Already a subscriber? Make sure to log into your account before viewing this content. You can access your account by hitting the “login” button on the top right corner. Still unable to see the content after signing in? Make sure your card on file is up-to-date.
Two states have filed a lawsuit against the firearm manufacturer, Glock, accusing the company of enabling the illegal conversion of its pistols into machine guns.
What’s the deal: The lawsuits filed by Minnesota and New Jersey against Glock allege that the company’s semiautomatic pistols are susceptible to illegal conversion into fully automatic machine guns using inexpensive and easily obtainable “switches.” These small devices, also known as auto sears, can be purchased online for as little as $20, created using 3D printers, or sourced illegally from overseas manufacturers, such as in China. Once installed, a switch allows the firearm to fire up to 1,200 rounds per minute, which both states say create a serious risk to public safety. The lawsuit accuses Glock of failing to modify its designs to prevent these conversions and profiting from the appeal of their guns to criminal markets.
Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison said, “Glock knows that its semiautomatic handguns are easily and frequently converted to illegal, fully automatic machine guns with Glock switches, and Glock knows that these fully automatic handguns present a significant threat to public safety.” He added, “Glock’s actions, and their inaction, violate Minnesota law, and put kids, communities and law enforcement in danger. This has to stop. It is critically important that we continue to hold individuals who commit crimes criminally accountable for their actions. It is also important that when corporations knowingly make, market, and sell products that put people’s lives in danger, we hold them civilly accountable. We can and must reduce gun violence and keep Minnesotans safe by pursuing justice using the tools of both criminal and civil law. One is not a substitute for the other; rather, when we use them together, we fight gun violence both downstream and upstream.”
New Jersey Attorney General Matthew Platkin echoed these concerns, stating, “We sued Glock because they have knowingly sold products into our state for decades that can be easily converted into machine guns, which are illegal under state and federal law, and which are killing our residents, killing cops, and killing our kids.”
Another view: While Glock has not directly responded to the lawsuit, critics of the lawsuit argue that the company should not be held liable for modifications made by third parties using devices it does not produce or sell. The National Shooting Sports Foundation, a firearm trade group, described the lawsuits as “frivolous” and an attempt to misuse the courts to advance gun control measures. They added that Glock cannot be held liable for the actions of criminals who alter firearms in ways that violate state and federal laws.
