Smith & Wesson Forum

Go Back   Smith & Wesson Forum > >


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 02-04-2014, 05:52 PM
ISCS Yoda's Avatar
ISCS Yoda ISCS Yoda is offline
US Veteran
History of the internal lock History of the internal lock History of the internal lock History of the internal lock History of the internal lock  
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Dallas, Texas
Posts: 3,810
Likes: 744
Liked 3,318 Times in 1,546 Posts
Default History of the internal lock

A little history checking, please.

I recollect that the agreement in 2000 that S&W made with the Clinton administration was made AFTER the acquisition by Saf-T-Hammer of S&W from the British company of Tomkins PLC. If that is not correct, if, in March of 2000, Smith & Wesson signed the agreement with the Clinton administration and Saf-T-Hammer was NOT involved, Id like to know. I have always thought that it was the influence of Saf-T-Hammer and its plan to sell locks from one company in the conglomerate to another that took S&W over the top with the internal locks.

Comments solicited. Accurate HISTORY definitely solicited.

Sidebar: This is not a critique of the IL - I don't care about them one way or another. I just want to be able to say the right thing when the subject comes up.

Thanks.

***GRJ***
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 02-05-2014, 10:48 PM
Squarebutt Squarebutt is offline
Member
History of the internal lock History of the internal lock History of the internal lock History of the internal lock History of the internal lock  
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: MA
Posts: 940
Likes: 858
Liked 793 Times in 403 Posts
Default

S&W was still owned by the British firm in 2000 when they signed the deal that was negotiated by Assistant Atty. General Andrew Cuomo for the Clinton administration. There was a huge customer backlash, orders fell off sharply, and Tomkins got out at a fire sale price in 2001.
The NYT has some of the highlights of the Tomkins/S&W saga: Tomkins PLC. News - The New York Times
It was a tough time at S&W, and a lot of the help was laid off. It took several years to return to its prior status.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #3  
Old 02-05-2014, 10:55 PM
shawn mccarver shawn mccarver is offline
SWCA Member
History of the internal lock History of the internal lock  
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 7,220
Likes: 2,771
Liked 5,252 Times in 2,140 Posts
Default

My recollection is that Tomkins entered into the agreement. Mr. Bob Scott had been President at S&W, I think, and left, if I recall, to go to Saf-T-Hammer. It was after the value of S&W tanked because of the back lash that Mr. Scott was involved in purchasing S&W from Tomkins. Mr. Scott and Saf-T-Hammer more or less changed the direction of S&W and brought it back from the brink of disaster. The agreement with the Clintons was essentially canceled, repudiated, released, or however you want to say it, under Saf-T-Hammer and Mr. Scott after the Tomkins people were gone.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #4  
Old 02-06-2014, 12:12 AM
S&WIowegan S&WIowegan is offline
US Veteran
History of the internal lock History of the internal lock History of the internal lock History of the internal lock History of the internal lock  
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Iowa
Posts: 2,790
Likes: 6,325
Liked 1,805 Times in 943 Posts
Exclamation

Shawn and Squarebutt are exactly correct! It distresses me no end that people make up their own versions without using Google to look stuff up first. It ain't that hard and it's irresponsible not to.
__________________
Bob.
SWCA 1821
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #5  
Old 02-06-2014, 04:20 PM
ISCS Yoda's Avatar
ISCS Yoda ISCS Yoda is offline
US Veteran
History of the internal lock History of the internal lock History of the internal lock History of the internal lock History of the internal lock  
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Dallas, Texas
Posts: 3,810
Likes: 744
Liked 3,318 Times in 1,546 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by S&WIowegan View Post
Shawn and Squarebutt are exactly correct! It distresses me no end that people make up their own versions without using Google to look stuff up first. It ain't that hard and it's irresponsible not to.
That's why I asked! I read the correct version, have seen incorrect versions, had dim memories of it, and knew I'd get a correct version here!

Gracias, amigos!

