The group was predominantly white male, as you'd expect. But it wasn't the 'torch and pitchfork' crowd either. The turnout made me really proud to do what we do.
-
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.
-
Be sure to enter the NES/MFS May Giveaway ***Canik METE SFX***
Glock Hearing - Can you attend?
- Thread starter Rob Boudrie
- Start date
The group was predominantly white male, as you'd expect. But it wasn't the 'torch and pitchfork' crowd either. The turnout made me really proud to do what we do.
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2005
- Messages
- 47,577
- Likes
- 33,661
And not one cell phone went off during the proceedings.
Last edited:
Maui5150
Banned
An Open Letter to Maura Healey, Massachusetts Atty General and Glock, Inc, Manufacture of Fine Armaments.
Respectable Persons,
It has come to my attention that there is a big commotion regarding Glock handguns and their safety. I am a little confused and puzzled by this action. I am the current owner of a Generation 2 Glock 17 and first my first Glock in 1990. I have never had an accidental discharge, nor have I ever found the usage of this firearm ever to be unsafe. I was raised and taught important precepts like muzzle control, trigger control, and firearm status, and they have served me well. I commend Glock on a reliable and smooth operating firearm.
What confuses me about Atty General Healey's actions is this seems to be a crusade in the name of "Public Safety" - meaning that these firearms, put me, the owner of such, at risk. I vehemently disagree. If anything, I have felt protected and safe operating or having my Glock near by. This lawsuit sounds frivolous and a poor use of tax payer funds, when there are far more dangerous and pressing threats in the average consumer household that go unaddressed.
Just last week, I realized there is no safety on my gas stove, and should the electronic spark not ignite, there is nothing to stop my house from filling up with gas. While children are rarely in my home, children do like to play and turn things and it is very easy for a child to in fact turn on the gas unattended and be unaware of the consequences. This not only puts myself at risk, but those of my neighbors as well.
I then looked at my counter and saw a butcher block stocked with kitchen knives. It may come as a surprise to you, but did not know that there is not locking or safety mechanism on a butcher block. Underage persons can easily reach over the counter or use a chair or other object to gain access. One such knife is 8" long and quite sharp.
This morning I was in my shower and realized that I could turn the hot water all the way on, and that there was no warning device or temperature safety. Shocking. I know. I would say I am astute enough to not have to test it in person, but I believe one could easily get a nasty burn.
Likewise, on my work bench, I realized that there were a great many hammers, wrenches and the like, and these all seem heavy as well as dropping, say on one's foot, I imagine could cause injury as well.
I also have candles on my mantle. Every year houses burn down and families are destroyed when candles are left unattended. Did you know that candles have killed more people in Massachusetts over the last 10 years than assault weapons? Quite shocking I know.
Granted there may be some extremely rare occurrences where there is a failure of some sort, but like not realizing the gas was turned on and not ignited, the shower is incredibly hot, the first part of an escalation of events is human error.
I used to race motorcycles by the way.
One of my few crashes at Loudon happened at over 70 miles an hour. Believe it or not, not only did I walk away... I rode that motorcycle home that same night after replacing a lever and a peg (though had some cosmetic work to do later on) But we were taught that accidents are caused by an escalation of events. Normally there is steps that can be taken early on that help avoid or mitigate things.
It may not come as a shock to you, but did you know my Glock is always in a state I intend. It is loaded when I want it to be loaded, unloaded when it needs to be loaded, and even when I know (or think ) the gun is unloaded, I still clear it not just once, but sometimes twice to be sure. It has served me well. Relying on gadgets and the like are what generally get a person in trouble.
The most important factor using any tool or device is the operator. Relying on gadgets, indicators, or other things ingrains a complacency that fosters laziness. As well, these devices, in a crisis or pressure situation often have unintended consequences.
For myself, I am competent, diligent, thoughtful, careful and aware. I don't need protecting from myself, otherwise my body would be covered in scalds from hot water burns, I would be missing toes from dropped knives, and my house (and neighbors) would be ashes from careless use of gas stoves or candles. I don't know what political or personal agenda the Atty General has, but there are far more pressing safety needs of the citizens as a whole, I can find no less than 50 items in my home that have even less safety controls and can pose more safety risk.
Despite my own actions, I have somehow managed to make it almost years on this earth, and have fired guns and specifically even Glocks for more than half of that time without ever harming another person, myself, nor having a discharge that was not intended. Glocks have posed no threats to the safety of myself or my family. If anything, Glocks have made the world a safer place for me.
Thank you for your hard work and commitment to continually improving these well-made, accurate, and enjoyable firearms.
Respectable Persons,
It has come to my attention that there is a big commotion regarding Glock handguns and their safety. I am a little confused and puzzled by this action. I am the current owner of a Generation 2 Glock 17 and first my first Glock in 1990. I have never had an accidental discharge, nor have I ever found the usage of this firearm ever to be unsafe. I was raised and taught important precepts like muzzle control, trigger control, and firearm status, and they have served me well. I commend Glock on a reliable and smooth operating firearm.
