|
Dave Kopel is the research director of the Independence Institute, a free market think tank in Golden, Colorado.
March 20, 2000, National Review
Online
Smith & Wesson's Faustian Bargain, Part ISmith and Wesson says that if it had not stopped the suits, the company would have gone out of business within a year, due to attorney fees. But it should be noted that other gun companies are under equally great financial pressure, and have not capitulated. To be sure, the agreement will have only a moderate effect on the way Smith and Wesson does business. At the same time, the contract terms — if enforced against other gun companies — could drive them out of business. The application of the agreement to several of Smith & Wesson's smaller competitors, or to Glock (one of the largest and most successful handgun companies), would destroy them. Thus, Smith and Wesson gains an advantage, by agreeing to terms which will harm its competitors. The positive short-term consequences for the company will be increased government sales and reduced litigation expenses. The negative consequences will be that Smith & Wesson will lose many of its retailers. In addition, gun buyers who care about Second Amendment rights will stop buying Smith & Wesson products. In the long term, S&W has increased the chances that it, along with every other handgun manufacturer, will be destroyed. S&W has legitimated frivolous lawsuits against financially vulnerable businesses, and has thereby encouraged the victimization of many other business by abusive lawyers and prohibition groups. In short, S&W's appeasement — which, in many cases, does little to alter the way the company has been doing business — gains it a short armistice with its enemies. But appeasement didn't save France, and it won't save S&W.
All handguns must meet the following safety and design standards: [Already done by many gun manufacturers.] [S&W has been giving away locks with every handgun since 1997.] [The lock that S&W will use can be left in the “open” position permanently.] [Note that the new technology is for new models only, not new production of current models. S&W has already been working at personalization technology. So far, solving the problem of putting a computer in a gun-and making the computer work 100% reliably-has proven extremely difficult. Buyer resistance to guns that only work 99% of the time is likely to be very serious. To the extent that this agreement helps pass legislation to mandate so-called smart guns, the agreement will put S&W’s competitor Glock out of business; Glock has made a business decision not to invest millions of dollars in personalization technology that may never work reliably.] [S&W guns already conform to this. The revolvers have a 10 pound trigger pull, and the semi-automatic pistols require that the slide be pulled.] [Common industry practice already.] [No handgun manufacturer in the U.S. makes guns which fail the drop test.] [“Pistol” in this context means a self-loading, semi-automatic handgun, as opposed to a revolver.] [Already standard on S&W pistols.] [A magazine disconnect prevents the gun from firing if the magazine is not in the gun, and there is a round in the firing chamber. People who own handguns for defensive purposes, including law enforcement officers, generally prefer guns without magazine disconnects.] [To the extent that the people begin to rely on chamber load indicators, they will violate the fundamental firearms safety rule: “treat every gun as if it’s loaded.] [So new S&W guns have to be incompatible with pre-1995 magazines. Here, S&W undercuts defensive gun use, by ensuring that people who buy new models will not be able to fire more than 11 rounds without stopping to change the magazine. There are many incidents in which defensive gun users have had to fire more than 11 rounds to stop multiple attackers, or even single attackers who are under the influence of drugs.] [Law enforcement retains the ability to obtain reliable firearms. Since defensive gun use by ordinary people is immoral, it would be better for them to die rather than defend themselves with an effective firearm.] March 21, 2000 Smith & Wesson's Faustian Bargain, Part IIAs promised, here’s the second half of Smith & Wesson's Faustian agreement with HUD, again decoded in [brackets]. [Every firearms manufacturer already includes a safety manual with the gun.] [The first item has been illegal since 1934. The second item is a slap at Intratec, which has advertised a particular model as resistant to fingerprints.] [This conforms to S&W’s current business practice. Many smaller manufacturers, however, do not have the resources to maintain an authorized dealer system.] [In other words, an authorized S&W dealer can’t sell a gun in most American states, since most states do not require background checks for handgun or long gun sales by private gun collectors. Already, every firearms dealer, including authorized S&W dealers, must, by law, run background checks on every customer; the requirement applies for in-store sales, and for gun show sales. Now, S&W will forbid its dealers to sell at gun shows simply because the law of the state where the gun show takes place authorizes unregistered sales by private collectors. Since gun show sales are a very important source of revenue for many small dealers, some dealers will probably drop Smith & Wesson, rather than dropping out of gun shows. This provision is an important step towards Handgun Control’s goal of requiring government permission for anyone to obtain a gun, under any circumstances.] [Standard practice among most dealers already, although the law says that if the FBI instant check system fails to respond after 72 hours, the sale may go forward.] [The second condition — demonstrating how to use the gun — is already common in many gun stores.] [The multiple sales report has been required by law since 1968. The delay is premised on the phony claim that lawful multiple purchases from retail gun stores are an important source of crime guns.] [Mandatory political correctness. No more sending your teenager to the local gun store to pick up some gun cleaning supplies for you. This helps further the idea that guns are evil, like cigarettes, and that children should be kept away from them.] [Furthers the lie from Handgun Control and Bill Clinton that so-called “assault weapons” — guns with certain cosmetic features — are preferred by criminals, as are magazines that hold more than 10 rounds. The sale of any of these items made before 1995 is perfectly legal, and HCI’s campaign for confiscation of all these items has been a failure. Many gun dealers are willing to sell S&W guns according to S&W’s terms, but here, S&W is attempting to forbid the sale of products from other companies. This provision will certainly cause some dealers to drop the S&W product line, rather than allowing one manufacturer to dictate the store’s inventory.] [In other words, stores that sell S&W guns must surrender their business privacy, and their Fourth Amendment right to insist that government employees obtain a court order before looking at private records.] [Easy for any store with a computer.] [So much for the Fifth Amendment principle of innocent until proven guilty.] [Has been illegal since 1968.] [Resurrects a BATF proposal that Congress voted down by a 3-1 margin in 1978.] [Doesn’t affect S&W, which only makes handguns, but undercuts companies like Marlin, which make lightweight .22 rifles for teenagers.] [No impact on S&W, but does affect some other handgun companies.] [Most gun stores advertise with newspaper ads rather than billboards, so this has little impact. But the provision implies that people in high crime zones and public housing should not have firearms for protection.] [Common already, since dealers don’t want their inventory stolen.] [Thus, the commission will have a 4-1 anti-gun majority.] [...and bring us a few steps closer to universal gun registration.] [Already done by most large manufacturers. Again, most traces are unrelated to gun crime.] [S&W commits itself to work with the gun prohibition lobby, and to outlaw companies like Glock, which do not want to risk their customers’ lives by making potentially unreliable computer guns.] [Who controls the trust fund?] [S&W commits itself to even further abuses, if more gun companies capitulate.] |
|
Share this page:
Follow Dave on Twitter. Follow Dave on Facebook.
Search this website with the FrontLook engine (slower, but more complete results than the Google search). Nothing written here is to be construed as necessarily representing the views of the Independence Institute or as an attempt to influence any election or legislative action. Please send comments to Independence Institute, 727 East 16th Ave., Denver, Colorado 80203 Phone 303-279-6536. (email)webmngr @ i2i.org Copyright © 2012
|