The Current Status of the Smith & Wesson Agreement with the ATF and State Governments.

10-10-2002 | VANNROX

[vannrox]

The Current Status of
the Smith & Wesson Agreement
with the ATF and State Governments.

As well as the "behind the scenes" efforts
by the "Gun Control" organizations.

Researched by VANNROX.
Compiled and analysis 10-20-2002.
Unique to Free Republic.

It is interesting what you can find when you are searching for Firearms Information. I have been searching for information on pistols. I am looking for a fine, high quality and reliable pistol. My interest settled on a Smith & Wesson Model 99. But, I am very uneasy about Smith & Wesson. Not that the quality of the Firearms or anything like that. But rather on the relationship that S&W had with the ATF. Was the agreement still in force? So, I set about to find out what was the status of the legality of the S&W agreement.

But during my search, I found answers to my questions. Answers that surprised me. Answers that grows counter to what I have "heard" and "read in the paper"! The following is some of the results of my studes to determine the current status of the Smith & Wesson agreement with the ATF.

[1] First off. Let's be clear. The "Gun Grabbers" are still active.

They have not gone into remission. They have not shrugged their shoulders and gave up. Yes, their funding has been reduced, and their numbers have decreased. But, the decrease in funding has much more to do with the dried up money tree from the "organized" Democrat Funding Sources rather than individual contributions.

These individuals are regrouping and engaging in a stealth effort to disarm America. That is POINT ONE. IF you disagree with me, then stop reading NOW.

[2] The second point must be understood as well. These individuals are possessed with evil intent. They are currently involved in plans and schemes that are cloked in a shroud of "moderate" respectability. Thy have NOT stopped their efforts. They have just adapted into a "stealth" mode.

[3] Thirdly, they have now focused their efforts. They have adapted key strategies and tactical goals all designed to fit into a long term plan that involves decades and years of engagement.

[4] The Gun Control Movement has NOT backed down from ANY signed agreement that they have managed to implement. This includes every bill, law, regulation, sponsorship, and agreement involving firearms. Yes, including the Smith & Wesson Agreement with the ATF. This is certainly contrary to what you may have heard otherwise.

[5] They have identified the methods that work, and they have identified what doesn't. They have refined these methods and are currently involved in long term efforts to implement these methods. Their long term goals stay the same. The complete and utter disarming of the American Citizen.