What confuses me about Atty General Healey's actions is this seems to be a crusade in the name of "Public Safety" - meaning that these firearms, put me, the owner of such, at risk. I vehemently disagree. If anything, I have felt protected and safe operating or having my Glock near by. This lawsuit sounds frivolous and a poor use of tax payer funds, when there are far more dangerous and pressing threats in the average consumer household that go unaddressed.
Just last week, I realized there is no safety on my gas stove, and should the electronic spark not ignite, there is nothing to stop my house from filling up with gas. While children are rarely in my home, children do like to play and turn things and it is very easy for a child to in fact turn on the gas unattended and be unaware of the consequences. This not only puts myself at risk, but those of my neighbors as well.
I then looked at my counter and saw a butcher block stocked with kitchen knives. It may come as a surprise to you, but did not know that there is not locking or safety mechanism on a butcher block. Underage persons can easily reach over the counter or use a chair or other object to gain access. One such knife is 8" long and quite sharp.
This morning I was in my shower and realized that I could turn the hot water all the way on, and that there was no warning device or temperature safety. Shocking. I know. I would say I am astute enough to not have to test it in person, but I believe one could easily get a nasty burn.
Likewise, on my work bench, I realized that there were a great many hammers, wrenches and the like, and these all seem heavy as well as dropping, say on one's foot, I imagine could cause injury as well.
I also have candles on my mantle. Every year houses burn down and families are destroyed when candles are left unattended. Did you know that candles have killed more people in Massachusetts over the last 10 years than assault weapons? Quite shocking I know.
Granted there may be some extremely rare occurrences where there is a failure of some sort, but like not realizing the gas was turned on and not ignited, the shower is incredibly hot, the first part of an escalation of events is human error.
I used to race motorcycles by the way.
One of my few crashes at Loudon happened at over 70 miles an hour. Believe it or not, not only did I walk away... I rode that motorcycle home that same night after replacing a lever and a peg (though had some cosmetic work to do later on) But we were taught that accidents are caused by an escalation of events. Normally there is steps that can be taken early on that help avoid or mitigate things.
It may not come as a shock to you, but did you know my Glock is always in a state I intend. It is loaded when I want it to be loaded, unloaded when it needs to be loaded, and even when I know (or think ) the gun is unloaded, I still clear it not just once, but sometimes twice to be sure. It has served me well. Relying on gadgets and the like are what generally get a person in trouble.
The most important factor using any tool or device is the operator. Relying on gadgets, indicators, or other things ingrains a complacency that fosters laziness. As well, these devices, in a crisis or pressure situation often have unintended consequences.
For myself, I am competent, diligent, thoughtful, careful and aware. I don't need protecting from myself, otherwise my body would be covered in scalds from hot water burns, I would be missing toes from dropped knives, and my house (and neighbors) would be ashes from careless use of gas stoves or candles. I don't know what political or personal agenda the Atty General has, but there are far more pressing safety needs of the citizens as a whole, I can find no less than 50 items in my home that have even less safety controls and can pose more safety risk.
Despite my own actions, I have somehow managed to make it almost years on this earth, and have fired guns and specifically even Glocks for more than half of that time without ever harming another person, myself, nor having a discharge that was not intended. Glocks have posed no threats to the safety of myself or my family. If anything, Glocks have made the world a safer place for me.
Thank you for your hard work and commitment to continually improving these well-made, accurate, and enjoyable firearms.
Individualist
NES Member
- Joined
- Jan 24, 2009
- Messages
- 4,663
- Likes
- 4,366
It was a good turnout. I even dusted off my best suit, i.e., the only one that still fits. The Glock attorney did a nice job - nothing that I would call a slam dunk, but he made some good points. The judge asked good questions and pressed both sides, but it felt a little slanted to the other side. There was quite a bit of B.S. spewing from the Asst. AG. I would give it a 65/35 win for our team, but this is MA so with the bias it is a complete tossup.
I think it was Rob who said to me AG’s lackey should have been called for perjury when he argued something along the lines of “the AG wasn’t anti-gun or out to take guns away." I was very impressed how well our folks were able to restrain from bursting out in hysterical laughter after that and a few other blatant lies.
I think it was Rob who said to me AG’s lackey should have been called for perjury when he argued something along the lines of “the AG wasn’t anti-gun or out to take guns away." I was very impressed how well our folks were able to restrain from bursting out in hysterical laughter after that and a few other blatant lies.
Last edited:
Chevy 2 65
NES Member
Sad part is people in Mass think the AG's office is doing the right thing.
Mine did but it was on vibrate, I thought I had turned it off. I sat there holding it in my jacket pocket hoping no one would notice. I guess it worked. Next time it stays in the car.
