I'M Getting Mine, Who Cares About You

It is wrong headed to want to destroy domestic civillian arms maker who makes the best quality of concealed carry revolvers for civillians.
Click to expand...


Your right, it is wrong, but it has nothing to do with what kind of guns they make, or how good they are.
The instigators of the frivolous lawsuits are the problem, but nobody seems to want to recognize this.
Attack the source, not the symptom.

[/quote]It is wrong headed to choose a self-defence weapon that is inferior with the only reason being one of politics.[/quote]

Again your right, but it's only a matter of opinion that all other comparble guns are inferior to S&W.

[/quote]Hate me, IDGAS, IMO SMITH and WESSON makes the best light weight concealable revolvers on the market. I buy what I want from who I want. I'm buying a new SW342PD.[/quote]

If your buying S&W because you agree that they aren't the real problem, then buying is the right thing to do.
However, if you buy S&W even if you agree with the boycott, that's something else altogether....
 
I've owned considerably more than 6 Smiths. 686's and 29's to be specific. As I said I detest the look and feel of Smith semis and always have. I'm not a wheelgun fan in general but all that I have owned, except my Anaconda(obviously bought before Colt's ignorance), have been Smiths. So far as I can see I am now without revolver options since singles are just not my thing and I had a couple bad experiences with Taurus long ago. The point is that the attempt to write off people who don't buy Smith now because they never did just don't float, sorry.

And I don't know how to be any more specific about companies that do business with Smith. The local gun shop makes a choice what they handle. Both in my immediate area have, for all practical purposes, eliminated Smith. Had they not I'd have found someplace else to go. All choices we can make ourselves. Many of the companies that deal directly with Smith don't have choices. They have contracts they have to honor or they simply cease to exist for that or other reasons hinging on Smith. It's tough to penalize someone who's stuck in the middle. Plus, of course, how many Smith suppliers are any of us likely to do direct personal business with? Very few.

It is true though that Smith, probably, isn't going away. The best possibility and outcome of any boycott is to get Tomkins to divest itself of Smith. How I, and most others, will treat Smith in that eventuality would really depend on what course they took. Once again, it's all about choices and the ones Smith, or its owners in whatever form, make decide those made on down the line to the consumer.
 
  • I regret posting this thread. It was conceived in anger and frustration. I apologize to the site owner, staff, and members for that.
  • As I don't want to be perceived as trolling and running, I would like to make a few comments.
  • mikemck-I don't agree with a lot of what you have to say, but you do conduct yourself like a gentleman and you try to be fairminded and evenhanded. However, I think it is ridiculous to posit that Ed Shultz alone is responsible for the decision to sign The Agreement. He surely could not make such a monumental decision affecting the wellbeing of his employers without their knowledge. As for Kimber, and whoever else might be buying manufactured parts from S&W, I assume they have pre-existing contracts that they are honoring. I would like to think they are searching for alternate suppliers. If Kimber has signed an agreement to purchase slides or whatever from S&W since the first of the year, then I would indeed refrain from giving them business. As for buying used weapons, I don't agree with your logic. The company does not benefit directly. They may get inadvertant advertising benefits,but that does not justify your argument.
  • Wallew- You are exactly correct
  • BigG- I am not an activist OR a poseur.Or a phoney or an armchair commando(pre-emptive strike). I chose my handle because I bought an AR-10 in October, I like it, and I didn't want to use my real name on the forum.Paranoid, but not delusional.
  • I am middle aged. I started shooting two years ago this month. A newbie. A babe. I own enough weapons to make my wife cringe when she hears "gun-a-month-club". I'm not bragging, I'm just telling you a little of who I am. I do not own any S&W firearms. That is not by design. I held no malice toward them Pre-agreement. I would like to own several some day. But not untill something changes in a big way with this agreement. You don't have to be a Rhodes scholar to know this agreement is despicable. You don't need to have twenty years shooting experience to see that the government is equally to blame. You just have to read it.
  • Again, I apologize for opening such a stinky can of worms. This board has seen enough bickering and rudeness the last three months.
 
