Archived Posts » 59,789,155
What's with the lawyer locks?
2/18/2012 2:56:22 AM
I know why they are required, but do all new revolvers have them? Who does and who doesn't produce them? Have the "accidental locking" problems been successfully resolved?
2/18/2012 8:11:38 AM
The majority of Smith & Wessons do (some Centennial J frames do not), some Rugers, Taurus do also. IIRC Rossi now does also. Charter Arms, the few Colts, NAA, Freedom Arms and Dan Wesson do not.
CD
CD
2/18/2012 9:52:41 AM
More government bullshit.
2/18/2012 11:22:23 AM
Originally Posted By shadowcop:
More government bullshit.
More government bullshit.
This
2/18/2012 11:24:26 AM
Good morning. I'm from the government and I'm here to help you.
2/18/2012 1:54:29 PM
Buy a pre lock revolver . The lock suck and will cause catastrophic fail to fire problems. It did in my 327. I am VERY HAPPY that I carry back up!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I got rid of the lock
and never looked back.
RLTW
and never looked back.
RLTW
2/18/2012 2:50:02 PM
Originally Posted By FrankSymptoms:
I know why they are required, but do all new revolvers have them? Who does and who doesn't produce them? Have the "accidental locking" problems been successfully resolved?
I know why they are required, but do all new revolvers have them? Who does and who doesn't produce them? Have the "accidental locking" problems been successfully resolved?
1) they are not required. They are worth extra "points" on import though.
2) Charter Arms are lock free, and made in the USA
3) Taurus, S&W, Ruger have locks.
4) Only the S&W design has a documented history of "accidental locking". I'd never buy an S&W with a lock.
2/18/2012 5:22:30 PM
Not all new Rugers have locks. I bought an SP101 about a year ago (new) and it did not have a lock. I believe that only new production Ruger LCRs and Vaqueros come with the lock.
2/18/2012 6:36:25 PM
I just removed the lock from a 2.5" S & W 66-7.
2/18/2012 8:36:11 PM
My SP101 I got a few weeks ago doesn't have any sort of lock. Unless I'm retarded. It's my first revolver.
(I do like the padlock it came with, though. Beefy as hell. Gonna use it for my locker at work!
)
(I do like the padlock it came with, though. Beefy as hell. Gonna use it for my locker at work!
)2/18/2012 8:45:19 PM
Originally Posted By NY_Shooter:
My SP101 I got a few weeks ago doesn't have any sort of lock. Unless I'm retarded. It's my first revolver.
(I do like the padlock it came with, though. Beefy as hell. Gonna use it for my locker at work!)
My SP101 I got a few weeks ago doesn't have any sort of lock. Unless I'm retarded. It's my first revolver.
(I do like the padlock it came with, though. Beefy as hell. Gonna use it for my locker at work!
)+1 I hate internal locks, but I actually appreciate the free gun lock, which I use for non-gun related things. They are perfectly functional gun company logoed locks.
2/18/2012 10:56:36 PM
Originally Posted By NY_Shooter:
My SP101 I got a few weeks ago doesn't have any sort of lock. Unless I'm retarded. It's my first revolver.
My SP101 I got a few weeks ago doesn't have any sort of lock. Unless I'm retarded. It's my first revolver.
I know nothing of the SP101 or GP100, but the New Vaquero lock can only be seen or accessed by
removing the grip panels. The backside of the panel has a pre-marked spot to drill for a keyhole.
Originally Posted By uncle_ho:
Not all new Rugers have locks. I bought an SP101 about a year ago (new) and it did not have a lock. I believe that only new production Ruger LCRs and Vaqueros come with the lock.
Not all new Rugers have locks. I bought an SP101 about a year ago (new) and it did not have a lock. I believe that only new production Ruger LCRs and Vaqueros come with the lock.
Assuming this to be true ( I have no clue either way), why, of all guns, does the Vaquero need a lock?
2/19/2012 1:12:16 AM
For the sake of argument... Why not just disable / remove the lock? OR... would this possibly end up a legal nightmare? For a carry gun I can see that. How about on a range blaster or hunting gun?
2/19/2012 1:41:40 AM
I passed on a new Smith because of the Hillary Hole
2/20/2012 4:12:32 PM
Originally Posted By moose-hunter:
For the sake of argument... Why not just disable / remove the lock? OR... would this possibly end up a legal nightmare? For a carry gun I can see that. How about on a range blaster or hunting gun?
For the sake of argument... Why not just disable / remove the lock? OR... would this possibly end up a legal nightmare? For a carry gun I can see that. How about on a range blaster or hunting gun?
Or is it just plain illegal to disable the lock for ANY reason?
2/20/2012 5:50:15 PM
Originally Posted By moose-hunter:
For the sake of argument... Why not just disable / remove the lock? OR... would this possibly end up a legal nightmare? For a carry gun I can see that. How about on a range blaster or hunting gun?
For the sake of argument... Why not just disable / remove the lock? OR... would this possibly end up a legal nightmare? For a carry gun I can see that. How about on a range blaster or hunting gun?
