Y'all forgive me. I done messed up.
- Thread starter Will Beararms
- Start date
Mike Irwin
Staff
If you really care that little, Cuerno, why are you even bothering to share your opinion with us?
Mike Irwin
Staff
Eric,
"Name a single dealer who is following it."
Not the point at all.
Whether or not it is being followed right now isn't important.
It's the fact that the agreement exists at all.
If the agreement isn't excised, how quickly do you think the next Democratic administration will FORCE compliance with the agreement?
"Name a single dealer who is following it."
Not the point at all.
Whether or not it is being followed right now isn't important.
It's the fact that the agreement exists at all.
If the agreement isn't excised, how quickly do you think the next Democratic administration will FORCE compliance with the agreement?
Mike, That is the end result for the buying public. If the agreement is not enforced on the dealer, it's worthless. I just don't see the point in chastising someone for buying a gun. If someone new to guns was set on buying a new S/W, would you harrass them as you have Will?
IMO it's stupid and wrong to support firearm registration, yet everyday many of us here on TFL go out and buy a brand new gun and fill out the 4473. Same with those strange folks who willingly live in a state that requires them to get permission to own a gun, much less purchase it.
It's just another example of the splintered ranks of gun owners.
IMO it's stupid and wrong to support firearm registration, yet everyday many of us here on TFL go out and buy a brand new gun and fill out the 4473. Same with those strange folks who willingly live in a state that requires them to get permission to own a gun, much less purchase it.
It's just another example of the splintered ranks of gun owners.
Eric,
I'm confused. How would you have us purchase guns? Bypass the laws we are now forced to comply with? To do so would risk our very right to own a gun of any kind.
How does the gun purchase registration process relate to a voluntary customer boycott of *&*?
I choose to follow the law and at the same time work to change it.
I choose not to purchase from a company who sold out my beliefs.
I choose to respectfully diagree with you.
I hope you will change your opinion...we need your support.
I'm confused. How would you have us purchase guns? Bypass the laws we are now forced to comply with? To do so would risk our very right to own a gun of any kind.
How does the gun purchase registration process relate to a voluntary customer boycott of *&*?
I choose to follow the law and at the same time work to change it.
I choose not to purchase from a company who sold out my beliefs.
I choose to respectfully diagree with you.
I hope you will change your opinion...we need your support.
Mike Irwin
Staff
You're still missing the point, Eric.
It was HOW the purchase was announced that made me livid.
A smile, a wink, a nod, crossed fingers, "repentence" that was really "I got mine, and I don't give!" with a plea for forgiveness.
That's why I was taking him to task.
By the purchaser's own admission, he knows the strictures of S&W's agreement with the Gov't. And yet, the gun was still purchased, and was accompanied by this plea for "forgiveness."
What kind of crap is that?
I have a LOT more respect for those who are saying "Yeah, I know about the agreement, and I don't give a crap."
At least they're being completely up front about it.
And, in case you didn't know this, the 4473 form is NOT gun registration. That form stays with the dealer. It does NOT go into a database.
Virginia has an instant check system in place. When I purchase a new firearm, NO information about the particular make/model of the gun is conveyed to the state. I don't know about other states, but if you live in such a state, consider private purchase.
Fully half of my firearms have been private purchases. No muss, no fuss, absolutely no paperwork.
I'm going to ask again.
Have you read the ENTIRE agreement that S&W signed?
Are you familiar with the terms of the agreemnent, and just how it WILL impact law-abiding gunowners when the next Democratic administration forces strict compliance with it?
It was HOW the purchase was announced that made me livid.
A smile, a wink, a nod, crossed fingers, "repentence" that was really "I got mine, and I don't give!" with a plea for forgiveness.
That's why I was taking him to task.
By the purchaser's own admission, he knows the strictures of S&W's agreement with the Gov't. And yet, the gun was still purchased, and was accompanied by this plea for "forgiveness."
What kind of crap is that?
I have a LOT more respect for those who are saying "Yeah, I know about the agreement, and I don't give a crap."
At least they're being completely up front about it.
