Tweet
Disabling Built-in Internal Lock Invites Trouble.
If anyone advises you to feel free to disable an ILS, take that advice with a grain of salt.
But do feel free to buy a gun with a built-in "safety feature" and then disable that "safety feature" and use the gun in a self-defense shooting . . . and then feel free to get sued on some stupid technicality which we will all read about in the newspaper . . . as we follow your sad story all the way to the big house, where you won't feel so free, no matter what advice anyone types on a handgun forum or blog.
Perhaps an individual who advises you to disable your handgun's built-in Internal Lock System will write letters of condolence to you when you are in prison . . . oh, I forgot, s/he's not offering you legal advice--just advice that might very well get you in very deep legal trouble . . . at which point you won't have the option to "feel free," as s/he has encouraged you to do.
I do not buy handguns with built-in Internal Lock Systems because I am simply being cautious and not altering a feature that has been built into a gun by the manufacturer.
Comments that advocate that you disable a built-in Internal Lock System are ill-advised and irresponsible.
It is akin to advising someone to disable the seatbelt mechanism in his car, although at least seatbelts have some utility, unlike S&W's ILS.
Telling someone to disable the ILS is the kind of advice I wish only my worst enemies would follow--not the kind of advice I would dole out to uninformed people who are new to the much-debated issue of the Internal Locking System being installed by the "Smith & Wesson Holding Corp." after the real "Smith & Wesson" was bought and renamed by a company called "Saf-T-Hammer" in order to avoid being completely destroyed by a lawsuit orchestrated by the Clinton administration through a sort of legal blackmail.
See part of the story here:
(If anyone can provide more accurate information and links to correct any errors I might be inadvertently spreading, please do so. I try to become correctly informed. If you show me I'm wrong, I'll change the inaccurate features in this post.)
The fact that the gun had been altered to remove or defeat a "safety feature" could be used as alleged "evidence" against me for an anti-gun prosecution in the event that I should ever happen to use that altered gun in a self-defense shooting.
The prosecutor could seize on the fact that I had deliberately done something that had made the gun "unsafe," which could in turn be used to argue that that shows my reckless disregard for human life and perhaps even unjustified intent to cause harm ("malice aforethought").
Maybe I'm wrong.
But I will face none of those problems if I only buy and use S&Ws that were made before the ILS was put into them.
A more crucial life-and-death issue, however, might be that the ILS can spontaneously engage when you do not want or expect it to do so.
Feel free to click the underlined link for information on this issue before you buy a Smith & Wesson which has been encumbered with this ridiculous "safety feature."
Numerous Smith & Wesson addicts (among which I count myself as one) have apparently experienced unintended "Internal-Lock-Induced-Failure"--apparently caused by the lock, which locks the gun--while you're trying to shoot it--contrary to your wishes. Did I mention that the lock could apparently lock the gun, when you do not want it to, while you are shooting the gun?
Sorry, I just cannot imagine buying a car, for example, that I KNOW could undergo a sudden, spontaneous four-wheel LOCKUP, due to a manufacturer-installed feature, while I'm driving it in a situation on which my life depends.
Stupid person that I am--I would instead buy the older model that does not have that potential, unintended four-wheel LOCKUP feature built in to it.
Hey, I don't know it all, as some folks do.
But wouldn't that be a drag to find yourself in a situation of the gravest extreme with a gun that "safely" locks itself up while you're trying to shoot some thug who appears to want to inflict death or great bodily harm on you?
But then again, maybe not--I don't know it all, as some folks do.
Happy shooting to all you lock lovers (if the lock does not engage spontaneously).
P.S.: Be careful about taking advice from anyone who might own stock in the new "Smith & Wesson Holding Corp."
"Feel free" to take that advice with a grain of salt.
(Feel free to accept my apology if the previous version of this post offended you.)
But do feel free to buy a gun with a built-in "safety feature" and then disable that "safety feature" and use the gun in a self-defense shooting . . . and then feel free to get sued on some stupid technicality which we will all read about in the newspaper . . . as we follow your sad story all the way to the big house, where you won't feel so free, no matter what advice anyone types on a handgun forum or blog.
Perhaps an individual who advises you to disable your handgun's built-in Internal Lock System will write letters of condolence to you when you are in prison . . . oh, I forgot, s/he's not offering you legal advice--just advice that might very well get you in very deep legal trouble . . . at which point you won't have the option to "feel free," as s/he has encouraged you to do.
I do not buy handguns with built-in Internal Lock Systems because I am simply being cautious and not altering a feature that has been built into a gun by the manufacturer.
Comments that advocate that you disable a built-in Internal Lock System are ill-advised and irresponsible.
It is akin to advising someone to disable the seatbelt mechanism in his car, although at least seatbelts have some utility, unlike S&W's ILS.
Telling someone to disable the ILS is the kind of advice I wish only my worst enemies would follow--not the kind of advice I would dole out to uninformed people who are new to the much-debated issue of the Internal Locking System being installed by the "Smith & Wesson Holding Corp." after the real "Smith & Wesson" was bought and renamed by a company called "Saf-T-Hammer" in order to avoid being completely destroyed by a lawsuit orchestrated by the Clinton administration through a sort of legal blackmail.
See part of the story here:
(If anyone can provide more accurate information and links to correct any errors I might be inadvertently spreading, please do so. I try to become correctly informed. If you show me I'm wrong, I'll change the inaccurate features in this post.)
The fact that the gun had been altered to remove or defeat a "safety feature" could be used as alleged "evidence" against me for an anti-gun prosecution in the event that I should ever happen to use that altered gun in a self-defense shooting.
The prosecutor could seize on the fact that I had deliberately done something that had made the gun "unsafe," which could in turn be used to argue that that shows my reckless disregard for human life and perhaps even unjustified intent to cause harm ("malice aforethought").
Maybe I'm wrong.
But I will face none of those problems if I only buy and use S&Ws that were made before the ILS was put into them.
A more crucial life-and-death issue, however, might be that the ILS can spontaneously engage when you do not want or expect it to do so.
Feel free to click the underlined link for information on this issue before you buy a Smith & Wesson which has been encumbered with this ridiculous "safety feature."
Numerous Smith & Wesson addicts (among which I count myself as one) have apparently experienced unintended "Internal-Lock-Induced-Failure"--apparently caused by the lock, which locks the gun--while you're trying to shoot it--contrary to your wishes. Did I mention that the lock could apparently lock the gun, when you do not want it to, while you are shooting the gun?
Sorry, I just cannot imagine buying a car, for example, that I KNOW could undergo a sudden, spontaneous four-wheel LOCKUP, due to a manufacturer-installed feature, while I'm driving it in a situation on which my life depends.
Stupid person that I am--I would instead buy the older model that does not have that potential, unintended four-wheel LOCKUP feature built in to it.
Hey, I don't know it all, as some folks do.
But wouldn't that be a drag to find yourself in a situation of the gravest extreme with a gun that "safely" locks itself up while you're trying to shoot some thug who appears to want to inflict death or great bodily harm on you?
But then again, maybe not--I don't know it all, as some folks do.
Happy shooting to all you lock lovers (if the lock does not engage spontaneously).
P.S.: Be careful about taking advice from anyone who might own stock in the new "Smith & Wesson Holding Corp."
"Feel free" to take that advice with a grain of salt.
(Feel free to accept my apology if the previous version of this post offended you.)
Comment