[vannrox]

"...The owners of the company who made that agreement are gone..."

So what. According to USC COntract Law. The contract is still inforce. And it is being enforced.


"...The new owners and the present administration have ended the agreement..."

I hope you are correct. COuld you please kindly give me a URL to verify this. That is why I was looking in the first place. I wanted a S&W 99, but I was unable to determine whether the agreement was revoked. Unless it has been revoked, or the company has completely reorganized under chapter 11 the odds are very likely that the agreement is still in force.

I would really like the link. Other than that, I am afraid that you are basing your thoughts and comments on "hearsay" and nothing legally binding.

Like I said. As far as I know, the agreement is still in place.

[blau993]

Read the story in the Wall Street Journal last week. The agreement you posted is ancient history. The company has since been sold. Its new management is all American, and they have repudiated this agreement. They have rejoined the fold, insofar as defense of Second Amendment rights is concerned. No boycott is in effect nor is any justified.

[mark the shark]

I believe that I also read a similar story on this subject in a recent NRA American Rifleman issue, that stated that S&W had backed out of this "Alleged" agreement from the
Clinton era. I'll try to confirm that with a google search.

[mark the shark]

I believe that I also read a similar story on this subject in a recent NRA American Rifleman issue, that stated that S&W had backed out of this "Alleged" agreement from the
Clinton era. I'll try to confirm that with a google search.