Why does S&W not...

[RMcL]

...have internal locks on its' 1911 series pistols?

 

[shawn mccarver]

We are not allowed to criticize current S&W products, so I will simply say that I love their autos for either the complete lack of an internal lock (in the case of the SDVE and 1911 Series pistols) or for having a choice of lock or no lock (M&P Autos and Centennial revolver models). Other than that, I love the experience of being able to take apart a new revolver to inspect and lube the internals while removing any non traditional internal parts that have never been there on older models. So, the whole wonderful line of new S&W products is a WIN-WIN.

 

[MichiganScott]

The OP asks the same question on the M&P forum. His previous posts were almost two years ago.

Please don't feed the trolls.

 

[handejector]

We are not allowed to criticize current S&W products, ...................

Where, exactly, is that stated as our policy?

Be specific, and show a quote, please.
I do not appreciate statements made about Board policy that are incorrect, so show me the proof.

 

[BigCityChief]

Where, exactly, is that stated as our policy?

Be specific, and show a quote, please.

Thank you, sir. I was a bit startled when I read that post.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[handejector]

Why does S&W not......have internal locks on its' 1911 series pistols?

I don't think the OP is really interested in his question, but rather in just stirring up trouble.
That has been handled.

This "why not?" is not really worth discussing.
This thread would be locked or gone, but I'm waiting on an answer to my question in Post 4.

 

[AveragEd]

Not to stir water better left calm, Boss, but perhaps he was referring to your warning(s) in the 1980-up forum.

Ed

 

[handejector]

Not to stir water better left calm, Boss, but perhaps he was referring to your warning(s) in the 1980-up forum.

Ed

I don't recall asking anyone else to explain what Shawn said.
I'm convinced he is articulate enough to do that himself.

Maybe you would benefit from really trying to understand what I said in the policy.
Maybe everyone would.

Read it again, and grasp the intent of each paragraph-

Bashing, Crying, and Whining

 

[shawn mccarver]

Just to let the group know that I do not ignore the boss, Lee's question, which was asked to me also in a PM, was answered in a PM.

Regards,
Shawn

 

[AveragEd]

Never mind.

Ed

 

[shawn mccarver]

At Lee's request, my PM to him is reprinted here:

"This large letter warning in red, which appears on the top of the 1980 and newer forum and reads:

WARNING!

We have a new policy on Bashing Current Production Guns.

Dictionary: "3. Informal: To criticize. . . ."

My read of the warning and policy is that "bashing" includes negative comments about the current production models, which includes the 1911 model, as it was introduced after 1980. It does not include actual problems that a writer may have had, but the OP did not ask about an actual problem. His question seemed to focus more on the issue of company policy related to production features of a current model.

I am sorry if I have misunderstood something about this policy. However, I have understood the warnings and the written policy to mean no negative comments about current production models, and the penalties appear so severe that I do not want to violate the rule in any way. Therefore, I prefaced my post with my short summary of the policy (i.e. no criticism) to alert any moderator that I was not, by my statements, trying to criticize. In fact, I pointed out a positive about current production pistols and current production revolvers in such a way that anyone reading who might see locks as a disadvantage might look at the presence in a positive way.

The post was meant to be humorous to some extent, but also to alert any moderator that I was aware of the policy (perhaps, after reading yours, I have misunderstood what you meant).

In any event, sorry for causing you trouble.

Shawn McCarver"

 

[handejector]

Just to let the group know that I do not ignore the boss, Lee's question, which was asked to me also in a PM, was answered in a PM. Regards, Shawn

I did not ask a question in my PM to you. My PM to you, titled "A question for you" contained nothing but a link to this thread.

