New Locking device for S&W??

B

Bobshouse

New member
Anyone have this on their revolvers?

locked.jpg



read about it here...

http://www.smith-wesson.com/misc/ilock.html
 
The sad thing is that Taurus offered to license *&* the unobtrusive Taurus version for free. *&* declined, and instead chose to re-invent the wheel.
 
Maryland gun buyers are going to have those locks one way or another by the first of the year or new guns can't be sold. Too many people ranted and raved to other gun people but were too lazy to contact their lawmakers or work to elect pro-gun candidates. The old, sad story of how we lose our rights, a little at a time.

Jim
 
Nope, it's on newly produced guns, which precludes my purchasing one anytime soon. Or possibly ever, if they don't get off their corporate butts.
 
I saw my first internally-locked Remington 870 the other day, but haven't seen a S&W with such a device as yet.

Regardless of the manufacturer, I personally wouldn't buy a gun with an internal lock. I view it as a victory for anti-gun and anti-self defense propaganda, media hysteria, and crackpot lawsuits. I get reminded of these kinds of corruption every day for free. No need to pay good money to place a physical reminder in my gun safe.

(Just had to vent a little. :rolleyes: )
 
I am a firm believer in trigger guard blocking gun locks. They should be on all unloaded or otherwise inoperative guns. That way, if crunch time occures suddenly, a person is less likely to try to defend themselves or their loved ones with a gun that won't do the job.

One of these days somebody is going to get hurt or killed because they didn't see that an integral lock was locked. Hope MMM etc get sued over it.

Sam
 
Isn't that one of those puposefully inflicted defects that cuts the value of S&W products by about 80% or more?

Funny the ones found on Taurus products don't cut the value at all, but they do sometimes bring a grimace to one's face...
 
Unfortunately or fortunately (depending on how you look at it), although the company is already increasing productions, this feature will most likely save Smith & Wesson's hide. There is now a distinct difference between pre and post agreement guns and a feature that is not disirable among die hard firearms enthusiast. Looking at past trends in the industry, it is most likely that pre internal locking guns will increase in cost (value) fairly rapidly and virtually evaporate from the used gun scene quickly. Leaving just new guns to buy for the novice entering the sport or the person driven to Smith & Wesson through name recognition and find the internal locking device as a true added benefit.

Robert
 
Or perhaps the novice will be sufficiently astute to purchase a quality firearm manufactured by a company with integrity. Such as Charter Arms or Iver Johnston etc.

Sam
 
Ya know, I don't really understand what all the fuss is about. My HK USPc .45 has a locking device on it too. When I got it, I read the manual, used the "key" to unlock it, tossed the key back in the box, and there it has stayed ever since. Gun works fine. And when I'm not using it, it is locked up in my safe.

Are these locking devices b*llsh*t. Yup. But most of them (Remington's excluded) don't get in your way once you unlock them.

M1911
 
The Government is going to come to Mike and Sam's homes and install the new locking devices on all their handguns and require them to watch Roise on TV and march in the MMM March this spring and summer. You have been bad boys!
Don Mallard
 
VictorLouis,

I work the industry and you would be surprised about the number of first time buyers, ladies especially, that find lockable boxes, trigger locks and internal locking devices as features.

Remember, not all that walk into a gun store are as hard-core as you or I and to these people these things do matter. They are not part of this culture and with all the junk they see on TV, fear of guns plays in their buying decisions.


Robert
 
M1911's practice is the same as I use on my Taurus M85. Just one question - Why is it when Smith installs an intenal locking device everyone gets their panties in a wad and when Taurus, Remington, Rossi and others did it, their actions are accepted as business as normal?
 
Arub,

...you forgot HK and Springfield, Steyr, and soon, Glock. :)

Everybody's "gotten their panties in a wad" about every one of those, too. Don't believe me? Use the search function.

My main complaint with this particular version is aesthetic. Taurus offered *&* the use of their far less obtrusive version for free. *&* didn't take it. Why?

This is really going to look good on those retro "hand ejector" models due out soon.:rolleyes:
 
...when..others did it, their actions are accepted as business as normal?
Click to expand...
I beg to differ, as Tamara pointed out.:) They have taken their share of flack for the decision. I was also going to point this out, but Tamara beat me to it:
My main complaint with this particular version is aesthetic.
Click to expand...
I suspect this is the sentiment of many, if not most S&W enthusiasts.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top