check out the following: http://www.phillynews.com/inquirer/2000/Apr/13/international/SMITH13.htm
sounds like S&W is finally realizing that they screwed up!
sounds like S&W is finally realizing that they screwed up!
S&W backpeddles
- Thread starter tc556guy
- Start date
Jeff Thomas
New member
This is interesting. I had the very strong impression that S&W's 'interpretation' of the agreement was almost surreal, and more likely a PR move. Hate to say it, but I think the government is 'right' in this case, that is, regarding the truth of the agreement.
I'm actually left with even less respect for S&W. How stupid can they be? Did they read this thing? Did they really think there would be little impact? Did they think the fed's would let them interpret it any way they wished?
I'm going to post your story below, because these newspaper sites change links all the time, and I suspect your link will die pretty quickly. Here is the text:
Smith & Wesson, government now disagree on settlement
Philadelphia Newspapers Inc
By Jonathan Weisman
BALTIMORE SUN
WASHINGTON - Smith & Wesson, America's largest manufacturer of handguns, has issued a "clarification" of its landmark pact with the federal government that would effectively eviscerate much of the gun controls trumpeted by the Clinton administration.
Smith & Wesson's interpretation - posted on its Web site - has forced the company back into talks with the administration that could lead to a protracted court battle.
Administration officials dismissed Smith & Wesson's interpretation as more of a public-relations gambit than a genuine change of heart, but said they would be willing to go to court to force Smith & Wesson into compliance.
"The deal speaks for itself," Neal Wolin, general counsel of the Treasury Department, said of the agreement that Smith & Wesson reached March 17 with federal, state and local officials as a way to settle lawsuits it had faced related to gun violence.
"I think the language of the deal is clear on all these points," Wolin said.
Contrary to the government's interpretation, the gun manufacturer says now, its agreement would compel Smith & Wesson dealers to impose background checks and other gun-sale restrictions only on buyers of Smith & Wesson products.
The government maintains that dealers who wish to sell Smith & Wesson's products must impose such restrictions on buyers of all guns.
Moreover, the company says, the criminal background checks to which it agreed for gun-show sales would not apply to guns sold by private citizens, only to those sold by licensed dealers.
Gun-show sales by licensed dealers are already subject to background checks.
"We can't agree to control things that we have no way to control," said Ken Jorgensen, a Smith & Wesson spokesman.
Federal officials touted Smith & Wesson's accord as a breakthrough, largely because it was supposed to have a broad effect on the firearms industry.
Under the government's interpretation, Smith & Wesson agreed that its products could be sold only by dealers who followed a strict "code of responsibility" for all gun sales, not just sales of Smith & Wesson products.
White House officials acknowledged that there were now stark differences between the administration's position and that of Smith & Wesson, which President Clinton hailed last month as a courageous and visionary company.
Since the deal was signed, Smith & Wesson has come under pressure from gun manufacturers, gun dealers and gun-rights activists, who have accused it of sabotaging the industry.
I'm actually left with even less respect for S&W. How stupid can they be? Did they read this thing? Did they really think there would be little impact? Did they think the fed's would let them interpret it any way they wished?
I'm going to post your story below, because these newspaper sites change links all the time, and I suspect your link will die pretty quickly. Here is the text:
Smith & Wesson, government now disagree on settlement
Philadelphia Newspapers Inc
By Jonathan Weisman
BALTIMORE SUN
WASHINGTON - Smith & Wesson, America's largest manufacturer of handguns, has issued a "clarification" of its landmark pact with the federal government that would effectively eviscerate much of the gun controls trumpeted by the Clinton administration.
Smith & Wesson's interpretation - posted on its Web site - has forced the company back into talks with the administration that could lead to a protracted court battle.
Administration officials dismissed Smith & Wesson's interpretation as more of a public-relations gambit than a genuine change of heart, but said they would be willing to go to court to force Smith & Wesson into compliance.
"The deal speaks for itself," Neal Wolin, general counsel of the Treasury Department, said of the agreement that Smith & Wesson reached March 17 with federal, state and local officials as a way to settle lawsuits it had faced related to gun violence.
"I think the language of the deal is clear on all these points," Wolin said.
Contrary to the government's interpretation, the gun manufacturer says now, its agreement would compel Smith & Wesson dealers to impose background checks and other gun-sale restrictions only on buyers of Smith & Wesson products.
The government maintains that dealers who wish to sell Smith & Wesson's products must impose such restrictions on buyers of all guns.
Moreover, the company says, the criminal background checks to which it agreed for gun-show sales would not apply to guns sold by private citizens, only to those sold by licensed dealers.
Gun-show sales by licensed dealers are already subject to background checks.
"We can't agree to control things that we have no way to control," said Ken Jorgensen, a Smith & Wesson spokesman.
Federal officials touted Smith & Wesson's accord as a breakthrough, largely because it was supposed to have a broad effect on the firearms industry.
Under the government's interpretation, Smith & Wesson agreed that its products could be sold only by dealers who followed a strict "code of responsibility" for all gun sales, not just sales of Smith & Wesson products.
White House officials acknowledged that there were now stark differences between the administration's position and that of Smith & Wesson, which President Clinton hailed last month as a courageous and visionary company.
Since the deal was signed, Smith & Wesson has come under pressure from gun manufacturers, gun dealers and gun-rights activists, who have accused it of sabotaging the industry.