And, in case you didn't know this, the 4473 form is NOT gun registration. That form stays with the dealer. It does NOT go into a database.
Virginia has an instant check system in place. When I purchase a new firearm, NO information about the particular make/model of the gun is conveyed to the state. I don't know about other states, but if you live in such a state, consider private purchase.
Fully half of my firearms have been private purchases. No muss, no fuss, absolutely no paperwork.
I'm going to ask again.
Have you read the ENTIRE agreement that S&W signed?
Are you familiar with the terms of the agreemnent, and just how it WILL impact law-abiding gunowners when the next Democratic administration forces strict compliance with it?
Mike Irwin
Staff
Oh, WillBearArms?
You want forgiveness?
Write out two checks:
One to the National Rifle Association of America.
One to the gun rights group of your choice.
Each check must be for the same amount that you spent on the gun you just had to have.
Spent $400 on the gun (including taxes)? Write out a $400 check for NRA and a $400 check for another pro-gun rights group.
Oh, no writing it off on your taxes as a charitable contribution, either.
You want forgiveness?
Write out two checks:
One to the National Rifle Association of America.
One to the gun rights group of your choice.
Each check must be for the same amount that you spent on the gun you just had to have.
Spent $400 on the gun (including taxes)? Write out a $400 check for NRA and a $400 check for another pro-gun rights group.
Oh, no writing it off on your taxes as a charitable contribution, either.
Since theyre under new ownership, I suggest everyone email them with our issues (I dont think I'm being Pollyanna - companies pay attention to these things when it becomes a pattern) it might help set things in motion. I'm sure there's pressure on them from elsewhere too, but the more the merrier.
It'd be a shame if a place like S&W went under because of decisions made by English businessmen who have no respect or understanding of American individualism. Anyone know who the owners are now? Theyre website?
It'd be a shame if a place like S&W went under because of decisions made by English businessmen who have no respect or understanding of American individualism. Anyone know who the owners are now? Theyre website?
I guess that depends on what you consider to be registration. The form has your name, address, and what firearm you purchased. That BATF can look at it anytime they want. To me, that is registration.
That's not the point, however. The point is that there are other, more onerous restrictions out there (like getting a permit to own/purchase a gun), and I don't hear anyone complaining about those.
Sure. I don't like it any more than you do. I haven't purchased any new S/W firearms, but then again, they cost too much, and I don't like very many of them.
"If all firearms manufacturers decide to put those restrictions in place, what will you do then?"
You mean if all manufacturers agreed to stop selling to any gunshop that carried semi-auto rifles or high-cap mags?
Well, I got mine, who cares about you. Right? Isn't that the popular attitude?
Or maybe you meen the part about no one under 18 being allowed in the area of the store that actually has guns in it. Well, my kids are grown, so who cares?
Is it the part about only producing handguns that require both hands to pull the trigger and no pocket rockets allowed. Well, there again, I got my snubbies already.
The point of the boycott is to insure that we do not have to cross this bridge.
And for those that think time heals all or that the new owners are our kind of people, dig up their press releases and see what plans they have to squash the agreement. The three releases I have read do not include any objections to the terms of the agreement. They have had plenty of time to publicly state that they are not happy with the agreement. They have made no such statements.
You mean if all manufacturers agreed to stop selling to any gunshop that carried semi-auto rifles or high-cap mags?
Well, I got mine, who cares about you. Right? Isn't that the popular attitude?
Or maybe you meen the part about no one under 18 being allowed in the area of the store that actually has guns in it. Well, my kids are grown, so who cares?
Is it the part about only producing handguns that require both hands to pull the trigger and no pocket rockets allowed. Well, there again, I got my snubbies already.
The point of the boycott is to insure that we do not have to cross this bridge.
And for those that think time heals all or that the new owners are our kind of people, dig up their press releases and see what plans they have to squash the agreement. The three releases I have read do not include any objections to the terms of the agreement. They have had plenty of time to publicly state that they are not happy with the agreement. They have made no such statements.
