Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Omaha Steve

(99,580 posts)
Thu Oct 9, 2014, 05:43 PM Oct 2014

Ex-wife of Glock founder sues him over millions

Source: AP-Excite

By KATE BRUMBACK

ATLANTA (AP) — The ex-wife of Gaston Glock, founder of the firearms company, in a lawsuit Thursday accused him and his associates of conspiring to cheat her out of millions of dollars.

They participated in a worldwide racketeering scheme aimed at taking money from Helga Glock through various criminal methods, including improper royalty payments, laundering money through fraudulent billing companies, and sham lease and loan agreements, the lawsuit claims.

They "stole and laundered money using a tangled web of fictive legal relationships, offshore business entities, and international financial transactions," the lawsuit says.

A woman who answered the phone in the media relations department at Glock Inc., the company's U.S. headquarters referred questions to the company's lawyer but then hung up before giving a name or contact number. She did not answer when called back and did not immediately return a message.

FULL story at link.


Read more: http://apnews.excite.com/article/20141009/us-glock-lawsuit-65403d39e8.html

48 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Ex-wife of Glock founder sues him over millions (Original Post) Omaha Steve Oct 2014 OP
You'd think a company whose business was killing people would be more ethical than that. Gidney N Cloyd Oct 2014 #1
lol.... dixiegrrrrl Oct 2014 #4
You would think they were more "efficient" in dealing with annoying people Demeter Oct 2014 #7
I was going to point out Glock is one of the largest suppliers to police departments but... AtheistCrusader Oct 2014 #14
Well done! Tom Ripley Oct 2014 #48
Morals, ethics and responsibility don't apply to gun manufacturers. flamin lib Oct 2014 #2
Glocks trigger pull of 5 lbs is pretty average.. EX500rider Oct 2014 #6
It's not about the trigger pull... hunter Oct 2014 #9
My springfield can't even if something does. Like the retention strap on the holster. AtheistCrusader Oct 2014 #13
I've had several since the late 80's... EX500rider Oct 2014 #41
You're a "safe action" non believer... ileus Oct 2014 #45
Making things up again? Lurks Often Oct 2014 #10
See # 15 nt flamin lib Oct 2014 #16
More nonsense from you. Lurks Often Oct 2014 #20
They are specifically exempted from the Consumer Product Safety Act. flamin lib Oct 2014 #22
They can be sued for defective defective products or breaking distribution laws hack89 Oct 2014 #23
And you need to go back to the gungeon where you can flamin lib Oct 2014 #25
Why can't they force a recall? hack89 Oct 2014 #27
Here is a long list of gun recalls hack89 Oct 2014 #31
The Kel-Tec PF-9 has an internal hammer block safety hack89 Oct 2014 #24
I'm typing this real slow because you seem to read badly. flamin lib Oct 2014 #26
Besides an internal safety and a long double action trigger pull that is. hack89 Oct 2014 #29
Is there a mechanical device that would prevent the gun from discharging I'd there were a flamin lib Oct 2014 #37
Isn't the proof of how safe a gun is the number of accidental discharges? hack89 Oct 2014 #39
anyone who has trigger time with a pf9 will tell you.. ileus Oct 2014 #46
Grown ups don't have to lie and distort facts to make their point Lurks Often Oct 2014 #32
Jumbo jets are specifically exempt from the Consumer Product Safety Act hack89 Oct 2014 #35
Gun manufacturers can be sued for defective products hack89 Oct 2014 #11
Unlike other products like autos or chainsaws the government is forbidden from interfering flamin lib Oct 2014 #15
Bullshit. Go read the actual law. hack89 Oct 2014 #17
Bullshit right back at cha. nt flamin lib Oct 2014 #18
Give us a cite from the actual law hack89 Oct 2014 #19
One more time. The federal government cannot force a recall on gun manufacturers. nt flamin lib Oct 2014 #28
Again - show us the pertinent section of the law hack89 Oct 2014 #30
The cpsa was amended in 1976 to exempt flamin lib Oct 2014 #34
Many things are specifically exempted from the CPSA but are still subjected to recalls. hack89 Oct 2014 #36
Ya can find all that but ya can't find the part about firearms and ammo? flamin lib Oct 2014 #38
I am agreeing with you on the CPSA. hack89 Oct 2014 #40
Here is a long list of gun recalls hack89 Oct 2014 #33
No empathy for those who profit from guns. Hoyt Oct 2014 #3
Good. All merchants of death should be sued. onehandle Oct 2014 #5
+1 Erose999 Oct 2014 #21
Yes Lord forbid if someones wants to hunt or protect themselves... EX500rider Oct 2014 #42
Wow! I had no idea that every gun owner was a gun dealer/manufacturer too. onehandle Oct 2014 #43
Are we expected to make our own? EX500rider Oct 2014 #44
I want to be the first one say, "Sorry about the ex-Mrs. Glock's fatal accident." nt valerief Oct 2014 #8
nothing like a divorce settlement fight to out the white collar Corp crimes. Sunlei Oct 2014 #12
Wonder if she'll buy HS Produkt??? ileus Oct 2014 #47

