Glock has responded to the Maryland lawsuit, and it’s a doozy.

Lawfare is just one of the latest tools in the anti-Second Amendment arsenal. Suing manufacturers is happening all across the country, primarily in blue states.

Glock has been under attack for several years, primarily over Glock switches, which are already against the law. But that isn’t enough for the anti-gunners.

They want Glock responsible for people doing illegal things.

Glock’s response to the Maryland lawsuit was terrific, with one of its primary arguments that the state of Maryland could ban handguns, but they haven’t even done that, so how is Glock responsible again?

One paragraph summarized it pretty well:

“Based on the above standards, Maryland approves the sale of Glock pistols to civilian consumers that Plaintiffs now argue constitutes the creation of a public nuisance. In fact, Maryland currently approves of the sale of more than a hundred different models of Glock pistols to civilian consumers after it considered factors including their quality of materials and manufacture, reliability as to safety, and utility for legitimate sporting activities and self-protection by civilian consumers. If a pistol was deemed to be unreasonably dangerous to be possessed and used by civilian consumers because it too “easily accepts … MCDs,” the Board tasked with approving only “safe” handguns would presumably not have approved such a pistol for sale.”

You’ll have to read the entire lawsuit here.

Note: Image of Glock from Shooting Illustrated.