AR-10, you have a good point about the companies having pre-existing contracts. This is the ONLY time this has been mentioned, and I will grant that it is a possibility.
If that is the case, these companies should not be a part of the S&W boycott. However, if they freely choose to do business with S&W, of course they should also be held to the same standard that S&W and all gun owners are held to.

If gun shops, gun owners, gun mags, etc, are expected to voluntarily shun S&W because the "sold out", why would other companies not be expected to do the same?
It's rather obvious that a company provides S&W with a great amount of financial resources, especially when compared to your average gun owner, who buys one or two pistols.

I have already stated that they don't benifit directly. So as long as they don't benefit directly, then it's okay?
This whole thing just sounds like the normal "do as little as you have to and hope it's enough to get what you want" that is so common these days.

Already over on Glocktalk at least one gun owner has already backed down and "sold out" because he wanted a S&W for his wife. He freely admits he had sworn never to buy another S&W, but I guess compromising his ethics is okay if that's what he has to do to get what he wants. Does anyone point out that he's a sellout just like they claim S&W is? Of course not, because he's a "gun owner" damnit, and he can do no wrong.
In my opinion, anyone who supports the S&W boycott and then goes out and buys S&W, new or used, is a much bigger sellout than S&W will ever be. It's pathetic that gun owners can't even stick to what they really believe in, and don't have enough resolve to stick with it, even after they have made it as easy as possible for themselves.

That's what's really disgusting about this whole thing.
The boycott is bad enough, but then to do it so half-assed because it's the only way to get enough people going to make a difference, it's just sad..
 
Smith & Wesson must be put on life support until they change their ways. Once they do that, then maybe we should start buying from them again. One "acivist" on my forum actually was so hurt by what S&W did that he took his rather large collection of Smiths to the grarage and introduced them to the band saw... cutting them all into little pieces and he swore that he would never buy another one.

So, save your crocodile tears and poser BS for those who still buy from S&W... for they are only posing as pro-gun activists! They will probably use their new bought Smiths to help herd the rest of us into the boxcars!


nralife
 
Mikemck

The instigators of the frivolous lawsuits are the problem, but nobody seems to want to recognize this.
Attack the source, not the symptom.

Of course we should attack the problem head on, but that doesn't also mean we can't show our displeasure withe the S&W sell out deal.

How much money have you given to the Civil Liberties Defense Fund lately to stop the frivilous lawsuits against the cities? Probably none...


CLDF Supporters,

January marks the one year anniversary of the Civil Liberties Defense Foundation. CLDF was formed to educate and litigate on behalf of the Bill of Rights of the U.S. Constitution. We chose as our initial endeavor a lawsuit against 31 cities that have been trying since 1998 to bankrupt the gun industry and destroy our right to keep and bear arms.

We were confident at the time, that such a lawsuit would garner the support of gun rights organizations, gun stores and gun owners from across the nation and that we would ultimately be successful in eliminating this ominous threat to our freedom. A threat which we predicted would cost upwards of half a million dollars to vanquish.

Since January of 2000, former Senator Jerry Patterson and Representatives Suzanna Hupp, Rick Green, and Bob Turner, have worked tirelessly - traveling to various fundraisers, appearing on numerous talk shows, and speaking to whomever would listen - in an effort to raise awareness and enough money to enable the Foundation to proceed with its lawsuit to protect the Second Amendment.

Despite a lack of support from most gun rights organizations and almost all of the gun stores we contacted, we were able to raise enough money from concerned citizens and incensed patriots like yourselves to finally file the lawsuit on November 16, 2000.

Although raising the money to have the lawsuit researched, drafted, and filed was a significant accomplishment for which we owe you many thanks, we still have not raised enough money to carry us through a lengthy litigation process against 31 cities and the state of New York. For that reason, we have refrained from serving the defendants with the paperwork necessary to proceed with the case. Once we do that, we will be locked-in to a battle we currently don't have the resources to win.

The CLDF Board of Directors has concluded that if we are unable to raise at least $100,000 by the service of process deadline two weeks from now, we will be forced to withdraw the case and live to fight another day. Given the amount of time, resources, and emotion we have committed to this project, we are not pleased with this turn of events.

