I am thinking about buying a 329 and I know a person can remove the lock himself,but I wondered if S&W would remove it of asked. I am wondering due to potential reckless accusations in a potential court case if you had to defend yourself. I would also have them put a longer firing pin as well. Thanks

Smith & Wesson would probably remove the lock if asked to do so just before the car manufactures remove the catalytic converter if asked to do so.

Why not just leave it unlocked? My 500 has a lock, but I have yet to use it.

Seatbelts were mandated years ago, you have that choice too. For the record I do use my seatbelt.

__________________
Not enough space

Not likely, they put it there for a reason and invested a lot in R&D for the design.

They will not. I have asked.

I am sure the S&W lawyers would have a fit....

Someone told me that if a gun is returned with the lock removed that they will replace if for you... Kyle

Just install "The Plug" available from a member here on this site. S&W would NEVER remove it!

Ok, I will just take it out. I wished they offered a 329 nighguard without the lock, like they do with the 340 pd. I would think they would with the higher recoil. Thanks for reply

I have heard of the lock malfunctioning under recoil when it is being fired. I also have heard of failure to fire due to too short of a firing pin. That is why I asked.

Gotcha, I just wished they had done more R&D when it came to the short firing pin!

Thats encouraging....

Thats a big 10/4. I will get one from a member when and if I get one, thanks

You can't defend yourself if the lock is activated so if it is not there, same difference!

Why would removing a "storage" device be reckless in a court case? The lock isn't a "safety"

If you are in court; the shooting is probably not justifiable.

THAT'S A GREAT ANSWER, bmcgilvray ! ! !

__________________
'Nam 1968-69.DAV,VFW,NRA Inst.

My 500 has gone BOOM each and every time I pull the trigger. I am willing to bet it has a little more recoil than yours.

__________________
Not enough space

Just do this. I had to send my 329PD back to the factory (cracked frame), I didn't bother with even finding the lock parts, just took the plug out and sent it. It came back with another lock installed. Those parts are long gone as well.....

There seems to be some misunderstanding about people's objection to the internal locks, so I'll explain mine.
First, it is inferior to a standard trigger lock. The chance of a lockwork malfunction with a trigger lock is zero. The chance with the IL is NOT zero. There is no benefit in having one element of a lock inside the lockwork because you still need an external component to make it work.
It can be easily defeated, a trigger lock would be much harder. The IL introduces a new unbalanced element into an otherwise uncluttered classic design. Namely, a little crud filled hole in a very prominent place.
To top it off, they add a little arrow and L stamped into the frame that reminds me of a cheap, wind up alarm clock. To me, it all adds up to a decline in the quality and aesthetics of the gun. But wait...there's more!
We are not given a choice if we want this feature or not. It's like it or lump it from the folks at S&W. That's why the IL bugs me.

I would have much rather signed a 'Hold Harmless' agreement at time of purchase than to have an IL on my revolver.

Actually we DO have a choice! I simply purchase older models that have no I/L. There are STILL plenty of older guns available in really good shape. Yes, you have to look around but once you find it there is no I/L issue to deal with.

Unless you have to have a model that was not made prior to the I/L I see no reason to NOT get a vintage Revolver. Quite honestly, there has not bee enough advancement in Revolver design to warrant me purchasing a new model. In fact I'll go one step further and say (at least on a personal note) that the new guns have gone down hill as far as material, workmanship and over-all quality. Just my own .02 Cents of course..........