Ed Schultz of S&W Answers my E-Mail

C

CassidyGT

New member
Check it out - Ed Schultz CEO of S&W answered my e-mail. here is the e-mail and below is his reply.

Thanks alot!! If all Gun Manufacturers stuck together we might have had a
>chance. But you blew it. I will not be buying any more S & W products, I
will
>urge others not to do so, I will post your despicable act on my web site.
>
>You guys just don't get it do you. Since when has compromise gotten us
>anything? Nothing but more laws that infringe on the rights of law-abiding
>citizens. As a prominent gun manufacturer, you have a moral responsibility
to
>preserve freedom and liberty that transcends your bottom-line. I think you
>should resign and let someone with more vision and a better developed sense
of
>values take over as CEO. Why this urge to make it difficult for me to
defend my
>family? Why the need to destroy my right to self-defense? The blood of a
>thousand victims will be on your hands and I hope you think about that. I
hope
>you think about every woman brutally raped who was not given the
opportunity to
>defend herself, every family victimized. My God man, this is America!!
Freedom
>should be on your lips at every moment, liberty running through your
fingers
>like blessed waters! You are supposed to be a leader, not a capitulator.
You
>are supposed to help me defend my life and liberty, not trying to take it
away.
>
>Thane Bellomo

Now the reply:

I'm amazed. Talk about not getting it. You are not much different than our
enemies. They believe gun manufacturers are responsible for what third
party criminals do with the products. You believe gun manufacturers make
laws. Companies don't vote, only citizens do. You too, are only looking to
find someone to blame for what is going on that you don't agree with.

S&W is vigoriously fighting the lawsuits AND we are winning. We are also
willing to sit down with anyone to discuss ways to reduce Violence, Crime
and accidental shootings. We are not willing to compromise our rights.
Personally, I will die before I give up my guns, are you willing to do the
same?? Doesn't sound like it to me, so go ahead and get rid of your S&W's

Ed Shultz

That is a GOOD reply and I am glad to have heard it. I hope all the CEO's of gun companies think the same.

THoughts anyone?
 
Maybe you should reply back and tell them that many on TFL are standing behind him and that his post has cleared up some of the rumers and misinformation going around.
 
Cassidy..

I hope all CEOs, including Schultz, mean it rather than merely think it.

I'm a cynic, and I hate to tell you, but Schultz's reply does nothing to alleviate my apprehensions. He failed to address the fact that the capitulating actions of the GMs in these suits can indeed benefit the anti's, thereby making it unnecessary for citizens to vote, as no legislation would be required. He also failed to address the fact that, while GMs are indeed winning, an offer to settle with the losing party(ies) obviously destroys one's winning position...i.e snatching defeat from the jaws of victory ;).
And, one last comment...he said go ahead and get rid of your S&W's...sure, whether you keep or get rid of them won't affect Smith in any way. Smith already got their money, and won't ever get another dime related to those particular guns whether they exist or not.

Bottomline....pretty hollow as far as I'm concerned

------------------
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes" RKBA!
 
I did reply to him and expressed my graditude that he not only responded, but responded in such a positive manner. I urged him to express these bold views publically and give us some inspiration.
 
Cassidy, would it be okay if I copy/paste your email and his response at a couple of other locations where people are coming down hard on S&W? Let me know. -Kframe
 
In fairness to the gun manufacturers, most are trying to 1) stay in the civilian firearms business and 2) keep their products out of the hands of BGs, without any more gun "control" laws.

No gun company likes to see its product featured on national TV as the gun used by some two-bit killer. So if they can take some reasonable steps to reduce the chances of that, they will do so. That may mean more impositions on distributors/dealers.
Maybe Rugers will not be so readily available at gun shows, and the dealer will charge a higher price. Is that so important?

Of course if you are seriously paranoid and won't buy from a dealer, you probably have all the untraceable guns you can use. (You are also wrong; any gun made after 1968 can be traced, with a little work and leaning hard on people, right to your mountain hideaway.) Can anyone who is using this forum seriously think he/she can't be traced if anyone wants to bother?

I am reminded of the fellow who wouldn't tell me the serial number of his M1 rifle because the "government might find out about it." He had bought it through DCM.

Jim
 
I guess now I'll have to order that 629. here's mine:

Subject:
Re: Gun Owners/Industry Betrayed by S&W?
Date:
Thu, 20 Jan 2000 15:40:34 -0600
From:
Ed Shultz <eshultz@smith-wesson.com>
To:
JWJohnson <jwjohndc@inw.net>


Smith&Wesson has not broken ranks with the industry. The industry is
defending against the lawsuits in the courts and winning so far. The
cities, who are being used by the anti-gun crowd to get at the gun
manufacturers have said that what they want is reduced Crime, Violence and
accidental shootings. What I have said is that S&W has always been willing
to discuss with anyone ways to reduce Crime, Violence and accidental
shootings. In fact those discussions have been going on for a long time.
We've added trigger locks and it now appears that the White House is taking
our suggestion to enforce the current laws rather than passing new ones
seriously.

