Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Smith & Wesson on VCDL's "Unfreindly to Gun Owners" list

Discussion in 'General Gun Discussions' started by 7mmsavage, Mar 6, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. 7mmsavage

    7mmsavage Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2006
    Messages:
    341
    Location:
    Chesterfield VA.
    I just read this and was suprised and dissapointed. Anyone else heard of this? For those unfamiliar with them, VCDL is a great organization, constantly fighting for Va gun owner's rights.

    NOTE: THE NEW OWNERS HAVE DONE ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO FIX THE EGREGIOUS AGREEMENT THE PREVIOUS OWNERS SIGNED WITH THE CLINTON ADMINISTRATION. OUR CALL FOR A BOYCOTT OF SMITH & WESSON STILL STANDS!

    The Virginia Citizens Defense League, Inc. is calling for all supporters of the Second Amendment to vote with their pocket books, and refuse to purchase any products from Smith & Wesson. This boycott is the only viable course of action against a corporate management which has agreed with the Clinton administration to impose regulations on the American people which they could not get from our elected representatives. Smith & Wesson has agreed to impose on its dealers requirements that they not sell guns at gun shows when private sales occur without a background check, even though such sales would otherwise be lawful. Further, each sale of Smith & Wesson firearms must include a written certification that the purchaser has obtained training in the safe handling and storage of firearms.

    A more important issue is that guns cannot be transferred as allowed under the Brady Law if the background check is not completed in the legally allowed time. One must wait for the background check to be complete, even if it is dragged out for months. Remember how the National Instant Check System was down for days on the weekend of the so called "Million Mom March?"

    The sale of Smith & Wesson to a US based company is irrelevant to the issue. Neither the old company (Tompkins), nor the new company (then called Saf-T-Hammer), have done anything to void the March 17, 2000 agreement. At the February 2002 S. H. O. T. Show in Las Vegas, then Smith & Wesson President, Bob Scott, admitted to me and another activist, that the agreement is still in place, and if we get a new US President, it could immediately be enforced. Please look at the agreement to remind yourself as to how egregious is at:

    http://www.hud.gov/library/bookshelf18/pressrel/gunagree.html

    The agreement contains nearly all of the items on the gun haters wish list. Please look at the web page. If it doesn't make you angry, you are not a supporter of the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution. On principle, we oppose those who would ban Smith & Wesson's new gun, or any other gun. However, we hope no supporter of our gun rights will support Smith & Wesson by purchasing it, or any other of their guns, until they void the HUD agreement.

    Let's be clear; Smith & Wesson cannot be allowed to hide behind the notion that we are better off that it is owned by a US company, than an UK company. So far, both companies are exactly the same; they both are supportive of the agreement they made with Clinton's HUD
     
  2. Bill2e

    Bill2e Member

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2007
    Messages:
    642
    Link did not work.

    I see dealer selling Smiths at Gun show so that point is moot. All gun manufacture put a safty statement statement in the manual. I have not noticed a training certificate.

    The only thing idon't like is the lawyer locks on the handguns. Those I will not buy.
     
  3. MachIVshooter

    MachIVshooter Member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2005
    Messages:
    14,380
    Location:
    Elbert County, CO
    I noticed lately they've been disappearing from certain models.
     
  4. SaxonPig

    SaxonPig Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2006
    Messages:
    4,787
    These people still complaining about the ill-fated "agreement" need to build a bridge and get over it. It was never fully implemented, Clinton is no longer president, and S&W changed ownership years ago. This deal was a bad idea but it was never acted on and has been forgotten by most people. If S&W tried to bring it up at this point to officially get out of it all it would cause is negative attention from the media and the anti-gun groups. Move on, already.
     
  5. Old Fuff

    Old Fuff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    23,908
    Location:
    Arizona
    And just how do the folks at The Virginia Citizens Defense League, Inc. know just what and what hasn't transpired? Smith & Wesson's position and actions have been largely dictated by the advise of they're attorneys, who might know a bit more then the VCDL. They just might have been influenced by one clause in the agreement that gave a court the power to enforce it, and it would be a sad day for everybody if this happened.

    Every day people are buying Smith & Wesson handguns, and each one that does has a good reason to join us in our fight to preserve the Second Amendment, and the related right to own, use and carry handguns. By the simple act of selling guns they have made us stronger. If Smith & Wesson should go under, or cease making firearms, just who would benefit the most?
     
