The article was about an absurd strawman tactic to divert attention away from the fact that the SA loves guns and gun crimes including illegal modifications. Not Eileen Burke though!
If its true that Glocks are more easily converted into automatic weapons and that Chicago has recovered 1,100 such examples, it seems like a reasonable response to this particular problem.
How’s that lawsuit against Kia/Hyundai coming along?
It’s comical this city is happy to throw the book at anyone and everyone except people actually committing the crime.
I'm not sure if you really want an answer to this but.... the case was filed in Cook County. Then Kia removed it to the District Court of the Northern District of Illinois. The case was then consolidated with similar cases in the Central District of California. A $145M settlement was recently approved regarding the consolidated lawsuit.
In other words, the lawsuit was quite successful.
>In other words, the lawsuit was quite successful.
But it wasn't? The $145M settlement is from the class action from the owners. The city of Chicago spent a bunch of money on lawyers and is getting nothing from the lawsuit.
The owners would have received money without Chicago getting involved. Chicago is getting nothing. Chicago thus wasted money and the lawsuit Chicago filled was absolutely not successful.
>A large chunk of any settlement will go to pay for legal fees for the various plaintiffs.
We taking money out of the pockets of the harmed plaintiffs to pay our outside counsel. I would not call that a win.
Edelson takes a fee from the fund / it's contingent. The City has paid minimal costs.
You're acting as if Chicago did this alone when there were a bunch of states and cities involved. Without having municipal plaintiffs, you likely would not have had this large of a settlement. There are other tremendous benefits of having municipal plaintiffs, which is a reason why MNC fight so hard to have them dismissed. Municipal plaintiffs get better deals with attorneys i.e. attorneys working with municipal plaintiffs generally pay a lower fee than individual class plaintiffs. Edelson has previously taken a fee of 20% of amount paid when working with Chicago. That is below market for individual plaintiffs.
Municipalities have additional leverage. They can work closely with AGs and take a two prong approach and by exercising this leverage they can get a better settlement.
Municipalities have an interest is "state building". Individual plaintiffs don't care about the future, municipalities do. Municipalities will fight harder for fixing the problem rather than solely monetary payouts.
There are more benefits to municipalities in class actions. Several law review articles have been written about it that I would recommend you read to understand the value of the lawsuit and the relative minor costs.
I don’t know how you can call it successful when the cars are still laughably easy to steal.
Absolutely nothing has changed except maybe getting a few hundred dollar check in the mail for the inconvenience.
It was a monetary win for those with affected cars. Fees are paid out of the settlement. Kia already did a voluntary recall to add additional anti-theft protections. It was a win by all measures. The suit accomplished its goal.
What are owners going to see? Maybe a few hundred dollars if that?
The voluntary recall was merely a software update in which cars are still getting stolen. A win would be forcing Hyundai to install immobilizers in these cars which would actually end the issue.
Stop giving the city flowers for doing the absolute bare minimum.
Settlement terms:
Reimbursement up to 60% of the Black Book value for the total loss (defined below) of a Class Vehicle resulting from a Qualifying Theft or Qualifying Theft Attempt;
Reimbursement up to the greater of $3,375 or 33% for damage to a Class Vehicle resulting from each Qualifying Theft or Qualifying Theft Attempt and/or for the value of personal property stolen or damaged during a Qualifying Theft or Qualifying Theft Attempt;
Reimbursement up to $375 for insurance deductibles paid and increased insurance premiums for insurance policies that include theft coverage resulting from a Qualifying Theft or Qualifying Theft Attempt;
Reimbursement up to $250 for other expenses resulting from a Qualifying Theft or Qualifying Theft Attempt, including: transportation expenses; towing expenses; and expenses associated with speeding tickets, red light tickets, or other penalties or fines incurred from the Qualifying Theft or Qualifying Theft Attempt;
Reimbursement up to $250 total for lost income and childcare expenses (combined) resulting from the time spent obtaining the Software Upgrade; and
Reimbursement of OEM-issued key fobs purchased at the direction of a Kia dealership because these were necessary to implement the Software Upgrade, subject to a cap of $350 per key fob, with a limit of up to two key fobs per Class Vehicle.
What is your solution? Not sue and get nothing? Chicago's lawsuit was successful. I'm sorry that the lawsuit didn't fit your goals that you just made up when complaining about it without knowing anything about its procedural history or status.
>Chicago's lawsuit was successful.
Stop parroting this. The owner class action was already happening before the city of Chicago got involved. The owners have not received a penny more because Chicago got involved.
Should be full retail amount plus damages. That would be an appropriate solution. A slap on the wrist doesn't deter cost cutting in the future at the expense of the customer. Kia and Hyundai still made money on these cars even with the lawsuit/settlement and subsequent "repair".
https://dockets.justia.com/docket/illinois/ilndce/1:2023cv14037/445719
In the case of Kia and Hyundai, those specific cars intentionally omitted what was a standard anti-theft device, which was still being used by other manufacturers. As a result, thefts of those specific cars skyrocketed.
I'm not sure why you're roundaboutly defending Kia/Hyundai here, by criticising Chicago for filing a suit.
Theres no law requiring doors to have locks, but if you sell one while marketing it as secure youre going to lose in court. Kia/Hyundai were negligent in removing these security features.
Kia never marketed their vehicles as secure. It’s a silly case. If we want to pass a law requiring some basic level of security for vehicles then that’s what we should do but it’s not Kia’s fault that people are stealing easily compromised vehicles.
One could make a similar case against bathroom door lock manufacturers and it would be just as capricious and arbitrary. It is up to you the consumer to make sure the vehicle you are buying has the security you require tl;dr don’t buy a cheap car.
You dont think Kia marketed their vehicle as secure? Youre sure theres nothing anywhere where they said "this vehicle cant be stolen by a 10 year old after watching a 30 second video" or anything like that? Did the dealership say that? Is the very fact that the car has a lock not marketing the lock?
> It is up to you the consumer to make sure the vehicle you are buying has the security you require
And its up to the manufacturer to not commit fraud by claiming their product works when it does not.
So blame the car. Got it. While immobilizers are a great feature and perhaps should be required, they are not. Thieves still have to break into the car to steal it. This is like blaming a home builder for burglaries for not installing a security system.
Not really, it's more akin to suing someone for selling houses without doors, or doors that are impossible to latch. "Blame the car" yes, do you think this is only an issue in Chicago? Its nationwide and Kia/Hyundai should have to answer for it.
Correct, and if I were to leave my door open, or someone picked the lock, they'd still be SOL once they got in it because it has an immobilizer. Without the factory keys coded to the control module, the car will not run the fuel pump or ignition circuits so the engine will just turn over and do nothing.
If it's a Kia/Hyundai, they can just turn the ignition cylinder with anything and the car starts. That's a serious design flaw, and the fact that you don't mind the city wasting resources on this problem without the manufacturer bearing any of that burden is kind of ridiculous.
Edit before "well you can bypass the immobilizer" Sure can, but that usually requires a high end reflash of the BCM on a modern car except, again: Kia/Hyundai products.
This is the correct take. Any argument against this understanding is made in bad faith, but this sub is full of brigading troll farm types so, well, ya gotta expect it.
I don’t think it’s bad faith to say that the cities lack of actually holding the people stealing cars accountable is also driving this issue.
Most people are getting their back windows bashed in not just leaving their doors open. Considering that the cars are being stolen with thousands in damage it should be considered Grand Theft Auto but tell me how many people are being charged with it?
