Paul Barrett’s: Glock, The Rise of America’s Gun

[RatherNotSay]

The United States embraced the Glock, turning an obscure Austrian pistol into "America's Gun." Today, when many Americans (mostly non-gun people) want to refer to a semiauto pistol, they say, "Glock." When movie and television directors put a gun in a cop's hand, it's usually a Glock. When a crime novelist wants to refer to a handgun in a sophisticated way, they refer to a "Glock." Look at the American handgun market in 1985 (dominated by revolvers and 1911s); look at that market today (dominated by Glocks and Glock-like models). That begins to explain the subtitle. Thanks for your interest! Hope you get the book, since you're a "Glock guy," and I can't imagine readers who would enjoy it more than Glock guys (and gals). All the best, Paul Barrett @GlockTheBook

I guess I can kind of understand but to say that glock "dominates" the market today is a little subjective. Maybe 20 years ago but "dominates" a strong word. Is it popular? OF COURSE! Is it considered one of the most reliable guns today? Of course! The directors and novelist are, I'm sorry to say, not very informed when it comes to the firearm market. I've honestly never heard of "non gun people" referring to semi autos as "glocks" in particular. It sounds like an interesting read though. I'll try and pick it up as it sparks an interest.

 

[Paul Barrett]

An author says thanks!

Well, all I can ask is that you pick it up and give it a read. Once you have, let's continue this discussion about the Glock's role not just in American gun circles but in the larger culture. I hope I persuade you that Glock has had more of an impact than many people realize. In any event, if you are inclined to get the book (either the Kindle version or the good old dead tree version), Amazon.com is offering a terrific discount if you "pre-order" now for delivery Jan 10. All the best, and thanks again for your interest, Paul Barrett @GlockTheBook

 

[zfk55]

And are you, in fact pro RKBA, or into restrictions placed on firearms as pertains to mag capacity and types of firearms deemed "proper" for us to own?

 

[Paul Barrett]

RKBA

I'm not sure I'm obliged to respond to your loyalty test, but I will say this: The Second Amendment is right there in the Bill of Rights. The U.S. Supreme Court has interpreted the Second Amendment to mean that laws that effectively ban the possession of handguns are unconstitutional. The Supreme Court, Justice Antonin Scalia for the majority, has also said that the Second Amendment does not prevent government from imposing reasonable restrictions on the RKBA, such as prohibiting children, the mentally ill, and felons from buying or possessing firearms.

If you read my book, GLOCK: The Rise of America's Gun, you'll see that my personal views on gun control are not central to telling the story of the Glock's rise in the United States. I don't think my personal views are all that important (who cares, really?). What I hope to offer is not so much an argument about the RKBA, but a narrative history of interest to a wide range of readers holding various views on the appropriate role and regulation firearms. Thanks much for your interest. -- Paul Barrett @GlockTheBook

 

[TheJ]

This is a great read. I found it fascinating both as somebody who has a big interest in Glock and other firearms generally as well as how the business achieved it's status in the America. I found the story that unfolded as I learned about some of the history and players behind the success of Glock to be surprisingly exciting and even riveting at times. The more I read the book the the more I wanted to keep reading it. I was actually disappointed that it had to end.

 

[SleazyRider]

Welcome!

I look forward to reading your book and to your reading at The Book Court in Brooklyn on the tenth!

 

[Paul Barrett]

GLOCK book reading Jan 10

Members of The High Road are cordially invited to a reading and reception for

GLOCK: The Rise of America's Gun​

January 10 @ 7pm
Book Court, 163 Court Street, Brooklyn, NY (Cobble Hill)

I'll read from and discuss the book, and we'll lift a glass, if you're so inclined.
Please stop by and say hello (and buy a book)!

All best,
Paul Barrett
Author, GLOCK: The Rise of America's Gun
www.glockthebook.com

 

[theCloud]

I'm not gonna buy the book. No way.
But I will download it onto my iPad!

 

[baronthered]

I don't shop online but my local bookstore has mine pre-ordered.

