I'd love to see both versions offered. Which ones would be the overwhelming favorite?
Would the locked versions sell at all?
My name is Red, and I Own an IL Revolver...
- Thread starter RedBerens
- Start date
- Status
stevieboy
Member
Guys, after 8 years of this nonsense you're flattering yourself if you think you're "keeping the pressure on" Smith. The bottom line is that Smith probably cares not an iota about what a few dozen unhappy forum members think or do. They're too busy making and selling guns.
The reason Smith continues to put locks in its revolvers has nothing to do with politics (contrary to what many of you think) nor does it have anything to do with product liability issues. Smith was not subject to any political pressure during the 8 years of the Bush administration, which happens to overlap almost exactly the period when it has sold revolvers with locks. And, a few years ago Congress enacted legislation that immunizes handgun manufacturers from most product liability suits. So, Smith is immune, lock or no lock.
Smith's decision to sell lock-equipped revolvers has everything to do with business. Think about it: Smith enjoys a monopoly over top end double action revolvers. No one else really competes with it at that level. So long as demand for its product remains high Smith can do pretty much whatever it pleases. Now, it happens to be owned in part by a company that makes the locks that Smith puts in its revolvers. Has it occurred to any of you that Smith can take advantage of its market share and its virtual monopoly by putting locks in its guns, thereby generating revenue for the company that owns it with every sale?
So, Smith is going to continue to sell guns with locks because it and its parent company make a profit doing it. Whether you detest locks or, like me, am utterly indifferent to them, makes no difference in the final equation.
The reason Smith continues to put locks in its revolvers has nothing to do with politics (contrary to what many of you think) nor does it have anything to do with product liability issues. Smith was not subject to any political pressure during the 8 years of the Bush administration, which happens to overlap almost exactly the period when it has sold revolvers with locks. And, a few years ago Congress enacted legislation that immunizes handgun manufacturers from most product liability suits. So, Smith is immune, lock or no lock.
Smith's decision to sell lock-equipped revolvers has everything to do with business. Think about it: Smith enjoys a monopoly over top end double action revolvers. No one else really competes with it at that level. So long as demand for its product remains high Smith can do pretty much whatever it pleases. Now, it happens to be owned in part by a company that makes the locks that Smith puts in its revolvers. Has it occurred to any of you that Smith can take advantage of its market share and its virtual monopoly by putting locks in its guns, thereby generating revenue for the company that owns it with every sale?
So, Smith is going to continue to sell guns with locks because it and its parent company make a profit doing it. Whether you detest locks or, like me, am utterly indifferent to them, makes no difference in the final equation.
You may be right, but I don't think so. I think that your assumptions about profit (is that a word that goes with S&W?) and parent company (who owns S&W today?) may be incorrect. We may all get surprised before very long.
Wheelgunner840
Member
stevieboy, you are most likely 100% correct. I still hate the fact that the IL exists for whatever reason. I would have bought several new guns in the recent past if it weren't there. As far as pressure? well that might be a too strong word. I will still voice my disapproval whenever talking to S&W makers.
WG840
WG840
girvin02
Member
I think that you may be underestimating a wee bit.
I think they make profit on the gun, not the lock. Omit the dumb lock and charge the same price, who would know or care?
I hope the company makes more products than just that lock.
There are two little retired city employee trolls that I know of who's egos are so big that they actually think that they personally can hurt S&W by not buying their new guns. LOL. That sort of goes along with them thinking that putting a forum member on their ignore list is somehow emotionally devastating to the lucky guy. LOL
Ladies and Gentlemen,
I believe this thread has run it's course. Anytime the lock gets mentioned, either in a good or bad scenario, it brings out the worst in folks - for what ever reason - normal dialog/communication skills fall prey to sniping, argumentative and nasty rhetoric.
We're not going to have it here, this is the 1980 to present forum, not all of the guns produced in this timeframe have locks, and whether you all like it or not, this isn't going to be the bitch about locks forum.
Get over it, as Lee has mentioned in recent posts. You don't like locks, then don't buy them. It's really as simple as that, however I'm going to suggest a step further, if you don't like them - fine - but continuously coming into threads to admonish or bash folks that don't have an issue with them is going to get you the wrong attention here, I promise you that.
If someone wants to post about their lock failure, go ahead. If someone wants to post about their new gun, let them have their say. The BS known as lock bashing is going to stop. I don't really care if you like this or not, this isn't going to be a lock bashing forum.
I'm not going to single out anyone at this point, but be aware that going forward anyone being difficult, causing problems - either in a pro or con lock sort of way, will be warned once, and will suffer the consequenses if the antics and nasty rhetoric continues.
Thanks for your help on this.
Now, back to our normal programming..
I believe this thread has run it's course. Anytime the lock gets mentioned, either in a good or bad scenario, it brings out the worst in folks - for what ever reason - normal dialog/communication skills fall prey to sniping, argumentative and nasty rhetoric.
We're not going to have it here, this is the 1980 to present forum, not all of the guns produced in this timeframe have locks, and whether you all like it or not, this isn't going to be the bitch about locks forum.
Get over it, as Lee has mentioned in recent posts. You don't like locks, then don't buy them. It's really as simple as that, however I'm going to suggest a step further, if you don't like them - fine - but continuously coming into threads to admonish or bash folks that don't have an issue with them is going to get you the wrong attention here, I promise you that.
If someone wants to post about their lock failure, go ahead. If someone wants to post about their new gun, let them have their say. The BS known as lock bashing is going to stop. I don't really care if you like this or not, this isn't going to be a lock bashing forum.
I'm not going to single out anyone at this point, but be aware that going forward anyone being difficult, causing problems - either in a pro or con lock sort of way, will be warned once, and will suffer the consequenses if the antics and nasty rhetoric continues.
Thanks for your help on this.
Now, back to our normal programming..
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