***GRJ***
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 02-06-2014, 04:58 PM
TheYoungblood TheYoungblood is offline
Member
History of the internal lock History of the internal lock History of the internal lock History of the internal lock History of the internal lock  
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Alabama
Posts: 163
Likes: 7
Liked 45 Times in 30 Posts
Default

I remember people buying a Ruger and other brands because of that agreement.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 02-06-2014, 05:21 PM
steamloco76's Avatar
steamloco76 steamloco76 is offline
Member
History of the internal lock History of the internal lock History of the internal lock History of the internal lock History of the internal lock  
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Western Pennsylvania
Posts: 3,599
Likes: 1,704
Liked 3,410 Times in 1,179 Posts
Default

Many gun shops in PA basically quit selling S&W's because of negative customer attitudes directly after the infamous agreement. Ruger gained a lot of ground, as did Taurus. Just glad S&W survived.
__________________
Virtue,Liberty & Independence
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 02-06-2014, 05:35 PM
Arik Arik is offline
Member
History of the internal lock History of the internal lock History of the internal lock History of the internal lock History of the internal lock  
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Outside Philadelphia Pa
Posts: 14,661
Likes: 6,364
Liked 14,439 Times in 6,215 Posts
Default

Ruger gained ground? I thought they caved to the mag limit. Didn't Bill Ruger himself claim that there was no need for a "large capacity magazine"?

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #9  
Old 02-06-2014, 05:51 PM
ISCS Yoda's Avatar
ISCS Yoda ISCS Yoda is offline
US Veteran
History of the internal lock History of the internal lock History of the internal lock History of the internal lock History of the internal lock  
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Dallas, Texas
Posts: 3,810
Likes: 744
Liked 3,318 Times in 1,546 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Arik View Post
Ruger gained ground? I thought they caved to the mag limit. Didn't Bill Ruger himself claim that there was no need for a "large capacity magazine"?

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk
That infuriated me more than anything S&W ever did!!!!

***GRJ***
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 02-06-2014, 05:58 PM
Warren Sear's Avatar
Warren Sear Warren Sear is offline
Member
History of the internal lock History of the internal lock History of the internal lock History of the internal lock History of the internal lock  
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Twin Cites, Minnesota
Posts: 2,248
Likes: 2,882
Liked 3,068 Times in 1,108 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Arik View Post
Ruger gained ground? I thought they caved to the mag limit. Didn't Bill Ruger himself claim that there was no need for a "large capacity magazine"?

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk
Why, yes, I believe you are correct, and if I'm not mistaken, in a letter to members of the House and Senate on 30 March 1989, Mr. Bill Ruger stated the following:

"The best way to address the firepower concern is therefore not to try to outlaw or license many millions of older and perfectly legitimate firearms (which would be a licensing effort of staggering proportions) but to prohibit the possession of high capacity magazines. By a simple, complete, and unequivocal ban on large capacity magazines, all the difficulty of defining "assault rifles" and "semi-automatic rifles" is eliminated. The large capacity magazine itself, separate or attached to the firearm, becomes the prohibited item. A single amendment to Federal firearms laws could prohibit their possession or sale and would effectively implement these objectives."

And, if am further not mistaken, in addition to the furor amongst Second Amendment advocates caused by the above-mentioned jewel of literary artistry, Mr. Ruger made comments during an interview with NBCs Tom Brokaw that angered gun rights proponents even further, by saying that "no honest man needs more than 10 rounds in any gun…" and, "I never meant for simple civilians to have my 20 and 30 round magazines…"

Interesting times, indeed.

History has been kind to Bill Ruger, and all this seems to have been forgotten, but not by me, a simple civilian.