	What the "Gun Grabbers" think WON'T work. Gun Buybacks. According to the "Gun Grabbers" this method is very ineffective to control gun violence. In three separate, moderately strong scientific evaluations, there was no reduction in gun violence following the purchase of large quantities of guns. Richard Rosenfeld's evaluations of two separate gun buybacks in St. Louis examined a 1991 program that bought 7,500 guns, and a 1994 program that bought 1,200 guns. Neither of them showed any reduction in gun homicides or assaults relative to the same offense types committed without guns. A similar evaluation of a gun buyback in Seattle found no reduction in homicide, and some evidence of an increase. The ineffectiveness of the gun buyback programs is all the more important because this research has been ignored. These findings have been in the public record for some time. They were included in the 1997 Maryland Report to Congress, and in the 1998 summary of that report. There is, to my knowledge, no contradictory evidence purporting to show that gun buybacks can be an effective policy for reducing gun violence. These programs are extremely expensive, usually costing hundreds of thousands of dollars. Yet as recently as the fall of 1999, another federal program was launched to encourage local agencies to spend many millions of federal dollars on buybacks in public housing authorities. Such a program might conceivably have some effect on gun violence if it was limited to residents of the small percentage of all public housing projects nationwide that suffer gun violence problems. But based on the city-wide program results, that seems unlikely.
	What the "Gun Grabbers" think WILL work. Uniformed Gun Patrols. This involved uniformed police and ATF searching homes, vehicles, businesses and individuals for unlicensed firearms. The first formal test of uniformed patrols against guns was the Kansas City Gun Experiment. In 1992 police in a high crime area worked on overtime to increase gun seizures by 65%. A modified replication of the Kansas City Gun Experiment was funded by NIJ in Indianapolis in 1996. The strategy of uniformed police patrolling high gun crime areas looking for illegally carried guns has also been evaluated in the March 1 issue of the JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION. In this study, gun homicides in two Colombian cities, Bogota and Cali, went down by about 14% whenever gun carrying was banned and police mounted special patrols using methods similar to those employed in Kansas City and Indianapolis. In this connection, it is worth noting that the Boston Police Department's well-known reduction in homicides in the early-1990s was statistically related to a major increase in weapons arrests. Their belief that "...As the people carry fewer guns, we expect fewer gun arrests..." was particularily pointed. Criminal History Checks. This involves the identification, registration, and observation of anyone and everyone whom purchases a firearm; firearm accessory or ammo. This is also known as "background checks for gun buyers". Apparently, reasearch by the University of Maryland claim that use of background checks have "...170 convicted felons who were prevented from buying new guns were 18% less likely to be charged with a gun offense..." Amazingly(!) these individuals claim that Background Checks have affected the illegal sales of firearms! The study states that "...Gun smugglers and straw purchasers, for example, may have found background checks too difficult to deal with, and dropped out of the business....". This method is fraught with peril. Because the "Gun Grabbers" use this method to control the flow of arms transfers within the states. They plan to go about this by a method that they innocously call "closing the loopholes". In otherwords, a solid and iron-tight grip on all methods of weapon transfer and sales. Gun Bans Of couse we all shout. That's what they want. But what is most critical here, and my point is that they have now shrouded their efforts within the uniform of respectability. They want to make every gun ban uniform throughout all the states. "...The available evidence suggests that several kinds of gun bans have been effective, although none of the findings have yet been replicated with rigorous field studies. One is a blanket or near-blanket ban on possession of handguns. New York City first enacted a near-ban on the purchase of handguns in 1911, with the Sullivan Law. While this law has not been formally evaluated, New York did have a lower homicide rate than many other big cities for most of this century. The law clearly alters the dynamics of the gun market, with strong evidence of the "Sanibel Island effect:" 85% of New York City crime guns traced by the ATF were imported illegally from outside of the state...". The Handgun Ban in D.C. When the District of Columbia passed an even more restrictive handgun ban than New York's in 1976, it created an opportunity for a detailed evaluation of its impact on gun crime. Loftin and his colleagues examined the trends in gun homicides in Washington and its surrounding communities before and after the change in the law. The 25% drop in firearms homicide that followed was not matched by a drop in other types of homicide, nor in an increase in homicide by other means. Nearby areas of Maryland and Virginia had no change in either firearms or non-firearms homicides. I wasih to stress that when they banned guns, the use of deaths resulting from guns was reduced - but the net number of homicdes STAYED THE SAME! In otherwords, the ban on firearms had no difference in the overall homicide rate. Yet, the "gun Grabbers" point to the study and the use of a ban because "...(Criminal death) might have been even worse without the handgun ban..."! Finally, the justification for banning assault guns, and semi and full automatic weapons is because "...since 1934, restrictions in the U.S. on the ownership of fully automatic machine guns have been associated with the extremely rare use of such guns in crime...".!!!! Federalizing all Domestic Firearms Manufacturers. This is a very ambitious plan, but has been in process now for over a decade. The first step has been to form legislative restrictions on all firearms manufacture. Followed, by important "Firearm Manufacturer Alliances with the ATF". The, now famous, Smith & Wesson agreement was the prototype and inital agreement that forged the inital Federal alliances. The plan called for manufacturer peer pressure and Legislative restricting to force all Firearm Manufacturers to comply to the anti-gun initatives. Eventually, over a period of years, the eventual federalization of all private firearms manufacurers.