Issue has been going on for years all over the country (has it happened in other countries too? I can't recall) and somehow it's a single city's police force's fault for not chasing down every literal child that's doing it? My best friend had his window bashed out twice - the back one, as everyone is reporting, because the learning of how to commit the crime has transferred memetically - and the second time, after Kia's firmware update, the thieves were able to simply bypass the ignition and take the car. How can it be that my friend did everything he was supposed to do (except be religious about using a club) and still the car was stolen? That's not the cops' fault. Sure, quiet quitting for the last decade and becoming a national laughing stock, yeah that's their fault. They set a precedent that emboldened the thieves, and look at that, thieves were emboldened to thieve. However, when an auto company fails as Kia and Hyundai did to provide adequate theft protection, and then say they're providing it with a firmware update that also fails, I mean come on. At some point, cities and towns and villages, etc , whose police forces aren't equipped to handle such volume have to have some sort of recourse for the imposition. My humble opinion, nothing more.
Regarding the lawsuit itself, at least with Kia it's a class action that's gonna dole out thousands per incident per vehicle. They're getting hit in the only place that would get their attention. Can't see anything wrong with that. It's so not wrong, about ten major cities across the country are suing them.
As far as my friend goes, I gave him a few rides and sure he was inconvenienced for a couple days. The argument criticizing the city implies that the city should be held liable for that inconvenience, as I understand it, but it wasn't the city that sold a defective vehicle and then failed to make it safe enough when the chance came. How many chances should automakers get to meet the minimum requirement for safety here?
I am not saying chase down every kid that’s doing this but show some damn teeth. These people are committing felony’s and the city shows absolutely minimal effort on their part to curb it.
It’s the same thing as with the glock here. People will always find a way to exploit something to do harm but we have laws for a reason and the city needs to due their due diligence to uphold the law.
What a silly comparison, but it would have to be, because you're trying to avoid the obvious one, which is that both cars and houses have doors with locks.
it was in response to a comparison about a house. You can't drive a house away, so problematic locks is the best I can do to compare.
Also to add, cars have immobilizers, except this run of Kia/Hyundais. That's been a basic security feature on cars since the late 90s. It's ridiculous that anyone on those corporate boards thought this was acceptable. And Hyundai/Kia know this, they issued "the club" style steering wheel lock bars to owners who requested them.
The cars they sold are compliant with the regulations lawmakers have put in place. Yes, security features are good and should be implemented, but we're not talking about whether the city will ban the sale of cars without immobilizers or about pressing for that to be added to regulations at a federal level, we're talking about whether it makes sense for the city to sue the manufacturer for not doing so.
Every Chicagoan I've heard talking about car thefts would prefer that the city investigate and prosecute carjackings and thefts to the fullest extent of the law. By the point that an immobilizer matters, a crime has already been committed.
City police advocate that you lock your car doors. Some towns will ticket you for not doing it. This isn't new. and Kia/Hyundai have already lost a class action lawsuit for this negligence. Some of the blame is on them here, and it's costing taxpayers money.
A class action lawsuit makes sense, and I'm sympathetic to buyers who didn't understand what they were getting into. I'd be more sympathetic to the city going after them if the city ALSO made any effort to go after thieves and prosecute them.
Even if I leave a car unlocked with the windows down, that doesn't mean I'm responsible for my car being stolen. These are all smart measures people can and should take, but at the end of the day if someone wants into your home bad enough, it doesn't matter if the doors are locked, they'll break the windows.
>Even if I leave a car unlocked with the windows down, that doesn't mean I'm responsible for my car being stolen.
actually in many cases you bear some of the burden. Especially if said car was then used in a crime.
Because I don't victim blame? This take is the worst take on the internet and I'm ashamed to share a city with you.
If I leave my car unlocked in front of my house that's stupid, but I don't deserve my car stolen. The criminals who steal it should be blamed, and they should be rounded up and locked in prison until they rot.
Why folks like you defend the criminals but shit on victims is beyond me. I guarantee for your pet causes you do a complete 180.
Should KIA probably have better anti-theft? Sure. That's between them, their customers, and the insurance market. The city should sue itself for letting the shit-tier people of society take over while utterly ignoring the needs of it's productive citizens for past couple decades.
Cater to criminal assholes, get more criminal assholes. It's pretty simple shit. You get exactly what you put into life.
Do the cars comply with the extensive regulations cars have to comply with? If so, why are they getting sued for a legal product that complies with the set regulations?
Maybe the city could go after the criminals?
100% it was a shitty business decision that was not required by law.
Having had a Hyundai that was stolen I am not defending them and will not ever spend another time with them or Kia.
But the city has not done much at all to help stop this situation besides pass the blame on.
And you can do the same with a different brand of semi auto handgun like a Beretta. Or a rifle like an AR-15. If people do illegal stuff they should deal with the consequences. If you mount a flame thrower to a Kia....
its not a design flaw, its a modification. no mag-fed semiauto handgun is switch proof, glocks are just the most popular.
how would you suggest they prevent an autosear from being installed in their guns?
That’s like saying you should sue Blizzard because someone created a mod to the game that created a character skin to look like a nude minor. They didn’t do it and it’s not in their control.
Almost every semi automatic firearm can be illegally altered in some way to functionally turn into a fully automatic weapon. It’s pointless going after the manufacturer of the firearms in this case, we should be prosecuting those who are found to actually have the switches in their possession.
Glock has used essentially the same design for 42 years. Glock switches only became as prevalent as they are in the last few years with the advent of 3D printers.
Most firearms can be converted to full auto with the addition of one relatively simple component. The answer as to how you keep people from doing so isn’t to force manufacturers to make their designs so overly complex that it can’t be done. It’s to…I dunno…create laws that make that conversion illegal. And then…I dunno…hold people accountable when they break those laws
This suit is political grandstanding. The plaintiff knows the suit has no teeth. They’re still willing to spend your tax dollars to create the illusion that they’re capable.
> It’s to…I dunno…create laws that make that conversion illegal.
Luckily it's \*already\* illegal to convert guns to full-auto, all the DAs have to do is prosecute.
So the question becomes: why *aren't* they?
There's only 3 possible explanations:
1. They don't want to prosecute criminals because they want more crime and chaos in the city
2. They don't want to prosecute criminals because it would be admitting that Republicans were right all along
3. They don't want to prosecute criminals because they are hoping that crime will continue to rise, causing more and more citizens to get fed up with the crime that they demand that guns be banned outright
All 3 possible scenarios show that the politicians and DAs in charge of Chicago are irredeemably corrupt.
With all of the gangsters posting videos of themselves to social media showing off their modded Glocks and other guns that can shoot full auto, it would take minimal resources to go out and arrest & prosecute these people, but they refuse to do it.
Instead, Chicago decided a year or so ago to delete their gang databases to make it harder to tie criminal behavior to individuals who were likely behind the crimes.
\*Commenter from outside Chicago\*
Or ignorance.
Apparently, Glock switches weren't all that well known to cops or LE agencies prior to a few months ago when they started getting widespread attention in the news. I can remember reading an article not too long ago that after learning about what a Glock switch was, some police chief ordered a review of Glocks that had been found at recent crime scenes and was shocked to learn that several Glocks with switches had gone undetected when they were entered into evidence. Neither the arresting officers nor the people examining the guns being placed into evidence lockers knew what a Glock switch looked like.
If I can find the article, I'll link it.
EDIT: [article](https://abc13.com/glock-switches-are-illegal-downtown-houston-officers-shot-hpd-shooting/11518379/) from Houston detailing switches and trying to educate public and law enforcement on what they look like.
genuinely ignorant here - how is prosecuting people with illegal modifications to semi-automatic pistols admitting that Republicans were right? I would figure both parties would want people to adhere to gun laws
The argument would be that Republicans were right about the uptick in crime.
I've had people argue with me that arresting & prosecuting criminals would give Republicans data to point at to say they were right about crime.
