View Single Post
Old February 20, 2013, 05:25 PM   #72
Senior Member
Join Date: October 3, 2012
Location: Arizona
Posts: 939
What I am confused about is why people are taking the side of a producer?
Because evidence points to the ammo not being factory. Because I'm an honest person and the evidence is pretty clear, the producer (of the gun) IS NOT AT FAULT.

The OP didn't come in with an attitude.
I haven't seen any attitude from anyone here in this thread yet. People are discussing something on an online forum. Not sure why this is pertinent.

Assuming the bullets are factory,
Evidence shows they most likely are it's a poor assumption.

consumers should back other consumers-producers only get away with bad products when they aren't called on it.
I'll back other consumers when they are in the right. In this case, the consumer is not. If everyone made a false claim, then it costs the company money. Do you think the company is going to just eat that cost? No, they're going to pass it on to us. False claims increase the costs for EVERYONE. I fully agree that a producer should make it right when it's their fault. But I also believe as consumers, we need to take responsibility for our actions. In this case, the consumer loaded bad ammo in his gun. It's his fault. S&W is giving the consumer an incredible deal, when they have no obligation to.

Why are other consumers immediately jumping to the producers side?
And why are you immediately jumping to the consumers side? Loading bad ammo into a gun isn't the fault of anyone except the consumer.

The producers test is evidence? ha. Right.
Yes, because the producer in this case has a reputation to uphold. S&W will make something right if it's their fault. Their lab processess need to be able to hold up in court. If they lie about something, and the consumer sues them, uh oh, it's going to cost them 100s of times what it would have cost them to replace the thing in the first place. This is the first instance of a Shield kaboom I've heard of. S&W makes quality products. Can bad products slip through the cracks? Of course. But in this instance the evidence is showing the gun manufacturer is not at fault...yet you're backing up the consumer who is at fault? Hmm.

How many times have I had to push a dealership to fix a car under warranty that they first balk at? Many. Please.
What's the relavance? We're talking about guns here. There's no car manufacturer out there with a good reputation when it comes to warranties. S&W on the other hand, has a very good reputation and will make right their issues.

I side with the side that is right. The consumer in this case did something he shouldn't have. S&W shouldn't replace a gun I throw in a fire, right? Then why should they replace a gun that has been loaded with questionable ammo?
Gaerek is offline  
Page generated in 0.05000 seconds with 7 queries