Mike Irwin
Staff
There still remains a critical, and fundamental difference, Eric, one that I just realized that you're missing.
Whether we like these laws or not, that's EXACTLY what they are. Laws, passed by our elected officials in DC.
No, I don't like them any more than you do, but they are laws, passed in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution.
The Smith & Wesson has the force of law, if and when the gov't chooses to force compliance.
But, unlike these other laws, the Smith & Wesson agreement was NEVER passed by elected officials.
In fact, many of its provisions are modeled on strictures that the Clinton Administration wanted to push through Congress, but whose efforts were continually stymied by a Congress that refused to act on any gun control legislation that Clinton wanted during the last 5 to 6 years of his presidency.
So, what does the Clinton administration do?
It attempts to enact what it wants, not through the legislative process, but through an extortive stick and carrot fiat.
Every manufacturer was (or would have been) targeted in this effort to circumvent the proscribed legislative process.
That fact alone should send a chill through everyone, that a Constitutionally protected right can be threatened in such an un-Constitutional manner.
S&W bought into it. They were the only ones. They have to pay the price, and should continue to pay the price until they step back from this agreement.
Whether we like these laws or not, that's EXACTLY what they are. Laws, passed by our elected officials in DC.
No, I don't like them any more than you do, but they are laws, passed in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution.
The Smith & Wesson has the force of law, if and when the gov't chooses to force compliance.
But, unlike these other laws, the Smith & Wesson agreement was NEVER passed by elected officials.
In fact, many of its provisions are modeled on strictures that the Clinton Administration wanted to push through Congress, but whose efforts were continually stymied by a Congress that refused to act on any gun control legislation that Clinton wanted during the last 5 to 6 years of his presidency.
So, what does the Clinton administration do?
It attempts to enact what it wants, not through the legislative process, but through an extortive stick and carrot fiat.
Every manufacturer was (or would have been) targeted in this effort to circumvent the proscribed legislative process.
That fact alone should send a chill through everyone, that a Constitutionally protected right can be threatened in such an un-Constitutional manner.
S&W bought into it. They were the only ones. They have to pay the price, and should continue to pay the price until they step back from this agreement.
For a change, actually read this and try not to be overly critical...
Being on the other side of THIS arguement, I am amazed at how if your opinion differs from the hard line you will be insulted, have your intelligence questioned and then told you are wrong. Yet I see very few people (Mike Irwin and AR-10 are exceptions) who use logic and reasoning to back their point of view. Just because I don't agree with you doesn't mean I am wrong, it doesn't mean I am not well informed and it doesn't mean that I am not every bit as active in the fight for gun rights as any of you.
Do I agree with the S&W agreement? No. Do I feel it should be torn up and defied? Yep. Do I think we should turn our back on S&W and force them out of business to "send a message" to the remaining firearm manufacturers? No. And I am going to take food off the table of a soon to be unemployed American who spent his career crafting excellent firearms at a S&W factory because the CEO made a poor decision trying to protect those people and (I'm sure) profits? Absolutely not.
And because of this I am a "scab"? Not to mention the other host of other derrogatory comments. But hey, I know it is alot easier to just do nothing (like a boycott) then do something. So instead I ask this, what are you doing for S&W? Where you there supporting them when it looked like they were going to lose it all to some stupid lawsuit? Did you buy their guns in a show of support and write political figures demanding that they back S&W and defy Clinton? Did you call the NRA ILA and ask what you could do to help? Or did you sit by, like WE all did with Kmart and watch the anti-gun lobby get their way, again. And after it was too late did you be-little Kmart and demand a boycott?
Well I did all of those things, including let Kmart fall to the anti's without standing up and supporting them when they needed it. And yep I bitched afterwards, and yes I stopped buying stuff there and then after reading a GREAT post on rec.guns I sent an email to Walmat thanking them for selling guns and ammo locally. I told them I would support them and buy my goods there. I told them to fight the good fight and I would too. I wonder what I would be posting about right now if we had ALL done that for S&W? Maybe I would be asking about that damn East German Makarov I want so bad but just can't seem to find.
mlk18
Being on the other side of THIS arguement, I am amazed at how if your opinion differs from the hard line you will be insulted, have your intelligence questioned and then told you are wrong. Yet I see very few people (Mike Irwin and AR-10 are exceptions) who use logic and reasoning to back their point of view. Just because I don't agree with you doesn't mean I am wrong, it doesn't mean I am not well informed and it doesn't mean that I am not every bit as active in the fight for gun rights as any of you.