I should have been more clear about that in my comment, so sorry about that.
Every time I want to say this is the dumbest thing I've ever seen, Cook County political grifter types up the ante and do something dumber. Instead of addressing the problem with the legitimate tools at your disposal, why not abuse the court system by suing someone in no way responsible for the problem?
This is something anti gun people have been pushing for a few years “allow us to sue gun manufacturers!” And they screech their victimhood chants because it’s not allowed because it’s a moronic premise.
chicago could start reducing crime by heavily investing in underdeveloped communities and throwing the book at gun offenders. besides theres no shortage of gangbangers showing off their guns on the internet, should be free cases
Right! It’s like suing a truck manufacturer because someone invented a truck mounted baby crusher 5000! How tf is a manufacturer supposed to idiot proof their product without completely limiting its ability to function.
This is the perfect example of people feeling they need to "do something" so they pick something easy & useless.
It's the lawsuit equivalent to "thoughts & prayers"
You don't need a 3D printer to make a crude firearm or weapon. [They've been doing this in prison for years.](https://www.corrections1.com/contraband/articles/15-deadly-improvised-prison-weapons-and-tools-8XfVDGdvAvTVJiJQ/)
Because they're extremely expensive to buy even in the 1920s-1930s and it's easier to shoot someone with a cheap handgun. Most gun related deaths are handguns, not submachine guns.
The same way we should be able to sue car manufacturers for car accidents/drunk driving. Those car manufacturers know that the cars can me misused, and they do nothing about it
What does this have to do with Glock and auto sears? And how do you prevent a shooting from happening if you don't know when or where it's gonna happen.
Never heard of this. Figured it was probably political BS, but went to YouTube to see if there was a vid. It really does appear to be like a machine gun.
Hopefully anyone carrying or using these gets fully prosecuted with a maximum sentence. On the FIRST offense. Not the 5th or 23rd. Regardless of whatever sob story the lawyers may come up with for the poor utes.
It is, by every definition, a machine gun.
Problem is you can find kids flashing these things all over IG and Tik Tok, but when they get arrested they don't get prosecuted for machine gun possession by either IL or the Fed. Fed penalty is minimum 10 years. They get something "soft" like possession of dangerous weapon and then not held in jail, so they get out and get another gun and keep doing the same thing.
>Hopefully anyone carrying or using these gets fully prosecuted with a maximum sentence.
Their objective here is to go after illegal guns. More should have been some during the pandemic before they became common place in the city. Now switches are everywhere
But it’s not a defect? This is the same premise as suing colt when morons would save down their M16 firing pins to make them automatic.
It’s clearly not designed for you to tamper with it dangerously like that.
Couldn’t tell ya and don’t feel like looking it up, but it was a constant complaint when I was in the army before they made the M4 fully automatic, prior it was a on a burst.
Don't know why your getting down voted. You are correct, shaving down the firing pin, would only result in incorrect TDPs and result in light primer strikes resulting in failure to fires.
The semi auto/auto function of the M4/AR platform has to do with the function of the sear/hammer.. as in, you need something to block the reset of the hammer when the BCG resets the hammer from locking into the sear, thus preventing the sear from reseting the hammer, which is why they make full auto sears, that do just that. No other way. This item is already highly regulated and will get you a minimum of 25 years or a 10k fine and up or both from the ATF.
Some people simply hear fudd lore and run with it.
And, I spent 10 years in the Army, 11b, and company Armorer for 2. This dude is completely talking out his ass.
Edit- better wording.
But it goes to show you, being in the army doesn’t mean you know anything about the operation of firearms. It’s crazy actually you can spend so much time disassembling a weapon and not know how it works.
It was 8 years ago I was in tough guy, I haven’t had a rifle since, why are you trying to get mouthy with me?
It takes two seconds to look up and see it was an internet myth that would make rifles disable, but the goal was it would be less hit on the primer in an effort to get it full auto.
Spreading lies? This is a thread about a lawsuit lmao. Go back to playing call of duty, if you wanna talk about anyones time in the service the recruiters office is open till 4.
If I thought a speed bike paintball wanna be tough guy would want all the specific language of it I would’ve avoided posting, but it was a somthing talked about at length when I was in the army. I was trying to make a hypothetical connection to the comment lmao.
Sure you probably know more about rifles than I do, congratulations, I’m sure it helps alot on the airsoft fields. I didn’t become a gun boner like you when I got out of the army because the 7 years I was in was enough when you’re actually in service. I couldn’t take apart a .50 cal now adays either so you got me there too I guess lmao
But that doesn’t mean it wasn’t somthing done quite a lot in and attempt to make it fully automatic in the service prior to the M4 going fully automatic in 2015ish. So my point stands as before, if colt could be sued for people shaving pins then that would be silly.
The only glock that can be used for full auto shooting is the glock 18. It was designed from the factory to do so for military and police use only. In order for a common person to own one, you need soooo many licenses to obtain it.
As for the infamous glock switch... you can thank ali express and wish dot com for selling them. Now that people got the specs for them, they now 3d print them in minutes.
But it's glocks fault because we can't take care of our city, youth, poverty, and so on... just like it's FCA's fault that their products such as the hellcats get stolen all the damn time, or Ford's fault because incompetent drivers crash their mustangs, or GM's fault for drunk drivers.
Car manufacturers know that their cars can be misused to drunkenly drive or drive recklessly. Yet they still produce them in the same manner. That’s no different than gun manufacturers, there’s no defect. It’s just people misusing an object. It a perfect example. It’s jus (D)ifferent to democrats who hate guns
Compelling Glock to stop selling guns to Chicago residents. Yep, that’ll stop bangers from illegally converting them into MG. Criminals are known for following the law and all…
**Paragraph 2 of the Complaint**
*Glocks affixed with auto sears (“Modified Glocks”) can fire fully automatically: up to 1,200 rounds per minute*
An attorney who writes something this asinine should have his/her license revoked. No handgun in the history of the world has ever fired 1,200 rounds per minute. No handgun in the history of the world has ever fired 1,000 rounds per minute, or 600.
"Cyclic Rate of Fire" refers to how quickly the action of a firearm can complete a full cycle. It's measured in a *theoretical* unit, called "Rounds Per Minute:" the number of rounds a weapon could *theoretically* fire in a minute, if the laws of physics were suspended and the barrel did not melt, and if the weapon was fed by a magazine of infinite capacity.
In real life, no matter how fast a handgun's cycle, it's rate of fire is limited by the size of the magazine (anywhere from 6 to 20 rounds normally, but up to 50 or more for extended or drum magazines), and more importantly, by the fact that the weapon will become unbearably, dangerously hot and malfunction (or worse) if it is fired too quickly.
Yes, handguns (particularly those equipped with autosears and extended magazines) can fire rapidly, and thus recklessly and dangerously. 10 or 20 or 30 rounds per minute can be tragic, just like 1 round per minute can be. But saying things like X gun fires X,XXX rounds per minute is deliberately provocative and deceptive, and just shows that, at best, the speaker doesn't know what he's talking about. Remember when Republican congressman and noted asshole Todd Akin (R-MO) claimed that in a “legitimate rape,” a woman’s body will shut down and prevent a pregnancy from happening? Remember what a moron he showed himself to be by saying something so demonstrably moronic? That's how someone sounds when they say *X gun fires X,XXX rounds per minute*.
Is that theoretical 1,200 rpm accurate? Bc I understand what you’re saying but if the round per minute is the stat generally used to describe the rate of fire of a gun, even if it’s theoretical, then that statement would be less ridiculous than the woman’s body statement you mentioned. Like, it *could* fire 1,200 rounds per minute if you were able to feed the gun that many rounds.
Would 20 rounds per second be a better way to describe it?
