Smith & Wesson Changes
- Thread starter 4DIR
- Start date
Standing Wolf
Member in memoriam
No integral gun locks for me, thanks all the same, and I won't even consider buying a new Smith & Wesson until its agreement with the Snopes Clinton-Liar Gore régime has been declared null and void.
Ignore the boycott crap.
The locks are nothing to worry about. If you don't use it, you will forget its even there. It does not interfere with anything.
Almost all newly manufactured guns are using the spent casing "technolgy". My last two Rugers had the little brown envelope with a spent casing in it.
Don't miss out on some good guns because of someone's political pressure.
The locks are nothing to worry about. If you don't use it, you will forget its even there. It does not interfere with anything.
Almost all newly manufactured guns are using the spent casing "technolgy". My last two Rugers had the little brown envelope with a spent casing in it.
Don't miss out on some good guns because of someone's political pressure.
Any mechanical device can fail. Besides, the integral locks are just downright ugly...marring an otherwise clean frame.
I'll confine my purchases of S&W revolvers to older designs, regardless of the politics.
IOW, buy their products even though they have failed to renounce an agreement designed to give the fed.gov control over what they make, when they make it and how they will market it.
Ummm...no thanks. There's enough fascism in our country already.
Whatever.
I won't argue about it here.
I didn't bring it up. Standing Wolf did.
...........................................
Besides the look of the lock, some call it a "zit", it really IS a non issue. The mechanics of it are designed well. Simple, functional only when activated by the key. I defy anyone to document instances of where the S&W lock caused ANY problem.
I won't argue about it here.
I didn't bring it up. Standing Wolf did.
...........................................
Besides the look of the lock, some call it a "zit", it really IS a non issue. The mechanics of it are designed well. Simple, functional only when activated by the key. I defy anyone to document instances of where the S&W lock caused ANY problem.
If you don't want to argue about it then you should refrain from posting one liners like "Ignore the boycott crap".
It riles up the knuckle draggers.
Smith and Wesson and their new features. How about research and development? Seems like a topic fit to discuss. They are spending a boatload on Smart Gun technology, I think.
How will that affect us when it hits the market? Do we want to actively fund such research? Gun owners in New Jersey are going to be gnashing their teeth if that technology is perfected anytime soon.
One more reason to add to a long dismal list of reasons to look elsewhere for "some good guns".
It riles up the knuckle draggers.
Smith and Wesson and their new features. How about research and development? Seems like a topic fit to discuss. They are spending a boatload on Smart Gun technology, I think.
How will that affect us when it hits the market? Do we want to actively fund such research? Gun owners in New Jersey are going to be gnashing their teeth if that technology is perfected anytime soon.
One more reason to add to a long dismal list of reasons to look elsewhere for "some good guns".
Mike Irwin
Staff
Well, the biggest change that they made can be found by clicking on the link in my signature line...
Be sure to check out the requirements in sections II, A, 1, d; II, A, 1, h, II, A, 1, o; and the composition of the oversight committee listed in section III.
No, not currently being enforced.
But not dead, either.
Care to make any guesses what happens when the next rabidly anti-gun Congress/President gets into office?
Given all the anti-gun hype that's springing up as a result of the sniper attacks in Washington, DC, anti-gun forces are licking their lips, and given that no legislation needs to be passed to force enactment of this agreement, this could end up being a slam-dunk for the anti-gunners.
Be sure to check out the requirements in sections II, A, 1, d; II, A, 1, h, II, A, 1, o; and the composition of the oversight committee listed in section III.
No, not currently being enforced.
But not dead, either.
Care to make any guesses what happens when the next rabidly anti-gun Congress/President gets into office?
Given all the anti-gun hype that's springing up as a result of the sniper attacks in Washington, DC, anti-gun forces are licking their lips, and given that no legislation needs to be passed to force enactment of this agreement, this could end up being a slam-dunk for the anti-gunners.
Being the proud new owner of a NEW S&W 642-2, I'll give you my first impressions of the big bad lock.
I wouldn't have noticed it if the owner of the shop hadn't pointed it out to me... It's a tiny little thing on the side, very similar to the Taurus locks. On the other hand, the ones on the bottom of the trigger guard, the ones designed by S&W's new owners, available on most S&W semi-autos, ARE ugly indeed, and do screw up the "lines" quite a bit, IMHO.
I don't have any problem with UNOBTRUSIVE internal locking mechanisms on my pistols.
All the ones I've seen internal drawings of are ACTIVE when locked and PASSIVE when unlocked. Which means, the commonly heard statement
While we can all imagine up some hypothetical way that a these locking devices COULD fail, has anyone EVER had one actually rendered a firearm non-functional while in the UNlocked position? Quite honestly, show me some real live cases of that, and I'm in the boat with you.
Until then, they're just like the locks on my Dodge pickup. I didn't ASK for door locks, and I don't have to USE the door locks, but they are there nonetheless.
But as I do enjoy pointing out... (applying to most subjects, first time for this one in particular)....
If you decide don't like internal locks on your firearms, and you absolutely refuse to buy a firearm with an internal lock, and you think they're ugly as sin...
God bless America!
I wouldn't have noticed it if the owner of the shop hadn't pointed it out to me... It's a tiny little thing on the side, very similar to the Taurus locks. On the other hand, the ones on the bottom of the trigger guard, the ones designed by S&W's new owners, available on most S&W semi-autos, ARE ugly indeed, and do screw up the "lines" quite a bit, IMHO.
I don't have any problem with UNOBTRUSIVE internal locking mechanisms on my pistols.
All the ones I've seen internal drawings of are ACTIVE when locked and PASSIVE when unlocked. Which means, the commonly heard statement
only has merit if you're talking about LOCKING the pistol. If you leave it unlocked, it's out of the loop.
While we can all imagine up some hypothetical way that a these locking devices COULD fail, has anyone EVER had one actually rendered a firearm non-functional while in the UNlocked position? Quite honestly, show me some real live cases of that, and I'm in the boat with you.
Until then, they're just like the locks on my Dodge pickup. I didn't ASK for door locks, and I don't have to USE the door locks, but they are there nonetheless.
But as I do enjoy pointing out... (applying to most subjects, first time for this one in particular)....
If you decide don't like internal locks on your firearms, and you absolutely refuse to buy a firearm with an internal lock, and you think they're ugly as sin...
God bless America!
PugetSound5
New member
10lbs minimum DA triggers on new revolvers.