Glock Spokesman Resigns


PDA






Guntalk
February 19, 2003, 05:07 PM
I just got a call from a reliable source that said Paul Jannuzzo, the Glock spokesman who appeared on "60 Minutes," has resigned.

Jannuzzo was scheduled to be a guest on Gun Talk Radio last Sunday, but cancelled because he was in a meeting with Gaston Glock. He was scheduled to be on the show this coming Sunday.

When I called his direct line this afternoon, there was no answer. Within 10 minutes of that call, I got a call from another firearm industry insider who said he had solid information that Jannuzzo has resigned.

I have no other details at this time.

If you enjoyed reading about "Glock Spokesman Resigns" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Gewehr98
February 19, 2003, 05:12 PM
Gave Jannuzzo the option of either being fired or resigning? ;)

10-Ring
February 19, 2003, 05:22 PM
I wouldn't be surprised to see more heads roll. Glock has experienced some negative press in the last few months. Suddenly (IMHO), they need a PR makeover :)

AZTOY
February 19, 2003, 05:23 PM
:D :D :D

CZ-75
February 19, 2003, 05:37 PM
But if you kill the messenger, does that make him less of an errand-boy?

Truth is likely that Glock needed a fall guy.

For the truly cynical (possibly me) this may be high theatre, with Januzzo and/or Gaston Glock orchestrating everything to both "test the waters" and make themselves out to be white knights who sacrificed one of their own when he strayed from the fold. Januzzo will either take a public sector job, or work as a lobbyist (probably for the NRA, since they're good at waffling).

larry_minn
February 19, 2003, 05:37 PM
Sounds like a good start. BUT they need to advertise that he went (off script) in his statements and that Glock does NOT support this huge waste of time/money. Until then No new Glocks for me,

Guntalk
February 19, 2003, 05:45 PM
Jannuzzo is a lawyer. He has been very involved in defending Glock and the firearms industry from the lawsuits filed by various cities.

His recent comments left a lot of gun industry people shaking their heads in wonder, because Paul has been considered very sharp, and one of the really good guys.

I would not be surprised to see him appear somewhere else in the firearms world.

Schuey2002
February 19, 2003, 05:48 PM
It's about time!!:fire:

SoDFW Jason
February 19, 2003, 05:49 PM
Talk about steppin' on your weenie :neener:

MitchSchaft
February 19, 2003, 05:50 PM
That doesn't change anything. They need to renounce what he's stated about the whole BF issue and let us know that they will never be involved with any type of infringement as such.

Soap
February 19, 2003, 05:50 PM
Thank God that one apparently anti-gun gun company has the cajones to let the heads roll.

blades67
February 19, 2003, 05:56 PM
He didn't step on it, he put on his extra large golf shoes an danced on it.:what: :evil:

larryw
February 19, 2003, 05:57 PM
I think Jannuzzo's comments on 60 Minutes were Gaston's position and he quit because he was sick of taking the heat for someone else's words. As has been stated, he's a successful lawyer with a long history of pro-gun rights activism. Why the sudden reversal if it wasn't dictated to him?

Think about it: do you really think Jannuzzo and Gaston didn't have a long talk to discuss what exactly was Glock's corporate position prior to the 60 Minutes interview? Ballistic fingerprinting means more funding for police and other LE agencies. More funding in these arenas means more sales for Glock.

My guess is we'll hear from Jannuzzo shortly, however, this time as a private citizen.

SkySlash
February 19, 2003, 06:02 PM
This doesn't change ANYTHING for me, even if it is true.

While Januzzo is an individual, he is still on the record as a spokesman for the Glock Corporation.

Until the Glock Corporation quits pussyfooting around the issue of their stance on both BF and whether or not they keep a record of fired casings, all future Glock purchases for me stay on hold.

-SS

Sactown
February 19, 2003, 06:13 PM
I think Januzzo was just the mouthpiece. I wanna see Glock refute the BF issue. I think they just killed the messanger.

John Forsyth
February 19, 2003, 06:16 PM
I think larryw may be very close to the mark. I think the situation is going to get a lot more interesting in the very near future.

Boats
February 19, 2003, 06:46 PM
I happen to think that until it is confirmed officially by Glock, Januzzo is still on the payroll.