//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

At Lee's request, my PM to him is reprinted here: "This large letter warning in red, which appears on the top of the 1980 and newer forum and reads: WARNING! We have a new policy on Bashing Current Production Guns. Dictionary: "3. Informal: To criticize. . . ." My read of the warning and policy is that "bashing" includes negative comments about the current production models,

Really?
You consider 'bashing' and 'criticizing' to be at the same level?
Let's quote the whole passage you quoted the free dictionary- bashing

bash (băsh)
v. bashed, bash·ing, bash·es
v.tr.

1. To strike with a heavy, crushing blow: The thug bashed the hood of the car with a sledgehammer.
​

2. To beat or assault severely: The police arrested the men who bashed an immigrant in the park.
​

3. Informal To criticize (another) harshly, accusatorially, and threateningly: "He bashed the . . . government unmercifully over the . . . spy affair"​

In today's common lingo, I don't think many of us consider criticism and bashing to be identical. The Urban Dictionary does a better job of defining current usage- Urban Dictionary: bashing)

1. bashing

1. criticizing or defaming​

2. hating and violently attacking someone or something on sight​

2. Bashing

1. Hitting someone or something hard.​

2. Giving someone a going over, beating them up.​

3. Criticising or insulting, in a derogatory manner, something which you don't like. Usually refers to different cultures or countries.​

3. bashing

The concept of saying rude things about a certain subject over the Internet.​

Criticizing has a somewhat different and far less harsh meaning the free dictionary - criticizing

crit·i·cize (krĭt′ĭ-sīz′)v.
crit·i·cized, crit·i·ciz·ing, crit·i·ciz·es v.tr.

1. To find fault with: criticized the decision as unrealistic. See Usage Note at critique.​

2. To judge the merits and faults of; analyze and evaluate.​

I am sorry if I have misunderstood something about this policy. However, I have understood the warnings and the written policy to mean no negative comments about current production models,

Like I said, show me the quote where I said "no negative comments".
I do not see it.

I do see:

This 1980 to the Present forum is a place for enthusiasts of S&W revolvers of this era to enjoy discussion of those products.

KEY WORDS - enthusiasts, discussion

If you are one of the people who constantly enters threads ONLY to spew your hatred for the internal lock, MIM parts, or whatever you dislike about modern S&W revolvers, STOP doing it.

KEY PHRASE - "ONLY to spew your hatred for the internal lock, MIM parts, or whatever you dislike about modern S&W revolvers, STOP doing it."

I am telling you to leave the people who do like and use these products alone to enjoy them, and move along to a discussion about something you like. Just as we don't allow anti-gunners to come here and bash you and your guns, you don't need to be here bashing the modern products and making the owners of them feel inferior or stupid for using them.

In other words, the people who buy and use the current guns do NOT have to suffer other people's hate for those current guns.

I am not saying that you cannot post about a problem that you have personally had. Tell us about it. Give us the facts. But DON'T come here merely to tell us what you hate and will never buy.

hmmmmmmmm...........that almost sounds like real, logical criticism would be allowed.

Bottom Line-
Again, I'm not telling you what to like or yearn for.
Just leave the people who are enjoying these products alone.
If you're going to bust if you can't spout off, tell it to the factory- Contact Smith & Wesson

Is the intent here so hard to grasp?
If someone is a Ford guy, should he go to Chevy forums every day and spout his hate for Chevy products and state he'll never buy one? Should he point out how stupid the Chevy owners are?

//////////////////////////////////////////////////////

If any of you do not know why this new policy was begun, you must not have read the 1980 to Present forum very much.
I have seen a newbie show up and proudly post his new gun, and be ridiculed and derided for buying the "modern junk" when he could have hit a gun show or pawn shop and bought a vintage treasure. Being a newbie to guns, he need not fear being stuck with the worst junk the pawn shop or gun flipper has......

I'm sure most of you saw the genesis here-
http://smith-wessonforum.com/s-w-re...h-brings-back-model-66-a-3.html#post137642085


Ladies and Gentlemen,
Be sure the new policy is here to stay.
Your transition can be as easy or as hard as you desire to make it.
You can work with us or against us on this policy.