Smith & Wesson 'Agreement'

[winman]

Copied from a Taurus thread:

"smith is still under the "agreement". while i own an older smith, i wont buy a new one because they havent made a serious attempt to get out from under the agreement. if and when they do, that will change."

I have several older Smiths and enjoy shooting them all.  Would someone please explain this 'agreement' business for me?  What exactly did Smith 'agree' to?

Thanks.

[Sir Knight]

The agreement is pretty much null & void on a number of different counts. First off, the Bush administration hasn't been enforcing it for the past 5+ years. I'm not a lawyer but somebody on another board provided legal links showing that if something is not enforced for a period of time, it becomes null & void. For example, if you let your neighbor use your property for a certain purpose (let's say, store firewood) and he does it for a while and you don't say anything, after a while he gains the freedom to continue to use to for that purpose. Same with the agreement, if it isn't enforced for nearly a decade, it'll be argued that it became null & void for the same reason.

If that isn't enough, S&W was promised special treatment in return. They haven't receive any since the agreement went into effect. Homeland Security went with SIG. The other day I read that another major government contract was awarded to HK. So it could also be argued that the agreement can't be enforced against S&W because they did not receive what they were promised in the first place.

That's just two areas. A third would be that one party can not commit to the actions of a third party. There is no legal grounds for that and that is what the agreement calls for with regards to the distributors of S&W products.

As I said, I see the agreement be dead for numerous reasons. If somebody doesn't want to buy their product for that reason, that's their business and I respect that just as they should respect the actions of others. I buy what I want when I need it if I can afford it.

[Graybeard]

That is very bad legal advice. Glad you're not a lawyer.

The agreement is just as valid today as it was the day it was signed. Non enforcement has no bearing in this situation. It was patently illegal when signed and is just as illegal today. But that will NOT stop the next dumocrap president from pulling it out and dusting it off and enforcing it on S&W. And the courts being what they are these days will no doubt rule in favor of the government.

I do not have the text of it readily available nor can I find the link to it on the net. But I'm sure if you do a search the text is here as is the link some where. Might be on Second Amendment Forum in the older threads.

Bottom line is the new company has made no attempt to get out from under it with a Republican in office. So next time a dumocrap is in there it will be dragged out and an attempt to enforce will be made.

Here is one old thread on it but still not with the text or link.

http://www.graybeardoutdoors.com/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=16849&highlight=s+w+smith+wesson+agreement

OK further searching turned it up. Here is the Link:  http://www.hud.gov/library/bookshelf18/pressrel/gunagree.html

and here is the text:


 

AGREEMENT BETWEEN SMITH & WESSON AND
THE DEPARTMENTS OF THE TREASURY AND HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT,
LOCAL GOVERNMENTS AND STATES

SUMMARY OF TERMS

Preamble: The city, state, county and federal parties agree to dismiss the parties from the pending suits and refrain from filing suits against the manufacturer parties based on an equivalent cause of action.

SAFETY AND DESIGN

All handguns must meet the following safety and design standards:

Second "hidden" serial number, to prevent criminals from obliterating serial numbers.
External locking device sold with all guns within 60 days.
Internal locking device on all guns within 24 months.
Smart Guns -- Authorized User Technology.
Manufacturers commit 2% of annual firearms revenues to the development of authorized user technology.
Within 36 months, authorized user technology will be included in all new firearm models, with the exception of curios and collectors’ firearms.
If top eight manufacturers agree, authorized user technology will be included in all new firearms.
Child Safety. Within 12 months, handguns will be designed so they cannot be readily operated by a child under 6.
Performance test. All firearms will be subject to a performance test to ensure safety and quality.
Drop test. All firearms will be subject to a test to ensure they do not fire when dropped.
All pistols must meet the following additional requirements:

Safety device. Positive manually operated safety device.
Magazine disconnectors must be available on all pistols to customers who desire the feature, within 12 months.
Chamber load indicators on all pistols, showing whether the pistol is loaded, within 12 months.
Large capacity magazines. New firearm designs will not be able to accept large-capacity magazines that were manufactured prior to September 1994. (Manufacture of such magazines has been prohibited since that date.)
Law enforcement and military exception. If law enforcement agencies or the military certify the need, exceptions to these requirements may be made. Manufacturers will ask that these guns not be resold to the civilian market.

