It's probably not wise of me to bring this up as I know I'll come under fire in one way or another, having recently bought a 686 L-frame. However, I can't help but wonder what the general feelings are towards Smith & Wesson years after the dirty "sell-out" scheme that suddenly turned the company into a traitor. But my heart tells me I should forgive and forget, as holding a grudge against an old and dear friend may as well be selling out to the devil in itself.
The agreement was basically a ploy by the anti-gun democrats like Bill Clinton and Al Gore to get gun companies to agree to incoperate saftey devices into their firearms and to force strict and useless restrictions on who sells them and how they're sold. Many gun owners were shocked that Smith & Wesson would sell-out to such an agreement with politicians just to try to save themselves from frivilous lawsuits. At the time, I too had agreed to turn my back on the company because of this and boycott Smith & Wesson products. However, as it turns out, we still won. While S&W would go on selling trigger locks and integrating safety devices into their firearms, I've yet to see myself having to pay more taxes on a gun or have a waiting period. Their precious assault weapons ban expired recently and in my opinion, now's one of the better times to buy a gun than ever. There is not so much wailing over school shootings to give any thrust to an anti-gun movement. I mean let's face it. That's ALL it takes. In the U.K., firearms were banned almost entirely in response to ONE shooting. People are so emotionally driven and arrogant that they will try to hang gun companies by the neck every time some pyschotic moron pulls the trigger. It's irrational and downright sickening. Such instances are PROOF as to WHY firearms are needed for defense.
So how about Smith & Wesson now? Ed Schultz, who was directly responsible for the agreement made then, is no longer with Smith & Wesson and I personally hope that he's been made just as miserable as he deserves to be for letting himself and the proud name Smith & Wesson be used as a scapegoat. Firearms themselves are not responsible for deaths, anymore than Smith & Wesson firearms are responsible for the cowardly decisions made by one of it's former CEO's. I believe that Smith & Wesson is now pretty much clear of the foolish agreement made then which including developing "smart guns" which I suppose is intended to mean guns who are intended for extremely stupid people. I haven't happen across any of these firearms in a gunshop and I doubt anyone will have to, either. We won, though the fight is never really over. You have to be concious of the fact that there is always someone out there who looking to make their wallet a little deeper at the expense of your rights. My suggestion is to vote and take whatever action you see is needed to support the NRA and your 2nd Amendment rights, even if it is as simple as going out and buying a gun to excercise those rights.
I do not feel that continuing such a boycott on Smith & Wesson now would be warranted, which is why I'm proud to have my new .357 Magnum. I bought a finely crafted peice of steel without even the slightest intention of promoting the type of garbage we saw then. Wiping one of the largest American gun companies off the face of the earth is exactly what the anti-gunners would love to see. You're not supporting the anti-gunners by buying a Smith & Wesson and if you are one to still bear such a grudge, you should probably consider who was really to blame. Bearing such sentiment might as well be the same as not owning a Mauser or Luger because they were used by Nazis, or perhaps not using an AK47 because of it's association with communism and terrorists. Let's get real. That's the same type of extreme idealism anti-gunners employ to try to take away our firearms. I won't turn my back on a historic and trusted gun company because of the mistakes of one man. If anything, I'd hope to see that Smith & Wesson stands it's ground in the future and remains involved in America's shooting tradition and the shooting sports that promote it.
More recently, I read an article about Smith & Wesson's struggles. It seems to mention them winning a contract to supply to Afghan security forces.
Whether you're fond of Smith & Wesson or not, you may find it interesting to read from the perspective of the company itself. I just felt it was important to bring light to this because it troubles me that so many people might still have the wrong idea about S&W. I'm not even a really big fan of S&W, personally. I don't have much bias towards any particular gun maker. But, I do have enough concern to defend them when needed and while I loathe the actions taken by foolish men in business suits, I could never let that twist my view of a gun maker that's been around for over 150 years.
Anyway, there's my forgiving contribution in the aspiration of a better future for Smith & Wesson and gun owners alike. Thanks for reading!
Basically, I beleive gun companies are trying to stay in business. It`s hard enough these days to OWN a gun, !!! must it be like to MANUFACTURE the things? I can never beleive ( or allow myself to ) that a gun company is going to deliberately do anything to spite their customers. What company would? But they surely must be confronted with choosing the lesser of 2 evils.
You shoud not come "under fire" for posting your valid points and feelings about guns on a gun forum. If anybody gives you any crap about it, there will be people here that will have your back.
As far as S&W, These are crazy times for the industry and owners. Peole/corporations are bound to make errors. Hopefully the errors made are not detrimental and all learn something from it. If I tried hard enough, I could find something to be mad about every Mfg. about. Just not productive in today's environment. However, again, we should learn from our mistakes.
Your A little behind the times as far as S&W is concerned. The sellout was by Thomkins LLC a British corp. S&W has since been sold to the Saf-T-Hammer Co. and the agreement with the Klinton adm. is null and void. S&W is back on our side again. The agreement was with Thomkins LLC, not Saf-T-Hammer Co. in this case S&W is considered a comidity or property not the agent of the agreement.
S&W has since been sold to the Saf-T-Hammer Co. and the agreement with the Klinton adm. is null and void.
Exactly. Now they insist on putting their internal locks (one more thing to break) on all their products of their own free will.
The NC the Department of Corrections recently replaced their old S&W revolvers with new ones. The new ones had the internal locks, I guess so no toddler in prison would accidentally shoot themselves. Oh yeah, the barrels on these guns blew off after a few rounds too. I guess that was some kind of safety feature as well. Obviously S&W stands for reliability and quality.
S&W has now agreed to buy back the defective revolvers and replace them with new M&P40s at a "discount". These guns also have the internal locks, because trained law enforcement officers need to be protected from their dangerous guns. And having to fumble around with a key during a prison riot to get your sidearm into action is somehow safer.
I try to avoid the Ford v. Chevy thing with guns. But I believe that S&W as a company are traitors to the gun culture and their (current) products are junk. I would not buy any product from S&W.
__________________
"Good. Bad. I'm the guy with the gun." - Ash
"S&W has since been sold to the Saf-T-Hammer Co. and the agreement with the Klinton adm. is null and void. S&W is back on our side again. The agreement was with Thomkins LLC, not Saf-T-Hammer Co. in this case S&W is considered a comidity or property not the agent of the agreement."
Thanks Dave! When companies change hands like that, the deal is void and no longer applies. I know I'm behind the times but apparently so is anyone who's still holding a grudge. That was my whole point. So as established before, Smith & Wesson is back on our side. As for the the safety locks, I'm not surprised that they are still putting them on the guns. They were added and I suppose they saw little reason to do away with them. I mean think about it. Then the headlines would say "Smith & Wesson REMOVES safety feautures from their guns and must not care about saving lives" blah, blah, etc. As I explained before, the only traitors were the businessmen who made that old deal. The people who made the firearms sitting in the gun shops right now had NOTHING to do with it so calling them a traitor is like calling the current Japanese or Germans badguys because of their roles in WWII. It's in the past!
The market for firearms is so broad now that you can find the perfect firearm for your use regardless. And indeed, there are things to like and dislike about any gun company or for that matter ANY organization on the face of the earth composed of human beings whom are ALL prone to making mistakes. I'm just glad that it didn't put Smith & Wesson out of business. Losing any major gun maker would be unfortunate for gun owners, whether you buy their products or not!
"S&W has since been sold to the Saf-T-Hammer Co. and the agreement with the Klinton adm. is null and void. S&W is back on our side again. The agreement was with Thomkins LLC, not Saf-T-Hammer Co. in this case S&W is considered a comidity or property not the agent of the agreement."
Thanks Dave! When companies change hands like that, the deal is void and no longer applies. I know I'm behind the times but apparently so is anyone who's still holding a grudge. That was my whole point. So as established before, Smith & Wesson is back on our side. As for the the safety locks, I'm not surprised that they are still putting them on the guns. They were added and I suppose they saw little reason to do away with them. I mean think about it. Then the headlines would say "Smith & Wesson REMOVES safety feautures from their guns and must not care about saving lives" blah, blah, etc. As I explained before, the only traitors were the businessmen who made that old deal. The people who made the firearms sitting in the gun shops right now had NOTHING to do with it so calling them a traitor is like calling the current Japanese or Germans badguys because of their roles in WWII. It's in the past!
The market for firearms is so broad now that you can find the perfect firearm for your use regardless. And indeed, there are things to like and dislike about any gun company or for that matter ANY organization on the face of the earth composed of human beings whom are ALL prone to making mistakes. I'm just glad that it didn't put Smith & Wesson out of business. Losing any major gun maker would be unfortunate for gun owners, whether you buy their products or not!
Saf-T-Hammer has installed their internal lock system into all S&W revolvers since 2004. This is a marketing decision and has little to do with safety. The internal locks would not be a problem if they were reliable, but the system itself is a flawed design. NC DOC is just one of the many "failures" experienced by the current consumers of the S&W Saf-T-Hammer revolver. This is sad because the S&W revolver was considered one of the most reliable and useful handguns in the world. Rick Devoid, chief instructor for Lethal Force Institute out of NH told me that he does not reccomend anyone buy a Saf-T-Hammer S&W because he has seen too many "self engage" during his classes. S&W denies any problem with the Saf-T-Hammer design and usually blames the customer. In the S&W Academy, all internal locks on S&W revolvers are deactivated. It seems that during classes in the 2005 calendar year several students and one instructor had their internal locks "self engage", no doubt it was user error...
I personally will never own a S&W revolver with an internal lock.
The M&P Semi-auto replaced the 3rd Generation S&W Semi-autos. This change was to market a new low cost polymer pistol (not the Sigma) against the popular Glock. The M&P has an internal lock in every pistol. Glock offers an internal lock that is optional.
The new S&W M&P is simply a repackaged Sigma. They have been reported very unreliable and I HATE their trigger. Unlike the Glocks, XDs, Steyrs, Etc with a secondary tab on their trigger, the Sigma has the lower half of the trigger pivot. This means it can be pulled accidentally just as easily and it feels like crap.
S&W is cutting their own throats in my opinion. Maybe they'll wholesale their ARs much lower than posted on their site. I'd suggest they develop something new but that would cost money they probably don't have.
__________________
Trust is earned, not... GIVEN away. - Worf
Only Smith & Wesson I wanted was the 686 unless I find me an old model 29 or a 629. My 686 is very nicely made and has one of the best triggers on a stock revolver I'd ever felt. If they do anything right, it's their revolvers. And that's pretty much what I think of when I think of a Smith & Wesson. I don't like Sigma's and I've never had any strong feelings either way about S&W automatics. They seem rather average to me. I'm just glad to see people disliking the brand for better reasons than the sell-out thing!
