Delaware Sues Glock Over What Third Parties Do With Third-Party Designed Switches
HOME›NEWS›LAW
LAW

Delaware Sues Glock Over Switches Made by Someone Else

Delaware Attorney General Kathleen Jennings sued Glock, Inc. and Glock Ges.m.b.H. under the state's Keshall "KeKe" Anderson Safe Firearm Sales Act. The state says cheap conversion switches turn Glock pistols into full-auto guns. Glock says it never sold one.

Bearing Arms|October 23, 2026|2h ago|2 min read|ORIGINAL SOURCE ↗

Delaware Sues Glock Over Switches Made by Someone Else

Delaware Attorney General Kathleen Jennings filed a civil lawsuit against Glock, Inc. and Glock Ges.m.b.H., the Austria-based parent company, alleging that Glock pistols can be converted into machine guns with little effort. The complaint rests on the state's Keshall "KeKe" Anderson Safe Firearm Sales Act. The target is small aftermarket parts known as "Glock switches." Delaware argues those parts can change a Glock into a weapon that fires up to 1,200 rounds per minute. The state says Glock has known about this design weakness for decades and kept selling the pistols to civilians anyway. Delaware joins a growing list of states that have gone after the manufacturer.

Key Details

The filing puts several specific claims on the record. Each one deserves a close read before anyone repeats it.

  • Court and law: Civil action in Delaware under the Keshall "KeKe" Anderson Safe Firearm Sales Act.
  • Defendants: Glock, Inc. and Glock Ges.m.b.H.
  • Plaintiff: Attorney General Kathleen Jennings, on behalf of the State of Delaware.
  • Central device: Aftermarket "Glock switches" that the state describes as cheap and quick to install.
  • Claimed rate of fire: Up to 1,200 rounds per minute after conversion.
  • State's knowledge claim: Glock has known for decades that its pistol design allows this change.
  • State's safety claim: Glock chose not to add features that would prevent conversion.
  • Timing claim: Sales to civilians continued while police nationwide reported more violence involving converted Glocks.

Jennings framed the case as a moral one. She said some manufacturers hide behind the idea that their products carry no moral consequences. She accused Glock of choosing profit over public safety. The complaint's central theory is that a company that knew about a conversion risk had a duty to design it out. Delaware has not, from the details reported so far, identified a specific Glock model or a specific converted crime tied to the company's own sales.

Background

Federal law already controls the device at the center of this case. The National Firearms Act of 1934 treats a conversion device that makes a semi-automatic gun fire automatically as a machine gun. The Hughes Amendment to the Firearms Owners' Protection Act of 1986 barred civilian transfer of machine guns made after May 19, 1986, which froze the legal civilian supply. Possession of an unregistered auto sear is a federal felony. Anyone who installs one faces prosecution regardless of what brand the gun wears.

Glock pistols became the most common target for conversion because of their simple design and huge install base. Manufacturers and cities have fought over the question of design liability for years. Most courts have treated the criminal misuse of a legal product as the fault of the criminal, not the company that made the product. The Supreme Court's 2022 decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen STOP

ORIGINAL SOURCE
This editorial was written by DownRange based on the original article. Read the primary source for additional detail.
READ ORIGINAL ↗
TAGS
glockdelawareglock-switchesmachine-gun-conversionproduct-liabilitynational-firearms-actsecond-amendment
SHARE:X / TWITTERFACEBOOK