Last edited by Warren Sear; 02-06-2014 at 06:34 PM.
Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Like Post:
  #11  
Old 02-06-2014, 09:14 PM
handejector's Avatar
handejector handejector is offline
Administrator
History of the internal lock History of the internal lock History of the internal lock History of the internal lock History of the internal lock  
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 16,998
Likes: 1,310
Liked 17,332 Times in 3,528 Posts
Default

Correct on Bill Ruger and magazines.
Ruger LE distributors could get their distributorship cancelled for selling 20 rd Mini-14 mags outside of LE agencies. As far back as the early 80's, factory 20 rd mags would bring $100-125.
__________________
Regards,
Lee Jarrett
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #12  
Old 02-06-2014, 09:26 PM
shawn mccarver shawn mccarver is offline
SWCA Member
History of the internal lock History of the internal lock  
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 7,220
Likes: 2,771
Liked 5,252 Times in 2,140 Posts
Default

If I recall correctly, Mr. Ruger suggested, in his letter to John McCain, that pistol magazines up to 15 rounds should be legal, and rifle magazines up to 20 rounds should be legal. It was pointed out at the time that his idea "just happened to coincide" with what Ruger offered, but was lower than what his competitor, Glock offered (at least as far as pistol magazines). The whole idea, of course, that some magazines are ok and some are not was thereby given some steam and the end result was a 10 round capacity, which was lower than what Mr. Ruger had suggested. Naturally, the fact that he suggested that any magazines were bad, regardless of how he defined it, caused a great many to say that "there is nothing Ruger makes that I really need that I cannot get somewhere else." Lee is quite correct that Ruger always limited its factory high cap mags for the Mini-14, and that was always enough reason for most people to "shop elsewhere." That has, of course, changed under the new ownership after Mr. Ruger's death.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 02-07-2014, 11:00 AM
S&WIowegan S&WIowegan is offline
US Veteran
History of the internal lock History of the internal lock History of the internal lock History of the internal lock History of the internal lock  
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Iowa
Posts: 2,790
Likes: 6,325
Liked 1,805 Times in 943 Posts
Wink

I remember vividly standing next to Dick Metcalf and Ken Jorgensen at PASA Park back then. Dick was arguing that it was terrible to try to boycott and destroy a great old company like S&W because of one dumb mistake. Tompkins made a really stupid business decision in trying to cut a deal with Andrew Cuomo. Cuomo told them he'd steer lots of Federal gun buying to them. Stupid...because Tompkins didn't check to see if he had the power to do that. Then Bush won and the rest is history.
__________________
Bob.
SWCA 1821
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 02-07-2014, 01:22 PM
Grayfox's Avatar
Grayfox Grayfox is offline
US Veteran
History of the internal lock History of the internal lock History of the internal lock  
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Bartlett, Tennessee
Posts: 3,728
Likes: 700
Liked 5,907 Times in 1,831 Posts
Default

I seem to recall that Mr. Ruger was highly unpopular until he donated a million dollars to the NRA and they suddenly became his best friends.
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
  #15  
Old 02-10-2014, 10:49 PM
M3Stuart's Avatar
M3Stuart M3Stuart is offline
Member
History of the internal lock History of the internal lock History of the internal lock History of the internal lock History of the internal lock  
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Northeast Texas
Posts: 2,851
Likes: 917
Liked 1,300 Times in 711 Posts
Default

Bangor Punta...Tomkins...Saf T Hammer... The point is things happen, things change. People are who they are. We say "mistake", they say "principle" or "shrewd business decision".

All I can do is buy what I like and hope other people like what I do and that the people who manage the companies are astute enough to produce those products.
__________________
But then, what do I know?
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
  #16  
Old 04-09-2014, 01:49 PM
JSW's Avatar
JSW JSW is offline
SWCA Member
History of the internal lock History of the internal lock History of the internal lock History of the internal lock History of the internal lock  
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 1,045
Likes: 1,458
Liked 645 Times in 253 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by steamloco76 View Post
Many gun shops in PA basically quit selling S&W's because of negative customer attitudes directly after the infamous agreement. Ruger gained a lot of ground, as did Taurus. Just glad S&W survived.
There is a gun shop near me that still won't carry new Smith & Wessons. Some folks don't ever forget.
__________________
John
S&WCA Life Member
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 05-07-2014, 11:38 AM
BigBill's Avatar
BigBill BigBill is offline
Member
History of the internal lock History of the internal lock History of the internal lock History of the internal lock History of the internal lock  
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: north america
Posts: 9,514
Likes: 1,062
Liked 7,697 Times in 3,220 Posts
Default

