First Colt, now Smith and Wesson

P

Phillip

New member
Okay, S&W is not saying they are going to stop sales....at least not yet.
But, I just heard a short news report on the radio that S&W is now making thier dealers sign a pledge of ethics. What this "ethical code" consists of is as yet unknown.
Smith and Wesson also will not allow dealers to sell thier handguns without trigger locks installed.
Anyone have any more info on this?
 
So it's not really " . . . now Smith and Wesson".

When arguing about trigger locks, pro-gun people say that trigger locks are fine as long as they're not mandated by law. Well now we've got trigger locks getting into the hands of people who need them, and it's optional. No one is being forced to buy or use a trigger lock. What's the problem?

------------------
“The whole of the Bill (of Rights) is a declaration of the right of the people at large or considered as individuals. ... It establishes some rights of the individual as unalienable and which consequently, no majority has a right to deprive them of.” -Alexander Addison, 1789
 
My understanding from the news this morning, is that S&W is requireing that the dealers sign this form stating they will (1) Offer trigger locks, (2) something else I can't remember, (3) pay more attention to who they are selling to. Sounds to me like they want to cover their backsides with a document makeing the seller ultimately responcible if the courts ever actually are able to place blame back on the manufaturer for the actions of a completely different character.

Yes this sounds ludicrous to anyone with an ounce of sense, but who ever said the courts should operate with logic?

------------------
"Is he quite safe?" "Of course he isn't safe, he is a lion, but he is good." - about Aslan (God-image) from CS Lewis's the Cronicles of Narnia
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Smith & Wesson Sets Ethics Code for Gun Shops, Wash Post Says



Washington, Oct. 22 <A HREF="aol://4344:30.bloombrg.389091.602536905">(Bloombe
rg)</A> -- Tomkins Plc's Smith & Wesson Corp., the leading U.S. handgun
manufacturer, said gun dealers selling its products must sign an ethics code,
the Washington Post reported, citing the company's retail sales manager, Paul
Pluff. Smith & Wesson said dealers who refuse to sign the pledge, which
requires them to sell the company's guns with safety locks, closely monitor
buyers and obey all firearms laws, or are accused of facilitating illegal
sales won't be able to sell Smith & Wesson products, the newspaper said.
Pluff denied the new code resulted from pressure exerted by lawsuits against
gun manufacturers, saying the company began working on the ethics code a year
ago, the Post said.


Over two dozen U.S. municipalities have lawsuits pending against gun makers
including Smith & Wesson, Sturm, Ruger & Co., and Colt's Manufacturing Co.


(Wash. Post 10/22 A11 WPST <Go> )


Oct/22/1999 7:04

[/quote]

------------------
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes" RKBA!
 
Based on what I've heard about S&W's proposal so far, my tentative response would be that, with the exception of providing trigger locks with all S&W sales, the so-called code of ethics is merely a repetition of what the letter and spirit of the law already require. The vast majority of dealers are scrupulously law-abiding anyway. The few bad dealers won't be affected by S&W's code of ethics any more than criminals are affected by gun control laws. So, to me, S&W is proposing an empty solution to a non-problem.

Worse, S&W's proposal looks to me like a concession to anti-gun propaganda. It seems to agree with the propagandists that legitimate dealers are unethical and are a major source of criminals' guns. It also seems to imply that trigger locks are a cure for poor gun safety education.

Maybe I'm overreacting or jumping to conclusions. I guess time will tell.
 
Before we go off on S&W for requiring trigger locks be sold with there weapon, it is no
more an attack on RKBA as a bicycle maker selling a bike lock being and attack on
freedom of travel.

If S&W wants to sell a trigger lock with each gun (they have sold lockable cases for
years) then they should put one in each retail pack and raise the price by $5.00 each. If you do not want you can through it away, if you really hate S&W or can not afford the $5.00 then don't buy from S&W.

As a point of Honor S&W should sell the cable style lock that really does prevent a fire
arm from working NOT a silly trigger lock
 
I thought S&W was already selling a locking device with each new handgun. I think one problem they have had is dealers taking the lock out and selling that seperately.
http://www.smith-wesson.com/misc/safety.html



------------------
Peace through superior firepower...
Keith

If the 2nd is antiquated, what will happen to the rest.
"the right to keep and bear arms."
 
I must again agree with Nestor Riveras' point of view. I like a another lock in the box. AS LONG AS NOBODY SAYS WHERE IT GOES. Hey, it is my property and I will responsibly control it. If I don't, either sue or arrest me. Good luck.
 
Sounds like a reasonably prudent thing to do to avoid liability. We know it's BS because safety can't be bought - it must be practiced. But when you have a naive jury, especially one assembled in an area heavily saturated with media disinformation, you've got the setup for a lawsuit in the waiting. The real solution is tort reform but we can't put tort lawyers out of work, can we?

------------------
Vigilantibus et non dormientibus jura subveniunt
 
First of all, I am not making an argument against trigger locks. Carl's "rant" on them is good enought argument against them, and I am glad I read it.
But, I find it disconcerting that S&W is bringing these policies (ethical code) to bear as there are already laws which govern the sale of thier handguns. They (S&W) are bowing to the antis by doing it whether they realize it or not, and it certainly won't absolve them of any liability. We have all seen how ludicrous the suits against handgun companies are, but that has not stopped them from being filed.
S&W management is trying to protect the company from liability, and they are doing it voluntarily. But we all know that when you give, the antis take. And they will take more and more. S&W just put more blood in the water.
 
We are really living in a "Lawyer" state.
his is very much like a police state but they are underhanded and use the force of thier words (secret laguage-legaleze) and the threat of monetary strangulation to enforce thier will. They require large amounts of money and luxury goods to survive.
It is WAY past time to eviserate these vipers. Old Will had it right. If we followed his advice we would have the lawyer overpopulation down to a reasonable level.
Another solution to the government problen is to not elect Lawyers. Most elected officials are of this persuasion. The
reality of justice is not valid to them. They worship the Law and money. The more money a law allows them to put in thier pocket the better the law to them.

TORT REFORM IS NEEDED IN THIS COUNTRY. WE NEED A SIMPLE SET OF LAWS AND LEGAL SISTEM!

After we manage to get the laws reformed and simplified for the common man it will be time to take the Insurance menace down to size.

Sorry for the ranting about common sense.

Also remember that S&W is owned by a BRITISH
Corperation. They are all for TRTBA...right.

Cheers,

ts
 
Laws and lawsuits aside, I doubt that S&W is overjoyed when one of their products is used in a crime. If they can sign up only honest distributors and dealers, I think it is to their (and our) advantage from almost any point of view. Does anyone here want to see more crooked dealers on TV, telling people with a record to "just sign any name" or saying "put down you are over 21" to a 15 year old? I don't. I know BATF is supposed to police dealers, but pressure from the other direction can't hurt.

Jim
 
Love those instructions. "Place key out of reach of children." Hey, if the gun has to be unloaded and uncocked, then locked, it's useless for it's design purpose anyhow, why not skip the lock and just put the gun itself out of reach of children?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top