We are desperately searching for a knight in shining armor to come to the rescue of this lawsuit and our right to keep and bear arms; however, our hope is beginning to fade. We have arranged several meetings with potential benefactors and will do our best over the next couple of weeks to insure that our effort has not been in vain. We need you to do the same. We need you to redouble your efforts to inform people about the seriousness of this issue and the need for the average American to pull his or her head out of the sand and realize what must be done to preserve our liberty. What needs to be done costs money and there is simply no away around that fact; we wish there was.

Remember - freedom is not free, nor is justice cheap.

We need your help to continue this fight.

Because of the the severe shortage of time, we need you and those you contact, to visit our website at http://www.LibertyDefense.com and make a donation online. We simply cannot proceed without your help and support.

Sincerely,

Trey J. Blocker Executive Director
 
Mikemck said:

"I would be surprised if even half of the people who are boycotting S&W have read through the agreement.
I personally don't agree with the S&W boycott, but I would certainly prefer that people at least make an informed choice on the boycott issue."


You're pretty quick to say that the majority of us are uninformed and merely followers, but that's obviously your opinion. Everyone has one.

If you, yourself, would take the time and read the agreement, you too would see that it affects S&W products as well as any others that a dealer may wish to stock. Full capacity guns are banned. You wouldn't be able to buy two handguns at once, your minor children wouldn't be able to walk through the sporting goods section at Kmart, browse, and look at rifles without an adult, civilians would only be able to purchase 'smart guns' in the near future, and gun shop employees would be required to attend 'classes'. It goes on and on for three pages, and I'm reciting this from memory. Imagine that.

This three page 'Code of Conduct' makes me sick. It also surprises me that you're so quick to stereotype gun owners as lemmings incapable of reading and comprehension.

You don't need to be 'in favor' of the boycott. That's your choice. I would hope, however, that you spread your criticism equally among the both pro-gun and anti-gun crowd.

straightShot
 
Smith & Wesson must be put on life support until they change their ways. Once they do that, then maybe we should start buying from them again. One "acivist" on my forum
actually was so hurt by what S&W did that he took his rather large collection of Smiths to the grarage and introduced them to the band saw... cutting them all into little pieces and he swore that he would never buy another one.
Click to expand...


Yes, when you feely truly outraged, and have the kind of resolve it takes to get something worthwhile done, it does tend to hurt a bit before it's all said and done.
I applaud your "activist" for doing what he felt must be done, although I don't agree with him, or you.

Personally, I think it's the knee jerk mob mentality average gun owner thinking that will eventually kill the 2nd Amendment in this country.
Your average gun owner will "cut off his nose to spite his face" and never think twice about it.

I fully advocate making informed decisions about what needs to be done, but evidently that's frowned upon here and on most other gun boards. Either you agree with the majority or your "part of the problem", a "troll", a "moron", etc..


So, save your crocodile tears and poser BS for those who still buy from S&W... for they are only posing as pro-gun activists! They will probably use their new bought Smiths to help herd the rest of us into the boxcars!
Click to expand...


And I suppose if we posers would just fall in line and tow the party line, basically do as were told, everything will work out just fine?

It's this "everyone who doesn't think exactly like I do is part of the problem" that's really pathetic.
 
Well, mike, it was I that pointed out certain contractual obligations(unless I missed it and AR did as well. if so then I apologize in advance) and it was also I who asked you a specific question "Do you have a better idea on how to deal with S&W?" You have yet to answer that. So, we know you do not support the boycott although your reasoning still seems rather vague at this point, but what do you support?

Surely you do not believe that it should be business as usual? And if not then what *should* we do? And how is taking a stand "toeing the line"? How is making a statement that further "appeasing" of the Extremists is cutting off our own nose? Since we're having this discussion, and it has remained amazing civil so far, let's really hash it out.

Oh, and I would agree that anyone who takes a boycott stance and then retreats on it is as bad as anything S&W has done. This is another reason why I simply cannot back off. Unless S&W makes changes, thru a Tomkins sale or a serious shuffling of management, there are many of us who will not go back on our word.
 
I didn't expect anyone to reply to this thread and admit "I didn't read it, I just heard they sold out so now I boycott them". There is absolutely no way to prove who read it and who didn't but maybe now at least a few more people have actually read the full agreement, and can make a more informed choice. That would seem to be a very reasonable expectation, and does benefit everyone involved.