Warnings about safe storage and handling included with all firearms within six months.

Illegal firearms. Manufacturers will not sell firearms that can readily be converted into fully automatic weapons or that are resistant to fingerprints.

 

SALES AND DISTRIBUTION

Code of Conduct. The manufacturers will sell only to authorized dealers and distributors and allow their authorized distributors to sell only to authorized dealers. Authorized dealers and distributors will agree to a code of conduct. If manufacturers receive notice of a violation by an authorized dealer or distributor, they will take action against the dealer or distributor, including termination of sales to the dealer or distributor. The Oversight Commission will review such actions and have authority to require termination or suspension if warranted.

The code of conduct will require authorized dealers and distributors to:

Gun shows: make no gun show sales unless all sales at the gun show are completed only after a background check.
Brady checks: wait as long as necessary for a completed Brady check showing that the purchaser is not a felon or otherwise prohibited before selling a gun to the purchaser.
Safety training for purchasers: transfer firearms only to individuals who have passed certified safety course or exam and demonstrate to purchasers how to use all safety devices and how to load, unload, and safely store the firearm before completing the sale.
Multiple handgun sales: all purchasers of multiple handguns to take only one handgun from the store on the day of sale, at which point a multiple sales report will be filed with ATF. The remainder of the guns can only be collected after 14 days.
Employee training: require all employees to attend ATF-approved training and to pass a exam on firearms laws, straw purchasers, illegal trafficking indicators, and gun safety.
Insurance: carry liability insurance where available, with a minimum coverage of $1 million for each incident.
Inventory control: maintain an electronic inventory tracking plan within 24 months
Security: implement a security plan for securing firearms.
Child access: require persons under 18 to be accompanied by adults in gun stores or gun sections of stores.
Weapons attractive to criminals: not sell large capacity magazines or semiautomatic assault weapons.
Compliance: provide law enforcement, government regulators, and the Oversight Commission established in this Agreement with access to documents necessary to determine compliance; cooperate fully in the Agreement’s Oversight mechanism.
Crime gun traces: maintain an electronic record of all ATF trace requests and report trace requests to manufacturers.
Indicted dealers: forgo firearms sales to licensed dealers known to be under indictment.
Straw purchasers: not to make sales to straw purchasers.
Manufacturer commitments. Manufacturers will:

Provide quarterly sales data to ATF.
Not market guns in any manner designed to appeal to juveniles or criminals.
Refrain from selling any modified/sporterized semi-automatic pistol of type that cannot be imported into U.S.
Reaffirm policy of not placing advertisements in vicinity of schools, high crime zones, and public housing.
Implement a security plan for securing firearms.
Designate an officer to ensure compliance with the Agreement.
Corporate responsibility for crime gun traces. If an authorized dealer or distributor has a disproportionate number of crime guns traced to it within three years of sale, the manufacturers will take action, including possible termination or suspension, against the dealer or distributor. The Oversight Commission will review such actions and have authority to require termination or suspension if warranted.

Oversight Commission will be established and empowered to oversee implementation of the Agreement. The Commission will have five members selected as follows: one by manufacturers; two by city and county parties; one by state parties; one by ATF. The Commission’s powers will include the authority to review compliance with the design and safety requirements, review the safety and training program for dealer and distributor employees, review manufacturer actions against dealers or distributors that violate the Agreement or have a disproportionate number of crime gun traces, and require suspension or termination if warranted.

