Smith & Wesson internal lock

Guns & Gear
1

Hi Folks,
Apologies in advance if this has already been asked.
Am I exposing myself to liability if I removed the internal lock on a Smith revolver?
I’ve been reading about Smith revolvers locking up from malfunctioning internal locks and am debating removing them. I think this is rather overblown but still has a degree of validity. Personally I have never had an issue with my revolvers locking up unexpectedly from this type of malfunction.
Two scenarios:

  1. I have a 329PD (.44 mag revolver) I carry for predator defense when hiking/backpacking (I live in CO so we’re talking black bear & cougar) and I think I would be alright in a justifiable defensive shooting against a bear if I had removed that internal lock.
  2. I carry a 340PD J-frame in my CCW rotation. I’d like to get feedback on any liability issues from removing the internal lock on this revolver which has a primary purpose of being a CCW.

Thank you all for the feedback.
John

4 Likes
2

I’m no lawyer, but logically, removing the lock should have no bearing on anything related to what you’re thinking of. The lock is really only a storage safety, and in no way makes your revolvers “dangerous” to the public at large, nor does it make you more likely to have a negligent discharge. The revolvers are always carried unlocked, anyway, so whether that little locking pawl is in there or not is meaningless to the intended functioning of the revolver.

Having said that, the concensus I’ve read on line, thinking about this with my own J frame with a lock, is an overzealous prosecutor could still bring it up in court against you, regardless of how meaningless it is to their case, just to paint a picture of you as someone who is so careless about safety that you chose to remove a safety device from your gun. We all know it’s total BS, but BS never stopped some people.

As for me, my personal opinion only, is I wouldn’t hesitate to remove it from my woods gun. It’s much more likely to be needed for 4 legged predators anyway, and would probably never become an issue. As for my carry gun, I suppose it depends on where you live and how self defense friendly the local DA’s are. Personly, I left it in my J frame, but I also have one without the lock that I do carry more often. It doesn’t keep me from carrying the lock one, though and I never really gave it another thought after reading and thinking about it for a few days when I got the gun. I know that I could easily show that removing the lock is not reckless, in that Smith makes, and I own, the same gun without a lock from the factory. However, I’d rather not have to make that argument in court if I’m already fighting for my freedom after, God forbid, I’m forced to defend myself.

Maybe subconsciously, because I have read of the rare failure, whether true or not, I did kind of get in the habit of carrying the no lock one a little more, but some of that reason is because my no lock one has rubber grips that I like better for pocket carry, where my lock one has wood.

Good luck in your decision and welcome to our group.

2 Likes
3

I can see a liberal prosecutor having a field day with that. “So you took the safety off of an already dangerous weapon? What kind of vigilante ARE you?”

4 Likes
4

Will removing this function possibly cause any other type of problems?
If you never use the locking system, does it work? And if you do not use it, does it matter?

4 Likes
5

Thanks folks.

Joseph,
I agree and am going to remove it on my backcountry .44 and think I wouldn’t have any issues defending from animal attack. I also agree that it is a “storage safety” and would be carried with it turned off anyway so I doubt a park ranger is going to care one way or another, especially if I have claw marks on my body!

Living in CO, very anti-2A, I can envision an over zealous prosecutor going after me in a CCW self-defense scenario. M Ayoob has an article recommending against removing any safety feature, although I still consider this a storage feature as we mentioned previously. Nonetheless, I’ve queried USCCA staff to get their input and will see what they say.
Appreciate the feedback.

4 Likes
6

Ron,
That’s what I’m afraid of being in CO…

3 Likes
7

Todd,
Doesn’t have any impact removing it but there are some rare occurrences of it malfunctioning and causing lock up of revolvers so now there are removal kits available and I’m considering them…

1 Like
8

trade in that revolver for a M&P m20 in 10mm for the backcountry defense. and forget about the crazy internal locks I am seriously considering it. I camp and visit remote high country whenever possible and really like its features and power with 15+1 of 10mm to problem solve

2 Likes
9

Leroy,
My buddy carries a Glock 10mm when elk hunting, very nice setup. I’ve just been partial to my Scandium .44 with Buffalo Bore ammo. Ive never had an issue with that revolver in 10yrs but ordered the removal/plug kit anyway.

2 Likes
10

good if you are familar and well practiced with it a friends has that Glock, I just do not care for its trigger. and blockinesss; spoiled by my 1911s i guess. cant afford a 10mm 1911 without saving up for several months at present. and the m20 is much more affordable , with greater capacity than most. feels great in hand too

2 Likes
11

Welcome to the family brother @John1620 and we are glad you are with us. I also say that the internal lock is more of a storage feature. I have the Smith & Wesson 637-2 and the 442 and they come with the internal lock which I never use. I have no idea why they are even needed.

4 Likes
12

@John1620 Welcome to the community!

2 Likes
13

I’m no lawyer but I imagine any attorney worth his or her salt would have a field day with that prosecutor

Again I’m no lawyer but I personally would not be worried about self defense use/liability because a storage function of the revolver, which most revolvers on the market do not have at all, was removed

3 Likes
14

Probably more rare than the lock supposedly malfunctioning is a case of someone having removed it, then used his revolver in a self defense situation. If such a case existed I’d be interested to see if the lock came up. I doubt such a single case even exists that’s documented to find.

I know Enzo mentioned his friend’s J frame where, out of the box, the lock was partially engaged, but I’m not sure I’d call that a lock failure. As he said, it never locked up on its own in real use.

My bigger concern with the lock, at least on my centennial where it doesn’t have the little pop up near the hammer, is that I might engage it during maintenance then forget to disengage it before carrying the gun. There’s no visual way to ensure it’s unlocked. For that reason, if I haven’t used the gun in a long time, I’ll dry fire a couple clicks to be 100% sure it’s ready to go. That’s probably a good idea on any carry gun coming out of the safe after storage, though.

2 Likes
15

With a semi competent defense lawyer I can’t see removing the lock being effectively used against someone in a self defense situation. But if a criminal got their hands on it and used it that might be an argument the prosecutor could use to try and place blame on the legal owner. Though I have never heard of anyone who actually engages those annoying little locks and, as you stated, the vast majority of revolvers don’t have them - so it should not be a legal factor. Plus the “keys” are universal and those kinds of locks are very easy to pick from what I hear though I have never tried.

I’m not a big fan of those locks. Seems like an extra expense added with little practical use. But I have never heard of anyone in a self defense situation who had the lock engage on its own while firing. I would never consider engaging the lock on my one revolver that has it because I am afraid that I might forget to disengage it before needing to use it. Or would have to waste a lot of precious time disengaging it before I could use it. But If the locks caused even occasional issues on their own we would be hearing more than the occasional internet rumor of incredibly rare cases of this happening. So I’m not worried about needing to remove it on my revolver.

4 Likes
16

Thanks Johnny.
Agree. I carry a 340 and have never used the lock.

2 Likes
17

Thanks Gents,
I think we’re all of the same mindset that a “storage lock” has no bearing on a self defense scenario with a responsible gun owner which we all demonstrate by the fact that we have CCW permits and have USCCA. A good defense attorney should be able to explain the IL is a storage safety just like a cable lock for a semi-auto and most revolvers don’t even have an IL. Further, one of the reasons I carry a J-frame is bc no one can accuse me of going out “looking for trouble” with a 5-shot .38 in this era of high-capacity 9mms.
Appreciate your thoughts.

3 Likes