	Unsupported tactics the "Gun Grabbers" Hope MIGHT work. Internal triggerlocks . This consists of a federally manditated and approved design that is integral to the design of a firearm that would prevent unauthorized individuals from utilizing the firearm. The implementation of such a requirement would render overnight the sale and use of all firearms previous to this agreement that do not meet the federal design mandidate. Some of the Gun-Control crowd insist in a Police "Override" capability and even argue for a built in tracking device! Unlikely as it sounds, these ideas have much support in the Democratic ranks in Washington. External triggerlocks . This is the same as an internal trigger lock design, but permits the modification of "legacy" firearms. Generally it is considered a "compromise" in the eyes of the Gun-Grabbers, such that it would appear reasonsible for political purposes, but in reality be just a simple step toward the manditorary internal trigger locks. "Smart Guns" that work only for one owner. This is generally opposed by about one half of the anti-gun crowd. They argue that "...The great epidemiological danger of the current "safe gun" proposals is that they will create a large legitimate market for new, improved guns, leading to substantial increases in gun ownership and gun density.." Which is opposite of what the gun-grabber desire. However, politically this plan has been embraced by the DNC who see it as a win-win situation in which they can appear to be "reasonable" while simultaneously federalizing the design of firearms in the US. "Firearms fingerprinting" before sale to allow police to trace all bullets fired to the gun that fired them . This would make a firearm barrel "fingerprint" available to all Federal agencies and the ATF. This was initiailized by the Smith & Wession agreement with the ATF, and is, to my knowledge, still operating from S&W to the ATF in Washington. More serial numbers on guns . This includes serial numbers for each and every component in a firearm. As well, as serial numbers laser etched on the brass casings of bullets, and different serial numbers for different states, all federalized under the ATF. The reasoning is to track stolen, or modified firearms, and would provide a source of extra monitoring for any manufacturer who wishes to fabricate or sell any item that has been numbered. Techniques include number stamping, bar codes, and even magnetic and material "signatures" buried within the metal or plastic. A stronger trigger-pull pressure requirement. This is obstensively to make a firearm difficult for a child to discharge. But the real tactic is far more inclusive. Buy forcing design requirements that are bounded by Federal Safety regulations, they would of opened up a Pandora's Box of all kinds of methods based on "safety" to force Firearms Manufacturers to design to FEDERAL requirements. Requirements that would be determined, not by an elected body, but determined by a federally established bureau. Background Checks at Gun Shows. . The effect of requiring background checks at gun shows can be tested directly with the data from dealers following the new Smith and Wesson "code of conduct." This so called "Background Check" is quite different from a Seller Background Check as mentioned above. This involves a key provision of the Smith & Wesson Agreement with the ATF. According to "Preventing Crime" "...In the Smith and Wesson agreement, for example, there will be a major natural experiment testing several of these proposals simultaneously with about 20% of the new handguns sold in the U.S. each year..." they had planned that "...Using both their Smith and Wesson guns made before the agreement and guns made by other manufacturers, the National Institute of Justice could compare the rates at which Smith and Wesson guns with internal, external and no triggerlocks are used in crime, suicide, and accidents...". As a result, by comparing the new Smith and Wesson serial number system to the old one may show differences in the rates at which police can catch gun crime offenders, and possibly differences in the rates at which well-numbered and poorly-numbered guns are used in crime. The one-gun-on-purchase-day limit with a 14-day waiting period for each buyer to collect the rest of the (unlimited number of) Smith and Wesson guns can be used to test the effects of that rule on gun violence: if Smith and Wesson crime gun traces go down, then the waiting period may have discouraged gun smugglers from buying them for transport into "Sanibel Island" States. Ammunition control . Ammunition control. Gary Kleck, whose 1991 book on gun control policy indicts a multitude of ideas, dismisses ammunition control. However, he is a minority. There is an active plan to make the purchase of annunition impossible, or at the very least prohibitative. All of the anti-gun establishment concedes that an end to ammunition would cause an end to gun violence. They only reason why some in the gun-control crowd do not believe that it would work is because it is easy for skilled people to make their own ammunition. The bias of gun-control groups is such that none believe that a gun-entheustist is smart or skilled enough to make their own ammounition. However, their plans take even this into account. Making lead, brass, primers, gunpowder, and gunpowder components restricted and difficult to obtain. A ten shot limit on firing each gun . There is a significant amount of debate on this issue. Many want zero-reloading capability and no semi automatic support in any domestic firearm. From what I have gathered, it appears that the plan is to sponsor a "reasonable" ten shot limit, initially. Eventually, being decreased to five, and then to three, and within ten years, zero reloading capability. A national one-gun-a-month purchase rule . This is supposed to prevent the "hot headed" from going out and purchasing a firearm in an emotional state which would eventually result in a gun death. The gun-grabbers reason that 24 hours is not sufficient to cool off, nor is a seven day period. They argue that individuals can stay in an enraged state for no less than a month and that federal controls are necessary to prevent crimes of passion being performed with firearms. Of course this argument has no validity. But they argue it does, and with an active propigandia mill with the DNC and the media they intend to implement their wishes.

