• If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership  The benefits pay for the membership many times over.

Glock Hearing - Can you attend?

Knuckle Dragger said:
Yes, it is. This is a court of law. Do you go to church in a "God is dead" t-shirt? Would you go to your daughter's high school or college graduation in a t-shirt?

This isn't a protest, it's civic engagement. The gun control crowd, including the AG, is trying to depersonalize these issues by framing them as challenges to the firearms industry and 'gun lobby'. To the extent that her actions are effect to Massachusetts citizens, she wants to marginalize those individuals as a no more than a small group of despicables made up of swamp-dwelling, mouth-breathing, misogynistic, homo-phobic and racists white male insurrectionists. Show up to court in a 'Tyranny' or 'Heil Healey' t-shirt and you just play into that narrative.

No, don't 'rally'. Come to the courtroom by 2pm, find a seat, listen to the arguments and learn. I'm having trouble getting some of the documents uploaded, but I'll try to post an outline of the case before the hearing.
Click to expand...
Jesus! I love your second paragraph!
 
I walked over today...easy to find. Right across the street for Govt Center T stop. The jury duty sign points to proper building.

See everyone there!
 
amm5061 said:
I'm surprised this is open to the public. I would think that her highness would require it be held behind closed doors.
Click to expand...
It is VERY rare for court proceedings to be closed to the public - usually it's in family court. Think about it. Secret trials? If it were that easy the Gitmo prison would have been closed years ago.

CK30 said:
I dont really drink, but I'd be down to meet up afterwards.
Click to expand...
I don't really drink any more. But then again, I don't really drink any less.
 
"what is the end game?"

The Glock attorneys were excellent. The AG's office admitted that the end game of this lawsuit is to protect consumers. That they would like to inform the "8000" consumer Glock owners in Massachusetts that they have an unsafe firearm.

Glock said the AG's office already decided in 2004 that Glocks are unsafe. Why do they need more info to decide...they did this already. Glock said they were fine with the AG's office writing the "8000" owners and warning them. Glock even offered to help write the letter.
 
iofneedle said:
"what is the end game?"

The Glock attorneys were excellent. The AG's office admitted that the end game of this lawsuit is to protect consumers. That they would like to inform the "8000" consumer Glock owners in Massachusetts that they have an unsafe firearm.

Glock said the AG's office already decided in 2004 that Glocks are unsafe. Why do they need more info to decide...they did this already. Glock said they were fine with the AG's office writing the "8000" owners and warning them. Glock even offered to help write the letter.
Click to expand...

I hope they do, that letter would be awesome.
 
iofneedle said:
"what is the end game?"

The Glock attorneys were excellent. The AG's office admitted that the end game of this lawsuit is to protect consumers. That they would like to inform the "8000" consumer Glock owners in Massachusetts that they have an unsafe firearm.

Glock said the AG's office already decided in 2004 that Glocks are unsafe. Why do they need more info to decide...they did this already. Glock said they were fine with the AG's office writing the "8000" owners and warning them. Glock even offered to help write the letter.
Click to expand...

They (Glock) better make sure they get it "in writing" that there will be no further prosecution if they are willing to do this. That no consumer protection class action lawsuit can be brought.
 
On my way to harpoon, but this was giggle worthy. The whole thing is about the ago trying to find out if a gun is unsafe, when in fact ma law says glocks are unsafe, and with that information ago wants to send strongly worded letters to us about our unsafe glocks.

Like, really?
 
Drix said:
On my way to harpoon, but this was giggle worthy. The whole thing is about the ago trying to find out if a gun is unsafe, when in fact ma law says glocks are unsafe, and with that information ago wants to send strongly worded letters to us about our unsafe glocks.

Like, really?
Click to expand...
And yet EOPSS say that they pass their test... I hope Glock brings that up.
 
DarthRevan said:
And yet EOPSS say that they pass their test... I hope Glock brings that up.
Click to expand...

EOPS and the AG's regulations are different. The AG's regulations require a loaded chamber indicator. The EOPS regulations do not.

Note, I'm not saying that I agree with the AG's office. But there is a certain logic in their position. They claim that:

1) a semi-auto handgun must have a loaded chamber indicator to be safe,

2) the Glock does not have a usable loaded chamber indicator.

Therefore, by their standards, Glocks are unsafe.
 
