What is the status of the Clinton S&W deal?

Status
Not open for further replies.

auburn2

Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2011
Messages
58
Reaction score
4
I know S&W is a lot more pro-2nd amendmnet than 10 years ago but has S&W ever actually nullified the deal?
 
Register to hide this ad
Nope,not yet. But,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, I think it will soon because of alot of the people who are calling S&W and telling them they will not buy anymore guns from them with that goofy ILS lock. I see about 6 months to maybe 3 years from now maybe.
 
I understand your question and I am as pro 2nd as they come but what is the problem with the internal lock?

If a person does not like it, unlock it and toss the key in the trash. The gun will work fine. I do not know where I put the keys for the guns with IL that I own. All the guns work fine.

In the real world and not in the world of us "gunist" the locks are beneficial in preventing death and injury. It may be difficult to believe but there are people in non-gun friendly areas that have children and they want that gun lock.

Would you want that internal lock where you can toss the key or have to deal with an external lock that had to be on the gun by law? Some areas require a lock be on a gun when stored. In this pro gun area, where virtually everyone owns guns, we cannot walk out of a store without a lock on the new gun we purchased.

The IL does not hurt anything. My car has a lot of factory added items that I do not want but it does not mean I have to use them.
 
What about all of the documented failures caused by the flimsy locking system.

It takes a responsible person to keep a firearm safe when its accessible to a child I am not sure a key lock or a padlock will help if that concern is absent.

The lock is of no issue to me as I prefer and buy older Smiths. If this were not the case the lock in of its self would be enough to keep me from buying the gun
 
Last edited:
I HOPE that comes about but feel that will be about the time pigs fly: Ever heard of ANY company discontinue a SAFETY component?:eek:
Yes I would love to see it but afraid the S&W lawyers would never let that happen.
 
What about all of the documented failures caused by the flimsy locking system.

It takes a responsible person to keep a firearm safe when its accessible to a child I am not sure a key lock or a padlock will help if that concern is absent.

The lock is of no issue to me as I prefer and buy older Smiths. If this were not the case the lock in of its self would be enough to keep me from buying the gun

What documented cases are you referring to? Other than a few early cases in ultralight guns using heavy ammo loads, I haven't been able to find any cases of guns locking up.
 
I understand your question and I am as pro 2nd as they come but what is the problem with the internal lock?

If a person does not like it, unlock it and toss the key in the trash. The gun will work fine. I do not know where I put the keys for the guns with IL that I own. All the guns work fine.

In the real world and not in the world of us "gunist" the locks are beneficial in preventing death and injury. It may be difficult to believe but there are people in non-gun friendly areas that have children and they want that gun lock.

Would you want that internal lock where you can toss the key or have to deal with an external lock that had to be on the gun by law? Some areas require a lock be on a gun when stored. In this pro gun area, where virtually everyone owns guns, we cannot walk out of a store without a lock on the new gun we purchased.

The IL does not hurt anything. My car has a lot of factory added items that I do not want but it does not mean I have to use them.



A revolver is a gun you go for if you dont trust a semi auto because its got no external safety for you to accidentally flip on in a stressful situation and has a bulletproof magazine for it which will outlast any semi auto magazine for decades

and that key lock goes against the basic principals of why you go for a revolver, not counting the failures of it with the magnum guns.

and its really the only change to smith and wesson revolvers that has really irked everyone, with the reccessed chambers its kind of 50/50 if that was a good or bad thing, ditto for the visibile firing pin mounted on the hammer

although after reading the gunzone 340pd article it makes you wonder just how much you could even trust one of the new supposed steel ones if that's the kind of modern smith and wesson construction that goes into a 1000 dollar gun nowadays.
 
Last edited:
My car has a lot of factory added items ...
Including ironically a key which is need to be put in and turned for it to work.

I don't own one of the lock guns and would rather not have one. Also I prefer the look of the older revolvers better, I don't like the little "triangle" looking cylinder release, I prefer the older style. That said the lock is probably a must have for many and it is a heck of a lot better than those trigger locks.

For what it is worth I have kids and keep only 1 loaded gun in the house - it is a 686 and it is in one of those small pistol safes under my bed. So the gun is not locked itself but the whole thing is locked up in a safe for safety reasons. If I had one of the newer guns I would probably have the pistol in am unlocked drawer but with the gun lock engaged. The latter would probably be quicker to ready in an emergency, all else considered.
 
Last edited:
Heavy loads or light loads a safety should NOT lock up a gun.

Not wanting to be argumentative but I carry a 442 with the ILS and would want to know if this is a current issue I should be concerned with. From Massad Ayoob's own article (posted Sept 2009), the problem was with "very powerful rounds with very violent recoil in very light guns (scandium, titanium). In the two years since that posting, I can find no newer articles or postings about actual lock failures, just the same conversation about what may now be a non problem.
 