[6] As concerned as I am, the point of writing this still stays the same. Has the Federal Government stood down and resended the agreement between the ATF and Smith & Wession?

OK, here is the shocker. The bullet fingerprinting so lauded by the anti-Gunners and claimed to not be in existance, is in reality thriving in the ATF. This this the program that was started as part of the Smith and Wesson agreement with the ATF. IT is current and it is in existance, and information is free flowing between the ATF and Smith and Wesson.

The program is called NIBIN. National Integrated Balistic Information Network.

I have been UNABLE to verify that ATF and SMith & Wession has Resended the agreement.

<![if !supportEmptyParas]>   <![endif]> <![if !supportEmptyParas]>   <![endif]> SOURCES: <![if !supportEndnotes]> <![endif]> <![if !supportFootnotes]> [1] <![endif]> . Albert M. Greenfield Professor of Human Relations, Professor of Sociology, and Director, Fels Center of Government, University of Pennsylvania, 3814 Walnut Street, Philadelphia, PA 19104, lws@sas.upenn.edu. <![if !supportFootnotes]> [2] <![endif]> . Dao, James, "Under Legal Seige, Gun Maker Agrees to Accept Curbs."  NEW YORK TIMES, March 18, 2000, p. A1. <![if !supportFootnotes]> [3] <![endif]> . Bruni, Frank, "Bush Moves a Little Away From the N.R.A.'s Positions", THE NEW YORK TIMES, March 18, 2000, p. A8. <![if !supportFootnotes]> [4] <![endif]> . Zimring, Franklin and Gordon Hawkins, CRIME IS NOT THE PROBLEM: LETHAL VIOLENCE IN AMERICA.  N.Y.: Oxford University Press, 1997. <![if !supportFootnotes]> [5] <![endif]> . Washington, D.C.: Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice, 1997. <![if !supportFootnotes]> [6] <![endif]> . Nagourney, Eric, "Edward Knipling, 90, Enemy of the Dangerous Screwworm."  The NEW YORK TIMES, March 27, 2000, p. A 25. <![if !supportFootnotes]> [7] <![endif]> . Koper, Christopher S., "Gun Lethality and Homicide: Gun Types Used by Criminals and the Lethality of Gun Violence In Kansas City, Missouri, 1985-1993."  Ph.D. Dissertation, Department of Criminology and Criminal Justice, University of Maryland, 1995. <![if !supportFootnotes]> [8] <![endif]> . Greenfeld, Lawrence A. and Zawitz, Marianne W.  WEAPONS OFFENSES AND OFFENDERS.  Washington, DC: U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics, 1995, NCJ-155284. <![if !supportFootnotes]> [9] <![endif]> . Wintemute, Garen J., Christiana M. Drake, James J. Beaumont, Mona A. Wright, and Carrie Parham.  "Prior Misdemeanor Convictions as a Risk Factor for Later Violent and Firearm-Related Criminal Activity Among Authorized Purchasers of Handguns."  JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION 280: 2083-2087, 1998.    <![if !supportFootnotes]> [10] <![endif]> . Computed from FBI, Crime in the United States 1993.  Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice. <![if !supportFootnotes]> [11] <![endif]> . Reiss, Albert J., Jr., and Jeffrey A. Roth, eds., UNDERSTANDING AND PREVENTING VIOLENCE.  Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences, 1993. <![if !supportFootnotes]> [12] <![endif]> . Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms.  Youth Crime Gun Interdiction Initiative: Crime Gun Trace Analysis Reports: The Illegal Youth Firearms Markets in 17 Communities.  Washington, DC: USBATF, 1997. <![if !supportFootnotes]> [13] <![endif]> . Koper, Christopher S., "Gun Lethality and Homicide: Gun Types Used by Criminals and the Lethality of Gun Violence In Kansas City, Missouri, 1985-1993."  