Salivating Smith & Wesson Supporters

[AR-10]

Time to beat the horse again.

We have gotten quite a few new members recently, so I don't think it's out of line to state once again that Smith and Wesson is a back-stabbing traitorous organization that would like to see us all restricted to buying no firearms except those that they market.

The impetus for this rehash is a thread in the Revolver Forum. If you are interested, you can find it here.

In that thread a member gave a link to the Smith and Wesson Forum, and suggested that if a person wanted to discuss the merits of a new Smith without mention of the boycott, that would be the place to go.
Then he humbly suggested that if you want to discuss the fact that Smith is joined at the hip to the infamous Agreement that you get the heck off the Revolver Forum and discuss it here.

Well, I stopped by the S&W Forum for a quick look-see, and it just about made me :barf: . I can see why you would hang out there if you wanted to chum around with a bunch of guys who think that S&W walks on water. I certainly didn't see any posters squirming at the thought of their hard earned money supporting a company that has promised to give a percentage of their profits to organizations that will use the money to fund gun control bills and anti-firearm advertising.

What I saw was people enthusiastically urging others to send money to Smith in return for shiny new toys. Post after Post of the same.

So, here I am, at the behest of Kenneth L. Walters, posting in General Discussion. Humbly suggesting that if you have not read the agreement in it's entirity it would be well worth your time to do so.

The link, courtesy of C.R. Sam, is here.

 

[Russian Furry]

Smith makes fine priduct. I could care less about their political actions. My 945 is sure a fine pistol! So are my S&W revolvers.
I am not a big fan of none-performance center Smith autos, but they are OK too.

 

[AR-10]

Why am I not suprised?

You buy all the Smiths you want. Tell everyone to do the same. I'm sure they'll take you serious.

 

[C.R.Sam]

AR10, thank you but I can't take the credit for the link. I got it from gunslinger, who did the research and brought it to the surface.

To all who havent read the complete and unabridged first agreement between Smith n Wesson and the Government and other entities.......I urge you to read the link at the bottom of AR10's post. Then maby we can discuss the situation in a rational manner.

Tho that first agreement was entered into by previous management, the current owners have publicly stated that they will honor ALL agreements signed by the previous management.

Smith and Wesson was a fine old gun house. Past builders and marketers of quality firearms. That is the old house. That is history. A long and glorious history yes, but history nonetheless. Past.

To the consternation of the government, only S&W signed. Other manufacturers took the stance that going under was preferable to knuckling under. Supporting S&W in these times is not only giving aid and comfort to those who would take our freedoms but it is also a slap in the face of the brave companies who have so far defied the government blackmail.

Sam

 

[HK1]

now I agree old smith is good and I have looked at some of the classics very heavily.....but I will never buy the new stuff....they sold us all out......I will shop elsewhere

 

[AR-10]

"Then maby we can discuss the situation in a rational manner."


Yes, thank you Sam. I needed that. Rudeness and rational thinking do not go well together.

Thank you also for explaining in a little more detail the current situation with S.&W.

Every so often I see someone post that Smith has been sold, or the agreement is not being enforced, or who cares? It is important to realize that the legally binding contract that Smith signed is not going to fade away.

But if a person has not read the agreement that person would be doing himself a favor by doing so. You post that link so often that I kind of think of it as "your" link. Sorry about the mis-representation.

 

[bastiat]

Imagine all these things:

All guns must have internal locking devices
All guns must have Authorized User Technology ('smart' guns)
All guns must have a DA trigger pull of 10 lbs or more
All guns must have a barrel length of 3", unless it meets some set performance specs
All pistols cannot have a combined length and height of less than 10"
All pistols must have a manual safety
All new guns cannot accept pre-ban high cap magazines.
All guns will be ballistically fingerprinted

All dealers can no longer sell government defined 'assault weapons'.
All dealers can no longer sell pre-ban high capacity magazines.
All dealers can no longer sell at gun shows that allow private sales
All dealers can only show a customer one gun at a time. Comparing two similar guns side by side not allowed.
All dealers must store their guns in fireproof vaults after hours

All buyers must complete a certified training course
All buyers can must wait 14 days between buying handguns
All buyers will contribute via their purchase to a fund to educate the public about the dangers of guns.

--

If Congress tried to do any of these things, what would your reaction be?

Is it any better that the government tried to do the same things via the back door, and S&W was willing to make it possible?

 

[C.R.Sam]

AR10....you and Rainbow six are among those who put the lie to the statements that republicising the onerous nature of the agreement does no good and falls on deaf ears.

If folks would just read, not scan, the first agreement......the question would be resolved. Either Saf-T-Hammer would stand against it or quit makin guns.

They did pick up a good manufacturing facility that has capability to make lots of neat stuff. The deal to make parts for Remington for 40 million bucks was either a low bid suicide move or a smart move. No idea which till the p&l is updated. Forty mil from Remington does represent nearly 200,000 handguns they don't have to sell.

Sam

 

[Waterdog]

Ya wanna bet, they sell off S&W within 2 years.

We, the gun buying public, will put them out of business.

Then maybe some real Americans, will pick it up for pennies on the dollar.

