How many folks wrote SW?

G

Glenn E. Meyer

New member
I did. Told him that he is adopting a policy that will not allow my daughter to use my gun to defend herself. More also.

Read other great letters.

Who else did?
 
I did. Told him that my issued 5906 would no longer be my duty weapon and that I could not recommend a SW weapon for the department as we are switching either to .40 or .45. Said that while 26 handguns for a small midwestern department was nothing compared to hundreds of handguns for a large agency, loss of civilian sales would hurt in the long haul as dpartments only purchase new duty weapons every 15-20 years.
Jeff
 
I did, back when the rumors were just coming out. Ed replied to my blistering message with "We do not and will not negotiate with anti-gunners."

I guess WJC and crew don't fit Ed's definition of anti-gunners.
 
I DID! Listen guys, e-mails only do so much good. We need to fill his snail mail box to capacity EVERYDAY and send so darn many faxes that he has by stock in a paper company to read them all.

Heck, One of the guys at my forum (Junglerat) permanently rendered seven S&W handguns totally inoperable and he is going to send Ed the pictures of them. That is the kind of thing I would like to see all of us do. We should cut all of our S&W handguns into little bitty pieces with a cutting torch and mail the dick (Ed) the remains.

NOW THAT WOULD MAKE A STATEMENT!!!

What do you think and what is S&W's snail mail and fax info????

Joe


Joe's Second Amendment Message Board
 
I sent an email and letter informing them of the beating in the PR arena they are taking in the gun community and that the govt promises to buy guns is pretty flat considering they are buying FOREIGN guns and ammo at every turn and want the lowest bid. They may have forgotten the CIVILIAN market is where they will live or die.
 
I sent an email and letter informing them of the beating in the PR arena they are taking in the gun community and that the govt promises to buy guns is pretty flat considering they are buying FOREIGN guns and ammo at every turn and want the lowest bid. They may have forgotten the CIVILIAN market is where they will live or die.
(if they are going to kiss ass it should be ours.)
 
I told him he could shove his politically correct products up his most convenient orifice. Then I thanked him for providing the rest of the industry with an object lesson on how little compromise gets you... They sold the farm, and only stopped SOME of the lawsuits against them!

Please, DON'T chop up those guns; Why make Sahrah Brady's day? Donate them to someone who can't afford a gun!

------------------
Sic semper tyrannis!
 
I sent an e-mail immediately, will send a letter today. I listed the model and serial number of the S&W pistols and revolvers I currently own (20+) and informed Easy Ed that S&W was now on my boycott list, right under Colt.

------------------
Slowpoke Rodrigo...he pack a gon...

Vote for the Neal Knox 13
 
I did not.
Actually reading the agreement alarms and infuriates me. The whole thing was done secratively and treacherously as a coup, like almost all of Clinton's supposed great victories. But this is why he as so few lasting accomplishments.
It is now another of his done but unfinished deals. I am going to let the dust settle for a week or two to try and figure out the implications and consequences.
All your reactions are fine. I suspect this will have a big impact on a company that in the past has made some really fine firearms.
 
I wrote S&W a polite e-mail requesting information regarding S&W's stance on the situation.

Having not read the thousands of posts about this, I've yet to see Smith's stance.

I'll wait & see.

Boycott if you'd like. But cutting up perfectly servicable firearms is dumb, in my book.

If nothing else, organise a demonstration, send out press releases & give the firearms to needy families. That would make a point the newsies couldn't resist. Major publicity.

I might never buy another new Smith, but even if S&W CEO killed God, I wouldn't ruin a perfectly good firearm to make a point which is nebulous at best.
 
Sent an email immediately, but no response from SW. I also sent emails to other gun manufacturers urging them to stand firm against coercive tactics, and would encourage others to do the same. Speaking as a business owner, it's always good to have customers tell you what you're doing right to balance out the complaints.
 
What good will a letter or e-mail do at this point? Denial is not a river in Egypt. The deal is done now and S&W has shown their true colors-----by turning on us and the rest of the industry.

The only "writing" I will do is with my wallet and you can make book that none of the contents thereof will ever go to S&W!

------------------
"When guns are outlawed;I will be an outlaw."
 
Will - CEOs fail and economic tides turn against companies.

Lawyers can find the way out of a cohersive deal. Get a new administration in and give
SW the incentive to know that they are screwed.

The Nile line is getting old
 
Brett is right - send them a picture of you giving a would-be new gun purchaser your S&W - let them know they lost a sale.

"....most convenient orifice" Mighty nice of you to take his convenience into account when telling him to shove it. :)
 
If anyone plans on destroying any firearms....please just send them to me through the ffl i use.....contact me and Ill give you the nbrs to talk to him....tks..surely we're not that dumb...fubsy.
 
I concede that I should have not referred to the Egyptian river but we are talking more than a tide here. We are looking at the rest of the industry being forced to play or get out. We are talking about S&W admitting that they did not do enough to stop crime when we all know that people kill people, not inanimate objects. We are talking about a company that betrayed their fellow teamates and did an end run around a legal strategy that gun manufacturers had spent millions to build. The very idea that Smith would come out and claim this was done to benefit the average Joe is ludicrous. New U.S. President or not;new Smith and Wesson CEO or not;new economic tide or not, I will never buy a Smith and Wesson nor will I allow one in my house or hunting camp.

Beretta has always taken the high road and makes one heckuva Duck Blind Shotgun not to mention a couple of pretty doggone good pistols. Springfield Armory puts out a fine, aaffordable 1911 variant. With people like this why should we fuel apostates like Smith and Wesson, Colt, HK and possibly Glock? I kid you not, I will take a Makarov over a Smith pistol any day from here on out.

Folks it comes down to the fact that that there's no such thing as a "half penny". You either are or you aren't in all aspects of life and Smith and Wesson isn't---------a friend of the Second Amendment.

------------------
"When guns are outlawed;I will be an outlaw."

[This message has been edited by Will Beararms (edited March 20, 2000).]
 
I did. Told 'em I'd carried a S&W for years but that will now change as I am now ashamed to admit I carry on of their products. New gun buyin' time for me - and it won't be a S&W or (pending the outcome of the pending news) it won't be a Glock either! Looks like it may be a Taurus Millennium for me. :)
 
Sir:
I wish to express my dissapointment and confusion concerning the recent response of S&W the HUD lawsuit. Many people in this nation, including myself, and most importantly my wife, depend upon quality S&W firearms to defend our very lives in these dangerous times. I am dissappointed that you have chosen to forfeit the civilian market in favor of the other agencies served by S&W. I'm confused that you would forfeit the reputation of dependability in the gravest extreme for the inevitable failure of the promises of "smart-gun" technology. We consider quality firearms manufacturers, like S&W, as essential partners in the defense of our lives and our liberties in this nation. Please reconsider this new policy direction and allow the nations firearms owners to rally in your defense against these spurios attacks. However; we will no longer support those companies that, by policy, equate the necessities of personal defense with the prevalence of criminal activity.

Has anyone received a response?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top