I was in the right place at the right time when one of my local gun shops had a clearance sale on the new s&w N frame revolvers for 50% off list with the IL sorry call me shameless I wish I purchased more. They are awesome.
I should of loaded up both my plastic cards and purchased the whole case.
I always wanted a DA revolver in 41mag. I wanted a redhawk first but there discontinued. I turned to s&w m57 & m58. After purchasing a 1948 k22 for my 3yo grandson and feeling the smooth action I wanted the s&w in 41mag. I haven't look at another brand of revolver yet and probably never will. My point is leave the revolvers with the IL for me, I'll feed them, take care of them and keep them cleaned and oiled. I take in abandoned kittens and unwanted dogs so I'll take in the unwanted s&w IL revolvers too. No complaints from me I'll give them the love they deserve.
Reply With Quote
The Following 4 Users Like Post:
  #18  
Old 09-01-2014, 10:43 AM
M3Stuart's Avatar
M3Stuart M3Stuart is offline
Member
History of the internal lock History of the internal lock History of the internal lock History of the internal lock History of the internal lock  
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Northeast Texas
Posts: 2,851
Likes: 917
Liked 1,300 Times in 711 Posts
Default

Has anybody seen the actual agreement that S&W 'signed'? I ask because; a contract must have certain elements to be enforceable. One of these is 'quid pro quo', or, consideration. In exchange for doing a thing, the party has to get something in return. According to the legend; Cuomo promised 'things'. If he didn't deliver, then the contract could be voided.

Inquiring minds want to know
__________________
But then, what do I know?
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 09-01-2014, 02:28 PM
S&WIowegan S&WIowegan is offline
US Veteran
History of the internal lock History of the internal lock History of the internal lock History of the internal lock History of the internal lock  
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Iowa
Posts: 2,790
Likes: 6,325
Liked 1,805 Times in 943 Posts
Angry

Quote:
Originally Posted by M3Stuart View Post
Has anybody seen the actual agreement that S&W 'signed'? I ask because; a contract must have certain elements to be enforceable. One of these is 'quid pro quo', or, consideration. In exchange for doing a thing, the party has to get something in return. According to the legend; Cuomo promised 'things'. If he didn't deliver, then the contract could be voided.

Inquiring minds want to know
Sounds like you've been taking law classes. I don't know what form the deal with Cuomo took but it's been a MOOT point since Bush won the election. Your question points to the idiocy of Ed Schultz of Tompkins in agreeing to deal with Cuomo w/o determining if he could conceivably deliver what he said!

Now Cuomo is reneging on promises he made as Gov. of NY State.
__________________
Bob.
SWCA 1821
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 09-01-2014, 08:48 PM
John R's Avatar
John R John R is offline
Member
History of the internal lock History of the internal lock History of the internal lock History of the internal lock History of the internal lock  
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Michigan
Posts: 1,217
Likes: 649
Liked 780 Times in 385 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Arik View Post
Ruger gained ground? I thought they caved to the mag limit. Didn't Bill Ruger himself claim that there was no need for a "large capacity magazine"?

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk
Yes he did, and I haven't bought a Ruger sense, and never will.
__________________
John
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 09-06-2014, 03:45 PM
zelda zelda is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: CSRA, South Carolina
Posts: 344
Likes: 12
Liked 185 Times in 85 Posts
Default

ls it possible a 'man' like Cuomo would knowingly ''LIE'' ???
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 09-06-2014, 04:02 PM
rwsmith's Avatar
rwsmith rwsmith is online now
Member
History of the internal lock History of the internal lock History of the internal lock History of the internal lock History of the internal lock  
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: (outside) Charleston, SC
Posts: 20,847
Likes: 24,476
Liked 16,581 Times in 8,305 Posts
Default Undoubtedly

