Glock's response


PDA

Kestryll
February 11, 2003, 01:06 PM
I just read this from Glock, I'm not sure how to take this.

http://www.gssfonline.com/2002/hot_topics/glockofficialstatement.htm

If you enjoyed reading about "Glock's response" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Schuey2002
February 11, 2003, 01:13 PM
It sounds to me like they are trying to suckup to us Glock owners.

I hate Brown-Nosers..:fire:

This response sounds like something that was cleverly crafted by a bunch of corporate lawyers..:scrutiny:

ball3006
February 11, 2003, 01:55 PM
saying. Look what happened during the DC shooter exercise where the cops looked up every owner of an AR15. The data base is there no matter what everyone is saying about it being illegal. All of this yellow paper has to go somewhere and into the fed's database is where it ends up. I am no happier than the next guy about govt gun owner list but they are there and will not go away, ever. Those two Marines that were busted trying to blow up Camp Lajune, pardon my spelling, were found out by watching specific internet sites pertaining to bomb making. If you don't think they don't watch these gun forums I have a bunch of seafront property in AZ.....chris3

10-Ring
February 11, 2003, 01:58 PM
I had once heard a rumor that Glock has a shell casing for EVERY GLOCK pistol ever produced in a HUGE vault. If that's true, they know what they're doing & for what purpose they'll be using those casings for :fire:

Weimadog
February 11, 2003, 02:04 PM
I had once heard a rumor that Glock has a shell casing for EVERY GLOCK pistol ever produced in a HUGE vault. If that's true, they know what they're doing & for what purpose they'll be using those casings for

I doubt it. What would they have done this for in the mid '80s?

Weimadog

MonkeyMan
February 11, 2003, 02:11 PM
Trying to differentiate between tying ballistic evidence to a person or a serial number is like the Glock 17 calling the Glock 19 Tupperware.

:banghead:

biere
February 11, 2003, 02:13 PM
The gssf currently has two announcements on it, well it did when I looked a half hour ago. The 2nd one says glock did not and does not have a data base.

However, a search using the words glock and fingerprint will turn up articles from 1999 saying they helped the atf set their system up. Several articles vary on dates and data, maybe they are all false. A search using the vp's name and the word glock turn up a few pages about stuff.

Overall I do hope glock does not have a data base, and if you search the database would most likely be scanned images in a computer since an actual vault would suck to keep let alone update. Of course I am also accused of having a spare tin foil hat, so run some searches yourself, read the announcements and decide where you stand.

Glock's statements all by themselves really bother me, regardless of if the past articles all over the net are all false and simply not refuted by glock. The chance the articles might be a tad correct is what has me posting this in a couple places. I did links at glocktalk but doing a search yourself will let you decide if more good has been done than more bad. I feel too much bad has been done right now, and the statements are not making me feel all warm and cuddly that glock has my best interest in mind.

As for the database being there already, I know it is. I also think they broke some laws during the maryland shooter time period and got away with it. That alone is proof for me to say "NO WAY" to seeing how this new database might help solve crimes. If the illegal one did not do it, why would a legal one be better?

Leatherneck
February 11, 2003, 03:34 PM
Lessee now--Glock kept a casing for whatever purpose but not a bullet? Really? :rolleyes:

TC
TFL Survivor

bbrins
February 11, 2003, 07:27 PM
What we already have is registration, ballistic fingerprinting just gives them another excuse for it. Since Glock sounds like they are in favor of registration, I will never buy one of their guns, ever. I was seriously thinking about buying one, but not now. Every handgun that I buy in the future will be having it's fingerprint changed.:fire: :cuss: :fire:

Carlos
February 11, 2003, 07:28 PM
Well, I purchased two Glocks in the last five years. I sold em both, and will never own another.

During the last Glock purchase, I overheard the dealer give the Serial Number and Model No. to the NCIC person. Thought that was odd. Probably not Glock's doing, but the a-holes are running these illegal databases any which way you look at it.

I never really had a problem with Glock, cept I don't like em, personally.

Nightcrawler
February 11, 2003, 07:49 PM
You know, I had been actually considering buying a Glock 20, assuming I could resolve the grip problem issues (thinking Robar grip reduction) so it actually fit my hand. I really was looking forward to getting into 10mm.

