S&W Boycott, Now I'm confused..

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sorry, 2.5, but that argument has been tried many times before, and it's as effective now as it was then.

S&W is not some poor, abused hostaged forced by the Big Bad Clintonistas to hand over their ATM numbers at the point of a gun.

S&W's management at that time entered into the agreement willingly, and if you believe some accounts, even sought out the governemnt instead of the other way around.

S&W's current management inherited the agreement when they bought the company.

They were concerned enough to work toward getting the agreemnt with Boston dropped, and yet have done nothing to break the agreement with the Federal government.

S&W has a rather unique opportunity, which they're wasting. An Attorney General who has said, in writing, that the Second Amendment is an individual, not collective, right.

A President who, while not the best gun friend we've ever had in office, certainly isn't the worst.

And a Congress that's, at the moment, largely amenable to our side.

What's S&W waiting for?

President Hillary Clinton?

Time's now, folks. If S&W doesn't take advantage of this opportunity in history, that Agreement is going to end up being shoved down the throats of every gun owner in this nation, even the ones who see its dangers now and have to courage to stand up for their rights, not just the millions of johnny-come-blindly's who will come out of the woodwork and raise a fuss only AFTER it's too late.
 
The bad guys aren't S&W.
Click to expand...
Spoken like someone who hasn't read the agreement...which intended nothing less than instituting fascism in the firearms industry.

If any other companies had been foolish enough to sign, we'd be crying about having to buy "smart" guns and wishing for the good ol' days.

I'm with Mike and pax and lots of others on this one...no new S&Ws for me; not until the agreement is formally and publicly repudiated.
 
Pax, we aren't writing about someone out to kill you.
Click to expand...
No, we are writing about someone out to kill my rights -- which is worse.

The bad guys aren't S&W. It was the clinton administration.
Click to expand...
Okay, the bad guys were the folks in the Clinton administration. So?

It doesn't matter whether the folks at S&W are actually to blame for placing their own behavior, or whether the Clintons made them do it.

Of course every Right Thinking Gun Owner hates the Clinton adminstration and wants to blame everything bad that has happened in the last century on the evil, conniving wackos who inhabited the White House a few years back.

But it doesn't matter.

It ain't about the reasons and it ain't about who's to blame and it ain't about the Clintons, the British, the other gun manufacturers who haven't always been our friends either. It ain't about any of that stuff. It is about the agreement.

The agreement has the force of law to people who haven't even signed the durn thing. We can't repeal it, 'cause it ain't a law. We can't vote out the slimes who signed it, because half the signatories already landed on their keisters and the other half ain't politicians.

The only thing that matters now is that the agreement is still alive. If the agreement doesn't die, it will be enforced just as soon as the elephants step out of the White House.

The agreement is the guy with the knife. I don't care how he got here, I don't care why he's here. I do care that I and my rights survive the encounter.

Capiche?

pax

"If someone has a gun and is trying to kill you, it would be reasonable to shoot back with your own gun." -- The Dalai Lama, (May 15, 2001, The Seattle Times) speaking at the "Educating Heart Summit" in Portland, Oregon, when asked by a girl how to react when a shooter takes aim at a classmate.
 
my two cents...

To start with...Boycotting S & W won't work - it's all lip service. People who want a new in box reliable revolver will choose the weapon they feel will be most effective and relaible when the time comes to use it...regardless of any political stance by some
internet guru.

e.g. How many people treasure nazi proofed and communist proofed arms? These old and new 'gun manufacturers' are not interested in your rights...yet they are imported and bought by the truckloads. Seems nobody is boycotting ak's - even though they killed americans by the truckload - literally; or norinco...even though they are from a communist country which doesn't have rights like ours, or skb or browning or other japanese manufacturers...hell they can't even own a sword there....

Also, S&W...made a poor business decision. But they didn't initiate it. I mean, they didn't say - how can we undermine the rights of Americans...i know...promulgate this contract. They made a decision for the survival of the company. Many firearms companies do this already...look at the ugly safety locks on remingtons, the new ones on beretta, the ones on taurus etc. Yea they didn't 'sign' a contract...but they are playing the same game none the less. I don't hear any boycott about these w/ the exception of ruger - a company that is doing pretty well.

