Should we boycott Smith & Wesson? I thinks so, what do you think

What a piece of work! I wish I had saved the email between myself and Mr Ed a few weeks ago when he ASS*ured me that S&W would never cave in, that they intended to continue to fight in the courts in a united front with other manufacturors. Those ugly rumors just weren't true, he said.
Goddam jerk is gonna hear from me, but not until I cool off enough to write a coherent post!
 
Now that Soft & Wimpy has caved to Commrade Klinton (others to follow, I bet), the market will be taken over by "Smart" guns.

And then all the "dumb" guns out there will be made illegal and you will have to turn them in. K.M.A.
 
I have decided to support a boycott of SW.
Listening to Joe Lockhart, Pres. dude, say that the NRA's position is totally destroyed by SW actions says it all.

SW by coming out when they did, in a critical debate, are total sell outs.

Also, CNN said that the government will now favor SW in all handgun purchases for LEOs.

Whores!

I understand that they had to fold because of the inability of the gun world to defend them but maybe destroying a company will give some guts to the rest.

Last, Lockhart can eat LaPierre - if the NRA cannot get a spokesperson who is articulate, doesn't look like a wideeyed scared chicken and can think fast - they are screwed.

Geez.
 
Boycotts are always very personal decisions by folks. This one will be particularly interesting, since there have now been statements that S&W will become the preferred provider of firearms to governmental agencies.

A truly disgusting situation.
 
Don't forget that while Clinton and his gang and hopefully his whole party will be gone in 8 months, but S&W has signed a leagally binding settlement with some 30 cities and the federal goverment that is enforceable in a court of law forever.
No matter who owns S&W, they will have their hands tied up by anti's forever more.
It is possible, I think, for legislative action to over ride this agreement. We will probably have to pass this if we want to save the old S&W.
If S&W actually is seriously for sale, getting out of legal liability may have been the sole goal of this settlement. In that case, I would suspect graft within the administration and S&W. Clinton doesn't have sides. He is not a liberal or a conservatiove. When you deal with him, only he is the winner or he doesn't play. There may be something deeply rotten at the bottom of this, no matter what you position on the 2nd.
 
S&W's decision makes perfect sense. They designed the SW99 for LEO use. Sales were low due to cost for most departments. Now the Federal Government will help them in the sales department by suggesting all departments look at agreements such as this before they buy. A plus for S&W!
 
They didn't design the 99, they licensed it from Walther.

Their own polymer gun - the Sigma was a rip of of a Glock has the court settlement demonstrated. And it stunk anyway.

It's funny:

Colt makes a crappy polyemer - the 2000 and bends over to the Feds.

SW can't capture a decent share and bends over.

Ruger did that already with the mag ban.

In a way, Glock has contributed to the fall of gun rights. He made a gun so good that our manufacturers had to fold in different cases.

Doesn't help that 'our' manufactureres are owned by Brits, try to buy out others and ban their handguns in the US and other fun trips.

Too bad I didn't invent DOS because I would buy SW with pocket change and have a different attitude.
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Byron:
If the tobacco companies, with their enormous diversification and profoundly deep pockets, couldn't ward off a barrage of threatened and actual lawsuits, what chance would a comparatively weak company like S&W have? None, zero, zilch. S&W got out from under about as well as they could have for all concerned. As for boycotts, well, the list is now Ruger, Colt, UPS, and Smith & Wesson. When the other gun companies follow, which they will, they'll have to go on the boycott list, too, of course. These boycotts will have no significant economic impact, so what these companies will discover is that they don't really need to pay any attention to people who threaten boycotts. S&W has been a major contributor and supporter of the shooting sports at all levels, including sponsoring the one show dedicated purely to guns and shooting that's available on TV. I have great sympathy for their plight, and I hope they survive and prosper; we are not better off without them. Byron
[/quote]

My gut tells me boycott, but my head says Byron is right.I don't think we yet know the effects of all this. I think it's a terrible move by Smith, but who knows the long-term impact. Will LEA's favor them now? Will cops agree to carry S&W "safe" guns? LEO guns are exempt from this, and many cops have unions, so maybe they'll boycott them. What will the impact be for other manufacturers? I hope that Glock (my choice in guns along with 1911's) adopts a built-in lock like the new Steyr pistols have. Totally your option to use it or not, and it can't accidentally be activated. If every manufacturer did this right away, a tremendous amount of air would be let out of the anti-gunners arguments. Glock, are you listening?

Rather than take our anger out on S&W, I think it should be directed at Clinton and his henchmen. This is nothing more than extortion, coercion, and blackmail by the government, using YOUR tax dollars. If you or I as individuals threatened to sue someone from existence with nuisance lawsuits, when they had done NOTHING wrong, would this be allowed to happen? I doubt it. We need to RAISE H*LL over this at every chance, to make people aware that our gov't has stooped to blackmail to try and do what they cannot do in the courts or legislature. This is SO contrary to what the Founders of this great country intended, imo. We are out of control. Example: the jury deadlocked in the civil trial brought by the family of the criminals from N. Hollywood bank shootout. 3 of 12 felt that the police had violated his civil rights and let him die. Is this insane? I had a liberal friend of mine call me, and he was outraged... to him it was a slam-dunk...the majority was right, and to Hades with the criminals. The two shooters fired thousands of rounds and were willing to kill anything and everything in their path. That someone, of the eleven wounded, didn't die is a miracle. This is what we've come to. Blame everyone one else, and take no responsibilty yourself. Argggggghhhhhhh


[This message has been edited by Covert Mission (edited March 20, 2000).]
 
S&W might as well re-tool their factory to make toilet seats, because that's the only way they'll ever get any business from me!
:mad:
 
Hey Glenn, maybe those spineless Brits gave Mr. Ed his marching orders,hands tied and forced to bow to the Queen.

------------------
We preserve our freedoms by using four boxes: soap,ballot,jury, and cartridge.
Anonymous
 
Two points or maybe more:

1. The goal is to ban all guns by slow cuts.
Maybe it would be a good idea to sell locks
and put in the integral trigger locks
as are being put on voluntarily.
Independent of the issue now, I don't
object to these as market features.

2. Then we can put the issue clearly.
Mr. President, do you want a nation
where women living along, home alone
or at work, on the road - have to
face the guy with duct tape and a razor
just holding a copy of It Takes A Village
to Raise a Child.

A New Sig:

The preferred lubricant for SW Guns in Preparation H.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top