Looks like if I get a 10 Mil it'll be an EAA Witness.

Airwolf
February 11, 2003, 07:52 PM
However, a search using the words glock and fingerprint will turn up articles from 1999 saying they helped the atf set their system up. Several articles vary on dates and data, maybe they are all false. A search using the vp's name and the word glock turn up a few pages about stuff.

http://thehighroad.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=8170&perpage=25&pagenumber=6

My response to Glock. The info on the ATF/Glock connection is documented there.

Carlos
February 11, 2003, 07:59 PM
Nightcrawler, you might want to take a look at the Steyr pistols. I bought an M40 - my Glock replacement. I found my pistol, and I own several others.

DeltaElite
February 11, 2003, 08:02 PM
It's a good idea for you guys not to buy a Glock, spend it on your tinfoil hats. :neener:

So they collect a casing to ship with the gun.
They have to honor some backwards states regulations.
Did you even read what they wrote and can you prove it wrong?

You should worry more about the microchips that your dentist places in your head when you get your teeth cleaned. :neener:

Nightcrawler
February 11, 2003, 08:22 PM
Nightcrawler, you might want to take a look at the Steyr pistols. I bought an M40 - my Glock replacement. I found my pistol, and I own several others.

Steyr makes a 10mm?

The only real reason I'd want the Glock over the Witness is because of the stuff availalbe for it; holsters, barrels, etc. I have a CZ-97, so the Witness 10mm, a large framed CZ clone, would probably be wisest anyway.

DeltaElite
February 11, 2003, 08:46 PM
I wish Steyr made a 10mm. :D
They make a nice gun, always have.

blades67
February 11, 2003, 09:06 PM
I think DeltaElite has hit the nail on the head.

Hawk
February 11, 2003, 09:11 PM
My wife, who has a sleeping problem, coupled with a "Perry Mason" addiction, sees to it that our TV never goes dark for too long a time.

Anyhoo, in the recent past, good old Perry gets a witness to demonstrate how easily and quickly barrels are swapped between handguns. Perp switched barrels with clients gun, trace leads to wrong suspect, Perry busts the plot - another case solved.

Howcome, something everybody KNEW in 1958 has been buried under hysteria? I've seen pics of Sarah, Barbie and Chuckie - they're old enough to have seen the original episodes - and that old Perry Mason episode had far more technical savvy than I've seen from any recently elected politician.

Preaching to the choir, I know, but the Perry Mason thing last night got me thinking about how common sense has become far less common. And to think the uselessness of ballistic databases was actually demonstrated by the media, in producing a work of fiction, about 50 years ago. Maybe Glock and the current supporters of the idea think the criminals have gotten as lazy and stupid as they themselves have.

Standing Wolf
February 11, 2003, 09:13 PM
It seems the last point is the most important; the characteristics are tied to a serial number, not a person.

Cute. Completely irrelevant, but cute.

Carlos
February 11, 2003, 09:19 PM
I'm not sure if they make a 10mm, but 40 and 9mm that I personally know about. CDNN sells em. The distributor that handled and serviced Steyr seems to have jumped ship on Steyr. That's a shame.

Yes, Steyr makes a finer pistol than any Glock. I have/had no problem with the quality of a Glock pistol, just he way it shoots for me. However, one of the big issues with Glock, with me a reloader, was an unsupported feedramp. No longer a problem. The Steyr is just a better built pistol, in my humble opinion.

I'm not happy with what Glock did, but I personally don't feel it is as bad as a lot of guys think. If the majority of the gunowners do to Glock as they did to S&W, Glock will get the message - the hard way.

Baba Louie
February 11, 2003, 09:22 PM
Baba Louie shaking his head.

It's not the guns or the empty brass they want a list of.

Its us of course.

Do we really care if Uncle Sugar knows who we are? Of course they know who we are, we're simple Americans (most of us).

Are we criminals? Not yet.

Will anyone come to take our beloved toolstoysweapons? I Doubt very much if it can be done quietly.

We might receive a letter telling us that your such and such is now deemed illegal due to, blah, blah, SB/HRXXX123 and if you don't turn it in or cause it to be un-usable, blah blah woof woof.

But getting back to the Gaston Glock et al issue...