Do I agree with the S&W agreement? No. Do I feel it should be torn up and defied? Yep. Do I think we should turn our back on S&W and force them out of business to "send a message" to the remaining firearm manufacturers? No. And I am going to take food off the table of a soon to be unemployed American who spent his career crafting excellent firearms at a S&W factory because the CEO made a poor decision trying to protect those people and (I'm sure) profits? Absolutely not.
And because of this I am a "scab"? Not to mention the other host of other derrogatory comments. But hey, I know it is alot easier to just do nothing (like a boycott) then do something. So instead I ask this, what are you doing for S&W? Where you there supporting them when it looked like they were going to lose it all to some stupid lawsuit? Did you buy their guns in a show of support and write political figures demanding that they back S&W and defy Clinton? Did you call the NRA ILA and ask what you could do to help? Or did you sit by, like WE all did with Kmart and watch the anti-gun lobby get their way, again. And after it was too late did you be-little Kmart and demand a boycott?
Well I did all of those things, including let Kmart fall to the anti's without standing up and supporting them when they needed it. And yep I bitched afterwards, and yes I stopped buying stuff there and then after reading a GREAT post on rec.guns I sent an email to Walmat thanking them for selling guns and ammo locally. I told them I would support them and buy my goods there. I told them to fight the good fight and I would too. I wonder what I would be posting about right now if we had ALL done that for S&W? Maybe I would be asking about that damn East German Makarov I want so bad but just can't seem to find.
mlk18
Eric,
Well, here's my reply...sorry it’s a bit long…
First of all, I don't think every one who wants to own a gun or who wishes to shoot should move unless they feel that getting a handgun permit and filling out the "yellow" sheet is so unbearable that they can not function. IF their desire to own a gun is strong (like most of us) AND they can not function in the society they inhabit, I agree, they should move to area which makes the person comfortable and allows that person to sanely live. I just don't see too any of us needing to respond to the paperwork in that manner.
I also doubt that many of us are financially secure enough to pull up stakes and move to a state which is more gun friendly or one that allows concealed carry (here in MO we can not carry!).
It just does not make sense for most of us to move...and I doubt that you would really want all of us moving in around you as you probably enjoy where you live for other reasons besides the favorable gun laws.
Regarding the Boycott of *&* being a restriction, I'm afraid I don't follow this line of reasoning.
The registration process is a series of legal requirements we currently must follow in order to purchase a gun.
I did not say I agree with the registration process, I just said it was part of the process we all must abide by.
The Boycott of *&* is just that. We who seriously support the Second Amendment have joined together (yes, loosely bonded at times) to express our outrage at the *&* Company. Our message could be interpreted in many ways, but generally we are saying "WE WILL NOT BUY YOUR PRODUCTS AS A RESULT OF YOUR ACTIONS" Those of us who have read the "agreement" and who are opposed to it are voluntarily choosing not to purchase *&* products.
"If all manufacturers make agreements like *&*, what will we do then"?...
I think the idea here is to send a message to our govt., and all manufacturers that we can choose who we will spend our money with. I believe the hope is that we will discourage *&* and all other manufactures from supporting such rubbish. "IF" all manufactures supported such agreements"...I think it's kind of pointless to worry about that today because it is not reality. If we don't care about agreements similar to the *&* "agreement"...then we can sit on the sidelines and let the cards fall where they may...but I don't think you or anyone else who truly loves our Constitution will sit here and accept that there is nothing we can do. We have to work together or we may just have to deal with many such agreements in the future.
