S+W Boycott

imported post

The boycott was apparently very effective in the beginning. Since then, the company has been bought out, but the deal made with Clinton has not been canceled. I myself have decided not to buy S+W products and will continue not to.

What's everyone else think?

imported post

I voted yes, but there are other reasons. They also don't have a product thatgets my attention.I would rather save money on a revolver and buy a Taurusand the M&P pistol isn't for me. Lets also not forget the Sigma.

imported post

I was boycotting... however I did by a like new (but still used) S&W 642 about a year and half ago... figured it wasn't new so it wasn't directly benefitting them...

I also just plunked down for a 5.45x39 AR upper being distributted by them for the AR. Mostly because they are the only ones doing it and I'm not waiting until someone else does it....

Considering those are the only two s&w's in my collection, one that was used and the other is technically just distributed by s&w but made by talos, I've done pretty good by avoiding them IMO, especially considering how tiny a fraction they make of my collection.

I wouldn't forget their betrayal.

imported post

I am still not buying a S&W. When I bought my last revolver, my needs were best served by eithera S&W or a Taurus and true to my word I bought a Taurus.

imported post

Sad thing is that if you boycotted every gun maker that had screwed the American gunowner one way or another you would probably have to make your own firearms.

And at this point it seems that we have failed to bring S&W to its knees. Not to mention no one is really pushing the effort, VCDL included. As it is I can't even adequately explain the reason to boycott S&W. So I'm giving it up.

imported post

I hadn't heard of the S&W boycott until I purchased my main carry firearm, my SW99. I really wasn't active in thepolitical side of gunsuntil I started carrying. I then heard about some sort of agreements and training that people were required to go through in order to buy a S&W, or something. I was confused, because when I bought my SW99 I proved no training and agreed to nothing. I actually own two S&W (ish) Handguns: a Walther PPK/s, and an SW99. The SW99 was actually purchased under initial reluctanceas I was looking for a Walther P99.

I still don't know exactly what this boycott was/is all about. I do know that S&W makes some great firearms. I wont be boycotting them unless I see good reason to.

EDIT: http://www.gunowners.org/a032100.htm

K so I read that. How much of this is still in effect?

imported post

Didn't know I was supposed to be boycotting them.

imported post

I work in an official S&W dealer shop and none of these things have ever come down the pipe from Smith, ATF, or any presidential administration. I consider this to be GOA hyperbole. The only applicable clause is that we don't allow unescorted minors in the gun shop, but that has nothing to do with this supposed "deal." I'm not aware of any other gun shops having implemented these "requirements" either.

Insofar as this is nonsense anyway, I have not and do not propose to boycott Smith.

-ljp

imported post

It's my understanding that none of the parts of the deal have been enforced because Bush took office right after Clinton and didn't enforce it, but there's nothing stopping a future administration from doing so.

imported post

Never owned a smith anyhow... Always bought a Ruger if I wanted a wheelgun. And I already have a .22 so don't need an AR... And none of their autoloaders hold my attention. Guess their product line just doesn't do it for me.

imported post

For those not familiar with what caused all this, this page gives a contemporary overview of S&W's deal with HUD. Long story very short, back in the late '90s when cities were suing gun manufacturers, S&W made an agreement with HUD and Boston making a ton of concessions on gun designs and a lot of other things that would have far reaching effects, even on other manufacturers to make the lawsuits go away. Here's another 2 part overview on nationalreview that may be a little more succinct.

In spring/summer '01, S&W was bought in an asset purchase. The above contracts did not have language binding on "successors and/or assigns". No terms of the contract have ever been enforced by the gov't. Many legal types think they are now unenforcable due to laches, ie the failure of the gov't to enforce it's legal rights under the contract in 8+ years. My understanding is that the current owner of S&W does not approve of the agreements, does not expect them to ever be enforced, and if enforced intends to fight them under the 2 above legal principles.

In other words, the people who made these terrible deals (S&W was owned by an English company - go figure) are gone. The contracts are likely unenforcable now regardless. Different people own and run the company now. So, there is nothing left to boycott except the memory of the former owners and management team.

imported post

Deepdiver, excellent post.

Thanks for that information. I had never heard that the deal may be unenforceable now. That changes my opinion considerably. I will wait and see what happens when we get a Dem president.

imported post

That is interesting, and if true there really is no good reason to continue the boycott.

imported post

I concur...though i have never been a fan of smith and wesson to begin with. But maybe i'll take a closer look.

imported post

I came to the same conclusion as Deepdiver before I bought my S&W 642 Airweight with a crimson laser grip. It was, IMHO, a fantastic choice as aBUG, intended to be kept inan ankle holster.

The possibility that S&W could come up short in court has kept me from sending the registration card back to S&W.

imported post

I don't like their new stuff with the transfer bars and internal locks - so "other."

I'm ok with their older equipment.

imported post

I guessmy only thought on the "deal" is that although possibly or even likely unenforceable, what really counts is whether thecircumstances thatdefined the negotiatingpositions of thetwo sidesstill substantially exist.

Rhetorically speaking, is Smith & Wesson still in the same position where they can stretched over a barrel and forced to newly concede many, most, or some of what the earlierowners did? Is the other side stronger or weaker in their position? Is Smith stronger or weakerin their position?

Although I've never had muchopinion on Smith products one way or another, it seems to me, on the surface, that if we want Smith to prevail should there be more shenanigans by the other side, we need to do everything we can to improve the atmosphere for 2A generally, and support Smith by giving them a fair chance to earn our business. The stronger they are financially, the better they'll be able to sustain the legal costs of any shenanigans.

imported post

keep up the boycott, to teach the others. Bill Ruger when he was alive sold us out on the assault weapons. I won't buy those products either

S&W Walther PPK/S copies are JUNK, step up to the plate be a real man and get REAL WALTHER,

all S&W semi-auto handguns are junk. IMHO

sprat

imported post

sprat wrote:

keep up the boycott, to teach the others. Bill Ruger when he was alive sold us out on the assault weapons. I won't buy those products either

S&W Walther PPK/S copies are JUNK, step up to the plate be a real man and get REAL WALTHER,

all S&W semi-auto handguns are junk. IMHO

sprat

Click to expand...

So because I own a S&W Walther PPK/s, I'm not a real man? That's good to know. Oh, and all S&W autos are junk, too. Even the two that I own, that have never failed to fire or cycle. Ever. I really don't know which of your comments make you look more unintelligent. Of course then we have to take into account your lack of proper grammar, punctuation, and sentence structure.

How about this, why don't you back up your statements? I'm curious what proof you have that S&W autos are junk, and I'm REALLY curious how you're gonna prove that I'm not a real man....

imported post

sprat wrote:

keep up the boycott, to teach the others. Bill Ruger when he was alive sold us out on the assault weapons. I won't buy those products either

S&W Walther PPK/S copies are JUNK, step up to the plate be a real man and get REAL WALTHER,

all S&W semi-auto handguns are junk. IMHO

sprat

Click to expand...

From your post, one could conceive... That your talkin' out ya mouth but you not sayin' nothin'.

So, let's recap.

You mean to say the thousands of law enforcement agencies (NCDOC included) that have switched over to the new semi-auto S&W M&Ps had no idea what they were getting into? Even with years of firing, armoring and on-the-job with range time usage that the average person will never get? And that the hundreds of rounds without failure since I've bought one (M&P40) is just some sort of a fluke? And the fact that its going to be my duty weapon on the outside of a prison, is horrible fate and that I should be counting my blessings and saying my prayers when I strap that bad boy on?

Man, you straight out of a comic book. Break up your hatred. C'mon, now, break it up, son.