The lock on S&W firearms as well as others were cave in measures to gun control laws.
That's a Blue Sardine.
Honestly, if you can't see the relationship between the mandatory lock and the Second Amendment, there's no point in arguing about it.
I've said my say and I'm done saying it. Thanks to all who can also see the relationship. I do agree with your characterization of the lock as "stupid."
However, since it is stupid, the only reason it is there is to place another choke point on the ownership of firearms. It's rather like requiring all rifling to be 7 groove, 23" twist, left handed. If there's no reason for it, the only conclusion can be that it is another "choke point" because it is an additional expensive requirement on gun makers.
I.e., another nibble at a fundamental right. Y' gotta watch out for those little "inconsequential" nibbles.
Terry, 230RN
I know that clear thinking is hard but you can learn to do it if you practice.
Besides that there is not now, nor has there ever been a law mandating internal locks on
any firearm, one does not "cave in to" laws. One obeys them. Or not. One's choice.
The internal lock you've been wrapped around the axle about for 30 years has nothing to do with the NFA. Nothing to do with the 1968 GCA. Nothing to do with the Brady Bill, the expired AWB or any other gun control law.
Nor does it have anything to do with the Second Amendment. The entire Bill of Rights - including the Second Amendment - only places restrictions on the
government, not on private individuals or businesses.
It has to do with promises of fat .gov contracts at a time when S&W was hurting. Bad.
But that was almost 30 years ago. What really matters is that here today some people in Washington called them up and made ridiculous demands and here today Smith & Wesson told them to go pound sand.
If you people can't understand that, neither I nor anyone else can help you.
I have been holding off but I'm going to go ahead and get this thread locked.
You want to know why the Right keeps losing and the Left keeps winning? The Right is filled with rigid, unforgiving, sanctimonious Pharasees. People who would rather hold on to decades old grudges than win. People who look for motes in others ' eyes.
It is the Right, not the Left that insists on absolute, rigid ideologic purity. The Right, not the Left that refuses to have anything to do with people who those who don't measure up to the same standards of holiness.
It is the Right, not the Left that demands all or nothing.
Well I got news for you, A: nobody's perfect (including you) B: when you insist on all or nothing, what you tend to get is nothing.
Meanwhile, the Left is perfectly willing to accept help wherever it may come from. Even from their enemies.
Meanwhile, the Left is perfectly willing to accept any little partial victory they can get, no matter how small. Even if it is given to them by their Enemies.
And God knows the Right is expert at nothing if not at snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.
The Right will drop a perfectly viable candidate who is almost assured of victory in the grease because he once used intemperate and impious language, saying "we can't vote for someone like
that," while the Left will vote for an outright criminal if they think he or she can win.
30 years ago, S&W agreed to some pretty ridiculous demands. Most of which anyone with critical thinking skills can see were nonsensical, meaningless babble that changed exactly nothing.
Today, S&W said go pound sand. But the Pharisees would rather cling tightly to their precious grudges. Because remaining ideologicaly pure and holy is more important than winning.
