• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Commemorative gun Marks DC vs Heller.

DreQo

State Researcher
Joined
Jan 8, 2007
Messages
2,350
Location
Minnesota
imported post

Citizen wrote:
DreQo wrote:
SNIP (I'm going to show this post to my girlfriend to try to convince her to let me buy a revolver :D).
Convince your girlfriend to let you buy a revolver?


That young lady has some real influence.
lol We might as well be married :pbut don't tell her that.
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
imported post

DreQo wrote:
Citizen wrote:
DreQo wrote:
SNIP (I'm going to show this post to my girlfriend to try to convince her to let me buy a revolver :D).
Convince your girlfriend to let you buy a revolver?


That young lady has some real influence.
lol We might as well be married :pbut don't tell her that.

Well, if you think it might suggest something, I can just tell you she's already thought of it.

Years ago somebody did a survey on married couples. I don't remember the exact details but the gist was that theyasked how each partner how long they knew each other before the wedding. The girlsusually listed something like 3-6 months longer than the guys. Conclusion: the guys were already targeted and their fate sealed before they even took notice of the girl. THIS is why situational awareness is IMPORTANT, fellas.

Don't bother asking about buying a revolver. The only thing she's gonna let you buy is a diamond ring, buddy. :)
 

DreQo

State Researcher
Joined
Jan 8, 2007
Messages
2,350
Location
Minnesota
imported post

Haha yeah, I've found myself ordering things and then asking forgiveness when they arrive in the mail :D. I've always said it's better to ask for forgiveness than permission anyway, lol.
 

Armed

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2008
Messages
418
Location
Richmond, Virginia, USA
imported post

deepdiver wrote:
Pointman wrote:
Wasn't it Smith & Wesson that buddied up to the Clinton administration and all but patted Bill on the back for gun grabbing? Isn't that the company that made people's stomach's turn? I could be wrong, so we should check with the NRA, GOA, VCDL, heck, even the New York Times andClinton News Network.
We had this discussion before and I posted a bunch of stuff about why, IMO, to no longer boycott S&W. I don't remember it all off the top of my head and no longer have the cites together but here are the highlights (if anyone wants the cites it's in one of my posts from the last 9 months):

S&W has been sold/bought since then.

The current ownership does not/did not support the agreement.

The senior management involved in the Clinton Administration/Boston public housing agreement fiasco were employed by the prior owners, a British company -- actually, from what I can ascertain, noone involved in making or approving said agreement still work for the company, although one former manager who previously left S&W rather than support the agreement does again or at least did as of a few years ago.

S&W's position is that the agreement has voided as a function of law and no longer has, if it ever had, any force or effect - the longer time that elapses withouth the gov't trying to enforce anything, the stronger the legal position that it is void. They (S&W) do, or at least did, have a special "war chest" set aside specifically to fight against implementation/enforcement of the agreement if the gov't were to ever try to enforce it.

S&W is now again American owned and managed.

From the Virginia Citizen's Defense League (VCDL) vcdl.org

The sale of Smith & Wesson to a US based company is irrelevant to the issue. Neither the old company (Tompkins), nor the new company (then called Saf-T-Hammer), have done anything to void the March 17, 2000 agreement. At the February 2002 S. H. O. T. Show in Las Vegas, then Smith & Wesson President, Bob Scott, admitted to me and another activist, that the agreement is still in place, and if we get a new US President, it could immediately be enforced. Please look at the agreement to remind yourself as to how egregious is at:

http://www.hud.gov/library/bookshelf18/pressrel/gunagree.html

The agreement contains nearly all of the items on the gun haters wish list. Please look at the web page. If it doesn't make you angry, you are not a supporter of the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution. On principle, we oppose those who would ban Smith & Wesson's new gun, or any other gun. However, we hope no supporter of our gun rights will support Smith & Wesson by purchasing it, or any other of their guns, until they void the HUD agreement.



