Stories like this are very confusing to me and it just makes me frustrated, and wish I understood the law better. I thought consumer products were generally protected from lawsuits if damages were a result of illegal/improper use- murder seems like it would fall under at least 1 of these categories. Those switch gadgets are very illegal as they themselves are considered a FA weapon as I understand- of course, this would not apply to a private owner of one of these things who had gone through the required NFA process, but I doubt the people causing these problems have tax stamps for their modified guns. The facts that I know for sure is that Glock has been making their pistols since 1982, and those FA switches are a fairly new phenomenon on the streets- I never even heard of them prior to 2014 or so- but something I would think is important to know is that Glock didn't produce these illegal switches. This makes me think that the wrong party is being sued. Maybe Chicago should sue china, since I have been told that lots of these things are produced and smuggled in from there. And maybe sure them for fentanyl too.
To muddy the waters even more, the internet told me that the standard sidearm of the Chicago PD is a Glock pistol. So the municipality that is suing Glock is a customer of Glock. Will the plaintiff continue to do business with Glock while this matter is still in the system? Is continuing to do business with the opposition in the middle of a big lawsuit even legal? Cause it seems like a bad idea to me- definitely an awkward situation, and a serious concern if the police can't get goods and services for their pistols (replacement guns, factory warranty work, repair parts, specialty tools, magazines, armorer support and training, etc,)
Lastly, with the war-zone like situation on the ground in chiraq, it doesn't seem like enforcement and pacification of these specific "trouble areas" in the windy city is even a goal. I think people in charge prefer to just complain about it and blame the fact that they can't get the undesirable elements of their own population under control on people who don't even live near that place. I would think the feds would want to have a much heavier footprint on the ground there in terms of manpower for enforcement purposes. I believe most new employees of taxpayer funded LE agencies like the atf, DEA, FBI, etc. should expect their first assignment to be a "hardship assignment" to a trouble spot like chi town. The additional manpower is obviously needed (since the local authorities are either incapable, unwilling, or not allowed to fix their problems) and these new highly trained agents would get so much valuable experience right out of the gate, since failed policies have made these enclaves of crime such a target rich area for enforcement ops. Most of these offenders don't seem to have much sense, considering they are putting pics and videos of themselves all over social media with these weapons- most people see another felon that can't be stopped, but a highly trained operator should laugh at that and see that fool as an easy win for apprehension. NOT taking measures like this shows me a lack of dedication to fixing the problem. I truly believe taxpayer funded LE assets could be better put to use to protect and serve our citizenry by placing them in these lawless places to regain control, instead of squandering that talent by using them for menial work like going to people's homes to scold them for possibly purchasing something in the past that a body other than congress decided at a later time is illegal, or disrupting honest merchants trying to do business.
www.thetruthaboutguns.com