Irrespective of the alleged firing/resignation, I find all of this "corporate courage" talk bemusing. If in fact Januzzo has walked the plank or even if was pushed off, he is hardly the source of the brainrot at Glock Inc.

I would be SHOCKED:what: if it is reality that Januzzo singlehandedly wedded Glock's American fortunes to a BF scheme in partnership with the ATF and FBI. That kind of a deal has the scent of Austria all over it and such a decision would be too big to be left to the execs at the Smyrna subsidiary to make all on their lonesomes in what is by far the most lucrative firearms market in the world.

Glock's miscalcualtions to not begin and end with Januzzo, no matter how much Glock would have everyone believe that, if the Januzzo rumor is true. If there was in fact a parting of ways, it will have come with sufficient hush money so that Januzzo's official release from employment will be because he decided to "pursue other opportunities," and has nothing at all to do with the courage or foresight of Glock Inc. :banghead:

4thHorseman
February 19, 2003, 07:12 PM
I think they got the hint, don't you? Thousands of phone calls and faxes from all of us , I'm sure had a role in the decision to can him.
"He's a fall guy." So what. He's paid the big bucks to put his head on the chopping block if need be. Glock's policy will change now, or they know more of the same will surely follow.

MitchSchaft
February 19, 2003, 07:45 PM
I think they got the hint, don't you?

No. You don't change somebody's morals/values with a few phone calls.

4thHorseman
February 19, 2003, 07:52 PM
S&W got the hint real quick, phone calls, followed by a empty wallet when people quit buying. I think they know they messed up. Jammed phones lines was their first indication.
Did you call or fax Glock and let them know what you thought?

MitchSchaft
February 19, 2003, 07:55 PM
S&W's deal is still in place. They didn't get the idea either. New owners or not.

bamf
February 19, 2003, 07:57 PM
Well you certainly can change a companies outlook when your consumer base starts calling you and saying they won't buy anymore of your products, you hit them right in the old pocket book.

I don't know of any gun manufacturer with a more fantatical fan base than glock and these hardcore fans were saying I won't buy anymore of your products and the company rightly so took care of the mouthpiece that caused the problem.

4thHorseman
February 19, 2003, 07:57 PM
Did you phone or fax Glock on what you thought about Jannuzzo comments?

M58
February 19, 2003, 08:00 PM
Shell game...:p

MitchSchaft
February 19, 2003, 08:03 PM
No, I emailed 'em.

4thHorseman
February 19, 2003, 08:05 PM
Great Mitch, I respect your opinion.;)

Boats
February 19, 2003, 08:18 PM
and the company rightly so took care of the mouthpiece that caused the problem.

Thanks, I needed a laugh.:evil: If Januzzo was the problem, the problem hasn't been correctly diagnosed.

sm
February 19, 2003, 08:22 PM
This was bulleted on my Homepage...Didn't see this posted anywhere else.

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





Statement #1

GLOCK is not for gun registration plain and simple.

A database of firearm characteristics that are captured at the manufacturing site would actually be an argument again registration. GLOCK is not for retrieving and capturing characteristics of firearms that have already been sold: but, rather, believes consideration should be given to capturing the characteristics on new firearms before sale. This way the characteristics are recorded to a serial number not a citizen and his or her gun.

It seems the last point is the most important; the characteristics are tied to a serial number, not a person. This means that since the characteristics are not tied to a person, the ATF would have to do the exact same trace it is entitled by law to do now. Once they receive the cartridge casing from a crime scene, they then would (if the technology works) have a serial number. That way they can go to the manufacturer and ask for the first sale, which, in this case would probably be to a distributor, then they go to the distributor and ask for the name of the dealer and then from the dealer they go to look at the 4473 to see to whom it was sold. If the technology were any good this would seem to be a valuable crime-solving tool, not gun registration. They have the absolute right to do such a trace under the law right now and they do it every single day with every gun manufacturer in existence. To argue against the above scenario would seem to be an argument for criminal anonymity.

Too many people are jumping to conclusions; one has to ask oneself, how could some liberal anti-gunner say people registration is necessary if this concept of a serial number being tied to a firearm’s characteristics is viable? Can it be defeated, sure it can. Can a barrel be altered so that standard ballistic identification of a bullet is defeated? Sure it can. But the jails are not full and overcrowded because criminals are geniuses.

