and I believe their argument was reasonable and hard to argue against. But I have to say I really don’t care that much, they are obviously aware one political party will be after them no matter what they say or do, they have learned this from past experiences.
Therefore they really have nothing to lose (other than possibly a lower ESG score) by taking a hard line with the other party, and they are certainly aware their major customer base will also appreciate that kind of rhetoric. It’s really not that big of a deal to pick the side that agrees with you when in an argument.

Does it make me more likely to buy a new S&W, well to honest, probably a little. Unfortunately their is nothing in their current lineup that I want. I think I bought 2 S&W’s over the last year both made before 1980.

The argument about the lock is silly, is it ugly, yep. Is it redundantly pointless, yep. Does it add unnecessary complexities, yep. But do I care they do it, nope. I just want buy one, similarly I want buy a High Point. But going on and on about how terrible it is just seems silly.
It’s not forced, I certainly do not have one and likely never will. Don’t like it, don’t buy it…. Maybe they’ll notice and decide to grab the market of people like me, unfortunately we are apparently not the majority of customers.
But to see the (voluntarily purchased) lock as a 2A issue is just, well the word silly has come up twice already.

"So, tell us again what a lock has to do with the Second Amendment. Try using logic and reason this time."

The "logic and reason" comes from long-term observations of the anti-gun bloc over many decades.

While they have had major successes (NFA 34, GCA68, Sulllivan Act, etc.) they are also active in innumerable small ways such as with magazine capacities, ammunition restrictions, opening of new Parks, wildlife refuges, National Monuments, and other places that become off-limits to hunting, and hence firearms.

These minor things constitute a "choke point" strategy, where now an estimated "20,000" firearms laws exist nation-wide which impede or limit that thing called "firearms freedom."

I can't testify to the accuracy of the "20,000" number, but whatever it is, there are a lot of them... Do you remember when you could simply mail firearms back and forth or sell or gift a firearm to a friend or relative or even a stranger without a 4473? I do. But you can't anymore, since these are more choke points.

That's what that totally unnecessary and occasionally unreliable device has to do with the Second Amendment.

It's part of that long term incremental strategy of the anti-firearms bloc.

To them, the Second Amendment reads, "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed too much and only a little bit at a time, so most people won't catch on to what we're doing."

Terry, 230RN

That's not logic and reason. That's Red Herring.