I DO hear plenty from people who hate the paperwork and restrictions we now have to deal with. I read it every day. I also hear it in every gunshop. I AGREE with you Eric, I too hate the restrictions. The Second Amendment was not written to establish a militia…it was written to provide WE THE PEOPLE the MEANS to overthrow another tyrant like the King of England. The *&* boycott is our VOTE. We are voting with our dollars. If you are not going to vote...I guess you really don't have much to complain about.
Respectfully submitted
VonFatman
Well, here's my reply...sorry it’s a bit long…
First of all, I don't think every one who wants to own a gun or who wishes to shoot should move unless they feel that getting a handgun permit and filling out the "yellow" sheet is so unbearable that they can not function. IF their desire to own a gun is strong (like most of us) AND they can not function in the society they inhabit, I agree, they should move to area which makes the person comfortable and allows that person to sanely live. I just don't see too any of us needing to respond to the paperwork in that manner.
I also doubt that many of us are financially secure enough to pull up stakes and move to a state which is more gun friendly or one that allows concealed carry (here in MO we can not carry!).
It just does not make sense for most of us to move...and I doubt that you would really want all of us moving in around you as you probably enjoy where you live for other reasons besides the favorable gun laws.
Regarding the Boycott of *&* being a restriction, I'm afraid I don't follow this line of reasoning.
The registration process is a series of legal requirements we currently must follow in order to purchase a gun.
I did not say I agree with the registration process, I just said it was part of the process we all must abide by.
The Boycott of *&* is just that. We who seriously support the Second Amendment have joined together (yes, loosely bonded at times) to express our outrage at the *&* Company. Our message could be interpreted in many ways, but generally we are saying "WE WILL NOT BUY YOUR PRODUCTS AS A RESULT OF YOUR ACTIONS" Those of us who have read the "agreement" and who are opposed to it are voluntarily choosing not to purchase *&* products.
"If all manufacturers make agreements like *&*, what will we do then"?...
I think the idea here is to send a message to our govt., and all manufacturers that we can choose who we will spend our money with. I believe the hope is that we will discourage *&* and all other manufactures from supporting such rubbish. "IF" all manufactures supported such agreements"...I think it's kind of pointless to worry about that today because it is not reality. If we don't care about agreements similar to the *&* "agreement"...then we can sit on the sidelines and let the cards fall where they may...but I don't think you or anyone else who truly loves our Constitution will sit here and accept that there is nothing we can do. We have to work together or we may just have to deal with many such agreements in the future.
I DO hear plenty from people who hate the paperwork and restrictions we now have to deal with. I read it every day. I also hear it in every gunshop. I AGREE with you Eric, I too hate the restrictions. The Second Amendment was not written to establish a militia…it was written to provide WE THE PEOPLE the MEANS to overthrow another tyrant like the King of England. The *&* boycott is our VOTE. We are voting with our dollars. If you are not going to vote...I guess you really don't have much to complain about.
Respectfully submitted
VonFatman
V. A. Cop, thanks for the input, but it would appear you are a little late getting informed on this one. Do a search here on Safety Hammer and you'll find that there are good reasons to question just how 'pro gun' Safety Hammer is.
And the ownership being British, American, or East Latvian is not relevant to the problem. No one suggested a boycott because the Brits bought S&W, so returning to "American" ownership does not solve the problem. It's nice, if it's true. But it's not enough.
The problem is the agreement. Until that is repudiated, and legally killed dead, dead, dead, the problem remains.
BTW, thanks for being a cop, and say hello to that beautiful Montana sky for me. That's a man's country!
Someday....
And the ownership being British, American, or East Latvian is not relevant to the problem. No one suggested a boycott because the Brits bought S&W, so returning to "American" ownership does not solve the problem. It's nice, if it's true. But it's not enough.
The problem is the agreement. Until that is repudiated, and legally killed dead, dead, dead, the problem remains.
BTW, thanks for being a cop, and say hello to that beautiful Montana sky for me. That's a man's country!
Someday....
