I had a problem with my Shield 40. After many emails to S&W I got a phone call from an Executive at S&W. After discussing the problem about my Shield, I was told that S&W is taking serious consideration to stopping sales of all gun parts that relate to the firing operation of their guns. This would include items such as: trigger; trigger bar; hammer; striker; sear; blocker safety; related springs; etc. If those parts do not get installed properly, and the gun is: inoperable; dangerous; or prone to malfunction, S&W is concerned about their liability for selling those parts. I was told this policy could soon be in place for all gun lines, not just the Shield. I was also told that S&W may again sell those parts, once they have detailed instruction, as to how those parts should be installed, available on paper or through the internet.

S&W would also not make these parts available to companies such as: Brownells; Midway; etc., as these companies sell those parts to the public. This Executive wanted this policy to take effect as soon as possible. I have not named this Executive as I was told something that I likely shouldn’t have heard.

This is not the current S&W policy and at this point not everyone at S&W agrees with this policy, since they still sell those parts to the public, except for the Shield. Other gun manufacturers such as Glock, Ruger, Springfield, and others have policies that those parts are factory installed only. The Executive did not say S&W would never sell those parts to the public, but that they were considering stopping sales until they had specific installation instruction, for those parts, available to the public.

Just passing on what I was told.

Bob

RIP S&W

Glock will end up taking over the world.

Stupid move by S&W, IMO. Glock and all the companies that make parts for Glocks making them available to the user are a big part of why Glock is where it is.

As long as the S&W part is made correctly and the problem occurs due to faulty installation by the end user, the end user is responsible for problems related to that faulty installation.

I can see *some* worry due to the political/regulatory environment, but not to the extent to where S&W would or should selling the above mentioned parts.

We live in a very litigous society these days where the fear of "liability" governs over logic. People taking/accepting personal responsibility for their own dumb actions/decisions is becoming an endangered species.

One only has to look back at some of the awards that jurries have given out in ridiculous lawsuits that should not even gone to trial in the first place.

As much as I don't like it either, I think I would rather lose access to certain parts than complete access to S&W products after they've been financially thrown under the bus by some asinine jury.

__________________
Conrad
SWCA #1830 SWHF #222

Glock will never rule the world....attorney's do.

Randy

It`s a Myth we live in the very litigious country...We are not even close to being the most litigious...

Country Cases per 1,000 Population

• Germany 123.2
• Sweden 111.2
• Israel 96.8
• Austria 95.9
• U.S.A. 74.5
• UK/England & Wales 64.4
• Denmark 62.5
• Hungary 52.4
• Portugal 40.7
• France 40.3

As you can see we are about in the middle of the pack...Insurance companys have spread the lie "we are the worst" to justify higher premiums and legislation...against people filing lawsuits...

Do you think it`s unjust that a person is able to bring litigation against a doctor that just removed the only good kidney you have...and now the other has to be removed and you will be on dialysis the rest of your life...or a family that has contracted cancer from ground water because a drilling company contaminated it.... do they have the right to get justice and compensation...

There is ample evidence that the most litigious part of this country is the corporations suing other corporations.... not the people...

Of coarse there are countries that have NO litigation at all and they are Dictatorships....I doubt that`s what you are looking for...or maybe you are I have no way of knowing...Jim

No but I do think its unjust that a lady sues McDonalds because her coffee is hot, or someone who has been smoking for 40 years sues the tobacco company because they now have cancer.The problem is that there is no penalty for someone filing a junk lawsuit

Before the moderator locks this thread for being off topic - I'd respectfully argue that litigation has become a central issue in firearms ownership and use and the McDonalds hot coffee case has falsely become the poster child for lawsuit abuse.

I'd suggest anyone preparing to comment on this case see what Wikipedia has to say about it, first -
Liebeck v. McDonald's Restaurants - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Its really not so outrageous when you know the facts. The coffee really was dangerously hot according to generally accepted standards and McDonalds was well aware of the fact, had had numerous similar complaints, yet failed to correct the problem. But the real problem was highlighted in the extensive WSJ article on the case and that was the ineptness of the defendants and their counsel. They had numerous opportunities to settle the case for a minimal amount, yet they insisted on spending what was estimated to be millions on their defense. The extreme jury award was because the defense had so outraged the jury with their taunts, insults and intransigence. Even at that, "safeguards" in the system resulted in the case eventually being settled for something less than $600,000.

IMHO, if there was an abuse of the judicial system it was by the defendants who tried to throw their financial weight around and avoid responsibility for their actions. The system worked and the little old lady kicked their butts.

Now, can we get back to discussion of S&W's parts sales policies.

Ironically, their coffee is still outrageously hot and unlike other coffee cups, theirs are not marked with a warning.

As to the rest, I think you're right. We might not be the most litigious society, but we might be the most risk averse society. Some of that of course helped along by government agencies that impose ridiculous fines for "defective products" even when the only defect is between the ears of the injured party.

My last $02 worth as to not belabor the off topic discussion, but to set my comments straight... I did not imply that we are the most litigious country, I simple said they we live in a very litigious society, and I should have added, in what seems to be environment where people are far more willing now to file suit for less cause than previously seen.

Judging by the proliferation of print and TV ads from Law firms seeking clients to represent for settlements, liability lawsuits appear to have become more of a money making industry than a means of seeking justice.

Yes, there is ample evidence that the most litigious part of this country is the corporations suing other corporations.... and that is what I am talking about, and why S&W would/could feel the need to protect themselves by changing their parts sales policy.

I don't begrudge anyone the right to seek restituition for any egregious act perpetrated upon them through incompetence, fraud or conspiracy, any suggestion to the contray is frankly, flat out insulting.

__________________
Conrad
SWCA #1830 SWHF #222

That's not a good decision IMO. Broken strikers in XDs caused a lot negative publicity for Springfield. It is one of the reasons I don't own one. I was pleased that S&W did not have a similar policy. Glock parts are plentiful and they also offer armorer classes to civilians. This decision change will impact at least my purchases. OTOH, they are selling the Shields like hot cakes and probably can't make enough of them, let alone supply parts...

__________________
NRA Certified Instructor