As a business, I'm pretty sure that Gaston and friends are listening to their (get ready, you know it's coming...) Lawyers, who are looking at every way possible to minimze their exposure in the "American Judicial System", 'cause they want to sell their weapons to every Police Agency they can in order to "Make more money". So their lawyers tell them to not only work within the system, help them design it. Then, they'll buy MORE of our products.

You can imagine G.G. talking to his XO (use an Ahnie accent, its moah fun dat way)
Ballistic ID moving fohwahd? Ah(R)&D's on it G.G.
Locking system? Ah&D is on it too, G.G.
Single Owna/Usa? Ah&D's got several ideas to show you G.G.
Every Police Agency in America been contacted twice dis yeah? Ja G.G.
What's our Mahket Share? Looking Good G.G.

Eli Remington, Sam Colt, Oli Winchester and even JMB had great ideas, but they also wanted to make some money. Of course, they had a lot less governmental tape to wade through.

Anybody here NOT got an S.S.N.?

If you live here, work here and answer NO, then You might Not be on their list... but they're looking for ya.

Boycott em if ya feel the need. I've personally probably got too many darned Glocks, they need to be fed all the time and I choose to only carry one around anyway.

Now if I could just find a way to talk myself into one of those .500 S&W when they come out... darn politics anyway!

Don't worry, be happy.

Adios

DeltaElite
February 11, 2003, 09:23 PM
Actually all gun manufacturers are our enemies, since they put serial numbers on guns, that in itself is a form of registration.
Since it makes each gun unique.
That is if I thought along the lines of those who think Glock has sold us out.:rolleyes:

jsalcedo
February 12, 2003, 12:19 AM
I was actually considering a Glock so I could see what the fuss was all about.

I guess that idea is out the window.

The folks at Glock sound just like the former management of Smith and Wesson.

Too bad.

If Glock had just came out and given the RKBA stand on ballistic
characteristics nonsense they wouldn't have to answer to the
hundreds of thousands of angry gun owners.

Its amazing that so few gun manufacturers have their fingers on the pulse of their customers.

Let them die. I urge a Glock Boycott.

Zundfolge
February 12, 2003, 12:54 AM
The problem I've got with Glock is that they KNOW that a ballistic database won't work, yet in their statement they say ... "Will it work? We do not know. Will it be prohibitively expensive? Perhaps it will. But we cannot always just take the knee jerk reaction and say no because we are used to saying no. It needs time and study to either disprove or prove itself."


If they don't know that simply burning up a few boxes of FMJ will change the "fingerprint" of the gun, then I don't want to own a Glock because they are made by idiots :eek:


I'll be honest, a Glock never been very high on my list (although I've been getting the 10mm itch, which had moved the G29 up the list a bit), but at this point I don't think I could own one.

I won't buy a S&W (although I will inherit one when my father passes) and I won't buy a Ruger ... kinda sucks that Glock has made that list too :(

El Rojo
February 12, 2003, 09:27 AM
Good point Delta Elite. All gun manufacturers have been supporting registration for some time now. If they all would just refuse to put on register numbers and tell the feds to go to hell, we would have our 2nd Amendment rights back. I will not buy another firearm from any manufacturer that puts a serial number on their firearm.

This issue is pretty simple. The XO said the PC thing that we should look into the technology available. He probably really means, "I know it won't work, so I will act like it might so I can sound PC and please the bliss ninnys." If that pisses you off, good. Nothing wrong with that. Don't buy a Glock. Teach them a lesson where it matters most, with your wallet.

If you still want to buy a Glock, go for it. They didn't "sell out", they "mouthed out". Now the rest of the gun manufacturers take note, don't say stupid things or attempt to sell out your customer base. If you do, you will pay. If you even sound like you want to sell us out, you are going to suffer.

Firearms enthusiasts are an interesting, finicky bunch.

NewShooter78
February 12, 2003, 09:30 AM
I think that maybe its a bit overblown, but since I had no interest in buying a Glock anyway, let them reap the whirlwind for this. Cowtowing to government agencies so that you can keep your contracts with them is a bad way to manage your business. And pandering to the anit crowd is even worse.

What Glock's VP should have said in the interview is that it is a rediculous thing to consider. He should have stated how easily a BF can be changed, and how quick a barrel could be swapped out. But then again maybe he did and it was edited out? I seriously doubt that though.