Role of ATF. To the extent consistent with law, ATF will work with manufacturers and the Oversight Commission to assist them in meeting obligations under the Agreement. ATF will notify the Oversight Commission of certain violations of the Agreement by distributors and dealers if it uncovers such violations.

Ballistics Imaging. Within six months, if technologically available, manufacturers will fire all firearms before sale and will enter the digital image of the casings in a system compatible with the National Integrated Ballistics Identification Network and accessible to ATF. This will enable law enforcement to trace crime guns when only the bullets or casings are recovered.

Access 2000. Manufacturers shall participate in ATF’s Access 2000 program, which establishes electronic links with ATF and enables high-speed tracing of crime guns.

Legislation. The parties will work together to support legislative efforts to reduce firearm misuse and the development of authorized user technology.

Education trust fund. Upon resolution of all current city, state, and county lawsuits, manufacturers will dedicate 1% of overall firearms revenues to an education trust fund.

Most favored entity. If other manufacturers enter agreements with more expansive design and distribution reforms, and those manufacturers, along with the manufacturer parties to this Agreement, account for fifty percent or more of United States handgun sales, the manufacturer parties to this Agreement will agree to abide by the same reforms.

Enforcement. The Agreement will be entered into and enforceable as a court order and as a contract.
 

[Redhawk1]

Agreement or no agreement, I will buy Smith & Wesson guns.  

[Sir Knight]

As I said, I am not a lawyer and I do not claim to be. Which is why I rely on the opinions of others (who may, or may not, be correct):

• S&W has been actively dismantling the work of the former administration. They have had 12 agreements repealed, the largest being the one with Boston -- Source
  
  
• I have been told by people with more legal knowledge than I will ever have that "The Agreement" is not now a valid contract. Perhaps I am dead wrong for relaying what lawyers (completely unrelated to S&W) have told me. Won't be the first time ... Source
  
  
• There seems to be some misunderstanding here concerning the HUD suit and the "agreement." The suit never went to court. The new owners' actions combined with the new administration caused HUD etc. to drop the suit. There is *no legal contract* for the next hostile administration to demand be enforced. Get it? THERE IS NO LEGALLY ENFORCEABLE CONTRACT. Hillary & Co. would have to file a new suit, and start negotiations all over again (with, I predict, a very different reaction from S&W.) ... Source[/list:u]

[Sir Knight]

http://www.john-ross.net/betrayal.htm

[Sir Knight]

oops -- double tap

[myronman3]

and who is this "john ross"?  

seems to me, he is just another one of us @$$#0!#$, with another  opinion.  

i hardly consider that solid information.

do what you want with your money,  i will not support anyone who, in any way, trys to undermine MY RIGHTS  that my ancestors paid for with their blood; even if it is to try to save their company.    a company isnt $#!* compared against our rights.   besides,  none of the other companies took that route.  

i would love to buy a smith.  but it aint going to happen until i see PROOF, not some schmuck's opinion.

[Sir Knight]

John Ross is a gun author.

[Sir Knight]

... none of the other companies took that route ...

None of the other companies were being sued except for S&W and Ruger. And as far as I am concerned, Ruger did more damage than S&W. Thanks to him, hi-cap mags were selling for around $100 for ten years. At least therre were no such ill effects due to S&W and according to some, there never will be.

[DirtyHarry]

I suppose we will see if the agreement is still valid or not in 2008, or soon thereafter. If I were a betting man I would say it is.
My main problem is that the new ownership has stood around with their head in the sand for the last 5 years when they could easily have gotten this whole mess legally taken care of with the gun friendly administration we have now.
Whats that say about the new ownership? To me it says either they simply don't care or are in collusion.

[Dusty Miller]

I'm tired of this old argument and I'll buy an S&W gun anytime until they show me clearly that they have not backed out.

[Sir Knight]

... To me it says either they simply don't care or are in collusion ...