*************************************************************

I am certainly not an authority on the subject, but VCDL has not steered me wrong yet. If they recant or amend their post, I'll buy one of these revolvers. But until then - I refuse to give S&W one damn dime of my money!
 

longwatch

Founder's Club Member - Moderator
Joined
May 14, 2006
Messages
4,327
Location
Virginia, USA
imported post

Armed wrote:
deepdiver wrote:
Pointman wrote:
Wasn't it Smith & Wesson that buddied up to the Clinton administration and all but patted Bill on the back for gun grabbing? Isn't that the company that made people's stomach's turn? I could be wrong, so we should check with the NRA, GOA, VCDL, heck, even the New York Times andClinton News Network.
We had this discussion before and I posted a bunch of stuff about why, IMO, to no longer boycott S&W. I don't remember it all off the top of my head and no longer have the cites together but here are the highlights (if anyone wants the cites it's in one of my posts from the last 9 months):

S&W has been sold/bought since then.

The current ownership does not/did not support the agreement.

The senior management involved in the Clinton Administration/Boston public housing agreement fiasco were employed by the prior owners, a British company -- actually, from what I can ascertain, noone involved in making or approving said agreement still work for the company, although one former manager who previously left S&W rather than support the agreement does again or at least did as of a few years ago.

S&W's position is that the agreement has voided as a function of law and no longer has, if it ever had, any force or effect - the longer time that elapses withouth the gov't trying to enforce anything, the stronger the legal position that it is void. They (S&W) do, or at least did, have a special "war chest" set aside specifically to fight against implementation/enforcement of the agreement if the gov't were to ever try to enforce it.

S&W is now again American owned and managed.

From the Virginia Citizen's Defense League (VCDL) vcdl.org

The sale of Smith & Wesson to a US based company is irrelevant to the issue. Neither the old company (Tompkins), nor the new company (then called Saf-T-Hammer), have done anything to void the March 17, 2000 agreement. At the February 2002 S. H. O. T. Show in Las Vegas, then Smith & Wesson President, Bob Scott, admitted to me and another activist, that the agreement is still in place, and if we get a new US President, it could immediately be enforced. Please look at the agreement to remind yourself as to how egregious is at:

http://www.hud.gov/library/bookshelf18/pressrel/gunagree.html

The agreement contains nearly all of the items on the gun haters wish list. Please look at the web page. If it doesn't make you angry, you are not a supporter of the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution. On principle, we oppose those who would ban Smith & Wesson's new gun, or any other gun. However, we hope no supporter of our gun rights will support Smith & Wesson by purchasing it, or any other of their guns, until they void the HUD agreement.



*************************************************************

I am certainly not an authority on the subject, but VCDL has not steered me wrong yet. If they recant or amend their post, I'll buy one of these revolvers. But until then - I refuse to give S&W one damn dime of my money!
Well this is one of the few issues I depart with VCDL on. Mostly because I don't really think the deal is enforcable at this time, and because I predict upon implementation S&W will no longer be carried in most gun shops. So I don't worry about it.
 

Michigander

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 24, 2007
Messages
4,818
Location
Mulligan's Valley
imported post

longwatch wrote:
35 days from the decision to the marketplace not to bad when you think about it.

In WWII, 23 days after being approached by the US government and asked to design from scratch and manufacture 8000 bazookas and ship them within 30 days to help bust enemy tanks, GE had designed and produced 15,000 bazookas and had them all loaded onto ships on the way across the ocean.


But yeah, 35 days for some minor retooling to allow a special engraving is still decent. ;)
 

OldManMontgomery

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 20, 2008
Messages
31
Location
Hastings, Nebraska; the Heartland!
imported post

Okay, S&W has been sold and all that.

Does this Commemorative have that dingblasted lock thingie? I find that most offensive. I can steel myself to the lack of a barrel lock pin; perhaps the shrouded barrel isn't so bad; the frame mounted firing pin is functional.

But that cursed lock thingummie.

No.

Emphatically, NO.



To another poster's comment: In the spirit of the Heller decision and from the circumstances from which it sprang, I would thing a high capacity semi-automatic with no 'lock' would have been more appropriate. I'm more and more of a revolver shooter these days, but I think a pistol would have said "Here's your ban, elitist!" more than this revolver.
 

longwatch

Founder's Club Member - Moderator
Joined
May 14, 2006
Messages
4,327
Location
Virginia, USA
imported post

Yes it does have a lock. On a related note S&W is making a limited run of 642s without the locks.

Now that DC residents can have semiautomatics maybe they will make a run, or someone should.
 
Top