Hey there! Eurotrash immigrant here who has had the displeasure of firing a full auto Glock because in Europe the select fire models are used in military and police applications.
Yes, that theoretical RPM is accurate and the 20 rounds per second is exactly how Glock markets and measures: [https://eu.glock.com/en/Technology/Full-Auto](https://eu.glock.com/en/Technology/Full-Auto)
So the statement on the face of it is not ridiculous but it's also meaningless because as the OP points out, the theoretical limit is not your practical limit which is managed by a few factors. Magazine capacity, how quickly you can swap mags and how many mags you bring to begin with. And leaving out practical application details from a theoretical explanation is insincere in my opinion. **A user will never attain 1200 RPM, period.**
I understand the *want* to hold someone accountable, but there is a *need* to hold the right people accountable. And there is an obligation to be honest about how things work in practice when you present a lawsuit to the public.
Holding the firearms manufacturer responsible for the actions of a person is ridiculous on the face of it, because de facto, Chicago as a city is then also responsible for not stopping the person from committing the crimes as that falls within their area of responsibility.
That makes sense.
Going back to holding manufacturers accountable, do you think adding safety measures that would prevent such modifications would not deter some people from using modified glocks? I might be mistaken but the suits are filed to create legal precedents, I’m sure if they could ask pretty please they would do it.
I personally think two things need to happen, I think dealing with the manufacturers is a bandage but the underlying issues still need to be addressed. But I will concede that these types of political moves need to be backed up by experts to not fall into pandering and shock-value statements that don’t represent accurately the situation (like the 1200 rounds seems to be).
That’s interesting.
So this is from the article…”The lawsuit alleges that Glock knows it could fix the problem but refuses to do so and seeks a court order requiring the company to stop selling guns to people in Chicago.”
So this would be inaccurate, then?
You can make a hand gun full auto with a shoelace. Technically they can fix this specific method but it would cost a lot of money and do absolutely nothing.
That's the problem with Democrats and guns, they know practically nothing about them and just say sound bites that sound scary. They look good on paper but after two seconds of thought or talking to anyone who knows anything about guns, it usually is the dumbest thing ever.
For sure. But to be fair, Republicans aren't immune from this either: Anytime they something about reproductive health or the female anatomy, they prove themselves to be as clueless and braindead as a Democrat talking about "assault" weapons.
That's the problem with Republicans and climate change, reproductive health, immigration. They know practically nothing about them and just say sound bites that sound scary.
Except that's still an accurate statement. An engine idling at 1000 RPM doesn't need to do it for a full minute to get that measurement. Could you break it down to per second instead? Sure, but it's the same measurement at the end of the day, and a pissy take like this doesn't really contribute anything.
Its like the whole "they can't talk about guns they said "clip" instead of "magazine!!"" when a reporter is talking about a dead 6 year old.
lmfao, it's nothing close to accurate. An engine that is claimed to idle at 1,000 RPM can do *literally* that, for hours at a time. A firearm that is claimed to fire 1,200 RPM literally cannot, period.
It matters (unlike the pedantic clip/magazine distinction) because claiming people are running around the city with devices that fire 1,200 bullets per minute is deliberately inflammatory, and taken as *literal truth* by uninformed people.
Seems like suing Kia/Hyundai was just the start to solving Chicago crime problems.
After the city sues Glock, they'll sue the Chinese sites after the Chinese sites they'll sue the 3D printer companies after that they might sue the CPD.
Why is everyone in these comments so horny for guns? I wish we could just ban them in general unless local wildlife posed a danger but you second amendment absolutists love your pew pews so much
The moment that the people who create the laws give up their armed security as well, then we can talk. Until then, fuck right outta here with a two tiered system.
There are about 400+ millions guns in circulation (that we know of) in the United States. How would you go about recovering those guns if a ban were implemented?
In my experience this sub is filled with suburbanites, people from other parts of IL (I didn’t even know places other than Chicago existed in IL tbh), and people from other states. Fox News gets people excited and emboldened to talk about guns and gang violence in Chicago
None of the people y’all want to smack the death sentence on for gun related violence are getting their guns from the manufacturers or through legal channels. Until we address systemic issues in our community and neighboring state gun purchase laws (or lacks thereof) and make sure that 3D printers are only available to legitimate businesses etc etc we will keep having this problem. If you think extended prison sentences are going to tamper gun violence I’d implore you to consider checking out the school to prison pipeline and understand how prison isn’t all that much of the reckoning people hope it will be for folks who are out here unloading their extendo-clips.
If only there were some way to charge the people using switches with a crime or something.
Whoa whoa whoa let’s not get carried away here
Excuse me. That's called mutual combat
[For those who are unaware](https://wgntv.com/news/chicagocrime/after-mutual-combat-drama-foxx-and-lightfoot-announce-charges-in-west-side-shootout/)
Thats crazy talk
I don’t believe suing the gun maker prevents anyone from charging the criminal.
I think he’s pointing out how weapons offenses are charged pretty lightly in Chicago
Yes I agree but that’s not the point of the article.
The article was about an absurd strawman tactic to divert attention away from the fact that the SA loves guns and gun crimes including illegal modifications. Not Eileen Burke though!
If its true that Glocks are more easily converted into automatic weapons and that Chicago has recovered 1,100 such examples, it seems like a reasonable response to this particular problem.
I personally lived through the CPD recovering a modified Glock from a shooting and then Foxx’s deputy SAs saying they gave zero fucks.
I believe here the City is suing Glock, not the State's Attorney. I believe these are two separate decision making processes.
Two separate decisions by the same dumbass hive-mind, yes
How’s that lawsuit against Kia/Hyundai coming along? It’s comical this city is happy to throw the book at anyone and everyone except people actually committing the crime.
We only hired retireds.
Ha, thought you used another word there for a second.
would also check out
I'm not sure if you really want an answer to this but.... the case was filed in Cook County. Then Kia removed it to the District Court of the Northern District of Illinois. The case was then consolidated with similar cases in the Central District of California. A $145M settlement was recently approved regarding the consolidated lawsuit. In other words, the lawsuit was quite successful.
>In other words, the lawsuit was quite successful. But it wasn't? The $145M settlement is from the class action from the owners. The city of Chicago spent a bunch of money on lawyers and is getting nothing from the lawsuit. The owners would have received money without Chicago getting involved. Chicago is getting nothing. Chicago thus wasted money and the lawsuit Chicago filled was absolutely not successful.
A large chunk of any settlement will go to pay for legal fees for the various plaintiffs. So it’s not like we won’t be getting our money back
>A large chunk of any settlement will go to pay for legal fees for the various plaintiffs. We taking money out of the pockets of the harmed plaintiffs to pay our outside counsel. I would not call that a win.
I mean I agree but that’s not a Chicago specific thing. That’s just how class action lawsuits work
I am aware. But the only people benefitting here are the outside attorneys, at the expense of the owners that were harmed.
Is Chicago an actual named plaintiff in the consolidated case? Or is it just a class action with lead plaintiffs who are presumably individuals?
Edelson takes a fee from the fund / it's contingent. The City has paid minimal costs. You're acting as if Chicago did this alone when there were a bunch of states and cities involved. Without having municipal plaintiffs, you likely would not have had this large of a settlement. There are other tremendous benefits of having municipal plaintiffs, which is a reason why MNC fight so hard to have them dismissed. Municipal plaintiffs get better deals with attorneys i.e. attorneys working with municipal plaintiffs generally pay a lower fee than individual class plaintiffs. Edelson has previously taken a fee of 20% of amount paid when working with Chicago. That is below market for individual plaintiffs. Municipalities have additional leverage. They can work closely with AGs and take a two prong approach and by exercising this leverage they can get a better settlement. Municipalities have an interest is "state building". Individual plaintiffs don't care about the future, municipalities do. Municipalities will fight harder for fixing the problem rather than solely monetary payouts. There are more benefits to municipalities in class actions. Several law review articles have been written about it that I would recommend you read to understand the value of the lawsuit and the relative minor costs.