You're pretty quick to say that the majority of us are uninformed and merely followers, but that's obviously your opinion. Everyone has one.
Click to expand...


No, I'm not pretty quick to say that. I've read this and many other gun boards, and I see it all the time. The majority don't know the facts at all, but they are well versed on the opinions of the other gun owners.
It's everyone's responsibility to educate themselves and to keep themselves informed on the issues that affect us all.

I have read the agreement, several times in fact. I know exactly what it says and what it implies, and what it does not say.

How does your boycott ensure that other companies will not sign the agreement?
It's been pointed out before, but it bears repeating :
If it's a choice between going out of business now or signing an agreement and living to fight another day, which do you think they will choose? Hell, which would you choose?
Why not use all of your resources to eliminate the source of the problem?

This three page 'Code of Conduct' makes me sick. It also surprises me that you're so quick to stereotype gun owners as lemmings incapable of reading and comprehension.
Click to expand...


Just take a look at some the posts here and on GlockTalk.
Look at the questions people ask, over & over again. Look at the subjects. Actually read some of them, and think about some of the ideas and theories and strategies....It's scary at best. Hell, most people can't even bang out a simple repy without "double tapping" it, and then posting AGAIN to say sorry for the "double tap"...good lord....

If gun owners were all that everyone on these boards try's to make themselves out to be, we wouldn't have the problems we face today. It's that simple..
I guess if we would have had the hard charging activists these boards are so full of, the AW ban would never have happened, or the 10 round mag limit, or any of the other numerous restrictions I hear people whining & crying about every damn day.

You don't need to be 'in favor' of the boycott. That's your choice. I would hope, however, that you spread your criticism equally among the both pro-gun and anti-gun crowd.
Click to expand...


I call them like I see them. I know that's not very popular with any large group, but that's the way it is.
If I agree with what is being said, I usually don't reply at all.
If I see someone stating opinions as facts, I point it out, which usually leads to either venomous replies or the "bury our heads in the sand till it's gone" mentality.

Do I "troll" the gun control boards and get people riled up? No, because it's not only very immature and childish, and it accomplishes nothing at all. In fact, it just makes it harder for anyone else to have a reasonable discussion on the topic.
Am I critical of the majority of the anti-gun position? Yes, I am. Do I admit when what they are saying makes sense? Yes, I do acknowledge when they have a good point.
Denying everything does not make it go away, and it doesn't make it not true...something to think about there.
 
mikemck

I don't go over to Glock Talk that much, so I can't say what goes on over there. Double tapping a post from time to time is no crime and it happens to the best of us. I participate here at TFL because the participants are a cut above what you will find on the other boards (except for those on my board, of course :) ). Gun owners are a very diverse and independent lot, not prone to following others blindly. If you really want to see some convoluted thinking, try getting on the HCI Inc. or the MMM mailing lists and you will see what I am talking about.

For the most part, the people here do their homework and know what they are talking about. Very few shoot at shadows or go off half cocked. If you see any bandwagon jumping at all, it is because of the eagerness of gun owners to do ANYTHING that will peacefully help our cause. We have done all of the things that activists have traditionally done throughout the years and we are still seeing our rights eroded on a daily basis. People are getting desperate and probably are grasping at some of the wrong straws.

Show us a better straw and we will grasp it. Show us better way and we will take it. Get S&W to repudiate their agreement with HUD and the city of Boston and we will buy from them again.

If you had made more than a handful of posts here at TFL you would have a little more credibility when it comes to criticizing our methods. Right now it looks like you are either on the S&W or HCI Inc. payroll. Stick around a while and walk a mile in our shoes and see what I mean.

Welcome to the board.

Joe
 
Well, mike, it was I that pointed out certain contractual obligations(unless I missed it and AR did as well. if so then I apologize in advance) and it was also I who asked you a specific question "Do you have a better idea on how to deal with S&W?" You have yet to answer that. So, we know you do not support the boycott although your reasoning still seems rather vague at this point, but what do you support?
Click to expand...


