[J]ust because you’re paranoid doesn’t mean they’re not out to get you. Capitulation and collaborationism do happen. Bill Ruger was effectively the inventor of magazine bans, and he came up with that in an attempt to avert “assault weapons” bans. Smith & Wesson was almost destroyed by customers’ reaction to its 2000 agreement with the federal government to introduce a number of politically mandated design changes. The company made that agreement to settle a series of lawsuits aimed at bankrupting the firm.
There isn’t a magic answer for what to do about such cases. As a purely descriptive matter, here’s how it typically goes:
- Companies will optimize for self-preservation.
- Consumers will punish companies whose moves for self-preservation hurt the overall position of gun rights. (See, for example, how New Jersey’s old smart gun law caused an industry-wide halt to smart gun R&D.)
One way to describe that is “Soulless companies keep doing whatever the government tells them, and valiant consumers prevent them from dragging everyone off a cliff.”
But a more precise and useful description is “This is a decentralized discovery process for where to make a tactical retreat and where to hold firm, led by customers who get final say on how companies will behave.”
Glock is beating a tactical retreat on the issue of full auto switches. That might be bad for gun rights, or it might be … fine. AR-15 lowers are just as easy to convert to full auto, but they haven’t come under the same scrutiny because “force a change to a design that is trivially produced by thousands of hobbyist machine shops” is a much harder strategy for interest groups to execute than “sue this one very specific company”. Glock’s move takes this issue off the table and, for better or worse, doesn’t change much of anything on the ground.
— Open Source Defense in When should a gun company be cancelled?
Seems plenty pointless as it’ll be hundreds of years if not thousands before all the switchable Glocks are out of circulation.
It’s a big “meh”……………….
Following Day Long Demonstration, Coast Guard Security Opened Fire on U-Haul Driver Outside Alameda Base.
“Following a night of tense protests outside the Coast Guard base in Alameda, CA, U.S. Coast Guard security opened fire on a U-Haul driver who attempted to back into them.
…”
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/amy-curtis/2025/10/24/coast-guard-security-opens-fire-on-u-haul-driver-n2665424
First, it was these asbestos companies. Then it was the tobacco companies. Now it’s the gun companies.
If the “evil rich” can’t get their way through the legislative process, they will simply use their vast resources to sue their way into victory.
Gun control has always been racist.
But most folks don’t look at who is behind that gun control. And historically, it’s always been people with a lot of money, who wanna control people who don’t have a lot of money.
Wealthy landowners wealthy factory owners. For them.
It’s not a good idea that their workers have firearms.
Unfortunately , people keep thinking that a tyrannical government is always the enemy. That is only slightly correct.
You look at the history of the United States use of firearms and you’ll see that much of the conflict involved. Large landowners and factory owners VS workers. Or smaller businesses.
Factory worker rebellions, coal miner strikes, and railroad worker strikes. The range wars out west.
Even at the end of the civil war firearms were not confiscated. Unless those firearms belonged to newly freed slaves.
Back to racist gun control again.
In 2012 in Washington State, it was the computer tech company owners, like Paul Allen, who worked to pass gun control in that state. And at the same time, legalize drugs.
You see a private tyrant, or a government Tyrant. Would prefer that the population always be distracted by “bread and circuses” and intoxication.
And look, what Seattle has become after all those years have passed.
The rich do not like it when the poor and the middle class have access to rapid fire weapons.
But the rich certainly are comfortable with criminals who have access to machine guns.
I know this is true because the rich don’t arrest these criminals with machine guns. They don’t prosecute these criminals.
They simply take the machine guns away.
People have been whining about GLOK’s “lack of new innovation” for 20 years (which makes absolutely zero since, given the number of GLOCK-based clones that have flooded the market in the last few years) but now that they finally are doing something new, everyone is whining and acting like it is the end of the world and coming up with all manner of unsubstantiated theories.
Seriously, they were going to have to make changes eventually to keep up with the rest of the industry, and there have been rumors of the Gen-6/V model for the last two yeas (long before any lawsuits were filed) and re-engineering and testing a handgun design it NOT something you do in just a couple of months. It’s much more more likely they are just giving everyone the “innovation” they have been screaming for, and the timing for implanting the changes purely coincidental with the law suits.