Ph.D. Dissertation, Department of Criminology and Criminal Justice, University of Maryland, 1995. <![if !supportFootnotes]> [14] <![endif]> . Sherman, et al, op. cit. <![if !supportFootnotes]> [15] <![endif]> . Sherman, Lawrence W. and Dennis Rogan, "Effects of Gun Seizures on Gun Violence: Hot Spots Patrol in Kansas City." JUSTICE QUARTERLY 12: 673-693.  <![if !supportFootnotes]> [16] <![endif]> . McGarrell, Edmund, Stephen Shermak, Alexander Weiss, Targeting Firearms Through Directed Patrols, Indianapolis: Hudson Institute, 1999. <![if !supportFootnotes]> [17] <![endif]> . Villaveces, Andres, Peter Cummings, Victoria Espitia, Thomas Koepsell, Barbara McKnight, and Arthur L. Kellerman, "Effect of a Ban on Carrying Firearms on Homicide Rates in Two Colombian Cities," JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION 283: 1205-1209, 2000. <![if !supportFootnotes]> [18] <![endif]> . Sherman, Lawrence W., "Gun Carrying and Homicide Prevention."  JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION 283: 1193-1195, 2000. <![if !supportFootnotes]> [19] <![endif]> . Sherman, op. cit; unpublished data, FBI Uniform Crime Reporting Program as analyzed by Matthew Holtman, University of Pennsylvania, 2000. <![if !supportFootnotes]> [20] <![endif]> . Manson, Donald A., Darrell K. Guillard, and Gene Lauver.  PRESALE GUN CHECKS: THE BRADY INTERIM PERIOD, 1994-98.  Washington, D.C.: U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics, 1999.  <![if !supportFootnotes]> [21] <![endif]> . Wright, Mona A., Garen J. Wintemute, and Frederick A. Rivara. "Effectiveness of Denial of Handgun Purchase to Persons Believed to be at High Risk for Firearm Violence."  AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PUBLIC HEALTH 89: 88-90.  <![if !supportEmptyParas]>   <![endif]> <![if !supportFootnotes]> [22] <![endif]> . McDowall, David, Colin Loftin, and Brian Wiersema. "Easing Concealed Firearms Laws: Effects on Homicides in Three States." JOURNAL OF CRIMINAL LAW AND CRIMINOLOGY 86: 193-206. <![if !supportFootnotes]> [23] <![endif]> . Cook, Philip J. and Jens Ludwig, GUNS IN AMERICA: RESULTS OF A COMPREHENSIVE SURVEY ON FIREARMS OWNERSHIP AND USE.  Washington, D.C.: Police Foundation, 1996.  <![if !supportFootnotes]> [24] <![endif]> . Rosenfeld, Richard, "Gun Buybacks: Crime Control or Community Mobilization" In Martha Plotkin, ed., UNDER FIRE: GUN BACK-BACKS, EXCHANGES, AND AMNESTY PROGRAMS.  Washington, D.C.: Police Executive Research Forum 1995. <![if !supportFootnotes]> [25] <![endif]> . Callahan, Charles, Frederick Rivara, and Thomas Koepsell, "Money for Guns: Evaluation of the Seattle Gun Buy-Back Program."  In Martha Plotkin, ed., UNDER FIRE: GUN BUY-BACKS, EXCHANGES, AND AMNESTY PROGRAMS.  Washington, D.C.: Police Executive Research Forum 1995. <![if !supportFootnotes]> [26] <![endif]> . BATF, 1999, op. cit. <![if !supportFootnotes]> [27] <![endif]> . Loftin, Colin, David McDowall, Brian Wiersema, and Talbert J. Cottey. "Effects of Restrictive Licensing of Handguns on Homicide and Suicide in the District of Columbia."  NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE 325:1615-1620. <![if !supportFootnotes]> [28] <![endif]> . Roth, Jeffrey and Christopher Koper, IMPACTS OF THE 1994 ASSAULT WEAPONS BAN: 1994-96.  Research in Brief. Wahington, DC: National Institute of Justice, 1999. <![if !supportEmptyParas]>   <![endif]> style='font-family:Courier'> <![if !supportFootnotes]> [29] <![endif]> . Franklin Zimring and Gordon Hawkins, CRIME IS NOT THE PROBLEM: LETHAL VIOLENCE IN AMERICA.  N.Y.: Oxford University Press, 1997.  <![if !supportFootnotes]> [30] <![endif]> . Dao, James, "Under Legal Seige, Gun Maker Agrees to Accept Curbs."  NEW YORK TIMES, March 18, 2000, p. A1. <![if !supportFootnotes]> [31] <![endif]> . Kleck, Gary D.  POINT BLANK: GUNS AND VIOLENCE IN AMERICA.  N.Y.: Aldine deGruyter, 1991, p. 415.