In addition...any failure of S&W is simply another success story for the anti-gunners. Imagine, putting a company out of business that made the .22 rimfire, the .357. A company w/ over 100 years of firearms manufacturing. Gee, that's smart...lets boycott Beretta next because the anti gunners suggest them selling us locks w/ their pistols. Then we can knock another icon of the block.

Lastly, for a boycott to work...which I don't support. The boycott should put the onus on gun owners to pressure the smith and wesson distributors. They would feel that. In other words...march down to your nearest firearms store displaying a S&W...new used who cares...place your boxes of ammo, holsters, new weapon purchases, or sporting goods by the register and then meekly say, "Oh i see you still sell S&W, despite the political controversy which surounds them. I'm sorry, I can't purchase anything from this store until you no longer deal with that company." Then leave.

In short, the anti-gunners are making huge strides amongst the gun owners by empowering us to eat our own. We should probably be ashamed. In the end, we will all lament the loss of S&W if they were to fold by this fanciful boycott. The real culprit resided in the white house...he is gone. S&W is making strides to correct their mistakes....animated persons boycott them regardless...nobody is boycotting cigars, Monica Lewinsky had her own TV show, Wild Bill is dropping hints of constitution reform for a possible 3rd run...hell has indeed frozen over.

v/r,
L.W.
 
I believe your points are well taken LW, but it will be lost on many here. They are too fixated on S&W's destruction of our Constitutional rights to allow common sense to weigh in.
I’ve been a member of TFL & THR (TFL jr.) for some time, and have come to believe that there is/has been an air of anti-Smith & Wesson here/there for some time amongst a core group. My opinion, of course. ;)
 
I can't imagine how any gun owner who has read and understood the agreement can support S&W.

DO YOU GET THAT IF (WHEN) THIS AGREEMENT IS ENFORCED, YOU WILL LOSE A SIGNIFICANT PORTION OF YOUR GUN RIGHTS!!!???

The agreement has to be dissolved...or we WILL lose, without any laws passed or votes counted.

WHAT DON"T YOU PEOPLE UNDERSTAND?

:confused:
:cuss:
 
"To start with...Boycotting S & W won't work - it's all lip service."

Actually, it would work if more people had a sense about their rights, Leaky.

What is TRULY lip service is the lip service that so many gun owners are giving S&W -- "they're not to be blamed..." "they shoudn't be held responsible," "the agreement doesn't endanger our rights..."

THAT'S lip service of the worst kind, the kind. It's the kind that has the same person saying "I don't care about the agreement," in one breath, and "I care about my Second Amendment rights," in the next.

Sorry, but they're positions that are at opposite ends of the spectrum, in complete opposition.

"How many people treasure nazi proofed and communist proofed arms?"

We've played this game before, and it's still a smokescreen.

Please point to the map and show me where Nazi Germany is today.

Oops, that's right, they were crushed out of existence 50 years ago.

Communist arms? Last time I looked, the Soviet Union and most of its satellite states are now under the heading of FORMER Communist states.

Even China is making inroads towards a quasi-capitalist economic system. And even so, the purchase of firearms from China doesn't fall into the same league.

Britain and France also don't have rights like ours, either. Do you also have problems with them?

"Also, S&W...made a poor business decision. But they didn't initiate it. I mean, they didn't say - how can we undermine the rights of Americans...i know...promulgate this contract."

Uhm... Yes, they certainly DID initiate it. While S&W representatitives were sitting on a council of firearms companys working to adopt a unified front against both government action and lawsuits, S&W was going behind the entire industry's back to deal with the Federal government.

"look at the ugly safety locks on remingtons, the new ones on beretta, the ones on taurus etc."

This isn't about safety locks. I don't know why people insist on thinking it is.

Go read the agreement again.

Pay close attention to the sections that agree to give the Federal Government SIGNIFICANT control of the company via a council.

Pay close attention to the marketing restrictions that S&W would, as an agent of the Federal government, require of its dealers, such as no selling LEGAL full-capacity magazines for LEGAL firearms.

Those are just two of the onerous provisions, but they're not the only ones.

