"60 Minutes" tonight (Glock might not be our friend)

Status
Not open for further replies.
J

JeremyIA

Member
Joined
Feb 9, 2003
Messages
116
I know that some people love Glock pistols and I know that some people hate them. We all need to rise up and remind Glock of what happened to S&W when they wavered.

60 Minutes did a special on ballistic fingerprinting this evening. Mr. La Pierre did a great job of countering the argument but it was naturally slanted to make the NRA look evil. Then I was floored. A representative from Glock Inc., USA took a position sympathetic to the pro-ballistic-fingerprinting crowd.

I don't think Glock has an email address so I'll be calling them in the morning and then I'll be writing them a letter.
 
What advantage did Smith & Wesson have for bending their ear to the anti-gun crowd? None. We have to remind Glock to keep up on the history of the issue.
 
The guy was their VP in Georgia. At first he talks about how much additional it costs to do the testing for the two states that currently require it. Then he turns around and says he doesn't think it's really all that big of a deal.

Then the host mentioned that the two states that already require ballistic fingerprints have not had one single match in any of the guns in their database. They say that this means it just needs to be done on a national level.

One of their major jabs at the NRA was about a video the NRA produced that shows why ballistic fingerprinting is a waste of time and demonstrates how simple it is to alter the fingerprint. The 60 Minutes host promptly labeled it a "how to" video and said the NRA doesn't mind showing it to anyone that wants to learn how to do it. Implying of course, the NRA was teaching BG's how to alter their guns. :banghead:
 
I doubt Glock really cares. Until they get affected by something they say, build, sell, or recall through less sales, they couldn't care less. PC or not, w/ all those PD's & private citizen sales, why should they change anything?
 
Hkmp5sd--The GLOCK VP did not say that he didn't think it was a big deal. He said that we shouldn't be so quick to dismiss ballistic fingerprinting. He, in more words or less, implied that we should have an open mind to ballistic fingerprinting. The fact is, he sold out. He should have taken the pro-gun position instead of waffling when he was asked the tough questions.
 
I don't think anything was taken out of context. The Glock VP from Georgia thinks it's a good idea even though they have to go to more trouble and expense to meet New YorK and Maryland requirements (two test fires for each firearm and keeping the shell casings tied to the serial number,etc).

No Glocks for me thank you.........
 
Obviously, Paul Jannuzzo hasn't given this much thought. His general attitude is that he refuses to care whether ballistic fingerprinting infringes on our rights or not.

I'd say thats typical of a highly paid vice-president of a major corporation, wouldn't you?
 
Before we all jump on Glock, anyone got a transcript of this?

I didn't see it myself, but perhaps maybe 60 slanted the Glock rep's words?
 
...looks like a new boycott coming,.....no Glocks for me.....how soon they forget....are they U.S. owned?
 
If Glock is being "PC", its probably because they get most of their business from police contracts and don't want to anger the mostly liberal city governments.
 
I think it's important to have all the facts on this. I just saw the segment, and based on what I saw, Glock sold out. But as was pointed out earlier, 60 Minutes is quite good at creative editing.

How often do anti-gunners attack us without having all the facts? We don't want to be like them. I'd like to hear or read something from Glock itself, or at least hear of a corroborating interview before I pass the word to people I know to stop buying Glocks.

If this is actually Glock's position, they deserve a Kmart sized boycott.
 
Saw the whole episode, and there was no way the Glock guy was taken out of context. He wants to be PC, and the rest of us be damned.

LaPierre did a decent job, but he never pointed out that the "fingerprint" of guns changes as they're fired.

The "60 Minutes" gang never addressed the issue of how much it might cost the US to implement this system. Why not? Why not say that it might cost hundreds of billions of dollars, and result in a handful of traces?

The divide between us and them grows wider, and more precipitous, every day.
 
If Glock is being "PC", its probably because they get most of their business from police contracts and don't want to anger the mostly liberal city governments.
Click to expand...

$Cha-CHING!$

Follow the money. Remember, Glock didn't seem to want to deal with Joe Citizen shooter when the frame rail problem came up. Their focus was on the GOVERMENT users of their product.

I've always been on the fence about Glocks. I think this is the final nail in that coffin for me. There are lots of good companies out there that are responsive to ALL their customers needs. I'll do business with one of them, thank you very much.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

D
  • Locked
Young boy @ gun show during last nights 60 Minutes segment
2
Replies
48
Views
3K
CapnMac
CapnMac
T
  • Locked
NEWS 20/20, Face The Nation & 60 Minutes
Replies
9
Views
723
searcher451
S
G
  • Locked
60 Minutes tonight - Campaign Finance Reform at its best
Replies
0
Views
424
garrettwc
G
M
  • Locked
Minute by minute at VT
Replies
1
Views
459
LaEscopeta
L
G
  • Locked
60 Minutes Bias - Fed up
Replies
3
Views
629
general
G
Back
Top