Even if there is no State law to comply with the manufacturers are worried about lawsuits from stupid people who somehow managed to have an "accident" with one of their guns. This has been going on for a long time. At one point Ruger had close to 46 lawsuits filed against them by stupid people who somehow managed to shoot themselves or a family member with a Ruger product. Lose enough of those lawsuits and you could very well be put out of business. And it's not just firearms - it's everything you buy today. Ladders. Power tools. Motor vehicles. Even an empty 5 gal. bucket has warning stickers on it showing a baby falling into it head first and drowning. We are becoming too dumb for our own good. Any civil attorney will tell you - business IS GOOD!!!
S&W Revolver Internal Locks?
- Thread starter G11354
- Start date
- Status
Rollis R. Karvellis
Member
From my earlier post. (#39)
''If your firearm has not malfunctioned it has not been shot enough.''
This is not directed only to IL S&W's, but to every firearm ever produced including that one on your hip right now.
''If your firearm has not malfunctioned it has not been shot enough.''
This is not directed only to IL S&W's, but to every firearm ever produced including that one on your hip right now.
Well, I ordered an M&P 340 CT early this week and I sure hope that it has no internal safety lock on it. I ordered it through Buds during all these holidays. I've been reading on various threads where some people have been getting them without the locks. Since every handgun I've ordered through Bud's has been absolutely new, I am hoping that Smith has simply quit putting the locks on the M&P 340 altogether. I guess I won't know until I go pick it up...
Zaydok Allen
Member
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2011
- Messages
- 13,274
It references an old thread, but see post 11.
old lady new shooter
Member
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2015
- Messages
- 30,776
Can somebody please explain what problems can occur from the lock being on the gun if it is never used? Also, what is the "plug" some posts referenced?
RealGun
Member
S&W 60 Pro with ILS Plug
The Plug is right above the cylinder release.
The Plug is right above the cylinder release.
Sam1911
Moderator Emeritus
Some owners have reported that the lock occasionally turned when the gun recoiled so all of a sudden the gun was locked and they had to find the key and unlock it to keep shooting. And that might be inconvenient if you're using it at that moment to defend yourself.
The lock can be disabled or removed in a couple of ways. The most comprehensive removal leaves a hole in the side of the frame and you can buy a little covering plug to close it up.
old lady new shooter
Member
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2015
- Messages
- 30,776
Thanks Sam.
Looks like there is a silver lining to the fact that I haven't yet gotten to the gunsmith to have the tritium sights installed, I can ask him to remove the lock at the same time.
Mine barely recoils but I'd rather be safe than sorry.
old lady new shooter
Member
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2015
- Messages
- 30,776
Thanks, I figured that's where it would go but didn't realize that to really be safe the lock would have to be removed.The Plug is right above the cylinder release.
You guys are the best.
It's been a while since I've even given it a second thought, but as I recall, you only need to remove the flag that's between the hammer and the lock to functionally disable it, and the flag simply lifts off once the hammer's removed. The part that fills the hole is held in place, so it can stay. Replacing that part with a plug is largely cosmetic.
BSA1
member
Don't be surprised if a gunsmith refuses to remove the internal lock due to concerns about liability.
Sam1911
Moderator Emeritus
I've never heard of a gunsmith having a problem with removing a key lock from a gun. That's not in the same class as disabling a safety. But who knows? Stranger things have happened.
Fortunately, it's pretty easy to do the job yourself.
Fortunately, it's pretty easy to do the job yourself.
Zaydok Allen
Member
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2011
- Messages
- 13,274
Oh I see what you mean Waveski. Yeah that's a different question really.
RealGun
Member
The S&W fanboy forums dwell more on hating locks and worshipping old guns than current production issues with the guns. It is so tiresome. They just can't let it go and have to qualify nearly every comment to assure they are with the lock hate program. The rest have learned not to bring it up and push any buttons.
Smith & Wesson's internal lock is something like lightning.
While it is possible that you could be hit by lightning, it is also highly improbable that you will be.
So some folks ask themselves, "is this a feature that I will need and use, or simply another devise that's included but is of little or no importance to me?"
If the answer is, "No - it's something I won't use and don't need, but might add another (very unlikely) possibility of a way to disable my defensive revolver - then no, I don't want it."
One of the advantages of a revolver is the simplicity of its action, that is unlikely to get out of order and/or fail at a critical time. Adding unnecessary parts to the mechanism which in any way reduces reliability is unwise, no matter how remote the possibility/probability may be.
For that (and other reasons) I have avoided buying S&W revolvers that have the internal lock, and instead buy those that don't have it from the used gun market.
However my views do not necessarily apply to others, who may see the lock as a useful way to secure the piece against use by others (especially children), or simply decide that other features offered in these guns effectively offset any risk the internal lock might cause.
So it boils down to a question of individual choice, with both views having several options. Yes or no is not written in stone.
While it is possible that you could be hit by lightning, it is also highly improbable that you will be.
So some folks ask themselves, "is this a feature that I will need and use, or simply another devise that's included but is of little or no importance to me?"
If the answer is, "No - it's something I won't use and don't need, but might add another (very unlikely) possibility of a way to disable my defensive revolver - then no, I don't want it."
One of the advantages of a revolver is the simplicity of its action, that is unlikely to get out of order and/or fail at a critical time. Adding unnecessary parts to the mechanism which in any way reduces reliability is unwise, no matter how remote the possibility/probability may be.
For that (and other reasons) I have avoided buying S&W revolvers that have the internal lock, and instead buy those that don't have it from the used gun market.
However my views do not necessarily apply to others, who may see the lock as a useful way to secure the piece against use by others (especially children), or simply decide that other features offered in these guns effectively offset any risk the internal lock might cause.
So it boils down to a question of individual choice, with both views having several options. Yes or no is not written in stone.
Deanimator
Member
I think the biggest issues with it are:
- The design SUCKS. The descriptions of the observed malfunctions clearly indicate that it's badly designed. It's flimsy and poorly thought out. In addition to locking during firing, they've locked when dropped as well.
- Esthetics simply played no role in the concept. It could have been hidden, or at least put in a less obtrusive place which didn't alter the general shape of the firearm. Of course S&W has made some VERY odd esthetic choices over the past couple of decades. Who thought it was a good idea to move the front sight on the M1917 clones to the end of the barrel? To what end? And what's with the weird sloping front sight on the 4" Thunder Ranch gun(s)?
- The company by all indications has done NOTHING to address ANY objection to the lock, either functional or esthetic.
Because of that, my next NEW revolver would be either a Ruger or a Dan Wesson.
CraigC
Sixgun Nut
Some will, some won't. I know that Bowen absolutely will not. He is extremely liability-conscious, to the point that he won't even remove the warning label from a Ruger barrel. If he does a grip frame conversion on a gun that originally had the lock, the conversion will include re-installing the lock. Even if it incurs extra costs to machine the replacement grip frame to accept it.
bluetopper
Member
I don't bother the S&W locks and they don't bother me. We have a good understanding. Been that way for years now.......629-6, 586-8, two fine handguns in anybody's book.
- Status