For me it is a combination of philosophical and aesthetic objections. Yes, you can remove the lock and put in a plug to fill the hole. I refuse to support a company that will not give me the choice of whether I want a lock or not. All it takes is to leave out the lock parts and put a different sideplate on. I am also still not happy with S&W for knuckling under to the anti's. The locks look like crap to me as well. The fact that a prosecutor could use removal of the lock to try and paint a picture of a irresponsible firearm owner, even if the chance of that is miniscule, is one more reason they should not be on there. Until S&W offers every revolver without the lock they get no business from me. I will continue to buy pre-lock revolvers, as I have always done.
2/20/2012 6:21:29 PM
I just posted this on the "return of the 586 thread"
While everyone always assumes that politics and today's litigious society is behind it all, the decision to incorporate the lock was actually strictly business. And while everyone also says "...why don't they get rid of it, I'd buy a new one right away, hell look at all the sales S&W is losing out on by keeping it..." The management actually sees it the other way around.
Here's how it happened:
The notorious lock was invented and patented by a company called Saf-T-Hammer inc.
They went to Smith& Wesson with their product but It seems S&W wasn't interested in changing tooling nor paying royalties. The market was also a bust because nobody was willing to pay to have their gun retrofitted. So........
Saf-T-Hammer bought the S&W company out and now they have a special daily deal for gun buyers..., buy a lock and get a free gun with every purchase.
And for those that don't believe:
http://www.bizjournals.com/phoenix/stories/2001/05/14/daily1.html?page=all
While everyone always assumes that politics and today's litigious society is behind it all, the decision to incorporate the lock was actually strictly business. And while everyone also says "...why don't they get rid of it, I'd buy a new one right away, hell look at all the sales S&W is losing out on by keeping it..." The management actually sees it the other way around.
Here's how it happened:
The notorious lock was invented and patented by a company called Saf-T-Hammer inc.
They went to Smith& Wesson with their product but It seems S&W wasn't interested in changing tooling nor paying royalties. The market was also a bust because nobody was willing to pay to have their gun retrofitted. So........
Saf-T-Hammer bought the S&W company out and now they have a special daily deal for gun buyers..., buy a lock and get a free gun with every purchase.
And for those that don't believe:
http://www.bizjournals.com/phoenix/stories/2001/05/14/daily1.html?page=all
2/20/2012 10:10:25 PM
Originally Posted By JohnRippert:
For me it is a combination of philosophical and aesthetic objections. Yes, you can remove the lock and put in a plug to fill the hole. I refuse to support a company that will not give me the choice of whether I want a lock or not. All it takes is to leave out the lock parts and put a different sideplate on. I am also still not happy with S&W for knuckling under to the anti's. The locks look like crap to me as well. The fact that a prosecutor could use removal of the lock to try and paint a picture of a irresponsible firearm owner, even if the chance of that is miniscule, is one more reason they should not be on there. Until S&W offers every revolver without the lock they get no business from me. I will continue to buy pre-lock revolvers, as I have always done.
Originally Posted By moose-hunter:
For the sake of argument... Why not just disable / remove the lock? OR... would this possibly end up a legal nightmare? For a carry gun I can see that. How about on a range blaster or hunting gun?
For the sake of argument... Why not just disable / remove the lock? OR... would this possibly end up a legal nightmare? For a carry gun I can see that. How about on a range blaster or hunting gun?
For me it is a combination of philosophical and aesthetic objections. Yes, you can remove the lock and put in a plug to fill the hole. I refuse to support a company that will not give me the choice of whether I want a lock or not. All it takes is to leave out the lock parts and put a different sideplate on. I am also still not happy with S&W for knuckling under to the anti's. The locks look like crap to me as well. The fact that a prosecutor could use removal of the lock to try and paint a picture of a irresponsible firearm owner, even if the chance of that is miniscule, is one more reason they should not be on there. Until S&W offers every revolver without the lock they get no business from me. I will continue to buy pre-lock revolvers, as I have always done.
I am no fan of the lock guns, but you missed a couple of points. Safe-T-Hammer bought S&W, and guess what their product was/is? Granted, it was a knuckling under by SW before they bought the company, but I am pretty sure they did the market analysis and figured it would increase sales to people concerned about safety. It is nothing more than a storage device, and could be done away with easily if they wanted to put a cable lock in like most manufacturers. But, it is part of the frame forging, not the sideplate, so it is not quite as simple as you indicated.
I have one lock gun, a PC SW 500 mag. No such thing as a prelock for that model, or a 460, or any of the scandium models. I did take out the lock parts and put i a plug from Bullseye Smith over on the S-W Forum. I would be happier if they did away with the lock, but I'm not going to hold my breath; unless the company gets sold to some firearms enthusiasts (as opposed to businessmen trying to maximize profit), I am afraid that new Smiths will have the lock, MIM parts, two piece barrels with electro-chemical etched "rifling", and a host of other "improvements" that I don't want on my guns. All that said, I do like my 500!
2/24/2012 2:06:42 PM
I won't buy a lock with a gun attached to it. Period.
But I am an oldster. So I am not too enamoured by safety devices like the tickled pink youngsters are.
But I am an oldster. So I am not too enamoured by safety devices like the tickled pink youngsters are.
