Who disabled the lock on their S&W Airweight?
- Thread starter AdamSean
- Start date
- Status
MyGreenGuns
Member
I took mine out, but reinstalled it.
As much as I hated having the ILS, I hated the hole it left behind. I know I could plug it with something else, but thats trading one ugly for another.
All the complaints I've heard about it seizing up have been with the larger calibers. I have a 637 (.38spl), and tested it with some +p rounds. I never had a problem with it.
If I read any complaints about the .38 I might take it out again.
As much as I hated having the ILS, I hated the hole it left behind. I know I could plug it with something else, but thats trading one ugly for another.
All the complaints I've heard about it seizing up have been with the larger calibers. I have a 637 (.38spl), and tested it with some +p rounds. I never had a problem with it.
If I read any complaints about the .38 I might take it out again.
bdb benzino
Member
I have on 3 different guns. You can just remove the flag to stop the lock from working and leave the mechanism in place but deactivated, that way there is not an open hole there. Good luck!!
glassman
Member
I took the flag out, ground the post down with a dremmel and reinstalled the flag. Took about a half hour start to finish.
I did the exact same thing.
I suppose I got too caught up in the legal aspect of it, with regards to a potential civil lawsuit if I ever did have to use the pistol in a self-defense situation. Which is also why I no longer carry reloads in my SD pistols. Just one less variable to worry about if I ever have to face an ignorant jury.
pistolero guy
Member
revolver locks
I wont own one. I always buy used so I dont have to deal with them. dont trust em
I wont own one. I always buy used so I dont have to deal with them. dont trust em
The Plug
http://smith-wessonforum.com/accessories-misc-sale-trade/143299-fs-plug.html
No horse in the race, just a satisfied customer.
http://smith-wessonforum.com/accessories-misc-sale-trade/143299-fs-plug.html
No horse in the race, just a satisfied customer.
Last edited:
BRE346
Member
I paid no attention to the lock on my Airweight, and it stayed quiet.
rcmodel
Member in memoriam
A much better question is.
Who actually can honestluy swear thay had an actual problem with the lock?
Or can honestly say they have seen anyone else have a problem with the lock in thier presence?
If it was even 1/10,000 of one percent as common as the Internet would have you believe?
The gutters would be running curb full with the blood of all the S&W owners who's lock failed in the middle of a gun fight!
And S&W would have long ago been forced to design a different lock, or no lock at all, by all the personal injury and death lawsuits filed against them.
But they aren't running full of blood, and S&W hasn't been sued over a lock failure.
Even once, to my knowledge.
rc
).LTR shooter
Member
- Joined
- Dec 14, 2008
- Messages
- 468
My solution to the lock dilemma was this:
I did not realize Smith made the 642 in non-lock versions too.
I did not realize Smith made the 642 in non-lock versions too.
Last edited:
trex1310
Member
My problem isn't with the lock it's with the damned key. I keep losing
them, besides I really don't want to keep up with them.
them, besides I really don't want to keep up with them.
Waywatcher
Member
rcmodel said:
A retired Sheriff's Deputy, who is a member of the same Pistol Club as I am, had it happen to his 329PD. He is an honest man. He (still) has lots of revolvers, mostly S&Ws.
ArchAngelCD
Member.
There is absolutely no legal aspect to deal with. Since the lock is not a safety device but a storage device you can not be sued because it's disabled if you use that gun in a SD shooting. Also, S&W sells no lock versions of their Centennial revolvers, how can that be done if it's not safe and you can be sued?
JFrame
Member
No arguments at all with the actual intent of the lock--but I believe the poster to whom you were responding was making the point that ANY non-authorized modification to a firearm could potentially be twisted by an appropriately greedy lawyer to somehow show malicious intent on the part of the shooter. How? I have no idea -- but I have seen enough reports of legal chicanery to at least have a concern that a lawyer could argue the case that a firearm owner rendered his weapon "more dangerous," in an effort to paint said owner as a violent misanthrope itching to use his "piece." All it takes is one unscrupulous lawyer (is that a redundancy?) and a stupid jury.
We can certainly argue the merits as to whether such a fear is worth considering, versus the potentially greater reliability of deactivating the safety.
Everyone must operate within their own comfort zone...
.
mdauben
Member
What if an unauthorized person find the gun and shoots someone accidently?
The fact that the new owner didn't lock up the gun or put a separate gun lock on it or unload it and probably would not have engaged the built in lock anyway is of course totally beside the point when he can just blame the previous owner for "disabling the important safetly device"
Certaindeaf
member
I'm no lawyer but if things aren't sold defacto as-is, perhaps it could be delineated in writing.. x is sold as-is to x on x for x.. with specifics spelled out in a signed bill of sale.
beatledog7
Member
Would you carry a gun with a trigger lock in place? Of course you wouldn't.
Carrying a no-lock 642, a locker 642 that's had the lock disabled, or a locker 642 that's intact are all the same thing.
Why? Because that lock, or the lack thereof, is the same as an external trigger lock, or lack of one, when you store the gun at home. When you're carrying it for SD, the lock is always disengaged anyway.
How you store the gun at home has zero bearing on how you would be or ought to be carrying it.
Carrying a no-lock 642, a locker 642 that's had the lock disabled, or a locker 642 that's intact are all the same thing.
Why? Because that lock, or the lack thereof, is the same as an external trigger lock, or lack of one, when you store the gun at home. When you're carrying it for SD, the lock is always disengaged anyway.
How you store the gun at home has zero bearing on how you would be or ought to be carrying it.
theicemanmpls
Member
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2011
- Messages
- 297
Can anyone come forward with proof of the S&W locks in question failing? Anyone? We have locks on the doors to our home. They have yet to cause any problems with the doors, and they get used lots more then my S&W with the lock.
A pet peeve of mine is gun rumors, and tall tales from the gun world.
A pet peeve of mine is gun rumors, and tall tales from the gun world.
- Status