Undoubtedly, at the time, these companies thought that being conciliatory was the right thing to do, and if they felt that they had to do something, then S&W made a good decision because theoretically, at least, adding the lock wouldn't affect any other functions of the gun. I don't expect that S&W or Ruger anticipated the backlash they got.
__________________
"He was kinda funny lookin'"
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 09-06-2014, 05:39 PM
KEN L's Avatar
KEN L KEN L is offline
SWCA Member
History of the internal lock History of the internal lock History of the internal lock History of the internal lock History of the internal lock  
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: N GA
Posts: 3,074
Likes: 146
Liked 2,136 Times in 871 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Grayfox View Post
I seem to recall that Mr. Ruger was highly unpopular until he donated a million dollars to the NRA and they suddenly became his best friends.
Funny how that happens!
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 09-06-2014, 07:21 PM
NYresQ NYresQ is offline
Member
History of the internal lock History of the internal lock History of the internal lock History of the internal lock History of the internal lock  
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Long Island, NY
Posts: 115
Likes: 1
Liked 82 Times in 36 Posts
Default

So why has S&W continued to make guns with the IL, while also offing some without it? Obviously the whole "liability" argument goes out the window if they are willing to make some models without it, so why ot drop it all together??

I would love to buy a new PC627, but I refuse to spend that much money and have a hole in the side of the frame after I remove the stupid lock. I had one of the first 329PD's made by Smith, it was a low two digit serial that had a habit of engaging the lock when firing heavy loads. it went back to Smith twice (on their dime) before I told them the third time it locked up I didn't want it anymore.

It wasn't urban legend or internet lore, I experienced it first hand and will never own a Smith with an IL. I thank god they came out with the 640pro... I wanted another 357 Jframe, but the used pre lock prices were a bit ridiculous...enter the 640pro, problem solved...


Now I just need them to lose the IL on all the PC and pro series guns and I can help support S&W with my hard earned money...
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 09-06-2014, 07:26 PM
arjay's Avatar
arjay arjay is online now
Member
History of the internal lock History of the internal lock History of the internal lock History of the internal lock History of the internal lock  
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Colorado
Posts: 10,513
Likes: 43,276
Liked 13,076 Times in 4,727 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NYresQ View Post
So why has S&W continued to make guns with the IL, while also offing some without it? Obviously the whole "liability" argument goes out the window if they are willing to make some models without it, so why ot drop it all together??

...
I would guess they would have to retool the frames again and that probably isn't cheap.Sales are quite good to people who don't care either way about the lock.I do agree though,that thing is an abomination History of the internal lock
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 09-06-2014, 08:11 PM
Inspector-Callahan's Avatar
Inspector-Callahan Inspector-Callahan is offline
SWCA Member
History of the internal lock History of the internal lock History of the internal lock History of the internal lock History of the internal lock  
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 582
Likes: 196
Liked 519 Times in 149 Posts
Default 10K/Q Overview

Quote:
Originally Posted by shawn mccarver View Post
My recollection is that Tomkins entered into the agreement. Mr. Bob Scott had been President at S&W, I think, and left, if I recall, to go to Saf-T-Hammer. It was after the value of S&W tanked because of the back lash that Mr. Scott was involved in purchasing S&W from Tomkins. Mr. Scott and Saf-T-Hammer more or less changed the direction of S&W and brought it back from the brink of disaster. The agreement with the Clintons was essentially canceled, repudiated, released, or however you want to say it, under Saf-T-Hammer and Mr. Scott after the Tomkins people were gone.
Agree. And there is some very good information on this in the 10K financials. The below is from the 4/30/02 10K. On May-01 Saf-T-Hammer acquired S&W and then later changed the name from Saf-T-Hammer to S&W Holding Corp in February 2002.

The lower section I included below the asterisk's explains some of the history of Saf-T-Hammer before it acquired S&W, and later changed its name.

To summarize, DeOro Mines acquired Saf-T-Hammer in 1998, and then changed its name to Saf-T-Hammer. Then, Saf-T-Hammer acquired S&W from Tompkins in 2001, and then changed their name to Smith & Wesson in 2002.

Back to the OP's question, if you are researching the history of the IL, then you are researching the history of the relationship of Saf-T-Hammer to S&W, and the ill-fated political fiasco with Tompkins that opened the door for the Saf-T-Hammer acquisition.