Last edited:
M1911 said:
EOPS and the AG's regulations are different. The AG's regulations require a loaded chamber indicator. The EOPS regulations do not.

Note, I'm not saying that I agree with the AG's office. But there is a certain logic in their position. They claim that:

1) a semi-auto handgun must have a loaded chamber indicator to be safe,

2) the Glock does not have a usable loaded chamber indicator.

Therefore, by their standards, Glocks are unsafe.
Click to expand...
rwl1955 said:
What about all the unsafe Glocks the Boston PD are carrying?
Click to expand...
This was more the line of thinking I was going for but I know what you're saying.
 
All my Glocks have LCIs per 940 CMR 16,00 . Not my problem that the AG doesn't like the Glock LCI nor do I care what she thinks.

Any letters from the AG will go right into my paper shredder, unless it's unique and I decide to keep it for posterity. [laugh]
 
Last edited:
God, I am so ashamed to live in this state!

What the hell is wrong with the idiots that run the gov. here.


Glocks are so unsafe that most law enforcement in this state use them..


Only a fuking idiot would rely on a chamber indicator!

The first thing you do is visually check the chamber before you start handling any firearm!

Like a god dam letter is going to stop a negligent discharge. NOT!


Hey AG, maybe you should ban all firearms made before 1998 and any others that do not have a chamber indicator!
While your at it make it retro active to that date and anyone that possesses one is a felon with a ten year jail term!!

Make sure you notify anyone with an illegal Glock brought here into MA that their gun is unsafe as well.
Can't have felons running around with unsafe Glocks here in MA!


Another stupid sign for a person too stupid to know any better!!


PS: Make sure you label every firearm with the following "Bullets come out this end!".


First the rifles, next the pistols and lastly your grand dad's shotgun. The order in which they will take them!
 
Last edited:
Someone should file an injunction to stop Glock sales to LEO statewide until they have a ruling on this case (ianal so that probably isn't something an injunction can be used for, I know they are typically used to prevent a penalty as opposed to a sale of). I'd love to see cops get pissed enough so that all citizens are able to purchase them and get rid of this bullshit cast system we currently have.
 
Glocks' counsel made a good point - the AG has already determined Glocks are unsafe, it does not need additional info to make that determination. Just send all Glock owners in MA a letter saying they own an unsafe gun. Glock's counsel even offered to help the AG write the letter.

The hearing also provided positive confirmation, via Glock counsel's testimony, that Glock's distributor contracts bar sales to MA dealers.
 
Rob Boudrie said:
Glocks' counsel made a good point - the AG has already determined Glocks are unsafe, it does not need additional info to make that determination. Just send all Glock owners in MA a letter saying they own an unsafe gun. Glock's counsel even offered to help the AG write the letter.

The hearing also provided positive confirmation, via Glock counsel's testimony, that Glock's distributor contracts bar sales to MA dealers.
Click to expand...

Why is Glock offering to help write the letter indicating that its guns are unsafe?
 
I love the way the state argued that consumers don't need to learn to shoot to get a license, so the Glock is unsafe. Of course, every course to get an LTC does require demonstration and operation to determine if a gun is loaded, and we all teach the same method that the Glock lawyer explained in court.

Why should an instructor attempt to describe or show the dozen or so loaded indicators when a simple press check works on them all?

While the state did not lie, the misrepresentation was quite sad.

Maybe we'll see just how pathetic the gun registry is when we see who does and does not get a letter.

Of course, we need to see what the court decides.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
I look forward to taping my letter to the door of my safe. I hope she sends me one for each of my Glocks.

The other great line - "You've already killed us in MA, you can't kill us twice".
 
Well, I couldn't make it today, sorry.
How many people showed up?
So what happened?

Thanks to those that did make it, I was with you in spirit...
 

Similar threads

Can you guys tell me what this is?
Replies
7
Views
481
LittleCalm
L
  • Locked
Navy scrubbed this photo can you see why?
Replies
17
Views
717
Mountain
Mountain
Things you didn't know you needed
Replies
14
Views
464
greencobra
greencobra
Migrants can carry guns
Replies
23
Views
724
KBCraig
KBCraig
Missouri law being passed: If you home school, your home is now considered a school and you can't own guns
Replies
17
Views
621
Nhusa
N
Back
Top Bottom