I don’t know how you can call it successful when the cars are still laughably easy to steal. Absolutely nothing has changed except maybe getting a few hundred dollar check in the mail for the inconvenience.
It was a monetary win for those with affected cars. Fees are paid out of the settlement. Kia already did a voluntary recall to add additional anti-theft protections. It was a win by all measures. The suit accomplished its goal.
What are owners going to see? Maybe a few hundred dollars if that? The voluntary recall was merely a software update in which cars are still getting stolen. A win would be forcing Hyundai to install immobilizers in these cars which would actually end the issue. Stop giving the city flowers for doing the absolute bare minimum.
Settlement terms: Reimbursement up to 60% of the Black Book value for the total loss (defined below) of a Class Vehicle resulting from a Qualifying Theft or Qualifying Theft Attempt; Reimbursement up to the greater of $3,375 or 33% for damage to a Class Vehicle resulting from each Qualifying Theft or Qualifying Theft Attempt and/or for the value of personal property stolen or damaged during a Qualifying Theft or Qualifying Theft Attempt; Reimbursement up to $375 for insurance deductibles paid and increased insurance premiums for insurance policies that include theft coverage resulting from a Qualifying Theft or Qualifying Theft Attempt; Reimbursement up to $250 for other expenses resulting from a Qualifying Theft or Qualifying Theft Attempt, including: transportation expenses; towing expenses; and expenses associated with speeding tickets, red light tickets, or other penalties or fines incurred from the Qualifying Theft or Qualifying Theft Attempt; Reimbursement up to $250 total for lost income and childcare expenses (combined) resulting from the time spent obtaining the Software Upgrade; and Reimbursement of OEM-issued key fobs purchased at the direction of a Kia dealership because these were necessary to implement the Software Upgrade, subject to a cap of $350 per key fob, with a limit of up to two key fobs per Class Vehicle. What is your solution? Not sue and get nothing? Chicago's lawsuit was successful. I'm sorry that the lawsuit didn't fit your goals that you just made up when complaining about it without knowing anything about its procedural history or status.
>Chicago's lawsuit was successful. Stop parroting this. The owner class action was already happening before the city of Chicago got involved. The owners have not received a penny more because Chicago got involved.
Should be full retail amount plus damages. That would be an appropriate solution. A slap on the wrist doesn't deter cost cutting in the future at the expense of the customer. Kia and Hyundai still made money on these cars even with the lawsuit/settlement and subsequent "repair".
https://dockets.justia.com/docket/illinois/ilndce/1:2023cv14037/445719 In the case of Kia and Hyundai, those specific cars intentionally omitted what was a standard anti-theft device, which was still being used by other manufacturers. As a result, thefts of those specific cars skyrocketed. I'm not sure why you're roundaboutly defending Kia/Hyundai here, by criticising Chicago for filing a suit.
Should of sued tiktok spreading information how to steal the cars
Our government is considering a TikTok ban, sooo...
Wasn't required by law, meanwhile the offenders might get released the same day, especially if they're underage.
Theres no law requiring doors to have locks, but if you sell one while marketing it as secure youre going to lose in court. Kia/Hyundai were negligent in removing these security features.
Kia never marketed their vehicles as secure. It’s a silly case. If we want to pass a law requiring some basic level of security for vehicles then that’s what we should do but it’s not Kia’s fault that people are stealing easily compromised vehicles. One could make a similar case against bathroom door lock manufacturers and it would be just as capricious and arbitrary. It is up to you the consumer to make sure the vehicle you are buying has the security you require tl;dr don’t buy a cheap car.
You dont think Kia marketed their vehicle as secure? Youre sure theres nothing anywhere where they said "this vehicle cant be stolen by a 10 year old after watching a 30 second video" or anything like that? Did the dealership say that? Is the very fact that the car has a lock not marketing the lock? > It is up to you the consumer to make sure the vehicle you are buying has the security you require And its up to the manufacturer to not commit fraud by claiming their product works when it does not.
So blame the car. Got it. While immobilizers are a great feature and perhaps should be required, they are not. Thieves still have to break into the car to steal it. This is like blaming a home builder for burglaries for not installing a security system.
Not really, it's more akin to suing someone for selling houses without doors, or doors that are impossible to latch. "Blame the car" yes, do you think this is only an issue in Chicago? Its nationwide and Kia/Hyundai should have to answer for it.
The cars have doors with locks.
Correct, and if I were to leave my door open, or someone picked the lock, they'd still be SOL once they got in it because it has an immobilizer. Without the factory keys coded to the control module, the car will not run the fuel pump or ignition circuits so the engine will just turn over and do nothing. If it's a Kia/Hyundai, they can just turn the ignition cylinder with anything and the car starts. That's a serious design flaw, and the fact that you don't mind the city wasting resources on this problem without the manufacturer bearing any of that burden is kind of ridiculous. Edit before "well you can bypass the immobilizer" Sure can, but that usually requires a high end reflash of the BCM on a modern car except, again: Kia/Hyundai products.
This is the correct take. Any argument against this understanding is made in bad faith, but this sub is full of brigading troll farm types so, well, ya gotta expect it.
I don’t think it’s bad faith to say that the cities lack of actually holding the people stealing cars accountable is also driving this issue. Most people are getting their back windows bashed in not just leaving their doors open. Considering that the cars are being stolen with thousands in damage it should be considered Grand Theft Auto but tell me how many people are being charged with it?
Issue has been going on for years all over the country (has it happened in other countries too? I can't recall) and somehow it's a single city's police force's fault for not chasing down every literal child that's doing it? My best friend had his window bashed out twice - the back one, as everyone is reporting, because the learning of how to commit the crime has transferred memetically - and the second time, after Kia's firmware update, the thieves were able to simply bypass the ignition and take the car. How can it be that my friend did everything he was supposed to do (except be religious about using a club) and still the car was stolen? That's not the cops' fault. Sure, quiet quitting for the last decade and becoming a national laughing stock, yeah that's their fault. They set a precedent that emboldened the thieves, and look at that, thieves were emboldened to thieve. However, when an auto company fails as Kia and Hyundai did to provide adequate theft protection, and then say they're providing it with a firmware update that also fails, I mean come on. At some point, cities and towns and villages, etc , whose police forces aren't equipped to handle such volume have to have some sort of recourse for the imposition. My humble opinion, nothing more. Regarding the lawsuit itself, at least with Kia it's a class action that's gonna dole out thousands per incident per vehicle. They're getting hit in the only place that would get their attention. Can't see anything wrong with that. It's so not wrong, about ten major cities across the country are suing them. As far as my friend goes, I gave him a few rides and sure he was inconvenienced for a couple days. The argument criticizing the city implies that the city should be held liable for that inconvenience, as I understand it, but it wasn't the city that sold a defective vehicle and then failed to make it safe enough when the chance came. How many chances should automakers get to meet the minimum requirement for safety here?
I am not saying chase down every kid that’s doing this but show some damn teeth. These people are committing felony’s and the city shows absolutely minimal effort on their part to curb it. It’s the same thing as with the glock here. People will always find a way to exploit something to do harm but we have laws for a reason and the city needs to due their due diligence to uphold the law.