The contractual obligations are just theory. Either they have a contract or they don't, and even then it depends on when they signed it.
I myself will attempt to verify this information if possible.
But what if it can't be determined one way or the other? I suppose you will just give them "the benefit of the doubt" which is somewhat reasonable, but for how long?
Yes, I do have a better idea. Attack the source of the problem.
Whether you want to acknowledge it or not, S&W has done more
to protect your RKBA than most gun owners will ever do. They do this just by being in business! They knew when they signed it that it was not going to be popular. Apparently they did not know just how unpopular, but can you blame them? I can think of much more heinous violations.
How about Ruger and the 10 round mags? Charlton Heston and the AW ban? Does it get more disgusting that that?
Did gun owners have a response to these? NO.
Why should S&W be any different? Because it's easy to "make them pay", so it has to be done.
Gun owners seem to expect the gun companies to expend unlimited financial resources in defending against lawsuits when there is no end in sight. All so you can buy guns whenever you want them.
Attack the source, not the symptom.

Surely you do not believe that it should be business as usual? And if not then what *should* we do? And how is taking a stand "toeing the line"? How is making a statement that further "appeasing" of the Extremists is cutting off our own nose? Since we're having this discussion, and it has remained amazing civil so far, let's really hash it out.
Click to expand...


Let me ask you. How many gun companies are you willing to put out of business? Because you S&W boycott is not ensuring in any way that these companies will not sign if they are faced with bankruptcy or going out of business.
Your boycott does not alleviate the pressure these companies are faced with. Do you not understand this? Your boycott did not even stop S&W from signing ANOTHER agreement. How do you explain this?
I said it already, S&W had no reason to believe that gun owners would take a stand, based on past behavior.
Why would they not repudiate the agreement if it were possible for them to do so? Do you think that just maybe they can't, for reasons that are not clear to you?
Why would HCI not use the same tactic to get gun owners to put other companies out of business?
All HCI now needs to do is focus on one company at a time, to greatly increase the financial resources required to defend against the lawsuit. So, because there is not a company anywhere that has infinite resources, it will come down to either bankruptcy or compromise. Either way HCI will get what they want, and gun owners will be more than happy to help them.

[/quote]Oh, and I would agree that anyone who takes a boycott stance and then retreats on it is as bad as anything S&W has done. This is another reason why I simply cannot back off.[/quote]

It would depend on why you retreated. If you retreat because you just want to buy a S&W, that's selling yourself out.
If you retreat because you feel it's the wrong thing to do, that's something else altogether.
The person on GlockTalk sold out, because he still believed S&W needed to die, but he's also going to go ahead and buy S&W anyway, because that's what he wants. I personally have no respect for him at all, and I consider him and anyone like him to be the biggest threat of all to the 2nd Amendment, for obvious reasons.
Don't make the mistake of thinking he's the only one though, because it's just not true.
And don't mistake stubborness for selling out either. Be honest enough with yourself to take a hard look at your actions and make a decision you can live with.

[/quote]Unless S&W makes changes, thru a Tomkins sale or a serious shuffling of management, there are many of us who will not go back on our word.[/quote]

A lot of people seem to think if an American company owned S&W, the agreement could never have happened. This is ludicrous. American companies are just like all other companies. They are in business to make money, and any benefit you derive from that is secondary.
I would venture to say an American company might have signed under even less pressure, but we'll never know, and that's just my opinion.
 
If you had made more than a handful of posts here at TFL you would have a little more credibility when it comes to criticizing our methods. Right now it looks like you are either on the S&W or HCI Inc. payroll. Stick around a while and walk a mile in our shoes and see what I mean.
Click to expand...


This is simply ridiculous. To have any credibility, I have to have a certain number of posts?? Are you seriously telling me this?

What does this board, or the posts on it, have to do with protecting my 2nd Amendment rights?
If I spend all my time here and on other gun boards "posting", will that safeguard my rights somehow?

As I've said before, If I agree with what is being said, I don't usually post. It's my opinion that mature adults don't need positive reinforcement to confirm they're actions.
I've also hesitated many times to reply, because as I've seen many times, having difference of opinion usually results in venomous replies, insults, or even actual threats of extreme violence. Yes, I'm serious, and I know you've seen at least some of this type of response when someone has the nerve to disagree, especially with a board "veteran" whatever that's worth.

