You have to remember that Bob Scott bought ALL THE REVOLVERS and the entire Smith & Wesson company to put a lock on them. Why would someone think he will change that so they will buy one revolver or three? Bob bought the production of over two and a half million revolvers to put his lock on them. Will you really change his mind with how many revolvers you're going to buy? I can hear his response now. "I'm sorry, I can't hear you over the sound of the million pistols I'm making this year." He's not a jerk that's insensitive to customers. He bought a company that was simply going to be shut down by Tomkins and ended forever. He bought it for $15 million and turned it into a half-billion dollar business. He doesn't hear Jerry Miculek complaining about how he'll never use a S&W with the lock. There actually isn't anything wrong with the lock. But there's some guy on the internet that says it's a "hillary hole" and that he knows better what Smith & Wesson should do?
Why is it that some whiney consumers think they are going to do manufacturers a huge favor if they'll bend to their petty will? S&W makes more AR15's than it does revolvers, and its pistols outsell the rifles 4 to 1. More revolver sales aren't going to drive their profits up. They spent over $500 million this year. If they can cut the cost of their financing by a tiny fraction, it will save them more money in one deal than the revolver business makes in years. Revolvers are just not big business. They're only about 13% of the guns S&W makes, 10% of Ruger's production, and 9% of Kimber's. There really isn't anything short of a semi-auto ban that will increase that, but there are a lot of things that can decrease it by growing their other businesses that have more potential. Their revolver business isn't broken and does not need fixing.
