Even if choke point has been shut down bankers will not take any chances for a year or so. One thing that is for certain about banks they are cautious when it comes to regulators.
. Freedom, guns, and happy living go hand in hand, so to lose one of them is usually to lose them all. That's why we're doin' this 
You may know some really old old timers (who remember the time before NFA 1934) or some "sorta" old old timers who were buying guns before 1968, but if you don't you probably don't know anyone who's lived under much more positive gun rights situation than we have today. And some rights we enjoy now (and some of the decisions that have come down from the Courts) actually are more beneficial to us, in some ways, than how things were in the '40s - '60s.
In some ways we have -- in some ways we haven't. Just consider the case of lawful concealed carry. How hard was it to legally carry a handgun in most of the US prior to 1980? Practically impossible for most people. Now, nearly universal "shall issue." That's major change, and it is an important part of swinging society around to our view.
Ive been hearing a lot of bad things about them lately. Their M&P line is WAY OVER RATED and the handguns are awful. I will not support any company who would be so wreckless as to ban possible future products by putting restrictions on a free market.
Im aware of everything you said. Insulting me wont get you very far.
Completely agree.
This sort of thing is often thrown around the gun community. S&W wanted legislation to ban high-cap pistols so they could sell their revolvers. The major manufacturers want bans on surplus guns so they can sell more hunting rifles. The NRA just wants to prolong the fight so they can keep taking people's money -- they aren't really interested in finishing it "once and for all." Machine gun owners don't want to see the Hughes Amendment struck down because that would ruin the value of their gun collections. Remington and Winchester hate the CMP because it takes away their sales. Ruger doesn't care about civilians' 2nd Amendment rights. And on, and on.
)Over-rated is the first thing anyone says when a gun isn't just like whatever they're used to. Honestly the new M&P line is a very well-performing firearm, very capable in a skilled shooter's hands. They've got the occasional problem (so does Glock....and how about those 1911s?!?) but most shooters running them hard don't find them "over-rated."
You should do very careful study into exactly what proof there is that any company has done so ... recently, in it's current iteration ... and analyze how that company is actually doing for/with the shooting community today before you make an unfounded decision to eschew any maker for political misdeeds.
I am not a young kid. I can remember GOA calling for a boycott of smith and wesson products. I can remember S&W shutting down two factories due to the backlash from their political antics. I have to believe it when GOA say boycott S&W. You can stick your head in the sand. That is your right.This sort of thing is often thrown around the gun community. S&W wanted legislation to ban high-cap pistols so they could sell their revolvers. The major manufacturers want bans on surplus guns so they can sell more hunting rifles. The NRA just wants to prolong the fight so they can keep taking people's money -- they aren't really interested in finishing it "once and for all." Machine gun owners don't want to see the Hughes Amendment struck down because that would ruin the value of their gun collections. Remington and Winchester hate the CMP because it takes away their sales. Ruger doesn't care about civilians' 2nd Amendment rights. And on, and on.
Some of these things are based on some nugget of something that was almost true way back whenever or MIGHT have looked "truthy" because if you only think about it with half a brain it sort of looks like something bad might slightly benefit someone on "our side." Old scores are brought up for re-hashing decades down the road by folks who's granddaddy said that ... whatever. Don't believe most of what you hear. (Don't even believe half of what you THINK!
Over-rated is the first thing anyone says when a gun isn't just like whatever they're used to. Honestly the new M&P line is a very well-performing firearm, very capable in a skilled shooter's hands. They've got the occasional problem (so does Glock....and how about those 1911s?!?) but most shooters running them hard don't find them "over-rated."
You should do very careful study into exactly what proof there is that any company has done so ... recently, in it's current iteration ... and analyze how that company is actually doing for/with the shooting community today before you make an unfounded decision to eschew any maker for political misdeeds.
Do they NOW? What is their opinion of Smith & Wesson's current activities and positions? Do you know?
Let's not be silly. I know AT LEAST as well as you the various noteworthy events in gun rights history. How, and weather, I choose to support a company today, for the actions and policies they follow TODAY doesn't mean I'm "sticking my head" anywhere. But refusing to work with/support the current entity operating under that name because of the misdeeds of other people, long dead and gone from that organization might be an indication of such "head sticking."
Yup, and Bill Ruger's deader than Betamax. The company that he used to run sells things and supports things he didn't have the vision to be on board with. So what? How many generations forward do "the sins of the father" follow?
Thank you for attempting to educate ME on gun rights history, but I assure you it isn't necessary. That stuff is (very) old news.
Look, times change, people change, companies change.
