GREAT NEWS - SMITH & WESSON IS ALREADY IN INDIA !!!

[Jr.]

Nice one, timmy.
I too am optimist and agree with partheus.
In the very near future we will have direct access to international quality Firearms.
The Indian market is opening up and has the Governments support.
S&W, Colt, CZ etc. will be manufactured in India and available for civilian supply.

Regards,
Jr.

[timmy]

Partheus, I think that your recounting of events is a pretty fair assessment, as far as it goes.

Likewise, your points regarding S&W are sound, as well.

I would point out a few other aspects of this business, however:

Firstly, we're not just dealing with S&W, there's a parallel thread dealing with Armscor, and it is on that matter that unsupported attacks were made and, I feel, successfully refuted. Unfair personal attacks were made, as well.

Secondly, a "cooling off" period ensued, and after this had passed, some questions were raised about licensing.

Thirdly, the response to these new questions was the assumption of a new IFG account that did not reflect the true identity of the poster and was used to deal with these new sets of questions.

Unlike the unfounded assertions regarding manufacturing methods and unlike the personal attacks, this new round of questions presented a reasonable request for information that could be based on facts and data.

Your questions about what S&W would do are fair and can be reasonably considered, although I'm not sure we'll actually have an account of what took place at various meetings.

Your points about delays are also valid, as we know such things happen -- although we are also aware that this has also been experienced here before regarding entries into the market, and I would note that none of the previous announcements have involved moving up dates, or other aspects that would be considered positive for members here looking to make a purchase of a firearm. You can see for yourself that this latest affair is viewed by some as "more of the same."

So, back to your original point, which generally asked (if I may term it this way), what will happen? My point in posting the reversed S&W picture is that I'm sure the most recent events in this saga did not have an overwhelmingly positive response toward something that had previously elicited a lot of interest here. The most recent mistake that was made perhaps involved more than just a breaking of board rules to at least a few. Just what "more" means in this case, we shall see. The nature of what's happened may have broader ramifications that we personally don't know at this point.

[partheus]

Ah, no. Your pistol pic was hilariously on point I didn't mean to imply it was off or anything. My apologies if I indicated so.

I guess all this circles back to the notion we really shouldn't believe anything online. I would like to point out however that the outrage against the manufacturers seems a tad unfair. All the hype we've seen has been the result of wannabe gun influencers and enthusiasts with their "<Insert big brand name> is coming to India!" posts/videos and not the manufacturers themselves.

Save for Glock and Webley, not one company has actually released a press statement with a confirmed date. While Glock did it via proxy (i.e. CMTPL) Webley did so under its own brand name and has in fact delivered, even if they're still finding their footing. The rest (IMI, CZ, Colt, Taurus etc) have mere pics on a website and the ocassional media mention of a collaboration which were picked on by individuals and blasted across the net.

In this sense, the move from Werywin was novel and a first even if all their claims aren't from the horse's mouth, which is why I was a little confounded by the "here we go again" posts. I also find it rather funny how this forum's gone from cribbing about not having any options, to cribbing about the sort of options we now have in a very short span of time

[timmy]

Partheus:

Please don't worry about your comments re: the pic I posted. i recognized that it would cause a range of responses. While humorous in itself, my purpose in posting it wasn't intended as humor. It was intended to observe that someone had made an error, and that this error had a potential for a negative impact on their purposes. Putting it bluntly, in other words: "You messed up!"

All the hype we've seen has been the result of wannabe gun influencers and enthusiasts with their "<Insert big brand name> is coming to India!" posts/videos and not the manufacturers themselves.

Indeed. I've thought of going back and making a post of all those posts knowing about and guaranteeing the appearance of one product or another on the market. Examining the dates of these posts would be a cause for hilarity by now!

In this sense, the move from Werywin was novel and a first even if all their claims aren't from the horse's mouth, which is why I was a little confounded by the "here we go again" posts.

I agree here, though perhaps not in the way you've intended: This was the first time we got someone coming on IFG who spoke from the "horse's mouth," as was noted in some responses to the announcements made. So yes, this situation was different -- different from people bloviating and amplifying their wishes, and not their knowledge.