  6. statelineblues

    statelineblues Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2006
    Messages:
    836
    Location:
    In PA
    I seem to remember that when the new owners of Smith & Wesson took control of the company, they stated in an interview that they did not feel obligated to support the "Clinton Agreement" signed by the former owners.
     
  7. ArmedBear

    ArmedBear Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2005
    Messages:
    23,171
    It seems to me that Smith and Wesson has been pretty busy supplying firearms to the growing number of civilians who have taken up concealed carry.

    It also seems to me that they don't want this market to disappear. When push comes to shove, they're going to be on the side that will keep their business open.

    An effective boycott wouild make damn sure that S&W's market depends on government contracts, not civilian sales. We would be screwing ourselves, and would help turn S&W into another Colt.

    If you're going to refuse to buy guns from a company, why not try Colt, instead?
     
  8. MAKster

    MAKster Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2006
    Messages:
    2,197
    Clearly the people saying we should boycott S&W have some hidden agenda. This issue is so dead I doubt anyone in the govt even remembers it existed in the first place. While it's true the agreement was never officially rescinded by the government, the likelihood that it could be enforced now is very slim. S&W never carried out any of the practices they agreed to. The government never carried out the actions they agreed to perform. The government never brought suit against S&W for not performing their end of the deal. Therefore, it can be argued that the government has waived their rights under the deal.
     
  9. Hk91-762mm

    Hk91-762mm Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2007
    Messages:
    415
    Location:
    western NY
    S+W stock is up!
    AND they make an AR-15 platform rifle!
     
  10. Old Fuff

    Old Fuff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    23,908
    Location:
    Arizona
    An excellent summary...

    But if Smith & Wesson had done what some seem to demand, and been aggressively contentious about the matter, and in effect rubbed the other side’s nose in it, they might have decided to respond in a like manner. My 20-20 hindsight says that S&W have handled the situation right. It remains to be seen what will happen now that the “other side” has a more friendly administration in Washington, but without question, events and time have weakened their position.
     
  11. CoRoMo

    CoRoMo Member

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2007
    Messages:
    8,940
    Location:
    Californicated Colorado
    I hope the shame still lingers thick at the HQs of S&W and Ruger for their conduct in the 90s. And I hope it makes for a different position when the next confrontation ensues.
     
  12. Bubba613

    Bubba613 member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2007
    Messages:
    1,953
    S&W owners should call for a boycott of VCDL.
     
  13. Acera

    Acera Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2007
    Messages:
    3,123
    Location:
    Free State of Texas
    S&W is not as friendly to most of my 2nd amendment beliefs as I would like.


    One example, look at their commercials. Only people in uniform are shown using anything semi-automatic. My impression is that they feel like the wheel guns, bolt action rifles, etc. are for citizens, but any semi-autos for military and LEO only.

    It's just a mindset. But they will gladly accept the profits from civilian sales.
     
  14. Hanafuda

    Hanafuda Member

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2008
    Messages:
    120
    I'll worry about this whenever S&W gets pushed into a corner over it by the federal government. The new owners bought that rotten apple along with the tree, and they can't just make it disappear at will. Furthermore, it would be idiotic & suicidal for the company to go public with a 'screw that agreement' campaign right now.

    S&W makes something for just about every niche of the firearms market that I would care to own ... revolvers (including the best CCW weapon in existence IMHO), target rimfire pistol, plastic fantastics, all steel semi-autos, 1911's, and AR15. About the only things I would feel I NEED to go elsewhere for a suitable example would be a pump shotgun and a lever rifle. I don't see the S&W company as being unfriendly to me at all.
     
  15. Duke of Doubt

    Duke of Doubt member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2008
    Messages:
    2,863
    MAKster nailed it in one.

    I helped organized my then regional aspect of the very effective S&W boycott when it was owned by Burger King, and to terminate said boycott when new ownership picked up the stricken company for a song. The new owners have ignored the settlement, which is not enforceable like a commercial contract. Either party is free to walk away, and S&W clearly has. The only "enforcement" possible is to bring suit for the claims negotiated away under the settlement. Today, those claims would fail in court. The HUD deal is DEAD, and I suspect Taurus is behind the effort to smear the new pro-gun ownership of S&W.
     