In my opinion, S&W could vacate the agreement because the Klinton administration has failed to deliver an adequate number of settlements of legal claims from the cities. Many of these cities are continuing their law suits against S&W. Seems that I just heard about another city filing suit against the gun manufacturers (including S&W) yesterday. Also, according to a Wall Street Journal the government will not be able to provide significant "bid" preferences that would benefit S&W.
Unfortunately, Smith & Wesson has damaged their "good will" with gun owners, dealers, and other manufacturers. They have created a public relation nightmare and gained very little from it and lost their "core" business.
Unfortunately, Smith & Wesson has damaged their "good will" with gun owners, dealers, and other manufacturers. They have created a public relation nightmare and gained very little from it and lost their "core" business.
They deserve to lose their business. Let them sell guns to soccer moms (no offense to anyone here.)
Maybe they're gambling that if Bush wins the election, he'll let them out of the agreement. That way they'd buy their peace until Jan. 2001 at everyone else's expense, and get their price back too.
Maybe they're gambling that if Bush wins the election, he'll let them out of the agreement. That way they'd buy their peace until Jan. 2001 at everyone else's expense, and get their price back too.
This is hysterical. This is better than putting a "friend of the government" out of business because now S&W has enemies on both sides. The government is cheesed because they're hallucinating about the agreement's meaning, and the patriots of the nation are cheesed because they caved in to an illegal agreement. They're going to be sued by the government and ignored by the people. Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha!!!!
They thought that they could sit on the fence on this one. The only way to survive this is to choose a side and defend it vigorously.
They thought that they could sit on the fence on this one. The only way to survive this is to choose a side and defend it vigorously.
Will Beararms
New member
Sorry Smith and Wesson, you chose to deal with the devil and now it's time to pay the proverbial fidler. Hey Schultz, don't let the door hit you in the rear end on the way out of the industry.
A good friend told me today that the Marxist occupying the mayor's office in Atlanta has decreed that all Glocks will be replaced by S&W in the Atlanta PD. I'm sure S&W is loving this. Gosh I hope they go belly up nd soon. Tommorow would not be quick enough. As for the people work at S&W, they should leave.
------------------
"When guns are outlawed;I will be an outlaw."
A good friend told me today that the Marxist occupying the mayor's office in Atlanta has decreed that all Glocks will be replaced by S&W in the Atlanta PD. I'm sure S&W is loving this. Gosh I hope they go belly up nd soon. Tommorow would not be quick enough. As for the people work at S&W, they should leave.
------------------
"When guns are outlawed;I will be an outlaw."
Brilliant tactic. S&W CEO laying the grounds to void the agreement by demonstrating that he is psychotic, I mean incompetent, and did not have mental facility to enter into a settlement agreement. Next act, we will discover that the CEO can not read. Calls on government to funnel more money to education.
AF Shooter
New member
Slick & Wesson is about to find out that once you've sold your soul to the devil, you've got nothing left to negotiate with. They deserve what's happening to them.
------------------
Tom Whitman
SSgt, USAF
[This message has been edited by AF Shooter (edited April 13, 2000).]
------------------
Tom Whitman
SSgt, USAF
[This message has been edited by AF Shooter (edited April 13, 2000).]
Danger Dave
New member
Will B.,
Since last I heard, Atlanta hasn't dropped S&W from their lawsuit, that's real interesting... And they won't approve raises for their officers, but they're happy to spend $$$ to replace perfectly good equipment. Seems bad for an already low morale.
Especially since the mayor, as far as I know, doesn't dictate what equipment the police carry. And I don't think City of Atlanta PD carries Glocks - it's Barettas if I recall... Fulton Co. may carry Glocks, I'm not sure.
Since last I heard, Atlanta hasn't dropped S&W from their lawsuit, that's real interesting... And they won't approve raises for their officers, but they're happy to spend $$$ to replace perfectly good equipment. Seems bad for an already low morale.
Especially since the mayor, as far as I know, doesn't dictate what equipment the police carry. And I don't think City of Atlanta PD carries Glocks - it's Barettas if I recall... Fulton Co. may carry Glocks, I'm not sure.
Sad, isn't it? Here we are rooting for the demise of the two biggest American handgun makers - Smith & Wesson and Colt.
*Their* slippery slope steepened when they were sold to foreigners.
*Our* slippery slope steepened when we made our *own* deal with the devil and expected the Republicans to preserve the Second Amendment, the Bill of Rights, and the Constitution.
Just as an exercise, is there a single amendment in the Bill of Rights which is not violated routinely by our elitist oligarchy?
------------------
Either you believe in the Second Amendment or you don't.
Stick it to 'em! RKBA!
*Their* slippery slope steepened when they were sold to foreigners.
*Our* slippery slope steepened when we made our *own* deal with the devil and expected the Republicans to preserve the Second Amendment, the Bill of Rights, and the Constitution.
Just as an exercise, is there a single amendment in the Bill of Rights which is not violated routinely by our elitist oligarchy?
------------------
Either you believe in the Second Amendment or you don't.
Stick it to 'em! RKBA!
Glenn E. Meyer
New member
While Colt and SW were sold to foreigners,
Glock, Beretta and Taurus seem to have
somemore guts.
Glock, Beretta and Taurus seem to have
somemore guts.
I had to peek!)
I agree that Smith and Wesson is totally wrong in their interpretation of the agreement. Don't they have lawyers? I can't believe they're serious. They signed it and now they're stuck with it. They had the owner of the Paradis Gun Shop in Colorado on the MSNBC show last night telling why he'd dropped Smith and Wesson. Of course, someone, either Brokaw or Clinton, had to say that there was "evidence" that the other gun makers were conspiring against S & W. Ridiculous! What evidence?