[vannrox]

For your comment and input.

[vannrox]

BUMP and Index

[Wonder Warthog]

So have you tried calling the new management of Smith and Wesson?? It seems to me that this change of ownership could have a significant effect. I seem to recall reading in the NRA magazine that the new ownership had disavowed the agreement.

[Blood of Tyrants]

From what I understand, the new management uses weasel words and will not answer directly to any question about their cozy relationship with the ATF.

[Blood of Tyrants]

Some of the Gun-Control crowd insist in a Police "Override" capability and even argue for a built in tracking device!

Anyone wonder why I prefer my old fashioned "dumb" guns?

[San Jacinto]

I will not have a S&W -- new or used. There are plenty of good alternatives. I would like to see S&W's become literally worthless, with no demand and no value. It would serve as a good example for the other manufacturers.

[Cicero]

The last I heard, Smith & Wesson was still on the clinton hook.

Until we hear otherwise, it seems to me that the boycott should continue.

[IronJack]

Excellent research. All the more reason to avoid Smith & Wesson like a Nile mosquito. There are better pistols available without any of the political baggage attached. The last thing we want to do is lend any default approval to these collaborators.

[Shooter 2.5]

I suppose everyone can go out and buy some Chicom POS if it makes them feel better. That will make a lot of sense.

[Shooter 2.5]

There are better pistols available without any of the political baggage attached.

If there are, I'd like to hear which ones those are.

[Double Tap]

Phone conversations that my father has had with some of the new management are interesting. They blame S&W's problems on the consumer, for boycotting them. They say that the contracts have not been desolved, but they are not being enforced at this time.

As to buying used S&W's, I will. They are good guns, except for the Sigma line and the SW99, and no moneys are going to the company from the purchase. You will not ever find a better trigger pull than on S&W revolvers.

[OXENinFLA]

Well written, I'll have to print this out and pass this along.

I would also like to ask how you think the current situation going on in DC (the sniper) is going to effect the gun grabbers ability to implement some of these horrendous ideas to take away our guns?

I would state for the record that I am a gun owner and believe that our gun rights "SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED"

P.S. thanks for taking the time to research and write this article

[mamelukesabre]

I tend to agree with you.

I am in favor of a S&W boycott, but I don't see why an old classic S&W revolver should be included in that boycott. I love those old revolvers and as far as I'm concerned, they have nothing to do with the current company or the company that made the deal with the ATF and clinton. Companies change hands and become new companies. THe only thing they have in common is the name.

Do you think if you go out and buy a brand new jeep that it is made by the same company that made the classic kaiser-jeep? I don't.

[mamelukesabre]

If you're talking revolvers, there ain't a better gun out there. BUt semi autos is a different story. THere's lots of top quality semi autos out there not made by S&W.

[Shooter 2.5]

I'm still waiting for a handgun that doesn't have the "political baggage" as IronJack mentioned.

More to the point, this is the last line to the article:

"I have been UNABLE to verify that ATF and SMith & Wession has Resended the agreement."

So what's the point of the article? The company was sold from a British company to an American Company, The CEO was canned, and the last line of the article still doesn't say whether or not the new owners have a contract.

[Wonder Warthog]

"I suppose everyone can go out and buy some Chicom POS if it makes them feel better. That will make a lot of sense."

Lots of "non-Chicom" handguns out there. The Taurus .357 revolver I have seems to be quite satisfactory.

[CalConservative]

There are better pistols available without any of the political baggage attached.

If there are, I'd like to hear which ones those are.

I do like my Para-Ordnance 7.45 LDA. I think it is an excellent pistol for the price.

[Shooter 2.5]

Browning and Taurus are the only guns I can think of that never had to work under the type of agreement that S&W had to agree to. Colt? They dumped their self defense line. Para-Ordinance? The company is in a country where they can't even sell to their own citizens. Kimber? Guess who make their frames. Any foreign manufacturers other than Taurus? More governmental restrictions.

[mamelukesabre]

WHat's this about kimber? Who makes their frames?