A New Legal Assault on Firearm Makers: Some Guns May Be Dangerous


Trouble is brewing in New England for gun manufacturers. The Massachusetts attorney general has launched an innovative investigation of major firearm makers based on her state’s expansive consumer-protection law.

The probe targets at least two companies—Glock Inc. and Remington Outdoor Co.—and possibly others. The investigation came to light because of lawsuits the gun companies recently filed seeking to block or narrow the Massachusetts safety investigation, calling it overly intrusive.  

The defensive litigation stated that Attorney General Maura Healey is demanding that Glock and Remington surrender a wide range of internal documents, including safety-related complaints from customers.

Glock is Austria-based and controlled by its founder, 87-year-old Gaston Glock. Beginning in the mid-1980s, the company’s  pistols revolutionized the handgun market with their large ammunition capacity and lightweight, mostly plastic frame.

Remington, 200 years old and based in Madison, N.C., is part of Freedom Group, which, in turn, is owned by a New York private equity firm by the name of Cerberus Capital Management.

Since the Glock was introduced in America 30 years ago, critics have said its design makes it more likely than other handguns to fire accidentally.

For example, the Austrian gun fires with relatively little pressure from the shooter’s index finger, and it has an unconventional safety mechanism built into its trigger, which some detractors say is ineffective. The company has responded that with proper training and careful technique, users will avoid accidental discharges.


Remington has had safety issues of its own. The company recently recalled two lines of rifles manufactured from 2006 through early 2014 because of accidental discharges. The recall notice stated to owners that “any unintended discharge has the potential for causing injury or death. Immediately stop using your rifle until Remington can inspect it to determine if the XMP trigger has excess bonding agent used in the assembly process, which could cause an unintentional discharge.”

The Boston Globe, which broke this story on Sept. 1, reported that, in her court filing responding to Glock’s suit, Healey argued that the manufacturer’s pistols are “prone to accidental discharge” and that the company may have been warned about the problem by customers but still failed to act.

“Responding to Glock’s lawsuit,” the Globe added, Healey referred to “news stories about a sheriff’s deputy accidentally firing a Glock pistol in San Francisco’s Hall of Justice, a Los Angeles police officer who was paralyzed from the waist down after his 3-year-old son accidentally fired his Glock pistol, and a Massachusetts man who was dancing at a July 4th party when his Glock handgun fired while it was in his pocket.”

Guns, it’s worth noting, are one of the only products not regulated by the federal Consumer Product Safety Commission.

© Copyright 2016 Bloomberg News. All rights reserved.

Breaking News at Newsmax.com http://www.newsmax.com/Finance/StreetTalk/massachusetts-consumer-safety-law-glock-remington/2016/09/06/id/746896/#ixzz4JZSt8PpJ
Urgent: Do You Back Trump or Hillary? Vote Here Now!

4 thoughts on “A New Legal Assault on Firearm Makers: Some Guns May Be Dangerous

  1. Tell her to F@#* OFF! Then tell her I am sorry you filthy, traitorous bitch, but there will be NO GUN SALES to Massachusetts, not to private citizens, not to any security and especially NOT to not to law enforcement at any level, town, city, county, State or Fed. No gun sales, no parts and no ammunition sales. How do you like your security team being disarmed you stinking skank?
    I also love how the pure idiots at Bloomberg cannot help themselves, they simply have to pile on with yet another lie at the end of the story. Traitors all, hang them HIGH!

  2. “Trouble is brewing in New England for gun manufacturers.”

    I think there’s a lot more trouble brewing for politicians, because people are becoming tired of this endless assault on their right to keep and bear arms, and are starting to realize there will be no end to it.

    “…an innovative investigation..”
    Why does an investigation have to be “innovative”? Because they’re grasping at a new straw every day to disarm Americans, and leave them vulnerable to attack. NEVER SURRENDER A WEAPON.

    “Guns, it’s worth noting, are one of the only products not regulated by the federal Consumer Product Safety Commission.”

    That’s because we have a constitutional right to own them. Vaccine manufacturers on the other hand, who kill many more people than gun owners, are protected from being sued by anyone over the poisons that are now being forced into your veins by law.

  3. Never will they put this into a reality based perspective.

    For the miniscule times someone has negligently or “accidentally” fired a Glock…

    how many times has it not happened?

    how is it the manufacturer’s fault?

    how many were forced to buy a glock?

    how many times was the ultimate reason negligence?

    No such thing as accidental firing of a gun it is always a result of negligence.


Join the Conversation

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *