What does Locked mean?
- Thread starter Too
- Start date
Register to hide this ad
WNC Seabee
Member
Newer S&W Models have a "feature" that allow the owner to use a Key to "Lock" their revolver. When locked, the revolver cannot be fired.
It is commonly accepted that S&W added the lock feature to pander to Gov't and lawyers looking for a "safer" firearm.
The controversy has 3 main points....
- The lock is ridiculous because it is no more effective than properly securing your firearm as you should be any way.
- The lock has proven, in certain models, to self-engage during firing. This is obviously bad, especially if you are in a self defense situation
- it's ugly
It is commonly accepted that S&W added the lock feature to pander to Gov't and lawyers looking for a "safer" firearm.
The controversy has 3 main points....
- The lock is ridiculous because it is no more effective than properly securing your firearm as you should be any way.
- The lock has proven, in certain models, to self-engage during firing. This is obviously bad, especially if you are in a self defense situation
- it's ugly
In 2002, S&W added a locking feature to their revolvers. It is located on the left side of the frame above the cylinder release latch. If you lock the revolver with the key provided, the revolver will not function until it is unlocked. The lock was added so S&W would comply with laws in all states about required safety features.
Many discussions have taken place about the lock and most forum members have absolutely no use for it, but S&W views it as necessary if they want to do business in all 50 states.
Like it or hate it, I believe the lock is here to stay.
Bill
Many discussions have taken place about the lock and most forum members have absolutely no use for it, but S&W views it as necessary if they want to do business in all 50 states.
Like it or hate it, I believe the lock is here to stay.
Bill
AEA
US Veteran
Occasionally, S&W releases some newer Models without the lock as special runs and they always sell out quickly.
You would think they would get the hint that no locks would outsell locks..........
I have one of the new 642's that was out last year or the year before without the lock.
You would think they would get the hint that no locks would outsell locks..........
I have one of the new 642's that was out last year or the year before without the lock.
I used to feel the same way, but I notice in the latest S&W catalog a few more revolver models are creeping in without the lock. In particular, they are Centennials and do NOT have the backstrap safety. I am not an anti-lock fanatic, but I do think it is an encouraging sign.
There is just no reason why S&W cannot provide lock-free models for shipment to states that do not require an internal lock. It's just not that hard to do. It might cost more, but I think it would be worth it to them to do it. I would certainly consider buying several revolvers that, as they are now, with the lock, I am indifferent about.
As we all know, internal locks on revolvers are not safety devices. For storage, any ordinary padlock will work just fine.
tom turner
US Veteran
IMHO, a lock does not belong on a parachute's rip cord OR on a self-defense revolver!!!
Also, with the locks sometimes going to "half-flag" and locking up the newer Smith revolvers with almost zero chance to get the gun working again without taking off the sideplate . . . it sounds like a problem that Toyota seems to be having with their gas pedals too! Unsafe for the user.
Ummm . . . I stopped buying new S&W revolvers in the fall of 2001 with the purchase of a just released Performance Center 646 moon-clipped revolver in .40S&W. In the meantime . . .
There are plenty of NICE vintage Smiths out there to keep me broke until the factory again makes guns that are totally "safe" to protect my life with, such as this "new" (to me) 1970 Model 27-2. What a gorgeous gun . . . forged parts, pinned barrels, recessed chambers, checkered top strap, gorgeous stocks, wonderful finishes . . . !!! Like several others, I bought 'em here in the classifieds from good S&W folks too!
Here's the way they made 'em 40 years ago . . . food for thought!
Best of all . . . without the ugly "weep hole" . . . you can show the LEFT side of the revolver. Gun stores USED to show the left side of their new revolvers!
Also, with the locks sometimes going to "half-flag" and locking up the newer Smith revolvers with almost zero chance to get the gun working again without taking off the sideplate . . . it sounds like a problem that Toyota seems to be having with their gas pedals too! Unsafe for the user.
Ummm . . . I stopped buying new S&W revolvers in the fall of 2001 with the purchase of a just released Performance Center 646 moon-clipped revolver in .40S&W. In the meantime . . .
There are plenty of NICE vintage Smiths out there to keep me broke until the factory again makes guns that are totally "safe" to protect my life with, such as this "new" (to me) 1970 Model 27-2. What a gorgeous gun . . . forged parts, pinned barrels, recessed chambers, checkered top strap, gorgeous stocks, wonderful finishes . . . !!! Like several others, I bought 'em here in the classifieds from good S&W folks too!
Here's the way they made 'em 40 years ago . . . food for thought!
Best of all . . . without the ugly "weep hole" . . . you can show the LEFT side of the revolver. Gun stores USED to show the left side of their new revolvers!
The nice thing is you can still get semi auto's without locks. Sure some of them have locks. But I got my new M&P FS .45 with no lock, no safety and no mag lock. It's a stripper and a darn fine weapon. I feel privileged to own it.
I'm sure it upsets the activist and lawyers. GOOD!!!!!
I'm sure it upsets the activist and lawyers. GOOD!!!!!
samuelrp
Member
That is a good looking smith.
kscardsfan
Member
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2008
- Messages
- 829
- Reaction score
- 44
To my way of thinking, the gun makers should do like Ronnie Barrett and just start ignoring the L.E. agencies of the nanny states like Chicago and California that don't think they're citizenry have the same rights as the rest of the U.S. to be protected in their own home. They should all band together and put the hurt on them big time. No products, no technical support or armorer's for exsiting weapons or anything. Make them suffer too. If nothing else I bet civilian sales would sky rocket after that move.
Pisgah
Member
I am sure thet S&W was catering somewhat to the anti-gun crowd when they added the lock -- but it is no coincidence that the lock appeared after the company was bought by Saf-T-Lok, the company that invented the stupid thing.
When it comes to internal locks I don't like them but I agree with Doc44 that they are here to stay. It doesn't bother me because I buy pre 1982 S&W revolvers anyway and I have only 2 made in 1983 and all the rest before 1982.
Similar threads
