testtest

Glock G26......

BET7 said:
I wonder if it's because Glock doesn't make any with manual safeties (like the 1911's, etc). Maybe Mass. doesn't think Glock's trigger safety mechanism is "Safe" enough. Just a thought. I've seen many manufacture's websites, have different models Indicating Mass. compliant, Cali. compliant, etc. Never really looked into these models, as I was fortunate not to live there.
Click to expand...
I originally thought that about the safeties, but I do have a few Sigs without them and they do sell the S&W models with and without safety. I have a Shield 2.0 without. My Sig 320 has a safety which means it's not at all modular unless I am cutting out the safety notches in the grips (that infuriates me) and my 365 has a safety as well. I think if it has a safety, trigger pull can be "normal" If it doesn't, it has to be 10 pounds. This is when it's sold. There is no law (yet) saying it can't be modified after purchase. I did put an Apex spring kit in my Shield. It's like spinning the roulette wheel here trying to guess what they are thinking and why.

I think Glock just wasn't going to modify their weapons for MA.
 
jmcd said:
I originally thought that about the safeties, but I do have a few Sigs without them and they do sell the S&W models with and without safety. I have a Shield 2.0 without. My Sig 320 has a safety which means it's not at all modular unless I am cutting out the safety notches in the grips (that infuriates me) and my 365 has a safety as well. I think if it has a safety, trigger pull can be "normal" If it doesn't, it has to be 10 pounds. This is when it's sold. There is no law (yet) saying it can't be modified after purchase. I did put an Apex spring kit in my Shield. It's like spinning the roulette wheel here trying to guess what they are thinking and why.

I think Glock just wasn't going to modify their weapons for MA.
Click to expand...
Do you know exactly what modification Ma. would like Glock to do to their pistols (i.e. have models with manual safeties)?. I know you mentioned that Ma. wants each manufacture to supply their firearms for testing. Why would Glock not submit to that? Just curious, not indicating you or anyone knows what mysterious reasons Ma. has for such nonsense.
 
jmcd said:
I originally thought that about the safeties, but I do have a few Sigs without them and they do sell the S&W models with and without safety. I have a Shield 2.0 without. My Sig 320 has a safety which means it's not at all modular unless I am cutting out the safety notches in the grips (that infuriates me) and my 365 has a safety as well. I think if it has a safety, trigger pull can be "normal" If it doesn't, it has to be 10 pounds. This is when it's sold. There is no law (yet) saying it can't be modified after purchase. I did put an Apex spring kit in my Shield. It's like spinning the roulette wheel here trying to guess what they are thinking and why.

I think Glock just wasn't going to modify their weapons for MA.
Click to expand...
Massachusetts approved handguns need to have some type of loaded chamber indicator along withe the 10lb trigger. They are also subject to drop testing. Every variation of a firearm model needs to be submitted for testing before approval. This includes the same gun but in a different color scheme.
 
BET7 said:
Do you know exactly what modification Ma. would like Glock to do to their pistols (i.e. have models with manual safeties)?. I know you mentioned that Ma. wants each manufacture to supply their firearms for testing. Why would Glock not submit to that? Just curious, not indicating you or anyone knows what mysterious reasons Ma. has for such nonsense.
Click to expand...
Glock also has been sued by the state of Massachusetts a few times.
 
BET7 said:
Do you know exactly what modification Ma. would like Glock to do to their pistols (i.e. have models with manual safeties)?. I know you mentioned that Ma. wants each manufacture to supply their firearms for testing. Why would Glock not submit to that? Just curious, not indicating you or anyone knows what mysterious reasons Ma. has for such nonsense.
Click to expand...
That's a valid question. I'll log into my local states pro-gun organization and see if they have anything.
 
BET7 said:
Do you know exactly what modification Ma. would like Glock to do to their pistols (i.e. have models with manual safeties)?. I know you mentioned that Ma. wants each manufacture to supply their firearms for testing. Why would Glock not submit to that? Just curious, not indicating you or anyone knows what mysterious reasons Ma. has for such nonsense.
Click to expand...
Best answer but with no specifics:

"Glock does not sell pistols directly to Massachusetts consumers because the guns do not conform with Massachusetts' safety requirements."

As @10mmLife mentioned. The AG here has sued Glock and has requested multiple documents not only from Glock, but also from Remington (at the time) dealing with "gun safety, product defects, misleading marketing and failure to honor warranties".
 
jmcd said:
Best answer but with no specifics:

"Glock does not sell pistols directly to Massachusetts consumers because the guns do not conform with Massachusetts' safety requirements."

As @10mmLife mentioned. The AG here has sued Glock and has requested multiple documents not only from Glock, but also from Remington (at the time) dealing with "gun safety, product defects, misleading marketing and failure to honor warranties".
Click to expand...
Hmmm, I wonder what their safety requirements are. If I were Glock and Remington, I'd consider counter suing if they had sufficient cause that Ma. was being unreasonable outside the law with their suits.
 
BET7 said:
OK 👌 10mm, I'll wait until you complete your research 👨‍💻👨‍⚖️. I have all night, but do wish you'll be quick about it ⏳⌛⏱.
Click to expand...
1583805175018.jpeg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top