Probably a ridiculous question, but...

[stantheman86]

Plain and simple......the lock is a "CYA" for S&W so if someone's 14 year old kid finds Daddy's 686+ under the bed and shoots his buddy with it, when the family goes to sue S&W they can say "Hey it had a lock to prevent this from happening"......there's not much else to it. S&W doesn't care if people are insulted by it and if you've been shooting since 1937 and know how to handle a revolver. They are covering their own ass against multi million dollar wrongful death suits. The same reason Ruger puts a billboard on the barrel of their guns, so when some idiot stuffs a triple proof handload in the gun and blows his face off, Ruger can say "it's right there on the gun, read the manual!" and the manual has all the CYA crap in it.

I'm sure lots of people thought the grip safety on the Lemon Squeezer pocket revolvers was stupid, but it was supposedly invented by Daniel B. Wesson after a kid shot himself.

Thank all the stupid people who shoot themselves and others because they can't follow the #1 rule of gun safety, or be bothered to teach their children and would rather sue a gun maker then admit their own stupidity....THAT is why guns have locks on them now.

Comparing 2010 to how it was back in "the day" is foolish.......we live in a "safety" generation now where people will sue because they hit a wall doing 70 and the car wasn't safe enough..... Just because a 1954 Pontiac had an all steel dashboard, no seat belts and a steering wheel that would impale people in a crash because "that's how it was when I was growing up" there's always people who think cars that have 20 airbags, infra-red cameras and crumple zones are "stupid", it because there are 40 times as many people on the roads now and a lot of them are idiots!

Back when the "good S&W's" were made young men also lined up to join the Service to fight the Nazis and Japanese. Now many kids 18-21 would rather cut their arm off than turn the PS3 off and do 3 years in the Army. Times have changed!

 

[lagavulin62]

we are getting into territory that is off the main topic maybe but....... I think stupid people making stupid decisions that endanger themselves as well as others have been around for a very long time. as long as there have been guns there have been people who accidentally shoot themselves. nothing new about that. but these lawsuits that bombard the courts and judges and juries that rule in favor of them is a recent development that is killing freedoms for us all. this is the age of "it's not my fault". without accountability freedom is at risk.

 

[bennettfam]

sign of the times...

Back when the "good S&W's" were made young men also lined up to join the Service to fight the Nazis and Japanese. Now many kids 18-21 would rather cut their arm off than turn the PS3 off and do 3 years in the Army. Times have changed!

Luckily just barely enough are signing up to keep our all volunteer military viable. My son in one of those, one year into a 4 year hitch with the Marines and is in Afghanistan right now. But your point is well taken. Times they are a changin'.

 

[lagavulin62]

I have always thought if they would allow for shorter duties, say like two years, they would have a better shot at attracting volunteers. I know the argument that short duties they run the risk not getting their money's worth from training a recruit but isn't that what extensions were for? also the enlistment is really 6 years and I always felt that was too long. I think many good men/women who are college material might join after high school if they didn't have to commit for 6 years. since many of our high school graduates are not ready for college at 18 this would be an opportunity to enlist some of that population. if they knew they could get some valuable experience out of high school, see the world, then be back at 20 to start college I think that would be a real selling point. but the military is too tied down in old ways I guess. heck they probably still require monthly haircuts.

 

[jrb_pro]

"It's ugly"? Really?

It's tiny and almost unnoticeable.

 

[stantheman86]

I graduated college with a BS degree and then did 3 years in the Active Army as an Infantryman, did 1 tour in Iraq......and I still have locks on my new S&W's

If I can handle 3 years in the service than pretty much anyone can Hell I'm getting kind of bored being out and had considered going back in.....I don't know if I'm a glutton for punishment or what......

Just trying to lighten up a tired subject, my point is people ask my S&W's have locks on them, why Ruger has the Magna Carta stamped on the barrel of their revolvers......because it's not 1943 anymore and alot of people aren't responsible, and it's a lot easier these days to find a lawyer when you screw up and blame someone else. Less kids grow up shooting and riding horses and hunting and all that, when I was in Basic at Ft. Benning most guys had never even handled a firearm before.

