Value of clinton's "preference" to S&W?

Karanas

New member
Now that the clinton administration has encouraged that "preference" be given to S&W in future gov't purchasing, I have a few questions.

1. While some agencies may have to honor this mandate, are others still free to make their selection of sidearms based on other objective criteria?

2. I don't have the stats to verify this, but it seems to me that S&W has been unable to capture a sizeable segment of the LE market in the past. Most departments I'm familiar with have opted for Glock, Sig or Beretta instead. Aside from cost, do these guns offer features that make them more attractive than S&W? If so, how is switching over to an inferior product going to sit with the rank and file LEO's?

3. How often do PD's changeout their sidearms? IOW, how likely is it that many of them will be switching to S&W in the next year or two?

4. Is the US Military, which has a sizeable investment in Beretta as their official sidearm, now going to transition over to S&W?

5. Are these gov't agencies that will be purchasing S&W products in the future going to buy the new, untested smartguns or the old, stupid guns that are supposed to be discontinued?


I don't know, but anyway you look at it, 30 pieces of silver just doesn't seem to buy what it used to. :confused:
 
Back
Top