WTK: Why Doesn't Someone make a "Lock Filler"?

[G-Mac]

Originally posted by Wyatt Earp: What liability? For eliminating a storage lock?

It's about as much liability as throwing away the cheesy padlock that comes with most guns these days.

The obvious difference is that one is built in and one isn't.

Disabling a SAFETY DEVICE that is BUILT IN to any product is a huge liability. I'd bet most gunsmiths would refuse the job, if asked to do it.

Or...let's put it this way...if their insurance carrier found out that they were doing it, they'd probably regret it.

 

[dsf]

Originally posted by G-Mac:

Originally posted by Wyatt Earp: What liability? For eliminating a storage lock?

It's about as much liability as throwing away the cheesy padlock that comes with most guns these days.

The obvious difference is that one is built in and one isn't.

Disabling a SAFETY DEVICE that is BUILT IN to any product is a huge liability. I'd bet most gunsmiths would refuse the job, if asked to do it.

Or...let's put it this way...if their insurance carrier found out that they were doing it, they'd probably regret it.

I tend to agree.

It would be interesting to have an attorney post their opinion in detail. The best I can do is relate that I spent this afternoon alone with an attorney (contract law specifically, but she still reaches for her sneakers whenever an ambulance flies by) and her answer is that were she the defendant's attorney (in a shooting) she'd greatly prefer the lock be untouched; were she representing an injured plaintiff she would be quite pleased to learn the (storage) lock was disabled. As she ineloquently put it "Why would I want the additional duty of explaining why the idiot removed a factory installed locking device?"

 

[SUTHERBRO3]

Originally posted by BlackAgnes:
Oversize cylinder release latch would cover it...

wHERE CAN A OVERSIZED RELEASE LATCH BE FOUND?
SUTHERBRO3

 

[pinkymingeo]

The dithering over potential lawsuits is nothing compared to the whimpering in reloading discussions, where the mere mention of lead or mercury spawns countless recommendations for biohazard suits, regular blood testing and other ridiculous methods for dealing with imaginary risks. If a kid gives himself a well-deserved lobotomy with your gun there'll be a world of trouble, locks notwithstanding. My recommendation is keep strangers away from your guns, keep shooting, and quit worrying.

 

[G-Mac]

Originally posted by pinkymingeo: My recommendation is keep strangers away from your guns, keep shooting, and quit worrying.

...and don't buy S&W revolvers with stupid, built-in locks....the solution to a problem that doesn't exist.

 

[mikey1966]

"well deserved labotamy" ? thats kinda cold and sociopathic. anyway , guns have been made with no locks for years. only ignorant , greedy companies that manufacture locks choose to destroy an american icon handgun. but yes , the long padlocks have been included for years and thats certainly good enough. you guys have to stop buying them. also , i am not qualified to diagnose anyone... it just sounds really bad. anyone agree about a "well deserved labotamy"?

 

[Porthos]

You could always thread a zerk fitting in there.

Seriously, couldn't someone machine it for a countersunk screw? I haven't really ever looked at the new Smiths so I wouldn't know.

Steve

 

[Bullseye Smith]

Wasn't the ruling of the high court touch on the lock saying they don't need to have them? If that is true it is OK to remove them. Later John

 

[seb5]

If S&W heard from all of us through the dollars instead of the internet maybe they would revisit the issue. It's simple economics. I will never own a S&W with a lock. I really like some of the newer models but won't go there. It's just my personal issue with the overly liability conscious attorneys that seem to dictate too much of our lives nowadays.

 

[2x6]

I've solved the lock problem for myself - I have never, nor will I ever, purchase a S&W with the IL. There are probably at least a half dozen guns in the current S&W catalog that I would like to buy and could live with despite not being P&R, missing the firing pin on the hammer, containing MIM parts, and lacking that old radiant finish. However, I draw the line with IL - to me it's a just butt ugly distraction and not necessary. I'll continue to look for the older models to satisfy my addiction.