Ed Shultz
-----Original Message-----
From: JWJohnson <jwjohndc@inw.net>
To: ceo@smith-wesson.com <ceo@smith-wesson.com>
Date: Monday, January 17, 2000 8:54 PM
Subject: Gun Owners/Industry Betrayed by S&W?


>It has come to my attention (via the web forums) that S&W has broken
>ranks and is considering or negotiating a settlement in the lawsuits
>against firearm manufacturors.
>I hope this is an example of misinformation on the web and not the
>outright betrayal of the lawful citizens and gun industry.
>Almost 25 years ago I bought my first handgun- a S&W model 66. Many
>years and many guns later, I still have that 66. I was to complete an
>order at my local dealers tommorrow for a new 629. I will NOT place that
>order until I am satisfied the news today is just ugly rumor.
>I hope you will respond, and I thank you in advance.
>
>JW Johnson
 
i have been emailing with Ed Schultz for a couple of months

nice to have a CEO that responds to email.
i have invited him to visit TFL. Maybe he is lurking...

dZ
 
I got a reply from Ed a few minutes ago. That guy's even more blunt than me. Love it! :D

S&W's off my sierra list. Other companies should take note of how S&W responds to controversy, instead of weaseling about it (yes, Zilkha, that means YOU!).

------------------
"If your determination is fixed, I do not counsel you to despair. Few things are impossible to diligence and skill. Great works are performed not by strength, but perseverance."
-- Samuel Johnson
 
protoolman,
If it's reported in the news, it must be true. right?
Maybe, just maybe, the 'other side' would benefit from some well placed rumors right about now. I don't think the (formerly anti-tobacco and now anti-gun) lawyers are above any sort of trick.
phony e-mail?? I can't vouch for the sincerity of the reply. But I can assure you my post is EXACTLY what was sent to, and recieved from Mr Shultz. complete.
 
Mine too. Exactly what I sent and what I received. I guess he could be lying, but why he would go through the trouble to lie to me is something I can't figure out. I guess stranger things have happened, but I tend to believe that the sell out thing is just a matter of perspective. ANY compromise is a sell-out as far as I am concerned. Since he is primarily a businessman, he probably thinks that he is not selling out at all, but rather merely talking about the issues. Who knows.
 
He took the time to reply to us and I don't think there is any deception.
they can talk all they want about reducing Crime, Violence, and Accidental Shootings. And IF they can find solutions WITHOUT compromising any of our Rights, what's the objection?
of course the anti's DO want to compromise our rights. but in the middle, are some people who just want to reduce C,V, & AS and are unaware of the broader implications.
These are the people most succeptible to the propaganda, and most in need of enlightenment.
Can we afford to alienate those in the middle?
 
He replied to mine as well. The text of our communications follow:
Dear Mr. Shultz,

The news I saw might have been somewhat abridged, hence the confusion.

We gun owners and Second Amendment folks feel as if we’re becoming pariahs for supporting our rights. We do know we are on the side of the Constitution, though.

Once a right is lost…it doesn’t come back (peacefully). And I do wholeheartedly believe that there are sectors of government who do want to disarm the American people.

However, as you may expect, after Colt pulled their sales to civilians, we are probably a bit sensitive to the manufacturers statements. So far, S&W and Ruger have been subjects of these rumors.

I also support an aggressive stance against these frivolous lawsuits and government trying to limit in anyway, shape or form the right to bear arms. I, personally, have communicated with my congressional representatives (House and Senate) on several occasions. Currently, we are pushing very hard for Bob Barr’s HB 1032 (prohibiting frivolous lawsuits).

But the “liberal” politicians don’t play fair…using innuendo and statements and statistics out of context to further their agenda (as Schumer did with the BATF statistics just before Christmas). Glendenning of Maryland is trying to push “Smart Gun” legislation even though the technology isn’t there yet. Our response to that is, that IF this legislation goes through, it will apply to everybody (not just civilians). I am curious if Glendenning will feel comfortable being guarded by untested technology.

As you know, we NRA folks get quite a bit of BS thrown at us by the media…just as the gun industry does.

We know the gun industry cannot afford a protracted fight in the courts. We know that you have to satisfy your stockholders first even if this means negotiating when the right thing to do is fight (I work Quality Assurance…I’ve learned a long time ago that the correct decision is not always the right decision).