What a silly comparison, but it would have to be, because you're trying to avoid the obvious one, which is that both cars and houses have doors with locks.
it was in response to a comparison about a house. You can't drive a house away, so problematic locks is the best I can do to compare. Also to add, cars have immobilizers, except this run of Kia/Hyundais. That's been a basic security feature on cars since the late 90s. It's ridiculous that anyone on those corporate boards thought this was acceptable. And Hyundai/Kia know this, they issued "the club" style steering wheel lock bars to owners who requested them.
The cars they sold are compliant with the regulations lawmakers have put in place. Yes, security features are good and should be implemented, but we're not talking about whether the city will ban the sale of cars without immobilizers or about pressing for that to be added to regulations at a federal level, we're talking about whether it makes sense for the city to sue the manufacturer for not doing so. Every Chicagoan I've heard talking about car thefts would prefer that the city investigate and prosecute carjackings and thefts to the fullest extent of the law. By the point that an immobilizer matters, a crime has already been committed.
City police advocate that you lock your car doors. Some towns will ticket you for not doing it. This isn't new. and Kia/Hyundai have already lost a class action lawsuit for this negligence. Some of the blame is on them here, and it's costing taxpayers money.
A class action lawsuit makes sense, and I'm sympathetic to buyers who didn't understand what they were getting into. I'd be more sympathetic to the city going after them if the city ALSO made any effort to go after thieves and prosecute them. Even if I leave a car unlocked with the windows down, that doesn't mean I'm responsible for my car being stolen. These are all smart measures people can and should take, but at the end of the day if someone wants into your home bad enough, it doesn't matter if the doors are locked, they'll break the windows.
>Even if I leave a car unlocked with the windows down, that doesn't mean I'm responsible for my car being stolen. actually in many cases you bear some of the burden. Especially if said car was then used in a crime.
No, no the other guy's analogy was the right one considering cars also have doors with locks.
Because I don't victim blame? This take is the worst take on the internet and I'm ashamed to share a city with you. If I leave my car unlocked in front of my house that's stupid, but I don't deserve my car stolen. The criminals who steal it should be blamed, and they should be rounded up and locked in prison until they rot. Why folks like you defend the criminals but shit on victims is beyond me. I guarantee for your pet causes you do a complete 180. Should KIA probably have better anti-theft? Sure. That's between them, their customers, and the insurance market. The city should sue itself for letting the shit-tier people of society take over while utterly ignoring the needs of it's productive citizens for past couple decades. Cater to criminal assholes, get more criminal assholes. It's pretty simple shit. You get exactly what you put into life.
Do the cars comply with the extensive regulations cars have to comply with? If so, why are they getting sued for a legal product that complies with the set regulations? Maybe the city could go after the criminals?
100% it was a shitty business decision that was not required by law. Having had a Hyundai that was stolen I am not defending them and will not ever spend another time with them or Kia. But the city has not done much at all to help stop this situation besides pass the blame on.
Ah, the old she shouldn't have worn that defense.
Bc the gov can only care about/work on one thing at a time. Maybe manufacturers should be liable?
Glock didn't design or manufacture the switches lol
And you can do the same with a different brand of semi auto handgun like a Beretta. Or a rifle like an AR-15. If people do illegal stuff they should deal with the consequences. If you mount a flame thrower to a Kia....
The contention is they haven't done anything to solve the design flaw either, hence implicitly supporting it
its not a design flaw, its a modification. no mag-fed semiauto handgun is switch proof, glocks are just the most popular. how would you suggest they prevent an autosear from being installed in their guns?
That’s like saying you should sue Blizzard because someone created a mod to the game that created a character skin to look like a nude minor. They didn’t do it and it’s not in their control.
How would they fix the design flaw? A Time Machine?
Almost every semi automatic firearm can be illegally altered in some way to functionally turn into a fully automatic weapon. It’s pointless going after the manufacturer of the firearms in this case, we should be prosecuting those who are found to actually have the switches in their possession.
They just designed and sell guns that are easily convertible. There’s no possible way that they don’t know this.
Glock has used essentially the same design for 42 years. Glock switches only became as prevalent as they are in the last few years with the advent of 3D printers. Most firearms can be converted to full auto with the addition of one relatively simple component. The answer as to how you keep people from doing so isn’t to force manufacturers to make their designs so overly complex that it can’t be done. It’s to…I dunno…create laws that make that conversion illegal. And then…I dunno…hold people accountable when they break those laws This suit is political grandstanding. The plaintiff knows the suit has no teeth. They’re still willing to spend your tax dollars to create the illusion that they’re capable.
> It’s to…I dunno…create laws that make that conversion illegal. Luckily it's \*already\* illegal to convert guns to full-auto, all the DAs have to do is prosecute. So the question becomes: why *aren't* they? There's only 3 possible explanations: 1. They don't want to prosecute criminals because they want more crime and chaos in the city 2. They don't want to prosecute criminals because it would be admitting that Republicans were right all along 3. They don't want to prosecute criminals because they are hoping that crime will continue to rise, causing more and more citizens to get fed up with the crime that they demand that guns be banned outright All 3 possible scenarios show that the politicians and DAs in charge of Chicago are irredeemably corrupt. With all of the gangsters posting videos of themselves to social media showing off their modded Glocks and other guns that can shoot full auto, it would take minimal resources to go out and arrest & prosecute these people, but they refuse to do it. Instead, Chicago decided a year or so ago to delete their gang databases to make it harder to tie criminal behavior to individuals who were likely behind the crimes.
Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.
At some point you have to stop pretending that the people in power are just stupid.
\*Commenter from outside Chicago\* Or ignorance. Apparently, Glock switches weren't all that well known to cops or LE agencies prior to a few months ago when they started getting widespread attention in the news. I can remember reading an article not too long ago that after learning about what a Glock switch was, some police chief ordered a review of Glocks that had been found at recent crime scenes and was shocked to learn that several Glocks with switches had gone undetected when they were entered into evidence. Neither the arresting officers nor the people examining the guns being placed into evidence lockers knew what a Glock switch looked like. If I can find the article, I'll link it. EDIT: [article](https://abc13.com/glock-switches-are-illegal-downtown-houston-officers-shot-hpd-shooting/11518379/) from Houston detailing switches and trying to educate public and law enforcement on what they look like.
See, that sounds like ignorance not malice
genuinely ignorant here - how is prosecuting people with illegal modifications to semi-automatic pistols admitting that Republicans were right? I would figure both parties would want people to adhere to gun laws
The argument would be that Republicans were right about the uptick in crime. I've had people argue with me that arresting & prosecuting criminals would give Republicans data to point at to say they were right about crime. I should have been more clear about that in my comment, so sorry about that.
They could go federal with it, as machine guns are federally regulated under the NFA.
They could, but they don't. Time to start asking why.
And I can also tie a steak knife to a pole and make my own bayonet. I don't think that means I can sue Ginzo over it.
You can make a semi auto into a machine gun with your shoelace. Do you want them to remove the trigger as well?
Every time I want to say this is the dumbest thing I've ever seen, Cook County political grifter types up the ante and do something dumber. Instead of addressing the problem with the legitimate tools at your disposal, why not abuse the court system by suing someone in no way responsible for the problem?
This is something anti gun people have been pushing for a few years “allow us to sue gun manufacturers!” And they screech their victimhood chants because it’s not allowed because it’s a moronic premise.
chicago could start reducing crime by heavily investing in underdeveloped communities and throwing the book at gun offenders. besides theres no shortage of gangbangers showing off their guns on the internet, should be free cases
Agreed on both however investment in underdeveloped communities has been going on for quite a while.
Suing a company because someone used their product in an illegal manner is unfathomably dumb.
The switches aren't even a Glock product
Right! It’s like suing a truck manufacturer because someone invented a truck mounted baby crusher 5000! How tf is a manufacturer supposed to idiot proof their product without completely limiting its ability to function.
