Posted: 1/19/2007 2:07:58 PM EDT
I heard that you can pop the sideplate and hammer and just take out the internal lock, is it that easy?
|
| Several people on the S&W Forum removed their internal locks. All that you need to do is remove the hammer and Dremel off the stub on the side which the lock contacts. If you do that, it won't matter what position the lock itself is in, it will have nothing to engage. |
|
No need for the Dremel, take off the cover, remove the hammer and you will see what needs to be removed. It is a small rectanglish shaped bar that is attached to the "locked" flag. There is a spring in there that I just left in as it doesn't get in the way and is kept in place by the hammer. Keep both pieces in case you ever sell the gun and the buyer wants them. |
|
|
For those of you recommending the use of a dremel to remove parts of the interenal lock........you should also advise the owner that this modification will possibly and most likely prevent you from obtaining any further warranty work from S&W. They have a strict policy of not allowing any gun leave their facility that is not to their safety standards. This also means, for an example, if you put in light springs --- they will change them back to factory spec. [ with a charge - but sometimes not ] . When selling such a modified gun ........... you must advise the new owner that the gun will not be worked on by S&W or any reputable gunsmith ----- unless you are requesting that they repair the gun back to factory specs, which can be expensive once the frame is altered. Limit this modified gun to "plinking" only ........... I would never IMHO use this weapon for self defense. The legal problems you could encounter if you have to shoot someone with a gun where the safety was removed, might be enormous. Not so much from the gov't, but from the attackers family will come lawsuits you wont believe. I don't believe I have read a case of this nature YET ........but you don't want to become the first. S&W didn't want to install these ugly "gimmicks" to their revolvers .........but they knew they couldn't survive the lawsuits .............. trust me, neither could you. God forbid an unauthorized person get a hold of this gun with the safety grinded off, an accidently shoot themselves -- GAME OVER for the Owner ! Just thought you should hear the [ un-popular ] other side of the story. JF. |
It's not a safety, it's a storage lock. These are two very different concepts. There is no way the gun could be effectively used as a defensive weapon with the storage lock engaged. It is a very simple thing to explain away in a courtroom and wouldn't have any impact at all. |
S&W "didn't want to install" the locks on their guns????? Where did you come up with that one?????? S&W is now owned by the company "Safe-T-Hammer, who designed these locks! He couldn't wait to install them on every S&W product! I'm sure it's more of a business decision, incorporating his other company's product into every handgun S&W sells (which I'm sure there's some sort of payment to Safe-T-Hammer, too) than it is a legal one! I'm not advocating removing the lock. I'd never do it on mine, just for the legal reasons. I'm in no rush to get sued or give a prosecutor any ammo to attack my character or judgement, by attempting to show how "irresponsible" or "reckless" I was by removing the internal lock on my carry gun. Someone just asked how to do it, so I answered. I'm not into giving people legal advice. They are big boys, they can make their own decisions and deal with any consequences. |
|
I think a lot of folks here are confusing this passive lock system with a safety. This is in no way a safety. No one in their right mind would advocate carrying this handgun with the lock engaged, so what difference does it make if it is not even there while you are carrying the handgun for protection. The only time this lock would be used is if it is in storage. If you have it in a safe or locked closet, then the locking mechinism is a mute point. It's kind of like the padlock they give you with every handgun these days, if you throw this padlock away, the lawyers won't have any more ammunition to attack you with because you were not supposed to have it on the gun and locked while you were carrying it anyway. These locks have been on Smith's for years now, someone please show me where anyone has been prosecuted for not having it locked while carrying the handgun. ETA, I am not advocating anyone removing the locks on their handguns, I could care less. What I am telling everyone is that I removed mine, and how I did it. There have been several instances of some of the lighter revolvers, under heavy recoil, locking up by themselves, with no input from the shooter. This is unacceptable to me in a defensvive handgun. |
|
I told myself I would not comment further on this matter [ because the arguement could go on forever ] ........ but some people are missing the point of my message so I feel I should try to be more clear in my comments. Hawgleg44 got my point that I was trying to make and understands very well what will happen to the person in court should he be sued by an attacker's family. Thanks The whole issue in a civil law suit is to place blame and award monetary compensation..... Layers know that this is more easily accomplished if you can show that the person you are suing is reckless, irresponsible or likes to act in a more dangerous manner than the "average person". The lawyers will claim that the "modified" gun is a danger to society .......... and guess what , you as the owner will not be able to produce one expert from the Manufacturer S&W that will testify for you. On the other hand, the lawyers suing you will march several S&W employees into court to explain the horrorible dangers of this "modified" gun, from removing their safety lock. They will cleverly tie that "irresponsible behavoir" into the shooting [ somehow ] . You can play the semantics game all day long ......... about how the device you removed was a storage lock and not a " safety lock" ......but bottom line the lawyers will preach that the device was added to this weapon to maker it safer in our society, around our children. Whether or not you agree with that premise will be immaterial. So it all comes back to CHARACTER and RESPONSIBLE actions that will decide your fate. If you feel you can convince a jury of old ladies that grinding off a device put there by the manufacturer to make the gun more safe -- was a good idea, than have it. I have worked too hard for my property ............ to give it away because of a foolish ruling by a jury of anti-gun people. That's what you are finding more and more in the court system nowadays. Just a sad fact of life ! JF. |
|
Why would opposing counsel even think to look for such a modification? And even if they trundled out "experts" in an attempt to paint you as irresponsible, your defending counsel would only need to make a phone call to Masaad Ayoob for your own expert who has documented S&W lock failures in print. He could also contact Jim McCloud of the New Hampshire Firing Line range. He's the owner of two revolvers cited in Ayoob's article that failed. Trust me, I've corresponded with the guy and he has little use for Smith & Wesson's smug dismissal of the problem. So-called experts have been saying this stuff about pinning 1911 grip frames and deactivating Browning HP mag safeties for decades. Can anyone present a single case where either was an issue? |
|
| I have a couple S&W revolvers that I bought new in the mid 90's before they were integrating the storage lock into all their guns. Thank God I did. I simply won't buy a new S&W revolver because of the lock. In fact I recently went down to my local gun shop to purchase a 442 because I've always wanted one. Took one look and changed my mind. I'm sure I'm not the only one who feels this way. Is anyone from S&W listening?! Started scouring the auction sites and found a new in box pre lock 442 that I now own. There are still plenty of pre lock models on the various gun auction sites. Get 'em while you can... |
|
| I handled a 386PD just the other day. I have a 640 Centennial and am well aware of what my hand feels like after about 50 or so full .357 magnum loads. (Yes, I know that's not the intended purpose of a .357 snub but practice is a good thing.) My hand hurt just thinking about dong that with the 386PD. I could not believe the weight of it. Or the lack thereof. Really nice gun though. Now if they'd only stop making them all with that stupid lock. |