The announcements, for the reason you pointed out, generated a great deal of good-will and acceptance, as can be seen by the responses here. That is why it is both puzzling and, frankly, offensive that this good will, so hard to obtain today (note your comment, "here we go again"), would be disregarded so casually with such an ill-considered action.

So, to sum up, you've said,

I also find it rather funny how this forum's gone from cribbing about not having any options, to cribbing about the sort of options we now have in a very short span of time

and indeed, there's a contrast to note here. I chalk this up to the fact that many perceive that there's been a breach of trust. Most of us recognized that the promises made before were nothing more than "blowhard" talk. But this time, there was trust extended (including by myself) and when one's trust is abused, people don't like that. Why should one be rewarded after spitting in your face, in other words?

This is why, I think, there are negative reactions, despite the promise of guns on the horizon. If one disregards the lack of straightforwardness, then yes, the cribbing is perhaps unwarranted. But, if one feels that an attempt has been made to take advantage when trust and acceptance is extended, then it doesn't seem so much like "cribbing" to me. After all, when one considers that there are going to be warranty issues and other such matters that arise in the marketing and selling of products, there is always a reliance upon trust and straightforwardness, and if there's reason to question this, is there not a reason to reflect upon how a vendor-customer relationship would work in such circumstances?

[vicky1730]

Finally some sensible conversation between decent people instead of the troll witch hunt like attitude we saw recently.

[partheus]

It was intended to observe that someone had made an error, and that this error had a potential for a negative impact on their purposes. Putting it bluntly, in other words: "You messed up!"

Indeed they messed up big time! My thoughts here reflect what I felt about S&W in India alone and the aggressive attitude displayed, and nothing more. In retrospect, I guess it may portray that I feel the op wasn't somehow completely at fault and that the real issue is something else. This is simply not the case and provided it was indeed a duplicate account issue, then I condemn the actions just as strongly.

It did occur to me that the hostile attitude forced the op into creating a duplicate account to deal with the criticism. However, it could just as easily have been a pre-meditated move to build some buzz for the brand as well. Both actions are wrong if this is what happened, then indeed they messed up and betrayed the trust of the people here.

What does interest me though is how the issue of duplicate accounts was established. To the best of my knowledge, this can only be done via monitoring computer details (IP, browser, MAC ids etc) being recorded by the IFG server. So for all we know, there were in fact two people who were using the same computer on the same premise to post on here.

For example, if a family member were to open an account on here thru my computer and start posting without revealing their relationship with me, I guess it would appear as though I am acting via duplicate accounts as well. How this issue was resolved hasn't been revealed yet. Actively posting via 2 or more accounts isn't the same crime as not revealing one's relationship and not being aware of the rules.

Admittedly, the nature of the second account's posts indicates against this since they won't ask for price details, or questions about the products if they were both related. Even so, personally, I will like to hold off any judgment or opinion on the matter until we've heard back from the op, or until more proof is made available.

[vicky1730]

Good point. What I am worried about is whether our posts are being so strongly monitored and tracked as to establish our IP address locations etc. in that case it is a serious privacy violation.

[timmy]

Many years ago (but it still doesn't seem that long ago to me!), I worked for a company that presented the practice of "RUMBA" as a means of management decision making. Every action and decision should RUMBA by being:

R - Reasonable
U - Understandable
M - Measurable
B - Believable
A - Achievable

I would ask that we would all keep this guidance in mind as we ponder the thoughts in your post, Partheus.

In retrospect, I guess it may portray that I feel the op wasn't somehow completely at fault and that the real issue is something else. This is simply not the case and provided it was indeed a duplicate account issue, then I condemn the actions just as strongly.

Here, the reason was given for the action taken against Mohshar. (He really wasn't the op, so I have no other recourse than to use his name to identify him.)

So, you raise the question of whether the reason for temporarily banning him was the one that was stated. What went on in the decision making process leading to this action wasn't presented, and even if it was, one still would have the choice of whether to believe the reason given or not.

