Chicago city attorneys dropped the lawsuit they filed against Glock in March, then replaced it with an expanded version on Monday, with the city making the same insane and absurd claims it made back in March: that Glock owners' ability to install the Sear (a “Glock switch” that turns a semi-automatic pistol into a rapid-fire weapon) directly contributes to Chicago's ridiculous levels of gun violence.
The fact that gun manufacturers are protected by federal law from these frivolous and costly lawsuits doesn't matter; the penalties they inflict are. Cities that can't curb gun violence are instead spending their resources finding people to hold accountable. The new lawsuit also names Glock.Ges.mbH, the Austrian parent company of Glock, as well as two of Chicago's most popular gun stores, Eagle Sporting Range and Midwest Sporting Goods. The new lawsuit accuses the two companies as a group of violating a city ordinance that prohibits them from engaging in any act or practice that violates the law.
Unfounded accusations
The complaint is full of harsh criticism and unfounded accusations that reflect the city's failed position.
The machine gun has returned as the weapon of choice for Chicago's criminals, this time in the form of a Glock pistol that can be easily converted into a machine gun with a simple quarter-sized device called an Autosear.
The city alleges that Glock knowingly designed its handguns to make it easier for criminals to modify them.
Glock designs its pistols to be easily modified to become machine guns, and the company knows that its pistols are frequently modified in this way.
The lawsuit, without citing sources, alleges that the ATF warned Glock about egregious and intentional design flaws.
Glock had received warnings from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) about its gun designs and knew it could have fixed the problems, but chose not to do so, putting profits above public safety and violating the law.
The city “knows” that Glock's design is “flawed” but continues to sell the handguns anyway.
According to the lawsuit, Glock entrapped local businesses into his criminal enterprise.
Glock exacerbates this problem by using some of the nation's most irresponsible gun stores, like Defendants Eagle Sporting Range and Midwest Sporting Goods, to distribute its handguns, even though Glock knows or has reason to know that these gun stores serve criminals.
Moreover, according to the lawsuit:
The top three crime firearms dealers are all Glock-endorsed dealers, accounting for about 13 percent of all crime firearms in the city that were traced to known purchasers.
A “crime gun”?
Notice how cleverly the accusations are made: the dealers are “irresponsible” and “facilitating criminals” and so Chicago's record levels of gun violence are their fault. All without evidence. But in war, evidence for unfounded accusations is not needed.
The complaint continues:
Glock has known about its dangerous design for years, and instead of making simple changes that would have prevented Glock handguns from being so easily modified into illegal machine guns, Glock made the business decision to continue making profits by selling easily modified guns to the civilian market.
The underlying message is “profits over principles.” Glock is greedy, gun dealers are complicit, and the design is intentional. Therefore, Glock must be banned from selling handguns in the city through its preferred network of gun dealers. And they must pay the fine. And they must pay their own legal costs, in addition to the city's legal costs.
The real purpose of the lawsuit
According to The Center Square, Alan Gottlieb of the Second Amendment Foundation denounced the city's dishonest, frivolous and unconstitutional claims and its true purpose.
If someone modifies a Glock to make it an illegal gun, then the criminal who did it should be pursued. And of course, Chicago has an excellent track record of not prosecuting criminals who misuse firearms. And therein lies the (real) problem….
The only reason they go after the gun industry is because they want to put gun manufacturers out of business.
The federal law that protects Glock and the two gun stores sued in the lawsuit filed Monday is the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA). The law was signed by then-President George W. Bush in 2005 and prohibits firearms and ammunition manufacturers, distributors, dealers, and importers “from instituting or maintaining a civil liability action for damages, injunctive relief, or other relief resulting from the misuse of their products by others.”
This should have solved the problem. It would have prevented anti-gun politicians in Chicago from filing such a frivolous lawsuit in the first place. But there is a war on private gun ownership in this country, and little things like following the law are ignored. The real goal is to bankrupt gun dealers and inflict enormous economic and social damage on Glock, the maker of America's most popular handgun.
Related article:
Chicago sues Glock for not perfecting its products
Glock asks court to dismiss Chicago lawsuit