Waterdog

 

[rock_jock]

Can you guys help me out here? I simply cannot understand why the new owners are not doing more to repudiate the agreement. They are losing untold millions by continuing the treachery, they have not seen the promised govt. and LE sales, and they are still being pursued in court. This doesn't make sense. Is there something I'm missing?

 

[Zander]

"Smith makes fine priduct. "

Well, they used to make a fine revolver.

Having viewed, handled and fired their latest production, I'd say they have a ways to go to retain their reputation...and in the meantime, Taurus et al. are kicking their butt.

In fact, I'd go so far as to say that current production Rossi designs...under the BrazTech import label...are revolvers with much better quality control on average.

Don't believe me? Check it out.

In the meantime, buy all the older *&* revolvers you can...they aren't making any more and we are highly unlikely to see their peer anytime soon, if ever.

 

[bastiat]

A novel idea...

How about forcing S&W's hand? They refuse to repudiate the agreement, but they don't appear to be following it.

The quickest way to see the agreement disappear is to demand it be enforced. Maybe calls to HUD and the justice department complaining that S&W doesn't appear to be living up to a signed contract with the government.

S&W will have to choose between breaking the agreement and making their dealers agree to the terms listed above. When the dealers get the contracts to sign, what percentage do you think will tell S&W to jump in a lake? They not only alienate a lot of customers, but now they won't have the dealer network to sustain themselves.

 

[Jeff Thomas]

Yes, by all means ... let's not upset the dyed-in-the-wool *&* supporters.

Hell ... if Hillary Clinton starts making quality firearms, let's buy from her as well. American Nazi Party becomes the next owner of *&*? Hey, no sweat. Can't let a little ol' philosophy get in the way of quality firearms. No sir.

Further derisive insults deleted.

Frankly, nearly all TFL members have more brains that to make some of the inane statements I saw in that thread. Pitiful. With friends like that, the RKBA needs no enemies.

Disgusted in AZ

 

[Mike Irwin]

Maybe Kruschev (sp?) was right.

Only this time it's gun owners who are hanging themselves with their own ropes.

 

[WilderBill]

I don't have any problem with someone that owns an older *&*.

However I don't even want ot look at a new one.

As long as we all stay away in droves the forces of the free market economy will, eventually cause them to either rethink their posistion or go out of bussiness from lack of sales.

I'd hate to see them go because competition is a good thing.
It keeps all the competitors on their toes.

We need to have not just more guns, but more everything Made in the USA, but as it stands now we don't need the cr*p that goes with the *&* name!

 

[AR-10]

I don't have a problem with anyone owning used Smiths, either.
I have one. There are others models I will own eventually.

I just don't see how a person who has read the agreement can rationalize a position that continues to support the company. I guess they are like the hunter who sees no good reason for anyone to carry a handgun. Or the target shooter who would not complain if the government outlawed all semi-auto rifles.

What really chaps me is the fact that when you discuss this topic in the Revolver Forum someone will often say "Hey, if you want to talk about that, go to General Discussion". I can understand that they don't want to get a guilt trip laid on them, but they don't often come here to explain their position, either.

It seems to me they are trying to censor dissenting views. They think it's fine to say "Get it!", but it's wrong to say "Before you get it, read this". I understand that they don't want a thread hijacked. Sam wasn't hijacking this particular thread. The fact that discussion arose from his contribution is natural.

There are lots of people who are uninformed regarding this subject. I just think that if posters want to encourage others to patronize the manufacturer by purchasing new guns that they should expect other posters to point out the fact that such patronage may end up affecting us all.

 

[AR-10]

So that there is no misunderstanding, let me make this clear.

I have no complaint with the moderators or the policies of this board. I think the board is spectacular, and the Moderators and staff do an excellant job. I do not feel that they are in any way trying to stifle the exchange of information or opinions.

And I am not proud of my response to R.F.

 

[Jeff, CA]

You know, I posted a question in the general handgun forum asking about used S&Ws. I wanted to know what to look for to distinguish pre- from post-agreement, etc.

I got ONE reply of any value (thanks, Mark IV Series 80).

For so many of you who wouldn't have anything but a used S&W, and who aren't shy about making that opinion known, you sure were tight-lipped with advice on used ones.

 

[Guyon]

500th post!

Jeff, perhaps I'm wrong here, but I don't really know how you could tell just by looking if a given S&W was made before or after the agreement with the devil. I suppose serial numbers could be matched up with dates of manufacture. Unless you're talking about changes in the pistol's features, that's about the only way I know.

The point, however, is not so much about when the pistol was made. The point concerns buying new S&Ws from dealers--thus sustaining the market for S&W and encouraging the company to make new guns. Right now, I wouldn't really care if a revolver was made two months after the agreement as long as it is a used revolver. Here, I simply would have no way of knowing precisely when it was made, but at least S&W wouldn't get a cut of the sale.

If we only bought used pistols from S&W from here on in, those "new" guns would sit on dealer's shelves, and the dealers would have no need to order new ones from the manufacturer. It's a collective effort though, and if people buy the new pistols and then sell them on the "used" market, the boycott loses its force.

 

[Gino]

S&W will get none of my money til the agreement is killed...