When this point is considered, it will be noticed that, in the end, one would have to know the thoughts and motives of those making the decision to take the action, and knowing the thoughts and motives of others is something that simply does not and cannot RUMBA -- we cannot know the hearts and minds of others.

We can, however, get a sense of whether RKBA in India is the primary consideration of those who administer this board by what goes on in these forums.

It did occur to me that the hostile attitude forced the op into creating a duplicate account to deal with the criticism.

I do not see how this statement can possibly RUMBA. To say that Mohshar was "forced" implies that he had no other recourse. Such an idea ignores the fact that other things in the management of the situation may have been going on without being made public. It also ignores that other avenues of action were available to Mohshar. Here, I'm reminded of the words of the stoic philosopher and Roman Emperor Marcus Aurelius, who advised:

You always own the option of having no opinion. There is never any need to get worked up or to trouble your soul about things you can’t control. These things are not asking to be judged by you. Leave them alone.

I have left a number of public forums in the over 20 years I've participated in online social media without giving a reason -- other options were available to Mohshar, and such an option was but one of them.

In no way can the use of the word "forced" enter into the conversation. Mohshar chose a course of action of his own free will and bore the consequences of that action. "Forced," as used here, is much more of a rationalization than it is a reason, because we are all responsible for what we do here on IFG.

What does interest me though is how the issue of duplicate accounts was established. To the best of my knowledge, this can only be done via monitoring computer details (IP, browser, MAC ids etc) being recorded by the IFG server. So for all we know, there were in fact two people who were using the same computer on the same premise to post on here.

For example, if a family member were to open an account on here thru my computer and start posting without revealing their relationship with me, I guess it would appear as though I am acting via duplicate accounts as well. How this issue was resolved hasn't been revealed yet. Actively posting via 2 or more accounts isn't the same crime as not revealing one's relationship and not being aware of the rules.

Admittedly, the nature of the second account's posts indicates against this since they won't ask for price details, or questions about the products if they were both related. Even so, personally, I will like to hold off any judgment or opinion on the matter until we've heard back from the op, or until more proof is made available.

This is a notion that seems reasonable on the face of it, but does not begin to stand up to RUMBA at all.

What nation describes its methods of decision making and intelligence gathering to this level of detail?

What police department or security service would do so?

Do the credit card companies describe in detail how they assure the security of each card member's assets?

Indeed, would Mohshar or any other company describe their decision making and information gathering measures such as you propose, for all to see?

There is simply no way a web presence like IFG could exist, if managed to cater to such curiousities. IFG, after all, serves a nation of over one billion people, has a very large membership, and deals with all kinds of people, some with motives that differ from those expressed in IFG's stated purpose for being, on a day-to-day basis.

To manage this effort in a positive and constructive way, a way that not only RUMBAs in its planning, but which also works in practice, rules are set down that are transparently available to all, whether they participate or just read the forums. These rules are enforced as rules, not suggestions, and are enforced in a fair way that ensures that everyone, from "big" to "small" has equal access to participation and consideration as much as this is reasonably possible to administer.

What is "reasonable" is that everyone reads the rules (which doesn't happen) and everyone abides by them (which, to a lesser extent, thank goodness, also doesn't happen). This is where the unpleasant task of enforcement enters the picture, but without it, the vast majority of our members would be unable to use the boards for their purpose.

I would point out that musings, ponderings, and engaging in hypothetical discussions are all well and good for an after supper discussion, but don't provide a sound basis for running these boards. They have, in fact, been tried and found wanting at various times, which is why rules exist, as they do in every human endeavor. It seems contradictory, but in every aspect of human activity, rules have proven to be necessary for folks to enjoy any measure of liberty.

[Anand]

Hi Mohit,
Long been a fan of S&W revolvers especially the K and N frames. I already own a Pre-Model 27 in .357 Magnum, and was wondering if you are going to be manufacturing/importing .357 Magnum ammo as the present cost is through the roof.
Thanks,
Anand