I am in the same boat. Thousands of rounds through my Smiths w/locks and never a problem with the locking mechanism. An un-warranted worry that induces supercilious attitudes.
Lock or No Lock
- Thread starter deltabowhunter
- Start date
I am in the same boat. Thousands of rounds through my Smiths w/locks and never a problem with the locking mechanism. An un-warranted worry that induces supercilious attitudes.
Black_Sheep
Member
As long as nice pre-lock S&W revolvers are affordable I will not purchase one with a lock. I had the unfortunate experience of ILF on my Model 60-14 so I don't trust the S&W IL design for anything except punching paper. YMMV
To lock, or not to lock, that is the question....
Amongst the four j-frames that I own, my 642 and 340 M&P both have the IL. My 940 and 442 do not. I have done nothing to disable the locks on the guns that have them, though would have preferred versions without this feature if they were then available. Generally, if I have an opportunity to find an older revolver of a specific model in excellent condition, I would choose it over a new one with the IL. I really like the features of the 340 M&P and frequently carry it with confidence.
Amongst the four j-frames that I own, my 642 and 340 M&P both have the IL. My 940 and 442 do not. I have done nothing to disable the locks on the guns that have them, though would have preferred versions without this feature if they were then available. Generally, if I have an opportunity to find an older revolver of a specific model in excellent condition, I would choose it over a new one with the IL. I really like the features of the 340 M&P and frequently carry it with confidence.
More theoretical than actual, methinks. It's been discussed many times here and to my recollection no one has pointed to a documented instance where removing the lock had negative legal ramifications.
And rationally speaking, of course, it shouldn't have negative legal ramification since the lock has no purpose related to practical, justified use of the firearm; it's a safety device for when the gun is stored. But the courts, as we know, are often irrational.
Where the concern seems to make some sense is if a gun has been modified to a very light trigger, or if the ammo is hand rolled and made to be particularly lethal -- then I can see why some would be worried that an overzealous DA might go after those user induced factors, and tampering with the lock has been conflated with them in the minds of those worried about courtroom appearances.
DonD
Member
Yeah, sure, what's that a going out of business sale? Don
Don't currently own any J frames. However, I do own and thoroughly enjoy a 21-4 that I bought a few years ago NIB at a LGS. I'd always wanted one of those type revolvers. However I simply could not afford one of the vintage revolvers. This one has been nothing but superlative in every possible respect. The IL is of no consequence to me. I've given thought to deactivating it, but I can't really say there is any reason to do so. In SA and DA it is completely and unfailingly reliable.
It's a good idea to take guns apart and inspect them before trusting your safety to them. The folks who assemble them may drop the ball sometimes.
I did this with both my S&W 340sc and 642 J-frames, and I took out the internal lock along with all the peewee springs and tiny parts associated with it. My revolvers now sport an "L" with a little arrow to show where to put the lube. The little hole is now a "Lube Hole"
A little drop of oil once in a while can take the grittiness out of the trigger feel
I did this with both my S&W 340sc and 642 J-frames, and I took out the internal lock along with all the peewee springs and tiny parts associated with it. My revolvers now sport an "L" with a little arrow to show where to put the lube. The little hole is now a "Lube Hole"
A little drop of oil once in a while can take the grittiness out of the trigger feel
I have a 629 (44mag), three 21's (44spec) and a 500 mag with the lock. I would prefer no lock. Frankly I have never had a problem with a lock. I carry a model 21 with the Buffalo Bore 200gr hard cast wadcutters and Corbon 200gr DPX reloads for CCW. I probably would not carry a light weight mag with a lock. I know some remove the lock, I worry about the legal ramifications. I guess I have read to many articles by Massad Ayoob.
I've been thinking about this IL stuff a lot recently. I don't buy any revolvers with the lock for both aesthetic and political reasons. Same thing I suppose applies to the M&P series. I recently purchased a 9c and it doesn't come with a safety or magazine disconnect.
So for both this semi and an older no-lock revolver as long as I keep my finger off the trigger (assuming loaded) then they are functionally the same. Why even continue to make revolvers with an IL?
So for both this semi and an older no-lock revolver as long as I keep my finger off the trigger (assuming loaded) then they are functionally the same. Why even continue to make revolvers with an IL?
sac-gunslinger- the guy is max headroom. on the idiot lock question, it's just one more thing to go wrong and it doesn't make any difference how many rounds have been through one. it only takes once in the wrong circumstances to be the last problem you will face. I don't even like the non pinned guns much.
Thunderhawk88
Member
I have had my 620 for 7 years and have never had a problem with the lock. It's not my carry gun, it's way too big for that, but it is a favorite of mine to shoot.
AZretired
Member
I retired from LE in 2006 after 25 years, more than half as a detective. In my experience in cases I worked and was personally aware of the issue of altering a firearm or for that matter the use of reloads has NEVER been an issue in criminal court or in civil court. I respect Maas Ayoob's opinion as I am sure he has access to more court cases than I, but I do not think removal/deactivation of the IL is any different than a trigger job, or extended safety on a 1911. A few years ago a bought a Springfield 1911 that came with a manual main spring lock built in to it. Every one I knew who bought one replaced it. Never an issue.
I think the whole IL issue has gotten way too muctime on these forums. The only thing that really bothers me about them is looks. They change the profile of the hammer guns (M60, K frames etc) on the 642 and 638, it's just a hole.
BrianE
Member
stc1
Member
I think the glue wore off on the sticky
LOL, made my day.
DITTO! Same here.
djh1765
Member
Buy the gun and throw away the key.
- Joined
- Oct 4, 2013
- Messages
- 1
- Reaction score
- 0
I have several S&W revolvers, all pre lock. I would never buy a lock gun. Just on principle, some may think it's silly, just my feelings.
Does S&W plan on offering any new guns without locks?
Does S&W plan on offering any new guns without locks?
shouldazagged
Absent Comrade
Corporate liability lawyers being what they are, probably damn few if any. I can no longer buy guns on my retirement income, but it I could I wouldn't automatically rule out one with a lock. I just prefer older revolvers.
Similar threads
- Locked