AtheistCrusader

(33,982 posts)
14. I was going to point out Glock is one of the largest suppliers to police departments but...
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 11:12 AM
Oct 2014

They like to kill people too.. So. Joke ruined.

flamin lib

(14,559 posts)
2. Morals, ethics and responsibility don't apply to gun manufacturers.
Thu Oct 9, 2014, 05:57 PM
Oct 2014

If they did there wouldn't be a special exemption from the safe products act. Any other manufacturer would have been legislated out of business long ago. The safetsafety and trigger pressure is so light that Blocks often go off in the holster resulting in leg wounds known in the gunner community as "glock syndrome".

EX500rider

(10,835 posts)
6. Glocks trigger pull of 5 lbs is pretty average..
Thu Oct 9, 2014, 07:15 PM
Oct 2014

Nobodies Glock ever went off in the holster without them stupidly putting their finger on the trigger while pulling it out.

hunter

(38,310 posts)
9. It's not about the trigger pull...
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 10:28 AM
Oct 2014

... it's about dim-witted Glock fetishists and the power of marketing.

AtheistCrusader

(33,982 posts)
13. My springfield can't even if something does. Like the retention strap on the holster.
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 11:11 AM
Oct 2014

I consider the glock safety system unsafe, but it has survived courtroom consideration, so, there's that at least.

EX500rider

(10,835 posts)
41. I've had several since the late 80's...
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 03:34 PM
Oct 2014

....times they have gone off with out pulling the trigger=zero

As a matter of fact when the Austrian Army was testing Glocks they dropped a loaded one 10 feet to a concrete floor 10,000 times with zero damage or misfires.

ileus

(15,396 posts)
45. You're a "safe action" non believer...
Sun Oct 12, 2014, 08:24 AM
Oct 2014

As for me and my family we're hammer fired.


Well except for a few strikers....but no glocks.

 

Lurks Often

(5,455 posts)
10. Making things up again?
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 10:50 AM
Oct 2014

Last edited Fri Oct 10, 2014, 01:12 PM - Edit history (1)

Here is the law in question: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/chapter-105

It does NOT prevent people from suing a gun maker if the product is defective or if the gun maker broke the law in the distribution of the firearm.

If you cut yourself with a kitchen knife do you sue the knife maker?

 

Lurks Often

(5,455 posts)
20. More nonsense from you.
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 01:11 PM
Oct 2014

You obviously don't think firearms are regulated enough, but to believe that they aren't regulated at all is absurd.

flamin lib

(14,559 posts)
22. They are specifically exempted from the Consumer Product Safety Act.
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 01:54 PM
Oct 2014

That act can force a recall of everything from toys to jumbo jets, yet firearms are exempt. In 1996 and again in 2003 S1224 was introduced to correct that but never made it out of committee.

George Zimmermanwe's gun does not have a mechanical safety device at all. How can that be a good idea for a consumer product? What power does the federal government have to recall it or for e the manufacturer to correct this defect?

Take your gun hugging affections back to the gungeon and let the grown ups have a discussion.

hack89

(39,171 posts)
23. They can be sued for defective defective products or breaking distribution laws
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 02:06 PM
Oct 2014
However, both manufacturers and dealers can still be held liable for damages resulting from defective products, breach of contract, criminal misconduct, and other actions for which they are directly responsible in much the same manner that any U.S. based manufacturer of consumer products (i.e. automobiles, appliances, power tools, etc.) are held responsible.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protection_of_Lawful_Commerce_in_Arms_Act

you need to stop spreading lies.

flamin lib

(14,559 posts)
25. And you need to go back to the gungeon where you can
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 02:17 PM
Oct 2014

Make up facts and avoid any disussion on gun violence by picking nits with all your ammosexual friends.

They can be sued in civil court by anyone with a few hundred thousand $$ but the government cannot force a recall.

How well would you fare against the gun industry mega bucks? Can you afford to hire a lawyer at $700 an hour? Glock can.

hack89

(39,171 posts)
27. Why can't they force a recall?
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 02:21 PM
Oct 2014

can you cite from the actual law? Isn't it time you actually back up your statements with some actual links? You have read the law, haven't you?


hack89

(39,171 posts)
24. The Kel-Tec PF-9 has an internal hammer block safety
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 02:13 PM
Oct 2014

it cannot be fired unless the trigger is pulled. Which is what you expect from a handgun.

flamin lib

(14,559 posts)
26. I'm typing this real slow because you seem to read badly.
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 02:21 PM
Oct 2014

There is no mechanical safety device on that pistol to prevent a negligent discharge.

hack89

(39,171 posts)
29. Besides an internal safety and a long double action trigger pull that is.
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 02:24 PM
Oct 2014

can you show that particular pistol has a history of negligent discharges or are you just pulling another fact out of your butt?

flamin lib

(14,559 posts)
37. Is there a mechanical device that would prevent the gun from discharging I'd there were a
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 02:59 PM
Oct 2014

Round in the chamber and the trigger were inadvertantly pulled? No.