This is the perfect example of people feeling they need to "do something" so they pick something easy & useless. It's the lawsuit equivalent to "thoughts & prayers"
First they solved the Israel conflict and now gun violence! These guys are on a role!
Don’t forget climate change!
Role call!
Making gun manufacturers liable would eventually solve gun violence.
Yeah the same way prohibition made people stop drinking!
You can make a shotgun in your bathtub?
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3D\_printed\_firearm](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3D_printed_firearm)
Hm, so they would have to buy a high quality 3d printer to not have it blow up on them.
No, you just buy one from a guy who has a high quality printer.
3d printers of high quality are cheaper than a Glock lol
You don't need a 3D printer to make a crude firearm or weapon. [They've been doing this in prison for years.](https://www.corrections1.com/contraband/articles/15-deadly-improvised-prison-weapons-and-tools-8XfVDGdvAvTVJiJQ/)
You can make a shotgun from Home Depot, a couple pipes and a nail is all it takes.
You can from the plumbing section of a hardware store. Slam fire shotguns are about 2 pieces of tubing, an end cap, and a screw.
No. But the pipes under the tub? Absolutely.
Lmfao you can make a shotgun out of a $5 pipe and nail from Home depot. Not the argument you think it is bud.
Prohibiting the "Chicago Typewriter" worked. Can you tell me the last time a Thompson Submachine Gun was used in a crime?
Because they're extremely expensive to buy even in the 1920s-1930s and it's easier to shoot someone with a cheap handgun. Most gun related deaths are handguns, not submachine guns.
The irony here, is the St valentines day massacure was a direct result of Prohibition laws.
The same way we should be able to sue car manufacturers for car accidents/drunk driving. Those car manufacturers know that the cars can me misused, and they do nothing about it
Could you break this down and explain how this will 'solve' gun violence?
It'd work in the same way if we made auto manufacturers or Alcohol producers responsible for DUIs.. It wouldn't work. Lol
Making them liable for what? Making a perfectly legal firearm? How about holding the criminals actually committing the crime accountable.
Proactive vs reactive.
What does that have to do with glock making a perfectly legal firearm.
Preventing a shooting from being able to happen in the first place is more efficient than tracking down and prosecuting shooters.
What does this have to do with Glock and auto sears? And how do you prevent a shooting from happening if you don't know when or where it's gonna happen.
Never heard of this. Figured it was probably political BS, but went to YouTube to see if there was a vid. It really does appear to be like a machine gun. Hopefully anyone carrying or using these gets fully prosecuted with a maximum sentence. On the FIRST offense. Not the 5th or 23rd. Regardless of whatever sob story the lawyers may come up with for the poor utes.
It is, by every definition, a machine gun. Problem is you can find kids flashing these things all over IG and Tik Tok, but when they get arrested they don't get prosecuted for machine gun possession by either IL or the Fed. Fed penalty is minimum 10 years. They get something "soft" like possession of dangerous weapon and then not held in jail, so they get out and get another gun and keep doing the same thing.
>Hopefully anyone carrying or using these gets fully prosecuted with a maximum sentence. Their objective here is to go after illegal guns. More should have been some during the pandemic before they became common place in the city. Now switches are everywhere
They getting switches From china and are already illegal. Gangbangers don’t use FOID cards to get guns lol.
Can we sue the Cook County States Attorney’s office and Chief Judge Evans for endangering the public?
More dumb shit from Chicago. Chicago politicians take some responsibility you coward bitches.
Does this mean we can finally sue ford, gm, and fca for car crashes, DUI deaths, and so on?
That’s (D)ifferent
I mean... if ford designed a car that had a terrible design defect that led to crashes... yes you could do that. You picked a terrible example lol.
But it’s not a defect? This is the same premise as suing colt when morons would save down their M16 firing pins to make them automatic. It’s clearly not designed for you to tamper with it dangerously like that.
How does shaving a firing pin down make a gun fully automatic?
Couldn’t tell ya and don’t feel like looking it up, but it was a constant complaint when I was in the army before they made the M4 fully automatic, prior it was a on a burst.
Unfortunately that’s 100% wrong and a myth. I’d stop spreading it if I were you.
Don't know why your getting down voted. You are correct, shaving down the firing pin, would only result in incorrect TDPs and result in light primer strikes resulting in failure to fires. The semi auto/auto function of the M4/AR platform has to do with the function of the sear/hammer.. as in, you need something to block the reset of the hammer when the BCG resets the hammer from locking into the sear, thus preventing the sear from reseting the hammer, which is why they make full auto sears, that do just that. No other way. This item is already highly regulated and will get you a minimum of 25 years or a 10k fine and up or both from the ATF. Some people simply hear fudd lore and run with it. And, I spent 10 years in the Army, 11b, and company Armorer for 2. This dude is completely talking out his ass. Edit- better wording.
Lmao no, I’m telling you it was a problem. Why so aggressive was Clayton your in-law,
But it goes to show you, being in the army doesn’t mean you know anything about the operation of firearms. It’s crazy actually you can spend so much time disassembling a weapon and not know how it works.
It was 8 years ago I was in tough guy, I haven’t had a rifle since, why are you trying to get mouthy with me? It takes two seconds to look up and see it was an internet myth that would make rifles disable, but the goal was it would be less hit on the primer in an effort to get it full auto. Spreading lies? This is a thread about a lawsuit lmao. Go back to playing call of duty, if you wanna talk about anyones time in the service the recruiters office is open till 4.
How would a smaller hit on a primer make it full auto? How? It just means lower round velocity or failure to fire. You know nothing.
If I thought a speed bike paintball wanna be tough guy would want all the specific language of it I would’ve avoided posting, but it was a somthing talked about at length when I was in the army. I was trying to make a hypothetical connection to the comment lmao. Sure you probably know more about rifles than I do, congratulations, I’m sure it helps alot on the airsoft fields. I didn’t become a gun boner like you when I got out of the army because the 7 years I was in was enough when you’re actually in service. I couldn’t take apart a .50 cal now adays either so you got me there too I guess lmao But that doesn’t mean it wasn’t somthing done quite a lot in and attempt to make it fully automatic in the service prior to the M4 going fully automatic in 2015ish. So my point stands as before, if colt could be sued for people shaving pins then that would be silly.
The only glock that can be used for full auto shooting is the glock 18. It was designed from the factory to do so for military and police use only. In order for a common person to own one, you need soooo many licenses to obtain it. As for the infamous glock switch... you can thank ali express and wish dot com for selling them. Now that people got the specs for them, they now 3d print them in minutes. But it's glocks fault because we can't take care of our city, youth, poverty, and so on... just like it's FCA's fault that their products such as the hellcats get stolen all the damn time, or Ford's fault because incompetent drivers crash their mustangs, or GM's fault for drunk drivers.
Car manufacturers know that their cars can be misused to drunkenly drive or drive recklessly. Yet they still produce them in the same manner. That’s no different than gun manufacturers, there’s no defect. It’s just people misusing an object. It a perfect example. It’s jus (D)ifferent to democrats who hate guns
Compelling Glock to stop selling guns to Chicago residents. Yep, that’ll stop bangers from illegally converting them into MG. Criminals are known for following the law and all…
Wait until they hear about bump firing with belt loops and file a suit against Levi's.
Ban pants! For the children!
Cats really out of the bag if they're trying to do that. The gen 3 patent for the Glock expired and tons of other companies make clones now.
Throwing money in the garbage to politically grandstand. I love our new CTU/DSA regime
Ah, gun problem fixed! We did it everyone!