Silver Bullet
New member
Ed2: Great new idea! I like it. Reading your suggestion to e-mail the new owners suggests a new line of effort on this issue. In addition to the boycott, maybe we can come up with other means of getting the new owners to come around. The e-mail idea is good. Appeals to logic or patriotism might work. I suspect they're presently just digging in and watching to see how many of us cave in.
I grabbed my Scottsdale phone book, and here's their address and number:
Saf-T-Hammer
14500 N. Northsight Blvd.
Scottsdale, AZ 85260
480-949-9700
This must be only about six miles from my house. I'll cruise over there and verify they're still at this address.
Let's put on our thinking caps and see if we can come up with other ideas in addition to boycotts and e-mail approach. I can't think of anything, but I'm sure there are thousands of TFLers here smarter than me who might come up with something. I just want to see us get out of the "boycott only" paradigm.
Keep the boycott too, of course.
I realize I'm being overly optimistic, but gee whiz, if we could pull this off we'll all be winners on this.
I grabbed my Scottsdale phone book, and here's their address and number:
Saf-T-Hammer
14500 N. Northsight Blvd.
Scottsdale, AZ 85260
480-949-9700
This must be only about six miles from my house. I'll cruise over there and verify they're still at this address.
Let's put on our thinking caps and see if we can come up with other ideas in addition to boycotts and e-mail approach. I can't think of anything, but I'm sure there are thousands of TFLers here smarter than me who might come up with something. I just want to see us get out of the "boycott only" paradigm.
Keep the boycott too, of course.
I realize I'm being overly optimistic, but gee whiz, if we could pull this off we'll all be winners on this.
mlk18,
I did read your post...all of it. Good job. We are not really too far apart...but I disagree with you...and I'm glad you took time to write down your thoughts. I'm also glad we can agree to disagree.
Silver B.,
Also, thanks for a good post. We don't have to get pissed at anyone accept the folks who want to do us in!
I did read your post...all of it. Good job. We are not really too far apart...but I disagree with you...and I'm glad you took time to write down your thoughts. I'm also glad we can agree to disagree.
Silver B.,
Also, thanks for a good post. We don't have to get pissed at anyone accept the folks who want to do us in!
Mike Irwin
Staff
MLK18,
S&W's employees can get jobs someplace else. The economy is still good, plants are hiring, an no one has ever said that these individuals have to go back into the same exact lineup.
I'm living proof that losing a job is NOT the end of the world as we know it.
Yeah, it stings.
Yeah, it's a pain.
Yeah, you may have to take some jobs that you may not like, or you may think are beneath you.
There has never been a guarantee that any person can expect to have a job day in and day out, no matter what.
That's what we call the endless cycle of life.
In contrast to that, though, once a fundamental right is lost or severely damaged, it's not coming back in our lifetime, or our childrens' lifetimes.
Rights are one heck of a lot harder to get back than a job.
If 125 people are put out of work by my defense of my rights, your rights, and every law-abiding American's rights, then that is a cost that MUST be exacted. I feel badly for those people, but I know that my actions were correct and just.
If one of the most venerable manufacturers of firearms in history goes under because I am defending my rights, that is again an acceptable loss -- a painful one, particularly painful for me, given my affection for Smith & Wesson revolvers, but an acceptable loss.
I also vehemently disagree with your assessment that a boycott is "doing nothing."
A boycott is an active process, an active decision by the participants to make a stand on an issue.
I am certain that the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King would be amused to know that the Birmingham Bus Boycott was actually a case of him and his followers "doing nothing," when they could have been doing what? Rioting in the streets? Burning the buses they refused to ride?
Now, if you really want to know how much I've supported Smith & Wesson in the past, go search on my name and the figure $700 (which was my average yearly expenditure on S&W branded products over the several years before the sellout).
You'll also find, in the same thread, I believe, what I had to say about K Mart. In a nutshell, they lost me to Walmart and Target YEARS ago, for reasons absolutely unrelated to firearms issues.
Filthy stores, surly employees, horrible prices (if and when you could find a price), and poor selection made K Mart a non-player for my shopping dollars.
Just like Smith & Wesson's poor choices made them a non-player for my dollars.
