Glock, maker of one of the most popular pistols in America, is suing Connecticut over its new law banning pistols that can illegally be “readily converted” to fully automatic fire. And in a separate suit, the National Shooting Sports Foundation and retailer Shadow Systems have also targeted the unconstitutional state law.
The law, which is set to take effect on October 1, was passed earlier this year.
In a statement announcing the lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut, Glock said it is seeking a temporary restraining order and a preliminary injunction against the law.
“The misguided law unconstitutionally infringes on the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding Connecticut residents by prohibiting an entire class of lawfully made and sold handguns,” Glock said in a prepared statement. “Through the lawsuit, Glock, Inc. seeks not only to gain clarity for Connecticut citizens, but more importantly, to safeguard core Second Amendment rights and ensure that law-abiding citizens maintain their right to choose the handguns they keep and bear for self-defense.”
The complaint maintains that the definition of banned “convertible pistols” is vague, ambiguous, and unclear as to whether Glock pistols manufactured after October 1, 2026, can be sold in the state. In response to customer, dealer, and law enforcement inquiries regarding the statute, Glock, Inc. said it has sought clarification from the Connecticut Office of the Attorney General and the State’s Attorneys, but to no avail.
Along with asking for the injunction, Glock is petitioning the court to have the state provide written confirmation that some of its newer models, including the V Series and Gen 6, don’t meet the “convertible” pistol definition.
Unsurprisingly, Connecticut officials aren’t budging on defending the new law.
“Connecticut’s commonsense gun laws are lawful and lifesaving,” Attorney General William Tong said in a prepared statement. “I will aggressively defend Connecticut against efforts to erode those commonsense laws that keep people safe on our streets and in our schools, houses of worship and businesses.”
On the same day that Glock filed the lawsuit, NSSF and Shadow Systems filed a similar suit arguing that Glocks are very common and protected by under the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms.
In a news release announcing the lawsuit, NSSF said the Connecticut law infringes on the right of citizens to purchase the most popular-selling handguns that are used for self-defense and renowned for their reliability.
“Connecticut is unconstitutionally infringing on Second Amendment rights while ignoring criminals who violate federal and state law to illegally modify these handguns to attach a ‘machine gun conversion device,’ or MCD, which has long been illegal to both possess and to attach to a firearm outside of strict federal licensing,” the NSSF stated in the release. “The firearm industry warns gun owners against illegal modifications that override intentional semiautomatic firearm engineering designs. Illegally modifying a firearm to enable automatic fire is a federal crime.”
Lawrence G. Keane, NSSF senior vice president and general counsel, said the law, like most gun-control laws, targets the wrong people.
“This law, and similar laws passed in other states, punishes law-abiding citizens by infringing on their Second Amendment rights to legally obtain the firearms they choose to protect themselves and their families against criminals who, by definition, have no respect for life or law,” Keane said. “Instead of enforcing the law and holding these criminals accountable, Connecticut’s elected officials pander to gun control donors and anti-gun special interests to scapegoat the industry and ban an entire class of ordinary firearms, which the U.S. Supreme Court’s Heller decision clearly holds violates the U.S. Constitution. Governor Lamont knew this yet didn’t hesitate to trample on the Second Amendment.”