For me, what is wrong with the IL, along with everything that has been said, is the "doubt factor" that will always be there for anyone who has heard or read of the chance, no matter how small, of a failure. And, oh teah, it's ugly-real ugly. I have a couple of Taurus revolvers that have their version of "the Lock" on them. I never even notice them; they are on the back of the hammer, and they work, I believe, in a more simplistic fashion. And, oh yeah, they ain't ugly!! Flapjack.
 
For me, the issue isn't the internal lock, MIM parts, 2 piece barrels or any of that. The lock is easily removed, etc..

I have a problem with post agreement S&W guns because I have a problem with them becoming signatory to the agreement, period. While it's true that the ownership at that time was a British holding company who's principles regarding citizen gun ownership run about 180 degrees opposite of the typical American commercial customer's, that regime is long gone. Yet, Smith & Wesson has taken zero formal legal steps to reverse course. Since S&W signed off on the agreement in the Mid 1990's, I've purchased a grand total of one new S&W firearm-a M&P15-A AR clone. I thought long and hard about that one also.

I, as an individual consumer, have zero affect on Smith & Wesson by boycotting them. What matters most to me is my contempt for the business decision they made a decade and a half ago. I really wish they were more like Barrett Firearms.

:(:(

Bruce
 
Last edited:
Including ironically a key which is need to be put in and turned for it to work.

I don't own one of the lock guns and would rather not have one. Also I prefer the look of the older revolvers better, I don't like the little "triangle" looking cylinder release, I prefer the older style. That said the lock is probably a must have for many and it is a heck of a lot better than those trigger locks.

For what it is worth I have kids and keep only 1 loaded gun in the house - it is a 686 and it is in one of those small pistol safes under my bed. So the gun is not locked itself but the whole thing is locked up in a safe for safety reasons. If I had one of the newer guns I would probably have the pistol in am unlocked drawer but with the gun lock engaged. The latter would probably be quicker to ready in an emergency, all else considered.

Not all cars require a key. My daugher is on her second car that starts with the push of a button and shuts off the same way. Anyone can start it as long as they have a little transmitter close by.

As to the IL on guns, I am not in favor of them but it saves each S&W buyer money. The lock gave S&W some legal protection from lawusits, especially those frivilous suits.

I have never heard anyone having a problem with a gun due to the lock. I know I never had a problem with them and I own a couple of guns, maybe more, with the lock. I toss the key and shoot just as if the little keyhole is not there.

The only two things create more disccussion than the IL. They are best caliber and the external extractor on a 1911. Neither of which effects the shooting of a firearm but only shows the reluctance of people to change.
 
No big company is ever going to remove a so-called safety feature from its products, it leaves them wide open to an onslaught of frivolous but very expensive litigation. Some dumbass drunk/stoned dude pops a cap in his own head with one of the "post-agreement" non-IL Smiths, and his heirs file a multi-million dollar lawsuit claiming that if only it had the lock their loved one would still be alive and snorting lines of coke with his buddies.

It is possible that S&W might modify the lock, or replace it with something else, but get rid of it?? Ain't gonna happen, no way, no how!
 
I think we should boycott S&W and any other gun company trying to do business in this litigious world we live in that does anything to offend our sensibilities. Then they can all go belly up and boy, won't we have showed them!

The more this lock issue gets talked about, the sillier the argument gets.
 
Same reason that I won't buy a Ruger or any other firearm that has warning labels and such inscribed on it.

Same reason I bought my M&P with the magazine safety feature and immediately removed it myself! I don't want to have to look at the billboard on the slide telling me that "Warning, the gun may fire if you pull the trigger" Really!?

I've also seen that idiotic warning stamped into every S&W 1911 that I have seen...won't ever buy one because of that.
 
What documented cases are you referring to? Other than a few early cases in ultralight guns using heavy ammo loads, I haven't been able to find any cases of guns locking up.

I experienced IL induced lock-up while shooting double taps with my 60-14, as a result I shall never buy another IL equipped S&W. Anyone that has an IL equipped S&W should refrain from tossing the keys, just in case the "impossible" happens.

Just sayin'...
 
I experienced IL induced lock-up while shooting double taps with my 60-14, as a result I shall never buy another IL equipped S&W. Anyone that has an IL equipped S&W should refrain from tossing the keys, just in case the "impossible" happens.

Just sayin'...

Exactly the kind of info I want to hear about (not just the usual chatter). I know the model 60 is a .357 magnum but is the -14 an airweight or one of the ultralights (scandium, titanium) or is it a standard weight gun? Do you remember the details of the ammo you were using? Finally, how long ago did this happen or when was the gun made?
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Back
Top