Appleseed Bans S&W M&P15-22s

[bofh]

Since this is supposed to be a gun forum, I thought I would post an informative gun post for once.

This made the news on gun blogs two days ago and is important to those owning a S&W M&P15-22. As reported by TTAG | Appleseed Bans S&W M&P15-22s, there seems to be a serious safety issue with the gun, including out-of-battery discharges and runaways. I have a S&W M&P15-22 and probably around 5,000 rounds through it with no such symptoms. S&W has not issued a safety alert or recall yet.

Now, back to your regularly scheduled program in the Politics and News subforum.

 

[Eidolon]

Any anecdotal data?

 

[bofh]

Any anecdotal data?

Follow the posted link. It has details on the reported issues, including anecdotal data. That's why this drastic move to ban the S&W M&P15-22 from Project Appleseed.

 

[Eidolon]

Since this is supposed to be a gun forum, I thought I would post an informative gun post for once

This isn't a gun forum. This is revenue generator for the forum owner, who threw the word "carry" into the title because it generates hits which equals advertising dollars.

 

[bofh]

This isn't a gun forum. This is revenue generator for the forum owner, who threw the word "carry" into the title because it generates hits which equals advertising dollars.

I know. Most forums are revenue generators. They have to, to offset hosting costs. Making money beyond that is an additional benefit.

My comment was just pointing out the imbalance between posts in the Politics and News subforum and actual firearms-related posts. Certain forum members have either never posted a firearms-related thread or have done so more than a year ago, yet they post new threads in the Politics and News subforum daily.

Only 6 of the 30 currently listed Latest Forum Threads are firearms-related. That 20% is actually a high number. Meanwhile, a lot, and I really mean a lot, of firearms-related news and information never gets posted here, because the dominating forum members and the forum owners don't care (i.e., have their own agenda) and simply don't know (i.e., are completely clueless about the topic of this forum).

 

[BluesStringer]

I know. Most forums are revenue generators. They have to, to offset hosting costs. Making money beyond that is an additional benefit.

My comment was just pointing out the imbalance between posts in the Politics and News subforum and actual firearms-related posts. Certain forum members have either never posted a firearms-related thread or have done so more than a year ago, yet they post new threads in the Politics and News subforum daily.

Only 6 of the 30 currently listed Latest Forum Threads are firearms-related. That 20% is actually a high number. Meanwhile, a lot, and I really mean a lot, of firearms-related news and information never gets posted here, because the dominating forum members and the forum owners don't care (i.e., have their own agenda) and simply don't know (i.e., are completely clueless about the topic of this forum).

I can't recall the exact name of the sub-forum, but there used to be one called something like, "2nd Amendment and Gun Politics." It got deleted when the "Politics" forum did, but didn't get reinstated when the "Politics and News" forum did. Being a court-watcher, or maybe I should say, "having been" an avid court-watcher, I used to both start threads relating to 2A politics/court cases, and participate heavily in them. Since the deletions though, the only place left that made any sense was the General Firearms forum, so though less often, that's where I put 2A legal-based stories. When P&N was reinstated, I figured it was for other-than-2A-politics and news, so I continued to put 2A stuff in the General Firearms forum. Well, they started getting moved to P&N, and of course, started getting off-topic replies because nobody interested in 2A issues frequents that sub-forum anymore. Not that they ever did before the deletions, but at least before there was a specific sub-forum where such threads could/should go.

I got criticized for using the words "permission slip" by a newb not long ago. To me, the fact that rights are as unimportant to the "dominating forum members" as technical and/or training discussions that are solely "firearms related" are is a testament to how both subjects have been discouraged with how the forum has been modified and moderated over the last several months. Yeah, the Politics forum was always the busiest even back in the day, but lots of decent 2A legal discussions used to take place here too, which I personally view as absolutely necessary to the good "health" of a firearms related forum.

Blues

 

[Danwin22]

Pretty sure you are talking about me because I did take exception to you calling my Florida Concealed Weapon or Firearm License a "Permission Slip"

Now you call me a NEWB.

True, I only joined this forum a couple of weeks ago but at 77 years of age and having purchased my first weapon at the age of 13 in 1952 I'd hardly think of myself as a "NEWB." I have been active on at least 15 other gun forums for many years

I don't hang around places that are robbery targets so I never had a reason to carry until now when crime seems to be on the rise in the Orlando area. Having guns for home defense has always been important and I'm good there.

The main reason for wanting a CCW was to be ready for "Open Carry" if they make it the law. It also eliminates the three-day waiting period when I purchase handguns.

I take care of my grand-daughter's jumping horses and we have Black Bears, Coyotes and Rattlesnakes in this area and although I can open carry on the property it might be hard to explain to a cop why I'm wearing a gun when I leave the property to go to my house and forget to take off the gunbelt.

It is not my intent to run up massive numbers of posts here, only to gain useful information on CCW and reply when I think I may have something of value to add.

 

[BluesStringer]

I offer my sincere apology to bofh for my impertinence in participating in a side-issue that arose from his OP. I did not mean to ignore the news about the Appleseed ban of the M&P 15-22. I should've limited my comments to only that subject so as not to attract or instigate schoolyard arguments that have zero to do with the topic.