 

[ball3006]

Glocks are now made somewhere over in GA now...............While your Chevy or Ford pickups are made in Canada or Mexico.........chris3

 

[rosewood151]

RobinKevin said "Just for the record I drive a Toyota Tundra..." Just for the record, your Tundra was built in San Antonio Texas or Princeton Indiana.

 

[youngda9]

RobinKevin said "Just for the record I drive a Toyota Tundra..." Just for the record, your Tundra was built in San Antonio Texas or Princeton Indiana.

Assembled...not designed, analyzed, procured, and tested.. The profits go overseas. (But this is another topic all together. Let's not threadjack)

 

[Hacker15E]

Assembled...not designed, analyzed, procured, and tested.. The profits go overseas.

Except for the profits that go into the very American pockets of the dealer, the US distributor who takes delivery from the factory, the US shippers who move the vehicles by train or truck from the factory to the distributor, all the Americans who work at Toyota USA headquarters in California, all the maintenance people who will work on the truck during it's lifetime, etc.

But other than THAT, you're right..."the profits go overseas".

 

[Zoogster]

I think it is interesting the author would make comments in favor of capacity restrictions when it is the capacity of the Glock that is one of the primary reasons the firearm became popular in the United States and appealed to police.
Faster reloads and higher capacity are the reasons the wonder nines were adopted by police to begin with. That police adoption being what led to widespread civilian adoption.
Without an average capacity 2-3x a typical revolver transition to 'wonder nines' is unlikely to have happened.


I don't know what the book covers and myself am not likely to read it, but I seem to recall Glock originally obtained a large following in the USA by nearly giving away Glocks at a little more than cost to police departments.
Police departments that were adopting 'wonder nines', the primary advantage of them over revolvers being capacity and faster reloads.
Over time this marketing strategy of getting them into the hands of police even if it meant severely reducing profits resulted in the firearm becoming an iconic police firearm.

Your average citizens typically being clueless like to purchase what the police or the military are using out of an assumption that they are the shooting professionals or 'gun experts' and so what they are using must have superior qualities overall to many other options.
You see this trend with several firearms, and the Glock was no exception.
(While the military and many police policies do tend to have minimum standards that make this a safe bet for those without much knowledge, it certainly doesn't meet the level of assumption by the general public.)
So by getting Glocks into the hands of huge numbers of police, Glock got themselves a massive following of people that wanted to buy the gun the police were adopting.


Polymer firearms also cost less to manufacturer than old fashioned steel framed guns, and so since Glock got away with charging as much for a plastic gun as the competition charged for a metal gun, they made a lot more profit per firearm. The industry quickly followed suit marketing and making polymer frames as a result (and pitching the lighter weight and other traits to encourage the market.) Profit is simply greater on a plastic gun, unless the market had demanded it be sold for cheaper, which it did not.
Today as plastic guns become the norm the general firearm price point is based around that, and people now often pay more for quality metal firearms, but originally Glock had a serious advantage.


Glocks work well, a quality product is of course important. I personally find them a good tool.


However I will not be purchasing the book and supporting the writer who has focused on tarnishing Glock in the past while writing for Bloomberg Businessweek.
The focus on trying to get Glock into trouble over tax evasion for example is quite obvious.
Most of big business and many in Congress do similar things, yet because Glock is a firearm manufacturer there is more effort to see them in trouble.
Many times things like 'tax evasion' are discretionary, a bunch of otherwise legal things that someone feels is illegal because all these otherwise legal things are done to reduce how much they will owe in taxes.
Businesses with lots of money, teams of lawyers and financial analysts, and a global business, find ways to protect that money and limit potential loss and liability. One of the ways many do so is to create several officially separate businesses, located in different parts of the world, and focusing each one on working on what the local laws make most profitable. Some of which may focus on only a limited number of things. Not putting all of their eggs in one basket in one company within one nation, and having a business model that makes the most of the laws they operate under within each nation.
While those wanting to take their money can label such things 'shell companies' and accuse them of tax evasion. Among other things.
Those with political anti-gun agendas can focus on gun companies doing what is otherwise quite normal in big business in an attempt to demonize them and get them into trouble. They can even make it appear they are just reporting the facts, and unbiased, while the accusations and intentional focus and coverage on them is itself due to a bias.
Because of past writings by the author, and who they have written for, I am inclined to believe their motivation is partially from something which is not beneficial to the firearm community.
Even though I commend their willingness to get out and promote the selling of their book by personally visiting the forums mentioning his book and most likely to put money in his pockets by buying it.