By extension, the issue of internal locks isn't even a blip on the radar, except for those who don't understand the agreemnt.


"In addition...any failure of S&W is simply another success story for the anti-gunners."

We've discussed this many times before, as well.

The Government and anti-gunner's agenda was to get EVERY firearms manufacturer doing business in the United States to sign this agreement.

So far, Smith & Wesson is the ONLY one.

If we lose S&W, sure, that's a tragic thing. But it's a victory if that loss keeps other manufacturers from signing the agreement.

And for the anti-gunners?

The loss of a single company is a phyrric victory at the very best, because now the ONLY company that agreed to abide by the agreement is gone. They're starting over at ground zero.

At least before, they and their agreement had a foot in the door of the industry.

"The boycott should put the onus on gun owners to pressure the smith and wesson distributors. They would feel that. In other words...march down to your nearest firearms store displaying a S&W...new used who cares...place your boxes of ammo, holsters, new weapon purchases, or sporting goods by the register and then meekly say, "Oh i see you still sell S&W, despite the political controversy which surounds them. I'm sorry, I can't purchase anything from this store until you no longer deal with that company." Then leave."

I urge you to visit www.thefiringline.com and read my messages on this subject.

I've stopped doing business with companies that still sell S&W products, and have let them know.

I've urged my friends to purchase from those shops that do NOT sell S&W products, and let the other shops and dealers know why.

I've also successfully talked a number of people into purchasing other firearms, or from other dealers, for the reasons I've stated above.

I fully agree with you on this -- the boycott should be mult-pronged.

Unfortunately, though, I'll admit that it has lost momentum.

From the initial successes in the days after S&W signed the agreement the boycott has slacked considerably.

People have bought into the theory that when S&W was sold, the agreement somehow died.

Nothing could be farther from the truth.

When S&W worked with the city of Boston to break that agreement, another segment of people assumed that meant the Federal agreement died then. Again, nothing could be farther from the truth.

Finally, the National Rifle Association once again sold out gun owners by letting S&W back into the fold with absolutely no movement by S&W on the Federal agreement at all.

I suspect, but can't prove, that NRA was the recipient of a bunch of S&W's blood money.

The day of reckoning is coming.

The day when representatitves of the Federal government, headed by an anti-gun President and fronted by an anti-gun Congress, will be sitting in a controlling position at S&W, just as the agreement states that they will.

And, when that day comes, American gun owners will once again prove themselves to be a day late and dollar short in protecting their rights.

To paraphrase Winston Churchill, the friend of my enemy is my enemy.

That's pretty close to the truth here.
 
They are too fixated on S&W's destruction of our Constitutional rights to allow common sense to weigh in.
Click to expand...
Frenchy,

Constitutional rights still matter. They aren't obsolete and they aren't up for sale to the highest bidder.

If that means I lack common sense, so be it.
To start with...Boycotting S & W won't work - it's all lip service. People who want a new in box reliable revolver will choose the weapon they feel will be most effective and relaible when the time comes to use it...regardless of any political stance by some internet guru.
Click to expand...
Leaky Waders,

The basis of your entire argument is, "It's hopeless because gun owners don't actually give a pile of belly button lint about our rights. The only thing they care about is being able to buy a good wheelgun and to Hades with the consequences."

Oddly, when Mike Irwin expressed a similar sentiment (but in gentler language than I did), folks on the other side jumped on him for being disrespectful. :D

The rest of your points expressed a fundamental misunderstanding as to the reason behind the boycott. Let me explain it again: The boycott is not about killing the company. It isn't about the company at all, in fact. It has nothing to do with why the company did what it did. It has nothing to do with who owns the company. It has nothing to do with what other companies have done in other situations. It has nothing to do with foreign policy, with communism, or with the availability of trigger locks. It doesn't have anything to do with those things.

The boycott is about killing the agreement, which has the force of law against people and companies which never agreed to be bound by it. The agreement is an end run around the law, and its terms are a Not A Good Thing for gun owners.

Unless it is killed now, the despicable thing will be enforced as soon as the donkeys get into the White House again.

