City of Chicago suing Glock
- Thread starter 44 AMP
- Start date
Agreed.
I would point out that NO other gun maker took the Clinton "deal" and that it wasn't exactly S&W who took the deal, it was Thomkins LTD, the British holding company that owned S&W at the time who took the deal and made S&W go along with it.
Not sure exactly what Herr Glock might have said, but I suspect something beginning with "F" and ending with the word "auf!" might have been in his response.
The Genie
The genie has been out of the bottle for years now. A simple waste of the taxpayers dollars going after Glock.
Metal 3d printers are becoming attainable, tho I can't see them ever being really inexpensive they will continue to decrease in cost.
The parts or the entire machine gun can be created easily from raw materials in the comfort of your home.
Now tell me again why Chicago is suing Glock? Manufacturer's?? We don't need no stinkin manufacturer's. I'm of course speaking of the collective we, not TFL and TFL members specifically.
The genie has been out of the bottle for years now. A simple waste of the taxpayers dollars going after Glock.
Metal 3d printers are becoming attainable, tho I can't see them ever being really inexpensive they will continue to decrease in cost.
The parts or the entire machine gun can be created easily from raw materials in the comfort of your home.
Now tell me again why Chicago is suing Glock? Manufacturer's?? We don't need no stinkin manufacturer's. I'm of course speaking of the collective we, not TFL and TFL members specifically.
March 21st Chicago cops fired 96 rounds in 41 seconds, killing a 26 year old driver of an SUV who (officers said) was initially stopped for not wearing a seatbelt.
Details, at this point are, of course, sketchy. but body cam footage has been released.
Five (5) undercover cops in an unmarked car stopped a young black male driving a white SUV in a residential neighborhood. The report says police said he fired first. (who actually did is unconfirmed at this time).
What is, apparently confirmed is that the cops fired 96 rounds in 41 seconds. DO THE MATH...
Don't know why Chicago is so worried about "machineguns" on their streets, when they have cops like that....
Details, at this point are, of course, sketchy. but body cam footage has been released.
Five (5) undercover cops in an unmarked car stopped a young black male driving a white SUV in a residential neighborhood. The report says police said he fired first. (who actually did is unconfirmed at this time).
What is, apparently confirmed is that the cops fired 96 rounds in 41 seconds. DO THE MATH...
Don't know why Chicago is so worried about "machineguns" on their streets, when they have cops like that....
too much data and no clarity
The news stories https://chicago.suntimes.com/police-reform/2024/04/09/dexter-reed-fired-first-chicago-police-officers-100-shots-copa and https://cwbchicago.com/2024/04/city-releases-videos-of-chicago-police-shootout-with-dexter-reed.html on this event contain enough information to make it quite clear that neither side is blameless.
Apparently his car had dark tinted windows so the seatbelt story does not hold water, he was parked in a crosswalk (so of course he needed to be shot multiple times), he reportedly fired first (11 rounds) in response to plainclothes officers aggressively approaching his vehicle with guns drawn, shouting profanity-laced orders to roll down the window; and when he exited the vehicle he left his gun on the passenger seat.
In the Sun-Times story is says
so one officer was responsible for roughly half of the 96 rounds. Makes the others seem restrained.
You mentioned it was a residential neighborhood - but it is also a dangerous neighborhood - see https://crimegrade.org/safest-places-in-humboldt-park-chicago-il/ - so no surprise that the cops were on edge, expecting trouble, assumed the worst, and acted out their fears. Not excusing their behavior, just pointing out no choirboys in this story.
Maybe the real reason for the lawsuit against Glock is to force Glock to provide full-auto model 18s to CPD so the cops don't have to get carpel tunnel syndrome practicing mag dumps. Beats me. Glad I'm here, not there, and chagrined I took the bait.
The news stories https://chicago.suntimes.com/police-reform/2024/04/09/dexter-reed-fired-first-chicago-police-officers-100-shots-copa and https://cwbchicago.com/2024/04/city-releases-videos-of-chicago-police-shootout-with-dexter-reed.html on this event contain enough information to make it quite clear that neither side is blameless.
Apparently his car had dark tinted windows so the seatbelt story does not hold water, he was parked in a crosswalk (so of course he needed to be shot multiple times), he reportedly fired first (11 rounds) in response to plainclothes officers aggressively approaching his vehicle with guns drawn, shouting profanity-laced orders to roll down the window; and when he exited the vehicle he left his gun on the passenger seat.
In the Sun-Times story is says
so one officer was responsible for roughly half of the 96 rounds. Makes the others seem restrained.
