Why I’m Selling My New Smith & Wesson 686 for an Old Smith & Wesson 686 by Robert Farago | Jan 07, 2011 | 13 comments facebook twitter linkedin email comments Zealot says: January 7, 2011 at 16:53 This could (should?) be cause for concern for anyone carrying a Ruger LCR as well. Different manufacturer, different mechanics, same concept – internal lock MIGHT = bad. There’s a reason I made that MIGHT so big… Reply DaveP. says: January 7, 2011 at 17:27 So do what I did: Have your gunsmith pull the silly thing out. It’s less than an hour’s work, admittedly will leave a little hole in the side of your gun (where the key used to go) but after that no more problems. Reply Robert Farago says: January 7, 2011 at 21:22 Uh-uh. If the Smith was ever used in a defensive shooting, Heaven forfend, the DA could use the fact that I disabled a safety device (designed to SAVE CHILDREN) against me, painting me as a murderous gunloon. Not guilty. Reply Ralph says: January 7, 2011 at 22:13 Storage, transportation and carry rules differ, and they differ from state to state as well. If a child or any innocent party ended up on the wrong end of a gun and injured themself or another, disabling the lock would likely be viewed as more evidence of careless misconduct by the owner. The primary evidence would be the fact that the someone who wasn’t authorized had access in the first place, whether the gun had a disabled lock or a working one. In a SD shooting, I don’t see how the disabled lock could be used against a shooter. If the SD shooting met all the legal criteria for the justified use of deadly force, it will meet the same criteria whether or not the lock is disabled. Reply DaveP. says: January 8, 2011 at 08:47 Nah. This isn’t a thumb safety or a mag drop safety; this is a trigger lock. You should pray that an overzealous DA brings up the issue… because then any decent defense attorney could make him look the fool he is in front of the judge and ‘twelve good men and true’. Reply Rabbi says: January 8, 2011 at 14:51 It is one more thing that a DA will use against you, one more thing to defend yourself against and one more thing that puts doubt in the mind of the Jury. I recommend NOT removing it, but buying a gun without. Rabbi says: January 8, 2011 at 14:52 Forgot–That’s assuming the gun is to be used for defense. It its for hunting, target or fun, remove it. Patrick Carrube says: January 7, 2011 at 17:50 How much you asking for it? Reply JOE MATAFOME says: January 7, 2011 at 20:04 I never liked those stupid locks, and I will now have them removed from my 3 S&W 500’s. I only use the snubbie for home defence, but I use the other 2 (8 3/8 and 10.5 inch barrels) for hunting. After seeing your video I realized just how SCREWED I’d be if some pissed off bear were charging me and that dumass lock were to jam. PS I forgot to mention that I would be pretty SCREWED if my home defence snubbie were to lock up. LMAO (it’s really not funny, but I just had to laugh about it.) Reply 2yellowdogs says: January 7, 2011 at 20:47 Couldn’t agree with you more. I think I might have the lock disabled/removed instead, but fixing and selling it is a completely rational decision…no matter what the odds are of it ever happening again. Reply TTACer says: January 7, 2011 at 21:58 Nice muzzle discipline in the vid. Reply Rabbi says: January 8, 2011 at 14:53 +1! Reply William C. Montgomery says: January 8, 2011 at 16:39 A veteran gunsmith once told me to never trust a Smith & Wesson. He thought Smiths were smooth and great to shoot, but that the innards were overly complex and fragile (especially their firing pins) compared to other top-tier competitors. In the twenty-two years since that conversation, I haven’t found many people who agree fully with him, but every time I see something like your gun jamming, his warning echos in my head. Really, a revolver jamming? Reply Write a Comment Cancel reply Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *Comment Name * Email * Website Notify me of follow-up comments by email. Notify me of new posts by email.