Just read today that a guy in NM was "cleaning a handgun" and it "went off" and shot his 4 year old son in the stomach, went through him and hit the "shooters" mother.....luckily both will survive, but I wonder if this idiot who forgot to check if his gun was loaded will try to sue the gun maker......

 

[bennettfam]

Hell I'm getting kind of bored being out and had considered going back in.....I don't know if I'm a glutton for punishment or what......

Stan, if you go back in, you ARE the man. No, you did your share. Now enjoy your Smiths, even if they do have locks.

 

[stantheman86]

Hahahaha Yeah when I say "considered" going back in, I also "considered" saving up for a Korth revolver I use the word consider alot meaning, "slight to no chance in hell"

 

[Inspector-Callahan]

SAF-T-Hammer

Plain and simple......the lock is a "CYA" for S&W so if someone's 14 year old kid finds Daddy's 686+ under the bed and shoots his buddy with it, when the family goes to sue S&W they can say "Hey it had a lock to prevent this from happening"......there's not much else to it.

It would appear on the surface to be a CYA issue, but it really is because S&W was purchased by a company that makes these locks (Saf-T-Hammer) and they figured a good way to sell them would be to force their customers to buy them.

There is no other reason. Until S&W decides to make a gun that I want to buy (without a lock) they will continue to forfeit my business. No biggie for me, its their loss. Sooner or later they will want my business. No company can simply ignore consumer demand and expect to thrive.

IC

 

[bwickens]

I can almost see the billboard now: "TRIAL LAWYERS --- SAVING YOU FROM YOUR STUPIDITY AND SHAME FOR OVER ONE HUNDRED YEARS".

 

[stantheman86]

The whole Saf-T-Hammer thing has been debated for a while, some people think it's an internet myth. Myself, I'm not too worried about it either way.

Think of it this way, NOW is a great time to get some great deals on used IL and MIM S&W's.....if for nothing else as range guns or plinkers. The early MIM and IL guns from the early 2000's that have been living in sock drawers and under beds are starting to find their way onto the used market as guys' wives tell them thet need to "sell some of these guns" so they become trade fodder. They are not collectible, there's little demand for them used, and people gobble up the "good old ones" so the IL and MIM's are easy to get dealers to give up just to move them out of the "used pile" in the store. I have seen a 686+ for $350 or so in almost new condition a few months ago, I wasn't looking for one, but that would have been a good buy looking back. I got my security trade-in 64-7 for $300 and the 10-14 for $350 in near new condition. 64-8's for $350 are out there too. I mean, nearly new guns with some handling marks, for the same prices people are gladly paying for holster scoured 10-5's with lots of rounds on them!

 

[bmcgilvray]

I think I must be curmudgeonly because I gotta stick with the old ones for both collectin' and usin'. No locks, MIM, two-piece barrels, frame-mounted firing pins (except for .22s) in this house.

 

[DonD]

Just read today that a guy in NM was "cleaning a handgun" and it "went off" and shot his 4 year old son in the stomach, went through him and hit the "shooters" mother.....luckily both will survive, but I wonder if this idiot who forgot to check if his gun was loaded will try to sue the gun maker......

Quite correct, NM definitely doesn't lack for brainless individuals. Last I heard, they hadn't decided if they would charge the jerk. As we all know, a dumb AD wouldn't have been too serious if he hadn't violated the prime directive of never pointing a gun at someone/something you don't wish to destroy. Don

 

[stantheman86]

I'll admit, ONE time and one time only, when I was 23 (about 7 years ago) I had an AD with a CZ-85 9mm in my basement.....I had a brain fart and pulled the mag out, and for some unknown reason pulled the trigger and "BANG" a bullet took a chunk out of the concrete floor.......note I said "floor" because the gun was pointed down at the ground and not at a (person, window,ceiling) and thus the only injury was to my ego.......that is the first and will be the only time I ever fail to clear a weapon, that was my warning! I don't care if I clear a pistol, go upstairs for 2 minutes, I come down and clear it again if I'm gonna clean or work on it. Those gremlins have a nasty habit of putting live rounds in guns people "swear was unloaded!"