I think throwing money at him may be only a little better than giving a contribution to Bloomberg himself. Someone knowing about what they write about does not make them friendly to it.
Josh Sugarmann of Violence Policy Center has maintained a Federal Firearm License for quite some time and knew what he was talking about, even while actively working to remove gun rights for Americans.

 

[Dr.Mall Ninja]

I'm not sure I'm obliged to respond to your loyalty test

I feel like that question is legit, you are on a website based on RBKA asking us to support you. All he was asking about magazine restrictions is do you support us? Paul do you own a glock?

I'm not trying to beat you up,i'm consdiering buying the book.

 

[2ifbyC]

I too believe the title is presumptuous. It’s worse than saying the Dallas Cowboy’s are America’s team; at least the Cowboys have American roots. A better title would have been “Glock: The rise of the polymer gun.” I do believe that the analysis that Zoogster provided for the rise is spot-on.
However, in fairness to the author, I can not offer an appraisal without having read the book.

The fact is we have become a global economy. And the number one goal of any company is corporate profits. So labor costs, raw material, government regulation, tax liabilities, unions, as nauseam; all play a part is pricing a product. And where best to sell firearms? England? Canada? How about the USA with gun enthusiasts with the constitutional right to bear arms? So, even with anecdotal data alone, the rise of reliable, accurate, high capacity, light weight handguns is no surprise.

The question in my mind and others as well is the conundrum of financially supporting the author by purchasing his book vis-à-vis the author’s reluctance to voice his personal view on high capacity magazines. I can appreciate the desire of the author to market his book on a gun enthusiast’s forum but he has a duty to reveal his position on the tenets that we law abiding gun owners embrace.

 

[SWMAN]

90% of Glock sales are in the U.S.? What proportion of sale are civilian? Looks like if the U.S. didn't have a 2nd amendment and a strong gun lobby Glocks might be Austria's gun.

 

[Zoogster]

SWman said:

What proportion of sale are civilian? Looks like if the U.S. didn't have a 2nd amendment and a strong gun lobby Glocks might be Austria's gun.

Most gun makers in the world have two legal options, sell to military and police, or sell to the US civilian population.
Large contracts with a military can be great or horrible. They can end a contract and leave you with no recourse and lacking customers, or buy huge numbers at a time and generate vast profits. They are not a dependable constant source of money, and as your only customer make innovation difficult.
Invent something in the civilian market and some may buy it, others will not, and it may at least pay for itself and make some profit. This at least allows you to be creative (like say Kel Tec.) Invent something for the military market and they don't adopt it? Dead end, at least for the foreseeable future and budgets you must balance.
This makes a civilian market much more fluid and ideal, even if you don't get the same bulk sales when things go well.

The result is most gun makers ideally want to sell in the American market, the largest market there is. Especially if they are playing by all the NATO and UN, and EU laws that make export to other potential markets really difficult.


The US gun laws on imports do limit things though.
There is a lot of rules importers must follow that domestic manufacturers do not. Giving most of the CCW market to domestic production for example because small guns, .380 chambered guns, etc don't score enough points to import, and features are required that make them hard to produce in a price competitive manner with American produced models.
Many of the more popular guns in the US are not legal for import. Even many of the Glocks have been imported in a configuration different from the one they are sold in because they don't score enough points for legal import.
Both pistols and revolvers must score a minimum number of points on two different points by feature systems for import, while domestic manufacturers don't have to score any points.
A Ruger LCP or Kel-Tec P3AT for example, popular guns in the US, would never be legal to import and nearly impossible to put into a configuration that would allow it.
Then there is 922(r) for long guns.
Many guns perfectly legal to produce, sell, and own in the US are illegal to import into the US.
This puts foreign manufacturers at a significant disadvantage to those producing guns within the US, and they cannot even take part in large proportions of the market. But it is still the largest market in the world, so if they can find a niche or way in they will.
The other option many take is to open a manufacturing facility in the US to get around the import restrictions.