When that happens, gun owners who only care about getting a good wheelgun will be shocked at what happens to their guns and their dealers. They will start whining about the good old days before the agreement went into effect. They won't be able to do a condemned-to-the-Netherworld thing about it then, though.

But asking gun owners to do something about it now, while we still can, is somehow against common sense. :confused: Pardon me, but I don't buy that argument.

pax

It is interesting to hear certain kinds of people insist that the citizen cannot fight the government. This would have been news to the men of Lexington and Concord, as well as the Mujahedeen in Afghanistan. -- Jeff Cooper
 
Oh, er, ...

<moderator hat on>
Some of the posts in this thread have skirted right on the very edge of personal attacks.

That ain't allowed, folks.

Attack the arguments, not the arguer.
</moderator hat off>

pax
 
Not attacking anyone...I think that we can all agree here that someone that would knowingly and willingly support giving up their own human rights are dispicable.

Before we continue, do we all agree on that point?
 
Why not boycott the justice department..they signed it too didn't they?

My argument about the boycott is that I wonder if S&W even realize they are boycotted? I mean ya...some people tyrade on the net about the dreaded boycott...but sales continue. Why? Because S&W makes a fine revolver and...because S&W isn't really in some coup to overthrow the second amendmant.

So my point is...the Clinton administration has probably (I'm no lawyer) overstepped their authority by coercing a manufacturer into signing a non-constitutional agreement. And, we as John Q Public are like....ok let's stone the person coerced by the government. It's really ridiculous.

It's kind of like the cia coming to your house and saying...we've been watching you...you wear blujeans everyday. We are making a contract for you to wear a dress. If you don't sign the contract and raise your hem-line then we'll deplete all your money from your bank accounts by you having to hire expensive trial lawyers. Sure, we know that you're in between jobs, but we're pressing you now anyways...because we want a new fashion movement. So after much fretting you sign the damn agreement, you don't shave your legs or anything but you put on some moo moo and get your newspaper. The headline is that the rest of the neighborhood is going to stone you at dawn for being a transvestite. They don't care if you were coerced. They don't care if you're wearing heals or pursuing less expensive ways to fight the government. They just look to you as someone who wants everyone to wear dresses. In scotland - where kilts are the rage - you'd be a hero...here youre a scapegoat. The other people who made the contract and signed the contract are let off scot free (pun intended).

If you feel that the NRA and S&W and Ruger are really and truly trying to debase your second amendment rights. Then go ahead..boycott them. Then, when there is no more classic gun companies making quality arms we can all carry around our commy made norincos thinking about how we patriotically saved the second amendment by forcing the american companies to die in our vain attempts to effect change.

There's a better way to end this thing w/o killing the victim. I don't know how....but there's got to be a little more commonsense than this...a boycot. It is indeed ridiculous.

v/r,
LW

PS All bleeding stops :)

PSS It's just my opinion...I have no problem w/ any arms maker...including S&W. Call me an anomaly.
 
It's almost as if some people think we're a breath away from being marched off to concentration camps. You really want to punish those responsible? QUIT PAYING YOUR INCOME TAX. I DARE those here complaining the loudest about federal quashing of rights to stop paying taxes. I dare them to make out their W-2s so that they wind up owing taxes and then DON'T PAY IT. It's easy to be that patriotic crusader by not buying a handgun most probably wouldn't buy anyway. Not so easy to face federal prison for those same beliefs. The Patriot Act is financed by YOUR tax dollars. Gun control and the AWB is financed by YOUR tax dollars. Until thse folks refuse to pay taxes, I conclude it's easy to look like a freedom fighter boycotting a product. But it's another thing to actually prove it.

Make mine a Smith.
 
There's a better way to end this thing w/o killing the victim.
Click to expand...

Leaky, S&W was in no way a victim in any of this, aside from being a victim of their own decision to sell out gun owners.

They certainly weren't forced.

No offence, but you really should read up on some of this before commenting. Does S&W know about the boycott? Yeah, they sold a company they paid 112 million for for 3 mil...A loss they attributed publicly to the boycott that you insinuate they might not have known about. The new owners refuse to denounce or refute the agreement. :rolleyes:

Galahad,

I'm surprised at your response. By your argument, unless I actively refuse to pay taxes, I might as well not even bother with supporting the Second. I'll continue to be a "pathetic crusader" if it means that we continue to make positive changes.
 