![[smile]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/001.gif "Smile [smile]")
CatSnoutSoup
NES Member
You bring up a good point, but none of this is in our best interest anyway, what would be in our best interest would be to be left alone given the benifit of the doubt that we can behave as responsible adults capable of managing our own safety. Unfortunately, as you know, our AG does not in fact give a fat rats ass about safety and is in truth bent on making her national politcal bones by playing the anti 2A crusader, and to those ends she is going to do what ever she wants to do.
dhuze
NES Member
In my experience this is 100% correct. Except I might say Even the bottom 10% of regular/active (meaning shoot often) shooters would smoke the top 10% of LEO.
I do agree with this. However, I think it is also true that those of us who are competitive shooters (even those like me who aren't anywhere near the top of the leader board) are also not representative of the majority of shooters. When I was in the leadership at a gun club, it was clear to me that the vast majority of the membership rarely came to the club.
dhuze
NES Member
I agree with this also. We have a 450 member list plus the retired members. I see about 50 or so of the same members every time I go. At the meetings I see a bunch of people I only see at the meetings.
I'm just saying that anyone who actively shoots can out shoot the majority of the police. Most never shoot except when they have to qualify which leads to poor performance.
Hmm, so what's the first safety rule we were taught? Consider every firearm loaded until YOU clear it. There's your loaded chamber indicator. What about revolvers? Healey is following her predecessors lead, Scotty H. who started this withch hunt.
amm5061
NES Member
![[rofl]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/013.gif "ROFL [rofl]")
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2005
- Messages
- 47,577
- Likes
- 33,661
Federal courts have had secret trials for years. I don't know if the trials are closed, or just not published. There was a news item a few years ago when a court accidentally gave a reporter the "hidden docket" of secret trials rather than the public docket.
Right!
Most Mass cops if offered a nice stainless steel Parker T-Ball Jotter pen set or a new gun would probably opt for the pen set! They could care less if they carried a Glock or a Taurus in that holster, as long as they were paid to shoot it and got OT for qualifying with it.
Recently I was told by a LEO that they get 40 hrs in the MPTC Police Academy. So I think that the AG is blowing smoke up the judge's ass.
If the dealer isn't an official Glock Dealer, Glock can't prevent said non-Glock dealer from selling Glocks or anything else, no contractual relationship means no ability to police sales. So MA dealer orders from a non-MA dealer who isn't an official Glock dealer, with impunity.
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2005
- Messages
- 47,577
- Likes
- 33,661
As to "why would Glock offer to help with the letter"
The assistant AG was explaining the need for the CID. He said that the AG may decide to do nothing, or may decide to write a warning letter. The Glock attorney did a great job thinking on his feet and replied with "you already know the guns are unsafe, you don't need any more information, write the letter now, we'll even help".
The assistant AG was explaining the need for the CID. He said that the AG may decide to do nothing, or may decide to write a warning letter. The Glock attorney did a great job thinking on his feet and replied with "you already know the guns are unsafe, you don't need any more information, write the letter now, we'll even help".
The last that I heard was 40 hours for locals and 60 hours for the Staties. But that was a good 10 years ago, so it might have changed. And I wouldn't call my source unimpeachable.
Maui5150
Banned
Do sessions of "Call of Duty" or "Grant Theft Auto" count?
dhuze
NES Member
They will probably write something like, According to the Attorney General Glock firearms are unsafe due to not having a loaded chamber indicator.
Glockster30
NES Member
Rob, the first time I read that in an earlier post, it didn't make sense to me why Glock offered to assist writing the letter. After the second time reading it, it still doesn't make sense.
That's like GM assisting Chevrolet to write a letter to Chevy owners telling them that the particular model Chevy that the consumer is driving, is not safe to drive. GM would not do this, and Glock should not be doing this because depending on how the letter is written, Glock is agreeing with the AG that its guns are unsafe.
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2005
- Messages
- 47,577
- Likes
- 33,661
1. The AG claimed the reason for the data from Glock's records is "we may need to write a letter telling Glock owners their guns are unsafe".
2. Glock response: That request is moot, since you already know they are unsafe. This means you have no need for the records you are requesting. Write the letter and we will help. You don't need our corporate archives to do that.
It's called "calling their bluff".
Glockster30
NES Member
Thanks for a making it clearer as it makes much more sense in this context.
DarthRevan
NES Member
I hope the judge sees it the same way.
nstassel
NES Member
One can make the argument that an lci makes a gun less safe. Because any mechanical device may wear or break, it causes an unsafe reliance on a device in lieu of proper training and manual inspection.
Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
badshot101
NES Member
- Joined
- Apr 25, 2013
- Messages
- 218
- Likes
- 97
Bad argument. The attorney general says that the LCI is important because average gun owners are NOT properly trained, and in their ignorant state need to be protected against themselves. Asking how much training we should have to be proficient would probably get you an answer of "oh about 300 hours", neatly disenfranchising all but the most determined.
I shoot at least one competition every weekend all with a Glock. I should be good to go right?