 

[Paul Barrett]

GLOCK author responds

Thank you for the interest in my book, GLOCK: The Rise of America's Gun, and in my views. Several thoughts in response to recent posts:

-- The proof of the pudding, as the old saying goes, is in the eating. Criticism of my coverage of Glock GmbH, Glock Inc., and their products would be far better grounded it the critic had read my book. I don't mind the online banter; I'm here, afterall, essentially a guest, and I'm a big boy. I can take a verbal punch. But tarring me by association with my employer and then saying you're not going to read the book seems, well, not exactly a thoughtful response. Sorry, that's my honest opinion. Read the book and then have at it.

-- The book is not primarily or even substantially about my views on gun control. It is the story of the Glock. Naturally my views color the way I tell the story. That's inevitable. There's no such thing as pure objectivity. But it is possible for an author to tell a story in an honest way, leaving plenty of room for readers to interpret the facts as they see fit, and still have conclusions of his own. My goals are fairness, accuracy, and illumination. Even if you may disagree with this or that particular opinion I have, I think you'll enjoy and maybe even benefit from reading the book.

-- I would own a Glock if it were not so arduous to obtain a pistol permit in New York City, where I live. It's just not worth the trouble, as far as I'm concerned. I have fired Glocks of various sizes and calibers on many occasions and even in a couple of IDPA competitions. I have taken instruction from some of the best in the business--namely, Massad Ayoob and Frank DiNuzzo. (Either one of those gentlemen, by the way, can attest to my fairness and integrity.) If you're a burglar and think that because I do not own a firearm, my apartment would be easy pickings, I urge you to think again. I keep my trusty aluminum softball bat near the front door and another one in the bedroom. You will not receive a friendly welcome. (I've never had a break-in, and I've never been a crime victim, save one time when I was a teenager visiting New York. A skinny kid pulled a knife on me in the subway, and demanded my wallet. This was circa about 1978; the bad old days in NYC. I ran up the subway steps and out onto the street, and he did not follow. End of story. No heroics, no casualties. Life in the big city.)

-- As for the RKBA, I think I answered the question. I have no problem with the Supreme Court's interpretation of the Second Amendment in the Heller and McDonald cases. I recognize and respect that firearms play an enormous role in American culture. Guns happen not to be central to my everyday life, but I enjoy shooting. My wife does, too, and she happens to be a better shot than I. Finally, I have made many friends and acquaintances among gun owners and Second Amendment advocates. I am glad to have established these relationships, and I've learned a lot from these folks. One of the joys of my work is that I get to meet people deeply involved in and committed to pursuits that not necessarily central to my life. These experiences remind me how lucky I am to live in a large and varied society where, other things being equal, most people respect the Golden Rule and are content to allow others to go about their business.

All the best to The High Road crowd & Happy Holidays! Thanks for all the interest in the book.

Paul Barrett

 

[jj1962hemi]

Paul, you're a gentleman and I appreciate your engagement.

I think "America's Gun" is an apt title due to the growth and broad acceptance (60% (?) of America's LEOs use them). I'm a blue steel and walnut type of guy, but, to me, the Glock is the Toyota Camry of pistols. Solid, reliable, relatively low cost for value. America's military helped launch the Peacemaker, the 1911, then the M9 in to America. LEOs and the military, while not having ALL members being gun-savvy, tend to torture test their sidearms far more than most of us ever will. That seal of approval makes them more marketable to a weekend shooter like me.

The fact that the revolver-like nature of Glocks has become so popular a design (so quickly) is amazing to me. I surely will own one some day.

Regarding your views on RKBA, the reason it may be relevant to many of us (respecting your privacy, this is not a loyalty demand) is that everybody's narrative is informed by their opinion. I remember a poll showing that 80% of news anchors in the U.S. didn't vote for Reagan in 1980. For me, that's why Fox News (worts and all) is a valid alternative. I never see a pro-gun, pro-concealed carry feature on my local news or in the national media, although ~3% of American men are in the NRA. This certainly eclipses ACLU membership or anything else except, maybe, AARP (and I hope AMAC takes over a share of that market).