Or, it shows that since neither side has lived up to the terms of the agreement for 8 years, it becomes unenfoceable as a lot of people are saying.

[myronman3]

man, i am tired of this one, too.  

i have been argueing with folks since the agreement was signed.   and all i ever asked for was proof that the agreement was null and void.   and guess what,  i am still waiting for that proof.  

no one would like to buy a new smith more than me.  if i dont have my principles, i dont have anything.  so i am standing on them, and am still waiting for someone to offer up proof

 i aint holding my breath.

[Redhawk1]

man, i am tired of this one, too.  

i have been argueing with folks since the agreement was signed.   and all i ever asked for was proof that the agreement was null and void.   and guess what,  i am still waiting for that proof.  

no one would like to buy a new smith more than me.  if i dont have my principles, i dont have anything.  so i am standing on them, and am still waiting for someone to offer up proof

 i aint holding my breath.

Sound like you are ready to blow a gasket. It is not like S&W is trying to take your gun rights.  :roll:

[DirtyHarry]

It is not like S&W is trying to take your gun rights.  :roll:

Maybe not, but they definately were and quite likely still are in bed with a faction that does want to take our gun rights.

[Sir Knight]

i have been argueing with folks since the agreement was signed.   and all i ever asked for was proof that the agreement was null and void.   and guess what,  i am still waiting for that proof.  

no one would like to buy a new smith more than me.  if i dont have my principles, i dont have anything.  so i am standing on them, and am still waiting for someone to offer up proof

 i aint holding my breath.

You want proof? How's this -- This was reported by Jeff OTMG (who has reported more accurate inside firearms information on the web than anyone else that I know of) back in 2002 (this is a word for word quote) ...

I want to hit this one first because of the way that I feel about S&W, the ‘agreement’, and actions that I have taken that have been a result of those feelings.  I don’t think that it is a secret to anyone that I have fully supported the boycott of S&W.  I have not purchased any new S&W products since April of 2000 and have strongly urged others to follow suit.  The boycott has been nothing short of a total and complete success.  For me the boycott is over and I can now urge everyone else to do the same, this is why:

I had a LONG discussion today with Paul Pluff of S&W.  Paul has been the liaison between S&W and the lawyers for S&W throughout this process.  He has learned much and how things worked.  Basically what Ed Schultz did was a HUGE mistake.  (DUH Jeff, you are suppose to give us NEW information) As we all know, the boycott was so successful that the British owners had to sell S&W for a huge loss.  Unfortunately the deal had been done.  Now this is what S&W has done.  What we know as ‘the agreement’ was in reality an ‘agreement to agree’.  It was never finalized as it needed a signature from a judge for a ‘consent decree’.  S&W would not agree to the consent decree.  They went to AG Ashcroft to inform him of their opinion, Ashcroft  agreed and would not ask a judge to sign it.  The AG’s office even released a statement and it was carried in the WSJ.  S&W DID go to the AG, did ask to be released from the agreement, the AG issued a statement saying that they would  not enforce it nor seek a judges signature to force enforcement.  Unfortunately, due to the actions of Ed Schultz, S&W cannot now use this information in any ad campaign, as much as they would like to, because it would work against them.  S&W has completed the discovery phase of other cases and have even more pending.  One of these is the famous agreement with the city of Boston, and there are about 10 others.  Were S&W to start jumping for joy about getting out of the deal with the feds, then the anti-gunners in the dozen other still pending cases could use that action to illustrate in court that S&W had the opportunity to ‘do the right thing’, but backed out of it knowing that it was the right thing to do.  It must be shown in all the remaining cases that S&W is doing the right thing and that the things that the anti’s are asking for in these cases are completely unreasonable and could easily lead the company to collapse either due to financial upset or by requiring things to be done that are beyond the limits of current technology.  These lawsuits have actually had a tremendously positive effect for our side on many of the lawmakers around the country.  The reason for this is that our side gets to tell its’ side of the story.  Too many times all we see or hear are a bunch of anti’s screaming how bad guns are.  The politicians watch the same TV news we do, but these suits have forced them to hear the opposing viewpoint, OURS.  As a result many of them have been swayed to our way of thinking.  This has been a great educational experience for them.  The fact that the court cases have been overwhelmingly come down in our favor had not hurt our position either.  If the judges are throwing out cases against the gun industry, then there just might be something to the argument that they have been hearing.  Another thing that has helped were the events of 9/11 last year. As tragic as it was, it has helped the general publics perception of gun owners simply because there have been so many first time buyers since then.  The ranks of gun owners have swelled and they have gained an understanding of what we have known for a long time.