The degree of obfuscation and avoidance of discussion along with the GITMO style torture of logic in amazing.

hack89

(39,171 posts)
39. Isn't the proof of how safe a gun is the number of accidental discharges?
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 03:07 PM
Oct 2014

can you show that this gun is actually unsafe besides your feelings on what is required?

Very few double action handguns have mechanical safeties because the trigger pull first has to cock the weapon - the gun will not fire as soon as the trigger is pulled. The fact that accidental shootings has steadily decline for decades indicates that guns are safe.

The ATF regulates gun safety. They have the power to pull unsafe weapons off the market. And don't forget that gun manufacturers can be sued for defective and dangerous products. Ask Remington about that.

ileus

(15,396 posts)
46. anyone who has trigger time with a pf9 will tell you..
Sun Oct 12, 2014, 08:28 AM
Oct 2014

they're not going off without pulling (really hard) on the trigger intentionally.


 

Lurks Often

(5,455 posts)
32. Grown ups don't have to lie and distort facts to make their point
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 02:33 PM
Oct 2014

which is something you don't seem capable of.

The Keltec is just as safe as a regular revolver, which relies on a long trigger pull to prevent it from going off by accident. Oh and you're wrong yet again, the Kel Tec PF-9 has an automatic hammer block safety, which prevents the gun from going off unless the trigger is pulled.

"Firing mechanism is Double-Action Only with an automatic hammer block safety."
http://www.keltecweapons.com/our-guns/pf-9/pistol/

hack89

(39,171 posts)
35. Jumbo jets are specifically exempt from the Consumer Product Safety Act
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 02:52 PM
Oct 2014
The CPSA excludes from CPSC's jurisdiction those products that expressly lie in another federal agency's jurisdiction, for example food, drugs, cosmetics, medical devices, tobacco products, firearms and ammunition, motor vehicles, pesticides, aircraft, and boats. These products may fall under the purview of agencies such as the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the U.S. Department of Transportation, the U.S. Environment Protection Agency, the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration, and the U.S. Coast Guard.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consumer_Product_Safety_Act

hack89

(39,171 posts)
11. Gun manufacturers can be sued for defective products
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 10:57 AM
Oct 2014

Last edited Fri Oct 10, 2014, 12:51 PM - Edit history (1)

what you cannot sue them for are the criminal acts of others. Which is what gun control groups tried to do in a concerted campaign to put them out of business.

flamin lib

(14,559 posts)
15. Unlike other products like autos or chainsaws the government is forbidden from interfering
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 12:33 PM
Oct 2014

With gun makers.

Only individuals with enough money and time can bring a civil suit.

hack89

(39,171 posts)
19. Give us a cite from the actual law
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 01:07 PM
Oct 2014

Show us in black and white that gun manufacturers are immune from all law suits.

flamin lib

(14,559 posts)
34. The cpsa was amended in 1976 to exempt
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 02:52 PM
Oct 2014

"Firearms, ammunition, parts for firearms and black powder".

Prove me wrong.

hack89

(39,171 posts)
36. Many things are specifically exempted from the CPSA but are still subjected to recalls.
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 02:56 PM
Oct 2014
The CPSA excludes from CPSC's jurisdiction those products that expressly lie in another federal agency's jurisdiction, for example food, drugs, cosmetics, medical devices, tobacco products, firearms and ammunition, motor vehicles, pesticides, aircraft, and boats. These products may fall under the purview of agencies such as the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the U.S. Department of Transportation, the U.S. Environment Protection Agency, the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration, and the U.S. Coast Guard.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consumer_Product_Safety_Act

That does not mean the government cannot force a recall. Cars are exempted, for example, yet thousands are recalled every year. And are you trying to tell me that the FDA can't force the recall of tainted food?

flamin lib

(14,559 posts)
38. Ya can find all that but ya can't find the part about firearms and ammo?
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 03:03 PM
Oct 2014

I can put up with a lot of shit from people who are passionate but not from people who are intentionally ignorant and too stubborn to see an opposing viewpoint regardless of validity and facts.

Welcome to my ignore list.

onehandle

(51,122 posts)
5. Good. All merchants of death should be sued.
Thu Oct 9, 2014, 06:54 PM
Oct 2014

Every gun dealer. Every gun maker.

Name them. Hound them. Sue them.

onehandle

(51,122 posts)
43. Wow! I had no idea that every gun owner was a gun dealer/manufacturer too.
Sat Oct 11, 2014, 09:37 PM
Oct 2014

The things you learn on librul forums.

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Ex-wife of Glock founder ...