Two US states sue Glock over machine gun conversion

By Tom Hals

(Reuters) -Attorneys basic in Minnesota and New Jersey sued Glock on Thursday, accusing the corporate of constructing handguns which might be simply modified to fireside as unlawful machine weapons by an inexpensive add-on often called a “Glock change.”

The lawsuits stated the $20 switches remodel Glock handguns, which the complaints stated had been the preferred model, into simply concealable weapons that may hearth 1,200 rounds per minute, recklessly endangering the general public.

The gun maker has recognized since at the very least 1998 that its weapons are uniquely receptive to the switches and has not taken steps to vary its design, in response to the lawsuits.

“We sued Glock as a result of they’ve knowingly offered merchandise into our state for many years that may be simply transformed into machine weapons, that are unlawful below state and federal regulation, and that are killing our residents, killing cops and killing our children,” New Jersey Legal professional Normal Matthew Platkin advised Reuters.

Glock didn’t instantly reply to a request for remark. The corporate’s U.S. enterprise is predicated in Smyrna, Georgia, and is owned by Glock’s Austrian mum or dad firm.

The Nationwide Capturing Sports activities Basis, a firearm commerce group, known as the lawsuits frivolous and an abuse of the courts to advance unconstitutional gun controls. The group famous the switches are unlawful and will not be made by Glock.

Many such switches are made in China, out there on-line, or might be created utilizing a 3D printer, in response to the lawsuits, which stated they’re practically not possible to eradicate.

Machine weapons, which federal regulation defines as weapons that may shoot greater than as soon as with a single set off pull, are strictly regulated below federal regulation.

The 2 lawsuits are the primary actions taken by a newly fashioned partnership of Democratic attorneys basic from 15 states and the District of Columbia in search of to carry firearms corporations responsible for gun violence.

The attorneys basic stated they intend to scale back gun violence by coordinating their enforcement of state civil legal responsibility and shopper safety legal guidelines.

‘A NEW CHAPTER’

Attorneys basic have banded collectively and received a few of the largest authorized settlements towards the tobacco business and opioid producers and distributors.

“If that is the start of a launch of coordinated attorneys basic exercise, that could be truly a brand new chapter in firearms litigation,” stated Timothy Lytton, a professor at Georgia State College.

Gun companies are broadly protected against legal responsibility by federal regulation, however gun management advocates have been probing methods to make use of state legal guidelines as a workaround.

The technique was most profitable in litigation towards Remington Arms, which agreed in 2022 to pay $73 million to households of victims of the 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary College bloodbath. Twenty college students and 6 adults had been killed on the college in Newtown, Connecticut, by gunman Adam Lanza, who used a Remington Bushmaster AR-15 rifle.

Each lawsuits on Thursday accused Glock of making a public nuisance and of violating varied product legal responsibility and shopper safety legal guidelines.

The lawsuits search court docket orders requiring Glock to disgorge income and to pay restitution, though quantities weren’t specified.

The Minnesota case additionally sought an injunction directing Glock to design safer handguns, and New Jersey requested the court docket to stop the corporate from distributing simply modified weapons within the state.

Glock was sued earlier this yr by the town of Chicago, which stated its police recovered greater than 1,100 Glock pistols with the modification between 2021 and 2023.

In June, the U.S. Supreme Court docket declared illegal a federal ban on “bump shares” that allow semiautomatic weapons to fireside quickly like machine weapons.

“I am unable to predict what the Supreme Court docket will do,” Platkin stated. “I am assured we’re on strong authorized floor. We would not have introduced a criticism in any other case.”