S&W knows it was a mistake and they are actively seeking to have the agreements dismantled, without giving the other side ammunition.  You will probably see more information on this topic over the course of this year as S&W battles on.  There is more specific information that I have, but I cannot go into detail as it could damage some of the work that is currently going on in this area and I sure don’t want to be the cause of that.  What you do is up to you, but knowing this I will happily support S&W and urge everyone else to do the same.

... Source.

As I said, I'm not a lawyer or claim to be one but I'll take his word over just about anybody else's.

[Redhawk1]

It is not like S&W is trying to take your gun rights.  :roll:

Maybe not, but they definately were and quite likely still are in bed with a faction that does want to take our gun rights.

I think you make a poor argument here. How in the world would a gun manufacture as you put it.   " it quite likely still are in bed with a faction that does want to take our gun rights"

Help me understand your position.  :?

[myronman3]

i dont think s+w is in bed with anyone now.   and i understand that they are working to take some action.   i believe that.   i think that they should be a more aggresive in their pursuit to get the "agreement" thrown out.  time is running out, and if they dont get it done soon, it will be next to impossible after the next election.  

bush is in trouble and i am very concerned about the next election.   luckily, the dem's cant help but be themselves, and they just keep shooting themselves in the foot.  

if smith fails to "get 'er done" soon, they might as well forget about it.  

and i dont care what your opinion on the whole issue is, if you think it doesnt set our rights back signifigantly,  you arent being honest with yourself.  

and that is how the myronman sees it.

[Redhawk1]

i dont think s+w is in bed with anyone now.   and i understand that they are working to take some action.   i believe that.   i think that they should be a more aggresive in their pursuit to get the "agreement" thrown out.  time is running out, and if they dont get it done soon, it will be next to impossible after the next election.  

bush is in trouble and i am very concerned about the next election.   luckily, the dem's cant help but be themselves, and they just keep shooting themselves in the foot.  

if smith fails to "get 'er done" soon, they might as well forget about it.  

and i dont care what your opinion on the whole issue is, if you think it doesnt set our rights back signifigantly,  you arent being honest with yourself.  

and that is how the myronman sees it.

I will use one of your lines and apply it to you. I am done with is worn out fight.

and i don't care what your opinion on the whole issue is

[myronman3]

hey redhawk-  i seem to remember you saying you sold your redhawk for a 500 smith,  right?  
maybe you should consider changing your handle to "last word", cause it always seems like you have to always get it to be happy.
hardy, har, har.  

I will use one of your lines and apply it to you. I am done with is worn out fight.

and i don't care what your opinion on the whole issue is

outstanding.  

  hey guys,  i dont care what you do with your coins.   i am just stating what wont be happening with mine, and putting info out there.   if you dont care- great,  we can all make up our minds here.  i believe, though, a person should have all the info available, then make up their mind.  

best wishes to all!  

[Redhawk1]

hey redhawk-  i seem to remember you saying you sold your redhawk for a 500 smith,  right?  
maybe you should consider changing your handle to "last word", cause it always seems like you have to always get it to be happy.
hardy, har, har.  

