Pef
Member
- Joined
- Apr 4, 2011
- Messages
- 957
- Reaction score
- 1,516
Was it conclusively attributed to the lock? Lots of things can make a revolver lock up. Curious what the diagnosis was.
Smith and Wesson said 'Don't do it!'
- Thread starter IllinoisCCW
- Start date
Was it conclusively attributed to the lock? Lots of things can make a revolver lock up. Curious what the diagnosis was.
Jayhawkhuntclub
Member
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2011
- Messages
- 740
- Reaction score
- 318
I know a guy that has a airweight 44 mag that locks itself with heavy loads.
Actually, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tabacco, Firearms and Explosives goes by the acronym ATF. (see their website)
As far as the lock is concerned, buy a gun without it and then you only have to worry about the other causes of lockup as mentioned in previous posts. If you can't find guns locally, I am sure that there are a few available on sites like GunBroker or GunAuction etc.
I have never had any lockup problems with any of the revolvers shown below.
As far as the lock is concerned, buy a gun without it and then you only have to worry about the other causes of lockup as mentioned in previous posts. If you can't find guns locally, I am sure that there are a few available on sites like GunBroker or GunAuction etc.
I have never had any lockup problems with any of the revolvers shown below.
Attachments
jtcarm
Member
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2011
- Messages
- 4,422
- Reaction score
- 4,317
Not possibly, but absolutely creates a liability for them, and for you if you ever shoot a bad guy with it. A defense or tort lawyer would have a field day with that one "oh, so you deliberately disabled the safety mechanism.... "
If you think the lock compromises function, sell it and get a pre-lock.
TSQUARED
Member
I have seen anecdotal references to loak failure. I have four S&W revolvers with the lock. Each one has had more than 15,000 rounds fired without experiencing any issues with the lock. However, if one feels insecure about potential lock failure then removal is an option.
Florida J Frame
US Veteran
- Joined
- Jun 27, 2008
- Messages
- 1,051
- Reaction score
- 816
Can you quote a case where this actually happened?
silentflyer
Member
Standard lawyer response, the same reason the trigger pull on a new gun is horrible, and why so many of us like "old" 4 and 5 screw wheel guns.
The lock is not a safety mechanism for the function of the gun. It is a storage lock devise like a cable lock.
I think the lawyer hype thing is BS
An airweight 44 mag,especially one loaded heavy,is just wrong in the first place.
Florida J Frame
US Veteran
- Joined
- Jun 27, 2008
- Messages
- 1,051
- Reaction score
- 816
I'll ask the same question . . . Can you quote a case where this even came up? We keep hearing about it on internet forums but I have not been able to find one real reference to it in a case.
Doug M.
Member
A) The status of the lock is not relevant or admissible in a self-defense shooting. See ER 401 and 403. It would not matter in a negligent discharge situation, either. It would only potentially matter in a negligent storage circumstance.
B) The display of the gun is enough until the time it isn't, a difference that cannot be predicted, only experienced. The timeline will be very compressed and the need critical.
C) If one has kids or other needs to have their firearms "safe" in a manner involving "unable to fire" (which is not "safe" if you need it), lock up all but the one you are carrying.
B) The display of the gun is enough until the time it isn't, a difference that cannot be predicted, only experienced. The timeline will be very compressed and the need critical.
C) If one has kids or other needs to have their firearms "safe" in a manner involving "unable to fire" (which is not "safe" if you need it), lock up all but the one you are carrying.
mkk41
US Veteran
Don't blame S&W. Thank the ambulance chasing lawyers and the irresponsible idiots who leave loaded guns where children can get them , and blame the manufacturer when the unthinkable happens..
Actually , I'm surprised that the 'locks' don't automatically engage when the cylinder is closed or after every shot!
Actually , I'm surprised that the 'locks' don't automatically engage when the cylinder is closed or after every shot!
mesinge2
Member
hotrod150
Member
If you think that the mere display of the gun is gonna end a home-invasion or assault, I sure hope it never happens to you because you're liable to get killed when it doesn't-- and maybe even woth your own gun.
hotrod150
Member
I disabled the lock on my 442-2, but there is a downside I considered. Say a kid (yours,a neighbor's, or one who broke into your house- doesn't matter) steals the gun & ends up shooting & killing someone with it. I'm no lawyer, but it seems to me that since you have intentionally removed or disabled a feature of the gun specifically designed to prevent such an occurence, you're liable to get your *** sued off and maybe even be criminally prosecuted.
Screwier things have happened in our court system.
Screwier things have happened in our court system.
It may be significant that S&W only makes certain models without the lock. 640, 340 PD, M&P 340, and a few others. All small, lightweight revolvers. IMHO There are only two possible reasons for this.
1 - certain law enforcement agencies which buy relatively large quantities demand the no lock version of these models
And/ or
2 - S&W knows that there is at least the potential problem with the mechanism in small, light weight revolvers.
As an aside, the trigger pull on the no lock M&P 340 I got a month or so ago was ridiculously hard. Well over 12 pounds. I honestly don't see how anyone can argue that such a small, light pistol with that hard a trigger pull is safer for anyone.
1 - certain law enforcement agencies which buy relatively large quantities demand the no lock version of these models
And/ or
2 - S&W knows that there is at least the potential problem with the mechanism in small, light weight revolvers.
As an aside, the trigger pull on the no lock M&P 340 I got a month or so ago was ridiculously hard. Well over 12 pounds. I honestly don't see how anyone can argue that such a small, light pistol with that hard a trigger pull is safer for anyone.