There are obviously limits that need to be set when one speaks of Government intrusion into the life of a citizen. But that is not what we are talking about here. We are talking about recording the mechanical characteristics of a firearm to a serial number and a serial number alone.

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.

Because criminals are as big a threat to civilian ownership of firearms as the antigun are. If it were not for the criminals the anti-gunners would not have an argument against firearms ownership except that they do not trust the people. Would you not love to be around the day that mask finally comes off?

As noted above it is a matter of drawing the line in an intelligent place. And that place may be saying no in this instance, but I do not believe we are at the place and have the necessary information to make that decision. Could ballistic fingerprinting be used as an excuse to go further? Certainly, we are not naïve enough to believe the camel has its nose stuck as far under the tent as it cares to go. The trick is to draw the line on the slippery slope in an intelligent place. Obviously, a national database or DNA registry could be a great crime-solving tool. But will we as Americans allow that level of intrusion into our personal privacy? Of course we will not. Likewise here there has to be a balancing of costs (intrusion into personal freedom) to benefits (potential crime solving tool). And, since there is no intrusion into our personal freedom and there is a potential for it to be crime-solving tool the equation clearly comes down on the side of waiting to see if the technology has any viability.

Statement #2 ( posted February 11, 2003 )

GLOCK IS NOT keeping a database on ballistic fingerprint of GLOCK pistols being shipped and neither are we giving anyone else data to retain. We are not collecting any data that could be put into a database. The questions about ballistic fingerprinting were conceptual in nature as the technology is yet to be proven.

Yes, GLOCK is capturing shell casings at the time of test firing. For a firearm to be shipped to either Maryland or New York it must be accompanied by shell casings. Otherwise, law abiding citizens in Maryland and New York could not purchase handguns of any sort.

Since GLOCK may be the only handgun manufacturer that test fires every single weapon it ships, we capture shell casings from each pistol and put them in a manila envelope. Nothing further is done with the shell casings. No ballistic fingerprint is taken, no data is collected and, therefore, no data is or can be stored.

We capture every shell casing so that the distribution network does not have to distinguish between firearms legal for sale in Maryland and New York and those legal for sale in the rest of the country. This is done for two reasons: one, it is easier for our distributors and dealers to maintain inventory and to ship to all 50 states; and, two, it helps to avoid shipping the wrong firearm to Maryland and New York and subjecting an unsuspecting dealer to criminal charges for selling an illegal firearm.

4thHorseman
February 19, 2003, 08:25 PM
You would think Glock could afford a spell checker program.

Intune
February 19, 2003, 09:14 PM
Are CNC manufactured barrels, bolts and firing pins as individualistic as fingerprints? I can hear it now: “So Mr. Smith, we have this casing from Glock Inc. and guess what? It is a close match to a casing we found at the crime scene. And you have no one who can vouch for your whereabouts on the night in question. Please step over here sir and put your hands on the wall…” What are the chances??? Frankly, I’d rather not take the chance of misidentification if there is one.

NIB
February 19, 2003, 10:22 PM
I wonder why everybody is all of a sudden bent up over this. It ain't anything new because I brought this up 2 years ago in GT after I read about it in an article and nobody cared. I guess because anything negative against Glock is supposed to be false according to GT.

:scrutiny:

Dean Speir
February 24, 2003, 02:23 PM
I think there's some question about the genuineness of Glock, Inc.'s second statement in relation to this from ATF, almost three years ago:ATF is currently conducting a pilot project with Glock, wherein they will capture digital image a test fire shell casing for handgun they manufacture. That image will be associated with the serial number of the firearm in a computer database. Later if a shell casing is recovered at a crime scene it could be compared against the Glock database. ATF Source (http://www.atf.treas.gov/press/speech/fy00/040700ggdsymposium.htm).

And Jannuzzo didn't quit; he and his fiancée, Monica Berecky, Glock, Inc.'s Human Resources Manager, were fired by Gaston Glock at the end of SHOT Show over an issue which had nothing to do with the statement he made on 60 Minutes. Intuitively, however, I wouldn't be surprised to see Jannuzzo resurface with the company which pioneered the Ibis "ballistic DNA" system, Forensic Technology of Montreal.

twoblink
February 24, 2003, 09:26 PM
For those in the market for a glock, might I recommend a Steyr instead? Steyr, the other white meat!

4thHorseman
February 24, 2003, 11:03 PM
twoblink, got a web site address for Steyr?

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