Best regards,

Roy Jackson



-----Original Message-----
From: Ed Shultz [mailto:eshultz@smith-wesson.com]
Sent: Friday, January 21, 2000 13:31
To: L.M.Jackson
Subject: Re: Lawsuits



Sir; I do not know what news you watched, but I'm looking at the transcript of the program I was on and it clearly states the I said the industry has done nothing wrong. In every interview I state that we produce a legal product, distribute it legally, and sell it only to those that can legally purchase it. Further, I remind the interviewer that every purchaser of our products is approved by the FBI before the sale can be concluded. I said that the cities are being used by the anti-gun group to get ate the industry by sponsoring these lawsuits. The cities are claiming that they are only looking for help in further reducing Crime, Violence and accidental shootings. S&W has always been willing to discuss ways of reducing Crime, Violence, and accidental shootings with anyone and it have changed many things over the last 150 years when we thought it would help in these areas.



Pleae understand that a company doesn't vote only citizens do. Trying to blame a company for what happens in the legislature is no different than trying to blame a company for what a third party criminal does with it's products. As an individual I'm not willing to give up the Second Ammendment OR my guns!! Ed Shultz

-----Original Message-----
From: L.M.Jackson <rjackson@cyberia.com>
To: ceo@smith-wesson.com <ceo@smith-wesson.com>
Date: Tuesday, January 18, 2000 4:54 AM
Subject: Lawsuits

Dear Sir,

I saw you on the news last night. I am very sorry you took the stance you did…you are admitting industry guilt even though you are not guilty.

I’m requesting you reconsider your decision, at least until Bob Barr’s HB 1032 has a chance to go through.

You could, as an industry, counter sue both the cities AND the feds (for lack of enforcement) which would put them on the defensive. Also, the industry could sue Hollywood studios for their irresponsible use on firearms in movies. At the minimum, this would put you, as a gun manufacturer, in a stronger position.

Clinton has been backing down on his lawsuit threats since just before Christmas. We got Schumer and his misuse of BATF statistics.

If S&W follows through with their capitulation, it will undo many of the calls we firearm owners (as well as the suits in Texas and D.C.).

I have called MY congressional reps on several occasions. Your statement is making my position, and the position of millions of gunowners in jeopardy.

Again, please reconsider your decision…it was the wrong decision.

Thank you,

Roy Jackson
 
I'm sorry to have to take the step, but when
I heard S&W calling out their new "friends"
the feds alleging antitrust violations last
week, I just went ahead and traded my Smiths.
At first, I wasn't going to buy any new ones,
but the whining to the feds pushed it too far. Actually, the Ti Taurus was better built than the 337 I traded. We all may be better off in the end, and S&W can enjoy those government contracts.
 
So how does forbidding dealers from selling AR-15s and perfectly legal preban high-cap magazines help prevent crime?

How does surrendering the autonomy of ones own company AND THE DISTRIBUTORS AND RETAILERS THAT ONE DOES BUSINESS WITH to a nebulous "oversight commission" help reduce crime? I'm all for S&W assisting in traces on guns used in crimes. Great, no problem. I'm all for selling safety locks with every gun. But this agreement went a little beyond that point.

The fact is that dealers who continue to do business with S&W will be forced to sub,it to controls placed on their inventory and business practicies by the "oversight commission." S&W has the right to make any agreement they want. They do not have the right to involve their business partners without prior consent.
 
I agree with TBeck. As I've written before, both here and in letters to the editor, the S&W agreement is not about trigger locks, no matter how much editorialists and Ed Schultz might like to pretend it is. It's about S&W voluntarily choosing to participate in federal efforts to block sales of entirely legal products made by other manufacturers, and about choosing to help the Clinton administration place more power in the hands of anti-gun bureaucrats who are not accountable to the voting public.
 
No offense, folks, but just compare what Schultz's says with what the agreement says. As has been said, how does running dealers out of business, forcing them to stop selling legal products, and creating abominations of your own products stop or deter crime or protect our rights.

This is about as logical as saying that you're against abortion and then becoming a supplier of the "morning after" pill. S&W sold out. End of story. It is now the darling of the gun control movement, as evidenced by the support it's getting from the gov't.

If Schultz believes the crap he's spewing, then he's delusional. And if he doesn't . . . well then he's in good company with the Liar-In-Chief.

Oh, and Mr. Schultz, if you're lurking, have you had the chance to run my e-mails by your counsel yet? I'd love to see their reaction when they realize that by admitting that smart guns can be manufactured within 3 years, they've admitted that they could have been doing it for years. The individual wrongful death/negligent design plaintiff's lawyers are going to love that admission of guilt.
 
By the way, why are we trying to poltically rehabiliate S&W now? Schultz got ticked off in his e-mails and said we were wrong. Well, so what. What's he going to do next, donate $ 1 million dollars to the NRA museum like Bill Ruger did, who went from being a pariah for helping write and pass the '94 Crime Bill to the patron saint of the NRA?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top