  16. Harve Curry

    Harve Curry Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2004
    Messages:
    1,756
    Location:
    Black Range of New Mexico
    Why does S&W have to label anything M&P ?

    Why not a Citizens Rifle , American, or Minuteman model.
     
  17. statelineblues

    statelineblues Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2006
    Messages:
    836
    Location:
    In PA

    Because it is recognizable and they already own the name...
     
  18. jerkface11

    jerkface11 Member

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2005
    Messages:
    5,498
    Location:
    Arkansas
    M&P has been a S&W trademark for a century.
     
  19. tinygnat219

    tinygnat219 Member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2006
    Messages:
    2,939
    Location:
    The Land of Northern Hospitality and Southern Effi
    Eh? HOW? Please come up with some sort of reason, or simply back off on the rumors.

    It's not as dead as people would like it to be. The signed agreement is still in place with HUD. It's on life support for one fact, the Bush administration simply didn't make it a point to enforce or even talk about. Even with the new ownership when it was sold back to an American company, that agreement could be made valid in a moment's notice with the current Obamessiah administration.

    I agree it's silly to call for a boycott of S&W right now, but it's important to note that the agreement is still there and COULD be right back out in front. I also have something to ask, when was the last time anyone saw a full-court press by the VCDL to ensure that a boycott stayed strong? Easy, there hasn't been. I think the VCDL leadership isn't making a strong case for this as there hasn't been a need to under the last administration and is hedging their bets that S&W will not fold if pressured to under the agreement. If anyone feels differently, the contact information for our President is on the webpage.

    Full disclosure here: I am a VCDL member and proud to be one. If there's a better, more effective organization out there that's run completely by volunteers, I have yet to even hear about it.
     
    Last edited: Mar 6, 2009
  20. Hungry Seagull

    Hungry Seagull member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2009
    Messages:
    2,167
    I dont care what they say, I feel the S&W M&P .45 is a good gun for me.

    One day our lives may depend on it.
     
  21. deadin

    deadin Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2005
    Messages:
    2,103
    Location:
    Ocean Shores, WA
    What an arrogant, pompous bunch to assume that anyone that isn't in lock step with their program is anti 2nd.
    At least it shows me another group that won't be getting any of my support dollars.
     
  22. Duke of Doubt

    Duke of Doubt member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2008
    Messages:
    2,863
    Hear, hear.
     
  23. feedthehogs

    feedthehogs Member

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2003
    Messages:
    1,801
    If everyone is gonna start picking at the scab again, then why not include all those gun makers with built in locks?
     
  24. JR47

    JR47 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2008
    Messages:
    1,414
    Location:
    N. Georgia
    The locks on many handguns aren't the result of the federal government, nor any attempt by the feds on your rights. They are the result of a group that isn't bound by the Constitution, per see. They are the states. Maryland requires a fired shell casing, and an internal lock on any handgun sold in the state. I believe that New York, California, and a multitude of other states require the same types of equipment.

    Smith & Wesson, the name and all properties, was sold to a new group. They aren't signatories to the original agreement, and would probably successfully resist a court challenge by the Administration. However, the idea that linton is gone, and nobody remembers the agreement is bogus. The current Attorney General, Eric Holder, had a finger in that pie, and I can assure you that he knows about it, today.

    As to whether the S&W attorneys, or those of the VCDL are better is an interesting, but trivial, point. S&W, prior to the Agreement, wasn't in any danger of insolvency, and was selling weapons quite well. Yet, they entered into the agreement. So, let your paranoia run rampant about them selling out a second time.

    As far as the comment about people marching in lock-step goes, we see a lot of that on these forums. You don't mouth the same pious platitudes about the Constitution and the government, and you're suspect.
     
  25. searcher451

    searcher451 Member

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2007
    Messages:
    2,516
    Location:
    Oregon
    SaxonPig and others who have chimed in are correct here: This is old news, and it's not even particularly interesting news at this point. S&W has some serious issues to contend with this at the moment, including a recall of every PPK and PPK/S pistol they've manufactured from day one, a new administration in Washington, a global economic meltdown, etc. Make-work nonsense like this, and at this late date, is not worth anyone's time of day.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page