"Scottsdale-based Saf-T-Hammer said it will be incorporating its safety features in Smith & Wesson fireams, including the .357 Magnum and .44 Magnum made famous by Clint Eastwood.

As part of its acquisition of the firearms company, Saf-T-Hammer will be changing its name to the Smith & Wesson Holding Corp., according to Saf-T-Hammer chairman Mitchell Saltz."

http://www.bizjournals.com/phoenix/s....html?page=all

IC

/////////////////////////////
Overview

Smith & Wesson Holding Corporation is a Nevada corporation headquartered in Scottsdale, Arizona. The Company was initially formed in June, 1991 as De Oro Mines, Inc. From inception, De Oro was primarily engaged in the business of developing mining properties. During 1992, De Oro transferred its remaining assets and settled its liabilities and after this transfer and settlement no longer conducted any business. Effective October 20, 1998, De Oro Mines acquired the assets of Saf-T-Hammer, Inc., and changed its name from De Oro Mines, Inc. to Saf-T-Hammer Corporation. On May 11, 2001, Saf-T-Hammer Corporation acquired Smith & Wesson Corp. and changed its name to Smith & Wesson Holding Corporation on February 15, 2002.

History Prior To Acquisition of S&W

Prior to our acquisition of S&W, our principal operations centered around development of two childproof gun safety devices known as the “Saf-T-Hammer TM ” and “Saf-T-Trigger TM ”. Both devices are easily removable, external devices that enable safe storage of weapons, including loaded firearms.


Financing the Acquisition of S&W

On May 11, 2001, we acquired S&W from Tomkins Corporation in exchange for a $5 million down payment and a $10 million note due in full on May 11, 2002. We also entered into a guaranty of a $30 million unsecured note from S&W to Tomkins. Our $5 million down payment was financed through a loan from


********
SAF-T-HAMMER CORPORATION
(A DEVELOPMENT STAGE ENTERPRISE)

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

THREE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 2001 AND 2000

(1) ORGANIZATION AND BUSINESS ACTIVITY:

Prior to incorporation as Saf-T-Hammer Corporation in 1998, the Company existed as De Oro Mines, Inc. De Oro Mines, Inc. was incorporated on June 17, 1991 in the State of Nevada. Its original Articles of Incorporation provided for 1,000,000 shares of common stock with a par value of $0.01 per share.

Effective October 20, 1998, the Company acquired the assets of Saf-T-Hammer, Inc. and changed its name from De Oro Mines, Inc. to Saf-T-Hammer Corporation.

Saf-T-Hammer, Inc. was the acquirer and De Oro Mines, Inc., the acquiree, and accordingly, this transaction was accounted for as a reverse merger since effective control of the Company was with the officer/shareholders of Saf-T-Hammer, Inc.

The primary asset of Saf-T-Hammer Corporation is a childproof gun safety device that the Company plans to manufacture and sell throughout the world. Currently, the Company has begun production of its gun safety device and has a patent pending for rights to the childproof gun safety device.

Last edited by Inspector-Callahan; 09-06-2014 at 08:38 PM.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Likes This Post:
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
internal Lock jimmyj S&W Revolvers: 1980 to the Present 7 03-28-2014 02:50 PM
M&P 9 with internal lock? Etemmu Smith & Wesson M&P Pistols 10 12-13-2011 01:36 AM
Do all 617's come with the Internal Lock? Joebklyn S&W Revolvers: 1980 to the Present 9 11-01-2010 09:02 PM
can the internal lock, lock my cylinder up? gunman1960 S&W-Smithing 4 06-02-2010 06:15 AM
642 No Internal Lock Available shawn mccarver S&W Revolvers: 1980 to the Present 8 10-17-2009 11:29 PM

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3
smith-wessonforum.com tested by Norton Internet Security smith-wessonforum.com tested by McAfee Internet Security

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:45 PM.


S-W Forum, LLC 2000-2015
Smith-WessonForum.com is not affiliated with Smith & Wesson Holding Corporation (NASDAQ Global Select: SWHC)