MA AG targets Glock and Remington
Revealed in a lawsuit challenging her unilateral and unlawful decision to make criminals out of thousands of people is the fact she’d been targeting two major gun makers and had them turn over a wide range of documents.
September 1st, 2016 at 7:05 pm
Horry Clap! Shannon Watts on steroids with power and authority. And I can’t believe some of the anti-gun comments.
September 1st, 2016 at 9:09 pm
Of course, you have the booger on the bang switch cops with the “accidental discharge”. Everybody on earth knows he pulled trigger. Duh! Not only is she out of control but the cop will let thousands of people lose their jobs and entire industries suffer to maintain his lie. Watch. T-y-r-a-n-t-s.
September 1st, 2016 at 9:24 pm
Of course, Glock could always refuse to do business at all in AssHatchusetts, like Barrett did in California.
September 1st, 2016 at 11:23 pm
Is the stupid bint TRYING to run business out of her state?
September 2nd, 2016 at 3:24 am
I’ll join the chorus asking “Why do these companies do business in these states?” It shouldn’t be that hard to cut off all distribution and sales in a small state like Massachusetts, as Ronnie Barrett has done with California.
I’m sure some rabid anti-gun politicians would regard that as a feature rather than a bug, but if no government agency in MA could obtain guns, parts or ammunition – not just from Glock, but every manufacturer, because today it’s Glock being attacked, tomorrow it’ll be Kel-Tec and Tangfolio (although those wouldn’t be the showcase actions Glock and Remington are, I’d wager the media will treat them like they are).
Which again raises the question: Why are manufacturers stil located in anti-American states. and yes, that means you, Smith and Wesson.
September 2nd, 2016 at 4:47 am
The “Booger hooks on the Bang switch!! That is how Glocks operate!! NO External Manual On/off safety switch!! that extra “Glock trigger that a lot of the industry now uses is the Safety…..
But they are Stupid!!!
As an old SKYDIVER, we have “back ups.” “Safety’s,” you know, Reserve Chutes, Reserve Static lines ad probably the most noted, the “AAD” or “Automatic Activation Device” that if you get “Stupid” or are rendered Unconscious (refer to the previous) it will sense that you are low and fire off your reserve… ‘saved a lot of people “BUT” I recall one lady set her AAD at her house in Huntington Beach, Ca at “Sea level” then went to skydive at Perris, (1400 feet ABOVE sealevel and proceded to “Bounce!! She would have to have snorted about a thousand feet of dirt before she got to firing altitude for where she set the aad..it should go off at about 750 feet above WHERE YOU SET IT! HB 0 feet Perris 1400′ do the math… It is a mechanical device and you have to be samarter than the device……GUNS INCLUDED!!!!!
“Keep yer’ booger hooks off the bang switch until you have target aquesition and knowledge of what is to at least twice the distance of your ammo!!
‘Nuff said!!!,
III%,
skybill-out
September 2nd, 2016 at 4:53 am
Glock in the pocket, even the side arm holster, if you “Rub it the wrong way!!” All it takes is “lean forward, the leather pushes the “safetytriger” and your next move puts enough force on the trigger and “FIRE!!!” Nuff said…..
III%,
skybill-out
September 2nd, 2016 at 5:59 am
I agree. Glock and Remington should announce that they will no longer sell, service or support the state and local LEO after January 1, 2017, unless they have a contract, and no contracts will be renewed. The other manufacturers should strongly consider announcing a similar policy.
The blue state gun banners are trying to pick off manufacturers one by one. The gun industry should return the favor. Gun owners would support the companies that make a stand, and punish companies that put their short term interest ahead of solidarity. Just ask Smith and Weson, who should be relocating more of their operations
September 2nd, 2016 at 8:34 am
@rickn8or, right! If the people don’t need guns, then neither do their State EMPLOYEES! And that especially goes for the Federal Government which has NO delegated powers re: what the people CHOOSE for their RIGHT of armed self defense.
September 2nd, 2016 at 11:33 am
I just think it is funny she decries firearm industry lawful protection from harassing lawsuits…while she files harassing lawsuits. Prove our point much?
September 2nd, 2016 at 11:57 am
dandydon, it’s that like H->illary!, she’s trying to pass off “harassing lawsuit” immunity as “product liability” immunity. Dishonesty much there Maura?
September 2nd, 2016 at 3:43 pm
rickn8or,
Glocks haven’t been MA-compliant for over twenty years.
September 2nd, 2016 at 4:15 pm
Glocks can be sold only to law enforcement officers in Massachusetts, because consumer sales are banned under state law. As such, Glock argues, Healey is misusing her investigative powers “for the ulterior purpose of harassing an out-of-state company that does not engage in in-state consumer sales.”
Right you are Tam, as usual. But isn’t this using a sledgehammer to swat a fly; being as there can’t be that many Glock negligent discharges by cops in MA? Or is she suing Glock on behalf of consumers in the other 49 states out of the goodness of her heart?
September 6th, 2016 at 2:30 pm
Tam, slight correction. Glocks have not been MA-compliant since the MA Gun Control Act of 1998.
Pedant off, it is curious that Healey is going after a manufacturer that has not sold a single firearm in MA to a civilian owner in very near a generation…