My argument against those who say the S&W lock is dangerous

[warf73]

If the S&W lock was dangerous for defensive purposes (accidental lockup), they wouldn't have put it on the TRR8 which was designed specifically for SWAT point men.


If it's good enough for point men, it's good enough for me.

If you think any SWAT team uses them as is from the factory your mistaken. That would be like saying Jerry Miculek uses a bone stock revovler from S&W.
Here you go http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CsLx5ISBXw4 I'll bet Jerry isn't using a factory gun, aka unaltered in any way shape or form.

[leftiye]

Never had a problem with the lock, but all my "new" Smiths are now fitted with the "plug", so I'll never experience that isolated incident. I kept the lock internals, so if I ever have a weak moment and sell a Smith, the new owner will have the option to putting it back into "original" condition.

Exactly, disable it.

[dragon813gt]

BTW if anyone takes the lock out you are right back to deactivating a safety which could be made to look bad in court if there were a shooting. I put the magazine disconnect back in my Hi Power for just that reason. It makes dry firing a pain, but I sometimes carry it and keep it around loaded, so it seemed prudent to put it back in.

If I was relying on the firearm to protect my life why would I care? Such a moot point IMO. There is the old saying that it's better to be judged by twelve than carried by six. I guess you don't carry reloads either? Talk about another dead horse topic.

[Petrol & Powder]

It's not that it looks cool, it's the fact that it holds 2 more rounds. Using 5 star firearms speed loaders, and rn boolits, that gun was hell on wheels when it played nice.

10-4, I should have used the sarcasm font.

[DRNurse1]

Love Life, what do you call 13+1 if 8 is hell on wheels (If capacity is the critical issue in a carry gun)?

Piedmont, you are worried about a jury's reaction to a righteous shoot? You are alive the BG is not is the reaction of concern.

[Tatume]

I had a revolver fail to close properly because unburned powder had gotten under the extractor star. I won't own any revolver that uses gunpowder any more.

[Tatume]

But seriously, although I own several S&W revolvers with the lock, I agree that the lock is at best absolutely worthless. It has no value, it adds nothing to the value of the gun, and I wish Bill Clinton had not put them on S&W revolvers.

[Ickisrulz]

The locks make the gun look ugly. That's why S&W photographs their guns on the right side for their website.

[Love Life]

Love Life, what do you call 13+1 if 8 is hell on wheels (If capacity is the critical issue in a carry gun)?

I call 13+1 legit. However, we are not discussing autos. We are discussing revolvers, and an 8 shot 357 magnum revolver is the bomb...when it is made well enough...not the TRR8.

Blasting 8 full snort 357 magnum loads is quite fun.

To summaraize:
13+1 in a auto loader is legit, but very ho hum since it is expected to have the higher capacity.
8 rds of 357 mag in a revolver is awesome because usually six is all you get.

Comparing apples to manatees will get us nowhere.

[dragon813gt]

I wish Bill Clinton had not put them on S&W revolvers.

So he made a private/public, not sure which they are, company put the lock on their firearms? Why didn't he make every gun manufacturer do this?

[Tatume]

So he made a private/public, not sure which they are, company put the lock on their firearms? Why didn't he make every gun manufacturer do this?

In order to pacify the Clinton administration, S&W entered into an agreement. You may see it here:

http://clinton4.nara.gov/WH/New/html/20000317_2.html

Other manufacturers resisted and ultimately prevailed. S&W is under new ownership now, or I would not do business with them.

Take care, Tom

[dragon813gt]

He didn't make them. They willingly made the deal. There is a difference between the two. In fully aware of the history and S&W is who the blame lies on.

[Tatume]

Okay, glad I could help.

[Piedmont]

The last I knew, there hadn't been a single case that this had been brought up in....... Has this changed???? The simple fact is that if a prosecutor wanted to, he could "make you look bad" for getting out of bed in the morning.... Or at least try to.


Dan

It isn't just a prosecutor you have to worry about. Civil suits often follow. The opposing attorney will not put a bunch of gun people on the jury. So, yes, I am concerned how things will look to an average member of the jury. If you guys want to throw caution to the wind, it is your life.

[Tatume]

I wonder if the same liability results from choosing an earlier model of S&W revolver that does not have the lock? Could the civil attorney not argue that one decided to ignore the availability of an enhanced safety device?

[sargenv]

Anyone who says that the S&W with or without the lock is not made for high volume shooting has apparently never been to the IRC where these things are pretty much the prevalent choice of firearm used.. There might be one or two Rugers and a rare Python, but S&W revolvers are the dominant revolver for that sort of shooting game.. I have a pre-lock S&W 610 with over 100,000 rounds through it.. I know other people with various N and L frame revolvers with an equal or greater # of rounds through them.. Not made for high volume shooting? Puh-lease..

Now if it's a case of high volume heavy loaded revolver shooting (say Sillouette) well then maybe so.. but then a lot of those loads are pushing proof load territory.. nothing will last long under those conditions..

[Love Life]

Anyone who says that the S&W with or without the lock is not made for high volume shooting has apparently never been to the IRC where these things are pretty much the prevalent choice of firearm used.. There might be one or two Rugers and a rare Python, but S&W revolvers are the dominant revolver for that sort of shooting game.. I have a pre-lock S&W 610 with over 100,000 rounds through it.. I know other people with various N and L frame revolvers with an equal or greater # of rounds through them.. Not made for high volume shooting? Puh-lease..

Now if it's a case of high volume heavy loaded revolver shooting (say Sillouette) well then maybe so.. but then a lot of those loads are pushing proof load territory.. nothing will last long under those conditions..

Take a deep breath and calm down. I said the TRR8 wasn't built for it. I proved it when it gave up the ghost at right around 15,000 rds of 358477 loaded over 5 gr of unique. Slap worn out. Yes, S&W has a warranty, but I had already sent it in THREE times for warranty work. It was a PC gun and should have NO issues.

Now my S&W model 28's have digested a plethora of 38 special and 357 magnum loads with nary an issue. Those are fine guns and will still be shooting long after I am buried. I have bought many older model S&W revolvers since the TRR8 fiasco and have no issues throwing down greenbacks for another older revolver.

[enfieldphile]

IMMO, it comes down to individual pieces. I don't accept that the older guns were always built better.

I have many S&W revolvers. Two are equipped w/ locks. The locks have never malfunctioned.

I'll take either form w/o prejudice.

[redneckdan]

I've seen two seperate 329s lock up. That was proof enough for me. Any time you complicate a machine you reduce reliability.

[220swiftfn]

It isn't just a prosecutor you have to worry about. Civil suits often follow. The opposing attorney will not put a bunch of gun people on the jury. So, yes, I am concerned how things will look to an average member of the jury. If you guys want to throw caution to the wind, it is your life.

Easily addressed if ever brought up...... something along the lines of......

"did you intend to shoot him?" "yes"
"did you pull the trigger to shoot him?" "yes"
"why did you shoot him?" "because I was defending myself/others from iminent harm."

And........

"were you found justified in shooting?" "yes" (for the civil suit you fear....)


There's nothing about this that can't be negated in a justified shoot.......


Dan