S&W's employees can get jobs someplace else. The economy is still good, plants are hiring, an no one has ever said that these individuals have to go back into the same exact lineup.
I'm living proof that losing a job is NOT the end of the world as we know it.
Yeah, it stings.
Yeah, it's a pain.
Yeah, you may have to take some jobs that you may not like, or you may think are beneath you.
There has never been a guarantee that any person can expect to have a job day in and day out, no matter what.
That's what we call the endless cycle of life.
In contrast to that, though, once a fundamental right is lost or severely damaged, it's not coming back in our lifetime, or our childrens' lifetimes.
Rights are one heck of a lot harder to get back than a job.
If 125 people are put out of work by my defense of my rights, your rights, and every law-abiding American's rights, then that is a cost that MUST be exacted. I feel badly for those people, but I know that my actions were correct and just.
If one of the most venerable manufacturers of firearms in history goes under because I am defending my rights, that is again an acceptable loss -- a painful one, particularly painful for me, given my affection for Smith & Wesson revolvers, but an acceptable loss.
I also vehemently disagree with your assessment that a boycott is "doing nothing."
A boycott is an active process, an active decision by the participants to make a stand on an issue.
I am certain that the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King would be amused to know that the Birmingham Bus Boycott was actually a case of him and his followers "doing nothing," when they could have been doing what? Rioting in the streets? Burning the buses they refused to ride?
Now, if you really want to know how much I've supported Smith & Wesson in the past, go search on my name and the figure $700 (which was my average yearly expenditure on S&W branded products over the several years before the sellout).
You'll also find, in the same thread, I believe, what I had to say about K Mart. In a nutshell, they lost me to Walmart and Target YEARS ago, for reasons absolutely unrelated to firearms issues.
Filthy stores, surly employees, horrible prices (if and when you could find a price), and poor selection made K Mart a non-player for my shopping dollars.
Just like Smith & Wesson's poor choices made them a non-player for my dollars.
Rainbow Six
New member
Speaking of logic...
mlk18 wrote:
Ok, let me get this straight. You state that with a few exceptions, the most of us don't use logic to enforce our point of view. You, on the other hand, quit doing business with K-Mart because they stopped selling ammo but you don't see it necessary to stop doing business with S&W after they sold your rights out to the govt?
Please, show me the logic you used to form this point of view!
I also used the arguement that boycotting = doing nothing. How wrong I was. Realizing that without S&W the agreement is null & void (they are the ONLY manufacturer participating) it seems very logical to me to believe that either the agreement or S&W has to go. I would much rather see the agreement thrown out but if S&W has to die to kill the agreement it is a very small loss compared to losing the rights the agreement threatens to restrict and infringe upon. Since we can't directly fight the governing bodies that back doored us with the agreement we have to take the only other option available and that is to go after S&W with (a very pro-active) an unrelentless boycott.
As long as there are people with the "who cares" attitude still buying new S&W guns and products we all risk the loss of much more than those who may be left without a job if S&W goes under, as pointed out by Mike Irwin.
mlk18 wrote:
Ok, let me get this straight. You state that with a few exceptions, the most of us don't use logic to enforce our point of view. You, on the other hand, quit doing business with K-Mart because they stopped selling ammo but you don't see it necessary to stop doing business with S&W after they sold your rights out to the govt?
Please, show me the logic you used to form this point of view!
I also used the arguement that boycotting = doing nothing. How wrong I was. Realizing that without S&W the agreement is null & void (they are the ONLY manufacturer participating) it seems very logical to me to believe that either the agreement or S&W has to go. I would much rather see the agreement thrown out but if S&W has to die to kill the agreement it is a very small loss compared to losing the rights the agreement threatens to restrict and infringe upon. Since we can't directly fight the governing bodies that back doored us with the agreement we have to take the only other option available and that is to go after S&W with (a very pro-active) an unrelentless boycott.
As long as there are people with the "who cares" attitude still buying new S&W guns and products we all risk the loss of much more than those who may be left without a job if S&W goes under, as pointed out by Mike Irwin.