You mentioned it was a residential neighborhood - but it is also a dangerous neighborhood - see https://crimegrade.org/safest-places-in-humboldt-park-chicago-il/ - so no surprise that the cops were on edge, expecting trouble, assumed the worst, and acted out their fears. Not excusing their behavior, just pointing out no choirboys in this story.
Maybe the real reason for the lawsuit against Glock is to force Glock to provide full-auto model 18s to CPD so the cops don't have to get carpel tunnel syndrome practicing mag dumps. Beats me. Glad I'm here, not there, and chagrined I took the bait.
First question, what the heck are undercover cops doing a "traffic stop" for??
But more to the point, while I don't live in a "dangerous neighborhood" if five people NOT IN UNIFORM and not in a marked police car approached my car, with drawn guns and yelling obscenities, I would think it was a carjacking (at the least) and they are NOT COPS.
Don't think I would engage in a shootout with such an adverse correlation of forces, I think I'd go pedal to the metal for the nearest actual police station, calling 911 on the way in....hoping to survive to get there...
Seems to me that if that were the reason, it would be cheaper and faster for Chicago to use some of their undercover cops to buy the Chinese made Glock switches from the thugs selling them.
OF course, that wouldn't make the news supporting gun control and earning points for the politicians...rather the opposite I think...
44 AMP, first I have to apologize for making light of this young man's demise. A wise person once told me that "if you can laugh, you can survive" - but I think he meant something quite different; like trying to find humor in irony - not joking about someone else's ill fortune. The image of Dexter Reed lying dead on the ground really got to me... just sayin'.
Your point about "five people NOT IN Uniform...guns drawn...carjacking" is well taken, but whereas you or I might speed off to the police station for 'help' I think Dexter's mindset was that the police are not on his side, and he needs to rely on himself and his own marksmanship skills / magazine depth. And.. were I able to "put the pedal to the metal" and drive away, I might just keep going as fast and far as I could, rather than seek out the police.
Your question about why undercover cops were doing a 'traffic stop' goes to the heart of the matter. The seatbelt is a red herring, the traffic stop is an excuse, and if someone came up with evidence that this was a targeted 'hit' I would be the last to cast doubt on their claim - as long as the evidence was halfway credible. It may be that the police believed he was dealing drugs or guns from the car parked in the crosswalk and wanted to 'take him down' for legitimate law-enforcement reasons. It is also possible that Dexter knew something detrimental - e.g. the name of one of their informers, or particulars of some graft/scheme that would hurt if it became public, and he needed to be silenced. We just don't know... but 'traffic stop' is just too weak and transparent.
And my wisecrack about carpel tunnel was just that, a stupid wisecrack.
The County is suing for their own reasons, unknowable to us at this time, but likely to at least include posturing and appearing to be 'doing something' about the chaos. And if the suit wins a settlement from Glock, all the better; "money talks".
Interesting Chicago statistics: https://heyjackass.com/
Your point about "five people NOT IN Uniform...guns drawn...carjacking" is well taken, but whereas you or I might speed off to the police station for 'help' I think Dexter's mindset was that the police are not on his side, and he needs to rely on himself and his own marksmanship skills / magazine depth. And.. were I able to "put the pedal to the metal" and drive away, I might just keep going as fast and far as I could, rather than seek out the police.
Your question about why undercover cops were doing a 'traffic stop' goes to the heart of the matter. The seatbelt is a red herring, the traffic stop is an excuse, and if someone came up with evidence that this was a targeted 'hit' I would be the last to cast doubt on their claim - as long as the evidence was halfway credible. It may be that the police believed he was dealing drugs or guns from the car parked in the crosswalk and wanted to 'take him down' for legitimate law-enforcement reasons. It is also possible that Dexter knew something detrimental - e.g. the name of one of their informers, or particulars of some graft/scheme that would hurt if it became public, and he needed to be silenced. We just don't know... but 'traffic stop' is just too weak and transparent.
And my wisecrack about carpel tunnel was just that, a stupid wisecrack.
The County is suing for their own reasons, unknowable to us at this time, but likely to at least include posturing and appearing to be 'doing something' about the chaos. And if the suit wins a settlement from Glock, all the better; "money talks".
Interesting Chicago statistics: https://heyjackass.com/
Closing the Loop...
Chicagoans will cringe at the word "loop".
Forgive me for the diversion with so many other more momentous matters currently in the News. But I did not want to let the withdrawal of Chicago's lawsuit against Glock to pass unnoticed.
Headline at https://cwbchicago.com/2024/07/chicago-quietly-drops-hyped-up-lawsuit-against-glock-firearms-company.html
Chicago quietly drops hyped-up lawsuit against Glock firearms company
The story is interesting but a couple of things stand out. One is that
Anyway it is not clear whether Glock bought them off (unlikely I think) or Glock refused to play the game and Chicago saw no percentage in losing in court.