Differing opinions and viewpoints should be encouraged, as they are beneficial to everyone. Gun Owners are particularly resistant to this though. Yes, anti-gun types can be as stubborn and closed minded as gun owners, but from my experience, it's not nearly as prevalent.
 
For anyone who didn't read the agreeement...

Here's the original text of it;

AGREEMENT BETWEEN SMITH & WESSON AND
THE DEPARTMENTS OF THE TREASURY AND HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT,
LOCAL GOVERNMENTS AND STATES
SUMMARY OF TERMS

Preamble: The city, state, county and federal parties agree to dismiss the parties from the pending suits and refrain from filing suits against the manufacturer parties based on an equivalent cause of action.

SAFETY AND DESIGN
All handguns must meet the following safety and design standards:
· Second "hidden" serial number, to prevent criminals from obliterating serial numbers.
· External locking device sold with all guns within 60 days.
· Internal locking device on all guns within 24 months.
· Smart Guns -- Authorized User Technology.
o Manufacturers commit 2% of annual firearms revenues to the development of authorized user technology.
o Within 36 months, authorized user technology will be included in all new firearm models, with the exception of curios and collectors’ firearms.
o If top eight manufacturers agree, authorized user technology will be included in all new firearms.
· Child Safety. Within 12 months, handguns will be designed so they cannot be readily operated by a child under 6.
· Performance test. All firearms will be subject to a performance test to ensure safety and quality.
· Drop test. All firearms will be subject to a test to ensure they do not fire when dropped.
All pistols must meet the following additional requirements:
· Safety device. Positive manually operated safety device.
· Magazine disconnectors must be available on all pistols to customers who desire the feature, within 12 months.
· Chamber load indicators on all pistols, showing whether the pistol is loaded, within 12 months.
· Large capacity magazines. New firearm designs will not be able to accept large-capacity magazines that were manufactured prior to September 1994. (Manufacture of such magazines has been prohibited since that date.)
Law enforcement and military exception. If law enforcement agencies or the military certify the need, exceptions to these requirements may be made. Manufacturers will ask that these guns not be resold to the civilian market.
Warnings about safe storage and handling included with all firearms within six months.
Illegal firearms. Manufacturers will not sell firearms that can readily be converted into fully automatic weapons or that are resistant to fingerprints.

SALES AND DISTRIBUTION
Code of Conduct. The manufacturers will sell only to authorized dealers and distributors and allow their authorized distributors to sell only to authorized dealers. Authorized dealers and distributors will agree to a code of conduct. If manufacturers receive notice of a violation by an authorized dealer or distributor, they will take action against the dealer or distributor, including termination of sales to the dealer or distributor. The Oversight Commission will review such actions and have authority to require termination or suspension if warranted.
The code of conduct will require authorized dealers and distributors to:
· Gun shows: make no gun show sales unless all sales at the gun show are completed only after a background check.
· Brady checks: wait as long as necessary for a completed Brady check showing that the purchaser is not a felon or otherwise prohibited before selling a gun to the purchaser.
· Safety training for purchasers: transfer firearms only to individuals who have passed certified safety course or exam and demonstrate to purchasers how to use all safety devices and how to load, unload, and safely store the firearm before completing the sale.
· Multiple handgun sales: all purchasers of multiple handguns to take only one handgun from the store on the day of sale, at which point a multiple sales report will be filed with ATF. The remainder of the guns can only be collected after 14 days.
· Employee training: require all employees to attend ATF-approved training and to pass a exam on firearms laws, straw purchasers, illegal trafficking indicators, and gun safety.
· Insurance: carry liability insurance where available, with a minimum coverage of $1 million for each incident.
· Inventory control: maintain an electronic inventory tracking plan within 24 months
· Security: implement a security plan for securing firearms.
· Child access: require persons under 18 to be accompanied by adults in gun stores or gun sections of stores.
· Weapons attractive to criminals: not sell large capacity magazines or semiautomatic assault weapons.
· Compliance: provide law enforcement, government regulators, and the Oversight Commission established in this Agreement with access to documents necessary to determine compliance; cooperate fully in the Agreement’s Oversight mechanism.
· Crime gun traces: maintain an electronic record of all ATF trace requests and report trace requests to manufacturers.
· Indicted dealers: forgo firearms sales to licensed dealers known to be under indictment.
· Straw purchasers: not to make sales to straw purchasers.
Manufacturer commitments. Manufacturers will:
· Provide quarterly sales data to ATF.
· Not market guns in any manner designed to appeal to juveniles or criminals.
· Refrain from selling any modified/sporterized semi-automatic pistol of type that cannot be imported into U.S.
· Reaffirm policy of not placing advertisements in vicinity of schools, high crime zones, and public housing.
· Implement a security plan for securing firearms.
· Designate an officer to ensure compliance with the Agreement.
Corporate responsibility for crime gun traces. If an authorized dealer or distributor has a disproportionate number of crime guns traced to it within three years of sale, the manufacturers will take action, including possible termination or suspension, against the dealer or distributor. The Oversight Commission will review such actions and have authority to require termination or suspension if warranted.
Oversight Commission will be established and empowered to oversee implementation of the Agreement. The Commission will have five members selected as follows: one by manufacturers; two by city and county parties; one by state parties; one by ATF. The Commission’s powers will include the authority to review compliance with the design and safety requirements, review the safety and training program for dealer and distributor employees, review manufacturer actions against dealers or distributors that violate the Agreement or have a disproportionate number of crime gun traces, and require suspension or termination if warranted.
Role of ATF. To the extent consistent with law, ATF will work with manufacturers and the Oversight Commission to assist them in meeting obligations under the Agreement. ATF will notify the Oversight Commission of certain violations of the Agreement by distributors and dealers if it uncovers such violations.
Ballistics Imaging. Within six months, if technologically available, manufacturers will fire all firearms before sale and will enter the digital image of the casings in a system compatible with the National Integrated Ballistics Identification Network and accessible to ATF. This will enable law enforcement to trace crime guns when only the bullets or casings are recovered.
Access 2000. Manufacturers shall participate in ATF’s Access 2000 program, which establishes electronic links with ATF and enables high-speed tracing of crime guns.
Legislation. The parties will work together to support legislative efforts to reduce firearm misuse and the development of authorized user technology.
Education trust fund. Upon resolution of all current city, state, and county lawsuits, manufacturers will dedicate 1% of overall firearms revenues to an education trust fund.
Most favored entity. If other manufacturers enter agreements with more expansive design and distribution reforms, and those manufacturers, along with the manufacturer parties to this Agreement, account for fifty percent or more of United States handgun sales, the manufacturer parties to this Agreement will agree to abide by the same reforms.
Enforcement. The Agreement will be entered into and enforceable as a court order and as a contract.
 
In regards to the CLDF, why would you imply that I have not contributed?
Yes, I have contributed, and will be happy to discuss contributions with you.

What's really telling, is that every time a thread concerning the CLDF comes up, or anything along those lines, you don't see to many replies. More of the "bury my head in the sand till it passes" type of thing.

Sadly, most of what I see are questions like "Which gun should I buy next", instead of "How can I make the most difference with my money". Never mind that a good many of these people can't shoot what they already have very well, as they have freely admitted in other posts. Spending copious amounts of money on ammunition for practice would be an improvement, and never mind actually "throwing it away" contributing to the cause.

No, It seems, from reading the gun boards and from seeing what the gun control advocates have been able to do, that most gun owners are content to "boycott" S&W and spend they're time here patting themselves on the back for doing such a fine job of it.
 
mikemck,

I have no problem with you disagreeing with the Smith & Wesson boycott or anything else related to 2nd Amendment rights. I know some fine people that think that S&W should be given a pass on what they have done. It is not pretty to see one of America's past premier firearms manufactures go down the tubes because of a deal they made with the devil (Clinton). But, the point is that they did make the deal when the other gun makers did not and now they have to suffer the consequences for what they did.