I will use one of your lines and apply it to you. I am done with is worn out fight.

and i don't care what your opinion on the whole issue is

outstanding.  

quote]

I don't need to sell anything to buy a gun, I just get rid of guns I no longer use.  I had my Redhawk up until about 3 week ago and I have had a S&W500 for over 2 years. So what is your point??

10,000 comedians out of work and your trying to be funny.

"last word"

[Dogshooter]

I don't really see where it does any of us any good to boycott an American gunmaker. The letters posted above seem to indicate (at least, to me) that S&W realizes it made a mistake and is actively seeking to correct that mistake. I own several Smith's and have every intention of buying more. Boycotting S&W out of business will only mean one less quality firarm manufacturer here in the US. And I don't know about you guys, but I don't want to think about having to settle for a Jennings to use when going out for Elk.


ps Did I understand correctly that S&W was a BRITISH company when the agreement was made and is now an American company?? If so that explains a LOT!!!!

[DirtyHarry]

I think you make a poor argument here. How in the world would a gun manufacture as you put it.   " it quite likely still are in bed with a faction that does want to take our gun rights"

Help me understand your position.  :?

It means quite simply that whether by their own volition or not if they are still indentured to the agreement then they are in fact still "in bed" with the anti gun faction who drew up the agreement with the previous ownership.

Dont get me wrong, I still buy S&W products, as long as they are used and from a private owner.
I got one heck of a deal on my 500 that way and S&W didn't get my money once removed as they would have if I had bought from my gun shop.

[Redhawk1]

I think you make a poor argument here. How in the world would a gun manufacture as you put it.   " it quite likely still are in bed with a faction that does want to take our gun rights"

Help me understand your position.  :?

It means quite simply that whether by their own volition or not if they are still indentured to the agreement then they are in fact still "in bed" with the anti gun faction who drew up the agreement with the previous ownership.

Dont get me wrong, I still buy S&W products, as long as they are used and from a private owner.
I got one heck of a deal on my 500 that way and S&W didn't get my money once removed as they would have if I had bought from my gun shop.

It is no different, S&W still got there money.
I will always support an American company that makes guns, S&W is a great company and make great products. I see it as you are talking out of both sides of your mouth.  :wink:

[myronman3]

10,000 comedians out of work and your trying to be funny.

if you lose your sense of humor,  what good is anything else?  

relax, buddy; just making sure your still awake.  

i see you signed the post

"last word"

so i see you havent lost yours.   :wink:

[Redhawk1]

myronman3, it's all good.
   :-D
"last word"

[S.B.]

Copied from a Taurus thread:

"smith is still under the "agreement". while i own an older smith, i wont buy a new one because they havent made a serious attempt to get out from under the agreement. if and when they do, that will change."

I have several older Smiths and enjoy shooting them all.  Would someone please explain this 'agreement' business for me?  What exactly did Smith 'agree' to?

Thanks.

Not wanting to start a war but, hasn't this dead horse been kicked enough? All any shooter has to do is buy a Taurus and compare it to the genuine S&W and there should be no question who puts out a quality product? Made in America!!!!

[Old Griz]

:cb2: I agree! Anyone who would buy a Taurus instead of a real gun is bound to be — confused!  :-D

[Mauser]

I think we need to get over this agreement.  Smith is an American company (now, I think), making a quality product and giving Americans good jobs doing so.  Whats more, they do it in a difficult political environment.  I understand the anger at first and with the foreign ownership, but I don't understand some people's inability to get past this, especially with a great old American manufacturer that is now trying to get it right.  It is naive to think that Smith should just renounce the deal with the government.  Have you folks seen how big and powerful it is lately?  What are you folks trying to do boycotting Smith now?  Run it out of business?  How does that help us? I think the gunmakers got the point of the anger.  By the way, I think Bill Ruger did more damage with the magazine capacity issue.  I've forgiven his company and have moved on.  We need these manufacturers to survive not die.

By the way a contract CAN be modified by subsequent performance or non performance.