Now back to your regularly scheduled "latest".
Chicagoans will cringe at the word "loop".
Forgive me for the diversion with so many other more momentous matters currently in the News. But I did not want to let the withdrawal of Chicago's lawsuit against Glock to pass unnoticed.
Headline at https://cwbchicago.com/2024/07/chicago-quietly-drops-hyped-up-lawsuit-against-glock-firearms-company.html
Chicago quietly drops hyped-up lawsuit against Glock firearms company
The story is interesting but a couple of things stand out. One is that
Anyway it is not clear whether Glock bought them off (unlikely I think) or Glock refused to play the game and Chicago saw no percentage in losing in court.
Now back to your regularly scheduled "latest".
Chicago reinstates and EXPANDS lawsuit against Glock
After 'quietly dropping' the lawsuit against Glock, Chicago is apparently doubling down by filing it again with 'new and improved' misinformation. (That's my editorializing there.)
You can read about it here:
https://cwbchicago.com/2024/07/chicago-sues-glock-again-and-adds-gun-stores-as-defendants.html
https://www.fox32chicago.com/news/chicago-drops-historic-lawsuit-against-glock
Or watch a 'news blip' of 28 seconds that is so shot through (pun intended) with misinformation ('what those in the Royal Navy call "lies"--thank you 44 AMP) that the ignorance of the piece, in my case, was literally jaw dropping.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m4MMZyMYhe8&t=28s
After 'quietly dropping' the lawsuit against Glock, Chicago is apparently doubling down by filing it again with 'new and improved' misinformation. (That's my editorializing there.)
You can read about it here:
https://cwbchicago.com/2024/07/chicago-sues-glock-again-and-adds-gun-stores-as-defendants.html
https://www.fox32chicago.com/news/chicago-drops-historic-lawsuit-against-glock
Or watch a 'news blip' of 28 seconds that is so shot through (pun intended) with misinformation ('what those in the Royal Navy call "lies"--thank you 44 AMP) that the ignorance of the piece, in my case, was literally jaw dropping.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m4MMZyMYhe8&t=28s
> A Glock switch or Glock auto-sear (sometimes called a button or a giggle switch)
> is a small device that can be attached to the rear of the slide of a Glock handgun,
> converting the semi-automatic pistol into a selective fire machine pistol capable of
> fully automatic fire.
>
> In 2019, the ATF recovered thousands of the ["Glock Switch"]devices which were
> imported from China. In 2021 and 2022, people have been manufacturing the
> switch devices with 3D printers.
(Wiki)
Pray tell . . .
- How should GLOCK be legally responsible for the illegal acts of others ? (New Chicago World View that it's always someone else's fault notwithstanding)
- How is a Glock so different that a similar 'Switch' concept/design couldn't be applied to the entire family of striker-fired pistols ?
Inquiring minds want to know.....
> is a small device that can be attached to the rear of the slide of a Glock handgun,
> converting the semi-automatic pistol into a selective fire machine pistol capable of
> fully automatic fire.
>
> In 2019, the ATF recovered thousands of the ["Glock Switch"]devices which were
> imported from China. In 2021 and 2022, people have been manufacturing the
> switch devices with 3D printers.
(Wiki)
Pray tell . . .
- How should GLOCK be legally responsible for the illegal acts of others ? (New Chicago World View that it's always someone else's fault notwithstanding)
- How is a Glock so different that a similar 'Switch' concept/design couldn't be applied to the entire family of striker-fired pistols ?
Inquiring minds want to know.....
They are not, the logic is seriously flawed.
The "entire family" covers a lot of different designs, and while many today are similar to the Glock many are not, and different enough that no one single design of "switch" will be applicable to all.
Since the very first semi auto firearms (of all types) there is no design that cannot be converted to full auto or select fire, by installing parts specifically made for that function.
DOING THAT, without prior Federal approval, has been a Federal CRIME for the past 90 years.
The BATFE is specifically tasked with reviewing firearm design to determine if the gun is, or is not "readily and easily" convertible to full auto or select fire.
IF the Glock is so bad, why isn't Chicago suing them? Why are they suing Glock, who does not make, offer or install them in their firearms?
Many, if not most semi auto firearms require machine work to the firearm to allow the installation and operation of full auto parts. Glock's particular design does not, the conversion parts are, literally, "plug and play" directly replacing the factory parts without modification to the firearm.
Doing so is a Federal crime, is not legal, and cannot be made legal under current law. Suing a manufacturer for criminal misuse or alteration to their product is A) barking stupid, B) wrong, and C) might actually qualify as extortion.
None of which seems to stop the people running the City of Chicago from doing it, though.