You can boycot them if you want, or you can buy them up if you want. But obviously a lot of gun owners have been turning up the heat on Glock if they have released those two letters already.

Wildalaska
February 12, 2003, 02:23 PM
I will not buy another firearm from any manufacturer that puts a serial number on their firearm

Guess you wont be buying any guns then...

Airwolf
February 12, 2003, 06:12 PM
I didn't see this tidbit posted before so I thought I'd add it to the thread for completeness and to give us a more detailed historical record of these events.

A member of full-auto.com contacted Glock to find out what the deal *really* was.

full-auto.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=004307

I'm leaving the link cold since Full-Auto doesn't have our "standards of decorum" :D

I'm also editing this to stay within THR standards.

********

I have been very vocal (imagine that!) with all my friends, congresscritters, etc on my RKBA position, and I wont start laying low now.

I was fairly troubled after 60 minutes Sunday night. I did the Glocktalk thing, and was watching the thread. Mr [Jannuzzo] released a fax yesterday, which you can ready for yourself here.

After reading his position, I decided to call and leave him a goodbye message. Switchboard put me through to Legal, which told me to hold on. He, [Jannuzzo] answered.

We chatted for a few minutes, he was very aggressive/defensive from word one. After he saw I wasnt swayed by his attempt to rationalize his position, he said and I quote, "This whole thing was started by a bunch of Internet yay-hoos". I was thinking, who the **** is he calling a yay-hoo? He proceeded to imply 60 Minutes did a spin, which I dont doubt, but I aksed, If they spun you so bad, why did your fax not relay that thought, and why did it reenforce your position of pro BF?

He then told me,"You obviously havent been listening to a G** Damn word I have said. Click.

*********

That pretty well speaks for itself, does it not.

It would appear that Glock really doesn’t think much of a large portion of its customer base.

Well, THIS "Internet yay-hoo" will be doing his best to see your business pay the price for such misjudgment and unfathomable arrogance.

4thHorseman
February 12, 2003, 06:33 PM
Airwolf, Jannuzzo is history, he's the last living cell in a dead body. They'll can him for sure now.
You know he is taking heavy incoming rounds now. No dought, it's only a short time left for him. He is costing Glock mega bucks. Money drives a free society.

DeltaElite
February 12, 2003, 07:28 PM
You guys are not yay-hoos...... yah-hoos, but not yay-hoos. :neener:

Is anyone really believing this conversation occurred?
Puhleasssssssse. :rolleyes:

Remember, serial numbers are our true enemy.
So quickly take your Dremel and grind em off all of your guns, it's ok really, it is. :p

4thHorseman
February 12, 2003, 07:31 PM
I guess you could say, "Jannuzzo had shot himself in the foot with his Glock!":D :D :D

Guntalk
February 14, 2003, 07:04 AM
Looks like you'll be able to hear it from his own lips. Jannuzzo has asked to be on Gun Talk radio this Sunday, from the SHOT Show.

I'll get that set up today.

I'll post the details here when I get them.

Kahr carrier
February 14, 2003, 07:16 AM
It looks like Glock is doing a little back pedaling. But personally I still like Glocks and I really dont like boycotting gun makers .Thats almost playing in to the what the Anti-gunners want ONE LESS GUN MANUFACTURER but thats just my 2 cents.:)

anchored
February 14, 2003, 10:22 AM
Glock's statement sounds fairly reasonable to me. After all, the gun itself is tied to the serial number and not the person, and that information is kept.
Plus, if it's so dang useless and ineffective, it must be harmless.
In any event, having the spent casings does nothing to tie the gun to the person any more than having the serial number does. Let's say the manufacturer gives the FBI the three pieces of info they have - the gun's serial number, the casing, and who the manufacturer shipped the gun to. The casing is entirely useless given the other two bits of data, and they already have those. There is absolutely no way that little piece of brass can be used against a lawful gun owner by itself.

Folks, this simply isn't even close to gun registration. It may be stupid, useless and a waste of time and money, but it doesn't help the anti's at all.

