| Have the Washington-area sniper attacks changed your views on gun controls? | ||||||||||
 |
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
| Yes, I now favor greater gun restrictions 12 votes (8%) |
No, I've always supported greater gun controls 50 votes (34%) |
No, I am opposed greater gun controls 29 votes (20%) |
No, but I'm afraid that Congress will be convinced to enact controls 23 votes (16%) |
Current gun controls already go too far 34 votes (23%) |
||||||
|
148 people have voted so far |
||||||||||
As a part-time gunsmith, I had purchased a sizable amount of S&W parts for their revolvers and semi-automatic handguns. Having worked on Smiths for a number of years I had a sizable client base for work. I was in the process of contracting the police department academy for the rebuiding of the academy revolvers, which take a huge amount of abuse. This promised to be a money generator and excellent experience.
After S&W signed on to the Klinton-Bore agreement, I was hounded by S&W for a copy of my business tax certificate, a list of customers, including type of firearm and work performed.
I would not participate and informed S&W. All the parts I had purchased were boxed up and sent back with a refund request. My reasoning was the agreement, and as long as S&W were signed to it, I would not work on ANY firearm manufactured by them.
Soon after the Tomkins sale, I was called by the Customer Service department and was asked if I would be willing to start ordering parts again. I said as long as Smith was part of the Kliton-Bore agreement there would be no business from me. The representative said that Smith was not going to cooperate any longer under the new management. Sales had fallen dramatically and they were looking to renew old ties.
I am still deciding if I want to take the risk. The offer is at a sunstantial discount, so there is incentive. My only problem is now I am part-time and have changed my priorities on gun-repair.