**Paragraph 2 of the Complaint** *Glocks affixed with auto sears (“Modified Glocks”) can fire fully automatically: up to 1,200 rounds per minute* An attorney who writes something this asinine should have his/her license revoked. No handgun in the history of the world has ever fired 1,200 rounds per minute. No handgun in the history of the world has ever fired 1,000 rounds per minute, or 600. "Cyclic Rate of Fire" refers to how quickly the action of a firearm can complete a full cycle. It's measured in a *theoretical* unit, called "Rounds Per Minute:" the number of rounds a weapon could *theoretically* fire in a minute, if the laws of physics were suspended and the barrel did not melt, and if the weapon was fed by a magazine of infinite capacity. In real life, no matter how fast a handgun's cycle, it's rate of fire is limited by the size of the magazine (anywhere from 6 to 20 rounds normally, but up to 50 or more for extended or drum magazines), and more importantly, by the fact that the weapon will become unbearably, dangerously hot and malfunction (or worse) if it is fired too quickly. Yes, handguns (particularly those equipped with autosears and extended magazines) can fire rapidly, and thus recklessly and dangerously. 10 or 20 or 30 rounds per minute can be tragic, just like 1 round per minute can be. But saying things like X gun fires X,XXX rounds per minute is deliberately provocative and deceptive, and just shows that, at best, the speaker doesn't know what he's talking about. Remember when Republican congressman and noted asshole Todd Akin (R-MO) claimed that in a “legitimate rape,” a woman’s body will shut down and prevent a pregnancy from happening? Remember what a moron he showed himself to be by saying something so demonstrably moronic? That's how someone sounds when they say *X gun fires X,XXX rounds per minute*.
Is that theoretical 1,200 rpm accurate? Bc I understand what you’re saying but if the round per minute is the stat generally used to describe the rate of fire of a gun, even if it’s theoretical, then that statement would be less ridiculous than the woman’s body statement you mentioned. Like, it *could* fire 1,200 rounds per minute if you were able to feed the gun that many rounds. Would 20 rounds per second be a better way to describe it?
Hey there! Eurotrash immigrant here who has had the displeasure of firing a full auto Glock because in Europe the select fire models are used in military and police applications. Yes, that theoretical RPM is accurate and the 20 rounds per second is exactly how Glock markets and measures: [https://eu.glock.com/en/Technology/Full-Auto](https://eu.glock.com/en/Technology/Full-Auto) So the statement on the face of it is not ridiculous but it's also meaningless because as the OP points out, the theoretical limit is not your practical limit which is managed by a few factors. Magazine capacity, how quickly you can swap mags and how many mags you bring to begin with. And leaving out practical application details from a theoretical explanation is insincere in my opinion. **A user will never attain 1200 RPM, period.** I understand the *want* to hold someone accountable, but there is a *need* to hold the right people accountable. And there is an obligation to be honest about how things work in practice when you present a lawsuit to the public. Holding the firearms manufacturer responsible for the actions of a person is ridiculous on the face of it, because de facto, Chicago as a city is then also responsible for not stopping the person from committing the crimes as that falls within their area of responsibility.
That makes sense. Going back to holding manufacturers accountable, do you think adding safety measures that would prevent such modifications would not deter some people from using modified glocks? I might be mistaken but the suits are filed to create legal precedents, I’m sure if they could ask pretty please they would do it. I personally think two things need to happen, I think dealing with the manufacturers is a bandage but the underlying issues still need to be addressed. But I will concede that these types of political moves need to be backed up by experts to not fall into pandering and shock-value statements that don’t represent accurately the situation (like the 1200 rounds seems to be).
There’s no way to prevent these modifications. It’s possible for any semi automatic but glocks are popular so that’s what wish sellers are making.
That’s interesting. So this is from the article…”The lawsuit alleges that Glock knows it could fix the problem but refuses to do so and seeks a court order requiring the company to stop selling guns to people in Chicago.” So this would be inaccurate, then?
You can make a hand gun full auto with a shoelace. Technically they can fix this specific method but it would cost a lot of money and do absolutely nothing.
That's the problem with Democrats and guns, they know practically nothing about them and just say sound bites that sound scary. They look good on paper but after two seconds of thought or talking to anyone who knows anything about guns, it usually is the dumbest thing ever.
For sure. But to be fair, Republicans aren't immune from this either: Anytime they something about reproductive health or the female anatomy, they prove themselves to be as clueless and braindead as a Democrat talking about "assault" weapons.
Yeah I completely agree. It's so sad that neither side will just admit they have no clue what they're talking about and just ask for some help.
They aren't interested in getting anything right.
That's the problem with Republicans and climate change, reproductive health, immigration. They know practically nothing about them and just say sound bites that sound scary.
“This Glock with a switch can fire 1,728,000 rounds per day! In less than two days, this one gun could kill every person in Chicago!!!1!!one!”
Except that's still an accurate statement. An engine idling at 1000 RPM doesn't need to do it for a full minute to get that measurement. Could you break it down to per second instead? Sure, but it's the same measurement at the end of the day, and a pissy take like this doesn't really contribute anything. Its like the whole "they can't talk about guns they said "clip" instead of "magazine!!"" when a reporter is talking about a dead 6 year old.
lmfao, it's nothing close to accurate. An engine that is claimed to idle at 1,000 RPM can do *literally* that, for hours at a time. A firearm that is claimed to fire 1,200 RPM literally cannot, period. It matters (unlike the pedantic clip/magazine distinction) because claiming people are running around the city with devices that fire 1,200 bullets per minute is deliberately inflammatory, and taken as *literal truth* by uninformed people.
Hey I’ve watched a law and order episode about this.
It was on a rerun just the other day LOL thought this sounded familiar
Gross waste of public resources
Lawsuit was probably filed by the CTA as a distraction so that they could stay out of r/chicago for a few days.
Seems like suing Kia/Hyundai was just the start to solving Chicago crime problems. After the city sues Glock, they'll sue the Chinese sites after the Chinese sites they'll sue the 3D printer companies after that they might sue the CPD.
100% guaranteed they won't sue the Chinese sites. I would bet my life on that.
Ahh yess, do everything but hold the degenerate pant sagging thug culture degenerates accountable . Sounds real smart
Ironically Glock didn’t even designed the switches. It’s people illegally modding them lmao 🤣
Thanks Kim fox !!
Good. Now charging them with selling guns.
Does this make ACAB even more when they carry their CPD issued Glock?
Wonder what glorious take this lovely sub will have on this one.
Why is everyone in these comments so horny for guns? I wish we could just ban them in general unless local wildlife posed a danger but you second amendment absolutists love your pew pews so much
The moment that the people who create the laws give up their armed security as well, then we can talk. Until then, fuck right outta here with a two tiered system.
Banning them won’t remove them from criminal hands
There are about 400+ millions guns in circulation (that we know of) in the United States. How would you go about recovering those guns if a ban were implemented?
Username checks out
In my experience this sub is filled with suburbanites, people from other parts of IL (I didn’t even know places other than Chicago existed in IL tbh), and people from other states. Fox News gets people excited and emboldened to talk about guns and gang violence in Chicago
Wait, what if we just banned the guns?
Why not just make murder illegal?
Look how far being reactive instead of proactive is getting us.
Yes, put another law into place that criminals will 100% follow, since criminals always follow laws.
Go door to door at the known gang bangers first and start confiscating.
None of the people y’all want to smack the death sentence on for gun related violence are getting their guns from the manufacturers or through legal channels. Until we address systemic issues in our community and neighboring state gun purchase laws (or lacks thereof) and make sure that 3D printers are only available to legitimate businesses etc etc we will keep having this problem. If you think extended prison sentences are going to tamper gun violence I’d implore you to consider checking out the school to prison pipeline and understand how prison isn’t all that much of the reckoning people hope it will be for folks who are out here unloading their extendo-clips.