F4GIB
February 14, 2003, 10:35 AM
Carlos posted: During the last Glock purchase, I overheard the dealer give the Serial Number and Model No. to the NCIC person. Thought that was odd. Probably not Glock's doing, but the a-holes are running these illegal databases any which way you look at it.


NICS doesn't require this data. My dealer never gives it because he call tham before he fills in the back side of the 4473.

Get a new dealer. Don't patronize this guy.

riverdog
February 14, 2003, 10:43 AM
If you're really worried about a database at Glock, check out http://glockmeister.com/catalog/default.php/cPath/10_66

If I wanted a .357 Sig, I'd buy a G-31 Upper and put it on my G-22 frame. Uppers are completely replacable with very little gunsmithing required. I can't think of any rationale reason to boycott Glock.

Guntalk
February 14, 2003, 06:57 PM
Paul Jannuzzo, of Glock, is scheduled to call in to Tom Gresham's Gun Talk radio show this Sunday at 4:15pm, EASTERN time.

He will be there to clarirfy the comments on ballistic imaging.

The show will be live from the SHOT Show in Orlando, starting at 2:06pm Eastern time, broadcasting from the Smith & Wesson booth.

Companies scheduled to be on the show to tell about their new products include S&W, Browning, Winchester, Marlin, Benelli, M-Pro7, and Leupold.

If you don't get the show locally, you can listen on the net.

www.guntalk.com

publius
February 16, 2003, 08:20 PM
So what did he say?

MountainPeak
February 16, 2003, 10:47 PM
publius, I've been trying to find out the same thing. IF he showed, my guess is his answers probably were a mirror of S&W's management statements after they stepped in it! If he didn't call in, why not? I have been trying to give the guy the benefit of doubt, but after they failed to even give me a "canned" response after the 2000 Glock Annual's BF announcement, I won't hold my breath. Thought I would add, I did try and listen to the program, but only caught the end when a S&W rep. was talking about revolvers. The little I caught was interesting. Their latest "BIG DAWG" platform could(someday) carry a 10 shot 357mag revolver. Now that I realize I can get the program off computer from Portland, I plan on listening to it.

Thumper
February 17, 2003, 12:04 AM
GLOCK is not for gun registration plain and simple.

I'm still confused as to why some see that as an ambiguous statement. Sounds pretty plain to me.

Zundfolge
February 17, 2003, 12:17 AM
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
GLOCK is not for gun registration plain and simple.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



I'm still confused as to why some see that as an ambiguous statement. Sounds pretty plain to me.


nobody sees the statement as ambiguous we see it as a lie.

All ballistic fingerprint database plans would require gun registration ... the silly notion that the ballistic fingerprint is tied only to the serial number of the gun is a distortion of the truth. It's like saying the license plate on your car is only tied to the VIN. What they don't say is that the VIN is tied to the name of the purchaser.

Tamara
February 17, 2003, 02:13 AM
NICS doesn't require this data. My dealer never gives it because he call tham before he fills in the back side of the 4473.

Get a new dealer. Don't patronize this guy.

Don't be so sure. ;)

It depends on whether one is going directly through NICS, or through a state program. In Georgia, they didn't want to know anything except "Handgun or Long Gun?", here in TN, the TBI wants the whole shooting match (make, model, s/n). Maybe Oregon works that way, too?

Thumper
February 17, 2003, 02:21 AM
nobody sees the statement as ambiguous we see it as a lie.

That hardly jibes with some claims here that Glock is trying to appear PC.

Guntalk
February 17, 2003, 08:10 AM
Paul Jannuzzo was in a meeting with Gaston Glock during the radio show yesterday. He sent someone to tell me what was going on, and that he wants to be on Gun Talk next Sunday.

I said that was okay with me. I'll set that up this week and post the particulars here so all can know what time he is scheduled for.

4thHorseman
February 17, 2003, 11:48 AM
"Paul Jannuzzo was in a meeting with Gaston Glock during the radio show yesterday. He sent someone to tell me what was going on, and that he wants to be on Gun Talk next Sunday."

Thanks Tom. Glock is trying to repair all the damage Jannuzzo did. I wouldn't want to be in their shoes right now. But on the other hand, I'd never be in their shoes to begin with. I would never say something so stupid. Jannuzzo"s time is limited. It is the end of his career at Glock.

If you enjoyed reading about "Glock's response" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!