What I do have a problem with, is your characterization of gun owners in general, and gun rights activists in particular. You condescendingly speak about how gun owners are ignorant, can't think for themselves, and how they follow the herd mentality like so many lemmings. That couldn't be further from the truth. I find your characterizations offensive and they mirror those held by the misguided folks in the anti-gun community. When you go around sounding like an anti-gunner, don't be surprised if people think that you are one in sheep's clothing.

This board has a lot of well read, dedicated gun rights supporters who have seen many a troll come and go. Time will tell if I have misjudged you or not. I hope that I have.

Good day,
Joe



[Edited by nralife on 02-04-2001 at 06:06 PM]
 
nralife: You said the following, and here's some more...

Quote from nralife:
What I do have a problem with, is your characterization of gun owners in general, and gun rights activists in particular. You condescendingly speak about how gun owners are ignorant, can't think for themselves, and how they follow the herd mentality like so many lemmings. That couldn't be further from the truth. I find your characterizations offensive and they mirror those held by the misguided folks in the anti-gun community. When you go around sounding like an anti-gunner, don't be surprised if people think that you are one in sheep's clothing.

This board has a lot of well read, dedicated gun rights supporters who have seen many a troll come and go. Time will tell if I have misjudged you or not. I hope that I have.


Here's a few more posts by mikemck. You can tell that he(or she) thinks the world of gun owners...


http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=55229
This is the problem with people who don't take the time to educate themselves on the issues.
I am speaking about both sides, because both sides end up looking bad in this interview.
This was a great opportunity to make a good argument for the 2nd Amendment, but instead gun owners once again come across as uneducated and paranoid.

http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=52914
What's really sad is that the majority of gun owners just automatically vote republican as this is what is constantly advocated on this and other forums...
GWB is made out to be the last best hope for gun owners in this country, and never mind his position on other important issues. In fact, most gun owners have no idea what his position was on any of the issues...all they know is that they were told to vote for Bush, and by god that's what they are gonna do, if they take the time to vote at all that is.

http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=55971
I can only imagine the outrage that would be generated if HCI was talking about doing the same thing that is being proposed here....
This looks like just another example of how gun owners feel the end justifies the means as long as it's in their favor.

It's just my opinion, but it's this kind of crap that has gotten us ( gun owners in general ), where we are today, and still it continues..

http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=50795&pagenumber=2
It's posts like this, using the examples that you have chosen, that makes it painfully obvious that your intellectually bankrupt.
It seems that you consider yourself superior to others simply because you are a heterosexual anti-abortion christian...couldn't be farther from the truth.
And if you think the Republican party is the savior of the American people, your also sadly mistaken..

The sad truth is that 95% of the gun owners just vote according to what they hear on gun boards like this one, instead of taking the time to try and determine how each candidate stands on important issues. So, not voting for Bush is not "madness" as the majority here in this thread would have you believe.

http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=51024&pagenumber=4
I would almost be willing to bet that 99% of the S&W boycott crowd haven't even taken the time to actually read the agreement that S&W signed. They just know that the people here on the forums say S&W is bad, they sold out, and now it's time to boycott them, and by god that's all they need to know.
Same damn thing can probably be said about the presidential election, but that's neither here nor there right now.

It's this mindless knee jerk mob mentality that does way more harm than good.
From what I've read here in this thread, and from actually being well acquainted with the average gun owner, I'm quite glad I'm not in the majority on this issue.

http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=51024&pagenumber=4
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You don't get it, do you?!? The fools who run [ran?] *&* have richly earned the contempt, scorn, derision and yes...outright hatred...they have received from American citizens who work to preserve the 2nd Amendment.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Please, at least attempt some level of maturity and drop the silly *&*. This is perhaps the most obvious sign of the level of maturity to be found on these forums.
 
Why bother to cut & paste from the thread instead of just posting a link to the threads in question?
Yes, I did say all of those things, and yes, I did mean them.
Ask me to clarify my point of view, and I will be more than happy to do so.

It's obvious, and has been for some time now, that having a different opinion is seriously frowned upon, and leads to nothing but chaos on this and other boards.
So that's okay, I'll just go back to lurking here and on other boards, as I don't feel a need to post when I agree with what is being said, but that is all that is welcomed or needed.

At any rate, I am well & truly done, and will certainly give careful consideration to all opposing viewpoints expressed here and elsewhere.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top