What it's doing there is serving no practical purpose except as a thing they can point to and say,
"See, it's safer! Now we don't have to install owner-recognition chips that'll make individual revolvers cost $3000.00 and put us out of business, right Congress?" It's stupid, but it's a safety feature, and once it's on there, heaven help the gun company that tries to remove it. Hence, magazine safety on Browning HP, striker safety on Colt 1911 series 80. If we hold public-appeasal design changes against manufacturers, I rapidly run out of guns that I'm interested in.
Remember, the "American" owners are having to deal with "American" anti-gunners who don't give a damn about our "American" second ammendment. Wow, "quotations" are fun!
I must agree on the stainless, however. I always like to know that my guns need me (or my Rem-Oil at least) as much as I need them. Mutual fulfillment breeds love and respect.
No offense to you either, Rusty, we just have to be careful that we don't do the anti-gunners' work for them. I'd hate to prove my right to own guns only to find out I can't get them anymore.
Edited to add:
I have about 20 Smiths laying around. Know how many were made after 1980? It's a number that rhymes with the Roman Emperor, Nero. That's not political, it's because the older ones were made better, and (as you mentioned) blue! That said, they can only improve if they continue to exist.
The old owners were punks, but remember what Sun Tzu said: If a worthless, wife-beating, dog-kicking crook uses his corvette in a bank robbery, put him in jail, but don't turn your nose up at his vette that you can pick up for $15,000.00 at a police auction! Okay, Sun Tzu didn't say it word for word, you have to read between the lines.
)
)