Thumper...yes I have...did...done ;)

I've read the agreement, read the arguments and respected yours and others opinions. I just don't feel the coersion of a company by the government merits boycotting of that company.

After all that...I purchased a 686. The only S&W I own...see I voted (with my dollars) to save the company under their new owneship rather than to be one of the monickers who will have to explain to their grandchildren how a company like S&W went belly-up. Still haven't shot it yet...it resides in my gun safe now.

I'm also in the process of renewing my NRA membership and DU membership. See...none of these organizations are perfect. But they have a track record...and it is generally good.

BTW...Bill Clinton and his cronies aren't evil. They are/were doing what they thought was best for the country. Even though we disagree w/ what he did/ordered/coerced...we permitted him to reside for 8 years in the white house. Eventually the supreme court will have to weigh in on all this second amendments stuff...waiting periods, magazine capacity, world gun taxes...whatever. Until then we will fiddle about worried who is plotting to take our rights away.

V/R,
L.W.
 
Leaky, I respect your decision.

I also hope that a Dem White House never gets a chance to take this legally binding agreement for a test drive.

I understand that you realize the ramifications...oh well.
 
Nope, that's not what I said Thumper. What I said was that if you want to cut off funds that go to an enity you feel tramples your rights, then stop paying your taxes. The federal government couldn't care less if you buy a S&W or not. Fienstein and Schumer get paid anyway with your tax dollars. What gets me is the "More 2nd Amendment than thou" BS. "The NRA is a bunch of sell-outs! S&W is a bunch of sell-outs!" Geez, it's freakin' tiring.:rolleyes: My life doesn't revolve around preaching to others why they're a bunch of "traitors" or what-not for buying a S&W or being in the NRA or being happy and not hating the friggin' government as much as the radicals think they ought to.

So, again, you can make a better statement by refusing to pay your income tax. That way, you will be 100% SURE your money will NOT go towards trampling your rights. You can even go so far as claiming "soveriegn citizenship" in not paying your taxes. Anyone can boycott Smith. Even an anti.:D But who has the guts to stand up for what he believes and refuse to pay into what he sees as a tyrannical system? Any takers?
 
Ah, to those involved, so far as I remember, the boycott DID work.

For what price was S&W bought by the brits, and for what was it sold? And to whom, and what was their major product at the time?

Leaky; I try to boycott the government at all times: what does it take to get them to boycott me?

Mike, I like your attitude and lines, but Pax is more logical: the objective is the agreement, no more no less. I think that a lot of people running machining centers could be badly hurt by an effective, post corporate sale, boycott, but that can't enter into the logic when rights are at stake.

That agreement, and most/all of the anti weapons/individual rights laws must go now, peacefully, while we have a good chance. 'cause if they don't, then it's only a matter of time before we all find out just how well we, and our weapons, function.

And that I wish to avoid.

As a final, S&W produces weapons, and so do many others. I seek performance and functionality, and many companies match Smith, at least in revolvers, since, for auto's, damned near anything is as good or better, as far as I'm concerned. I'd like cute, of course, and American made, but I'm most concerned that the bullet launcher does exactly that, and that the round flies to the "same" place every time.

I think we could lose S&W with no significant loss of choice, and agree that the setback to the antigun types would be worth the effort.
 
Galahad, I see what you're trying to say, but:

I think I make a better statement by picking battles that are currently winnable...come to think of it, that might be a workable definition of strategy. Whaddaya think?

;)

We have to work to make this agreement disappear.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

S
  • Locked
This just in from S&W
2
Replies
31
Views
3K
2nd 41
2nd 41
S
  • Locked
Good article on ending the S&W boycott
2
Replies
35
Views
2K
citizen
C
Z
  • Locked
Baby Guns: NRA & S&W Spit in Anti's face's....
Replies
5
Views
832
Balog
B
T
  • Locked
Organizations???
Replies
7
Views
428
spartacus2002
spartacus2002
N
  • Locked
Yes I said it, I'm considering joining NRA
2
Replies
26
Views
2K
BBQLS1
B
Back
Top