My best friend has a 15/22 and shoots the heck out of it. He's had it for somewhere around 3 - 5 years I'd guestimate. I've shot several hundred rounds through it myself and never had any kind of malfunction. I have no idea how many rounds he's fired through it, but I'd be real surprised if it was less than 10,000 - 12,000 at this point. He has a bunch of AR platform weapons, so he'll run the 15/22 to practice a course a few times before he shoots a 5.56 or 7.62 version for scoring. He's also got a pretty decent home-range that he shoots the 15/22 a lot on because it's so much cheaper to shoot. He has never warned me that he had any kind of malfunction with it before he handed me the rifle to fart around with, as he has with other weapons that have malfunctioned for him in whatever ways before.

The above represents some first and second-hand anecdotal commentary, just as the 6 instances that the AOC listed in their warnings. I remember some years ago when a disgruntled Remington engineer or machinist or whatever, went to CBS (I think) and told them that the 700 model was prone to spontaneous discharge. A "news" special was done on it, which I've watched a couple of times, and it sure looked like they were able to reproduce the spontaneous discharge for the cameras several times. At that time I'd had my Model 700 BDL 270 Win. for over 25 years, and though it wasn't a piece I used much for recreational shooting, I did sight it in and hunt with it for most seasons during that time. Never had problem 1 with it. If I were going to buy a bolt-action rifle off the rack these days, it would be one of the tactical models of the 700 that are available. I think I heard after that news special that it was manipulated in some way. Don't recall exactly what I heard, but my 700 is still in the safe and I wouldn't hesitate to count on it for one last hunt if that ever happens. I'm pretty sure my partner would say the same about his 15/22. In fact, it wouldn't surprise me if I tried to call him right now if I got his voicemail because he's outside shooting with it! That's happened several times before, though not only with the 15/22, but it has happened with that rifle too.

I think Appleseed might've jumped the gun, or the shark, whatever. What do you think about the story, bofh?

Blues

 

[bofh]

Apology accepted. leasantry:

There is a recall out for the trigger on all Reminton 700 models:

DESCRIPTION OF THE HAZARD: Remington has determined that some Model 700 and Model Seven rifles with XMP triggers could, under certain circumstances, unintentionally discharge. A Remington investigation has determined that some XMP triggers might have excess bonding agent used in the assembly process. While Remington has the utmost confidence in the design of the XMP trigger, it is undertaking this recall in the interest of consumer safety to remove any potential excess bonding agent applied in the assembly process.

I really have no opinion on Appleseed jumping the gun, or the shark, here. My S&W M&P15-22 has been fine. What is possible is that there is/was some quality control issue or design change (to produce the gun cheaper) that resulted in this issue on some rifles. I think that S&W will, at some point, issue a recall.

I use my S&W M&P15-22 mostly for plinking and getting new shooters used to the AR platform. Although my DD M4 V11 LW with its LANTAC Dragon muzzle brake has close to zero recoil and weighs only about 7 pounds, it is still easier for new shooters to operate the 15-22 with its 5 pounds and low noise.

 

[BluesStringer]

Apology accepted. leasantry:

There is a recall out for the trigger on all Reminton 700 models:

From the link:

PRODUCTS: Remington Arms Company, LLC (“Remington”) is voluntarily recalling Remington Model 700™ and Model Seven™ rifles with X-Mark Pro® (“XMP®”) triggers, manufactured from May 1, 2006 to April 9, 2014.

Mine was manufactured at least 18 to 20 years before that. The link also gives a pictured reference for how to identify the XMP triggers, and mine is the type that says if you have the ribbed trigger, it's not the XMP.

Thanks for the info though.

Blues

 

[bofh]

I am pretty sure that the S&W M&P15-22 issue is also related to a limited number of production years. Otherwise, we would have heard about the mentioned issues years ago. The rifle was introduced in 2009. Any inherent design issues should have been found and fixed by now. I am pretty sure the newly found issues are due to some changes in the production, as it was with the Reminton 700.

 

[BluesStringer]

I am pretty sure that the S&W M&P15-22 issue is also related to a limited number of production years. Otherwise, we would have heard about the mentioned issues years ago. The rifle was introduced in 2009. Any inherent design issues should have been found and fixed by now. I am pretty sure the newly found issues are due to some changes in the production, as it was with the Reminton 700.

That's what I was thinking and why I mentioned that the 15/22 that I had personal experience with was an estimated 3 - 5 years old. That certainly could make a huge difference.

Unfortunately, when media get a hold of safety issues surrounding a specific model of weapon, they color their "reporting" as being all-inclusive of that model. I could be mistaken, but as I recall, the story that I think I heard on a CBS channel about the 700 got the original engineer out of retirement to go on camera and say his own design was flawed, or maybe it was the reporting that promulgated that premise, I don't know for sure, but either way, the recall doesn't even start until sometime in 2006 production runs. I could be confusing two different reports, but I don't think so. Anyway, even at TTAG they didn't qualify the reporting with the possibility that it might be a late model issue only, and the AOC didn't seem to allow for that possibility either.

I have no problem with AOC suspending the weapon from their own events, but I think their announcement publicizing and reporting the issues they're relying on as evidence was weakly-sourced for the reader in the first place, and kinda reckless in its wording to the point that it could harm S&W's reputation. I guess they might feel like they're between a rock and a hard place, but I still think they jumped the gun a bit. Seems there should've been a way to keep it on the down-low unless and until S&W was seen as road-blocking the research into why the instances happened in the first place. Maybe they did wait until that happened and nobody but AOC knows (or reported) that they feel that way, but from the outside looking in, the announcement seemed thin on real evidence and long on unsubstantiated conclusions about design flaws etc., which seems to me to be a recipe for an expensive lawsuit that I doubt AOC has disposable dollars to defend. Guess we'll see....

Blues