We all tend to be skeptical due to the typical media dismissal of our values, which are broadly held in our society.

Thank you very much for your engagement and friendship!

JJ

 

[2ifbyC]

Mr. Barrett:
I applaud you for taking the time and effort to explain the intent for writing your book and for addressing some of the concerns that were posted.

I have a few comments in response:

- I have come to view the media as overly liberal and have grown cynical as a result. When you are affiliated with a liberal news organization, you may be tarred with a broader brush. Fair? No, but few play fair nowadays.

- There is another axiom that states, “You can’t judge a book by its cover”. Then why is such thought given to the title of a book? One reason is that it’s like a first impression; it either intrigues you or puts you off. If it’s the latter, you are going to lose sales.

- We can agree to disagree but would you support a cause that you had ideological differences with? We have fought long and hard for our 2nd amendment rights. You have asked that we purchase your book on good faith. We asked you to disclose whether you are friend or foe. Without a money back guarantee, you had some “splaining” to do. Your answer on RKBA was tenuous at best.

Thanks again for posting; your comments allowed a deeper insight into the man behind the curtain. I too wish you and your family Happy Holidays.

 

[ZeBool]

Paul, I feel like you're skirting around the Second Amendment question. You weren't asked if you wrote anything anti-gun in the book, instead you were asked for your personal view on the issue. I would not give my money to Paul Helmke in order to read anything that he has written, so why should I support an author that is wishy-washy at best when it comes to something that I have worked hard to support? The fact that you shoot does not make you a supporter. Many celebrities have armed body guards or utilize firearms in some capacity to protect themselves, yet don't support my right to do the same. You have entered a forum dedicated to firearms/gun rights to pitch your book, yet have offered little reason as to why I should support you and buy it.

 

[Paul Barrett]

GLOCK book author responds

At the risk of repeating myself, let me say, thanks for all of this heartfelt interest in my book about GLOCK. I'm impressed by the commitment.

My only additional thought is that if you only buy and read books by people who you already know you agree with on every last point, then I would not risk your hard-earned money on my book. There is definitely a risk that you will find a sentence or maybe a paragraph that strikes you funny, or maybe even wrong (although I hope you won't find even a word that is factually incorrect...I vetted the manuscript with several scholarly "gun guys" to make sure I got the details right). If you don't want to buy or read a book by someone who is skeptical of the NRA as a fundraising organization that relies on scare tactics -- which doesn't, btw, give away my views on guns, the Second Amendment, or much of anything else, apart from my opinion of the NRA -- then I definitely would steer clear of my book. On the other hand, if you are a die-hard gun control advocate and do not want to read about how your movement made up phony criticisms of the Glock and pushed for restrictive laws whose effect was the opposite of what was intended, well, you should skip the book, too. I pull no punches.

For what it's worth (possibly nothing), I go out of my way to buy and read publications and books that I know I'm going to disagree with to some degree. I like to test my ideas against facts and arguments with which I'm not familiar. I admire good, honest reporting even when it is done by someone who may have voted for a different person that I did for president. Plus, it's just fun to see what everyone is saying.

Finally, if you do decide to risk $26 retail or $16 right now on preorder discount from Amazon.com, I think you'll see that my perspective is not easily categorized. My wife has diagnosed me with a syndrome she calls Oppositional Personality Disorder. I'm a skeptic of all sides. I enjoy digging out facts that contradict deeply held premises and assumptions, be they liberal, conservative or in-between. If that's the kind of guide you're looking for on a journey to examine the invention, dissemination, and popularization of the Glock pistol, well, then, hop aboard. If not, God bless, kiss your wife, pat the dog, and have a great holiday. No hard feelings here. -- Paul Barrett, author, GLOCK: The Rise of America's Gun

 

[lowerunit411]

Bravo Paul...Merry Christmas

 

[amd6547]

I myself am an avid reader of opposing viewpoints.
But the ambiguous answer regarding the Second Amendment reminds me of why I am so glad to live near an excellent library, where I can read these opposing viewpoints without contributing my money to the author.
I will read this Glock book from my library.