GLOCK Sues Connecticut Over Ban

GLOCK filed a federal lawsuit Monday asking a judge to stop Connecticut from enforcing a vague new "convertible pistol" ban before it takes effect October 1.

The case is Glock, Inc. v. Griffin, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut against the officials responsible for enforcing House Bill 5043, now Public Act 26-41. GLOCK also asked for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction to block the law before it criminalizes ordinary retail sales.

The legal question: Connecticut defines a "convertible pistol" as any semiauto handgun with a cruciform trigger bar that can be "readily altered" or "readily converted" into a machine gun using a Glock switch. The statute never defines "readily altered," "readily converted," or "readily removed" — leaving dealers to guess what's legal.

Here's the twist: GLOCK says the pistols it currently sells were specifically redesigned to defeat those devices. Its Slimline models (G42, G43, G43X, G48) are physically too narrow to accept known switches. Its V Series and Gen6 guns use a "triple block" system — reinforced rear frame rails, steel domes in the slide, and a modified slide-cover plate. The complaint cites a July 8, 2025 ATF report finding the system blocked every conversion device tested on a Gen6 G19, with ATF concluding the hardened steel bracket wasn't easily altered.

Since December 1, 2025, GLOCK says it has stopped making standard-width Gen5-and-earlier pistols for the civilian market entirely, replacing them with the conversion-resistant V Series and Gen6 lines.

State of play: GLOCK met with seven members of the Connecticut Attorney General's office and two State Police firearms-unit representatives on August 27, bringing sample pistols to demonstrate why current models fall outside the ban. According to the complaint, the State Police reps admitted dealers were already asking whether new GLOCKs would be illegal — and that the unit didn't know. GLOCK then asked the chief state's attorney for a formal position. Nobody gave one before the lawsuit was filed.

By the numbers:

• 659 federally licensed dealers in Connecticut, including 35 GLOCK Stocking Dealers, facing a Class D felony — up to five years and a $5,000 fine — if they guess wrong.
• 85% of Connecticut law enforcement agencies issue GLOCK pistols, and the law contains no carve-out letting covered models be sold or warranty-replaced for police after October 1.

GLOCK's primary ask is a straightforward declaration: its current commercial lineup doesn't meet the statutory definition and can keep being sold. If the court won't go that far, GLOCK wants the ban struck down outright as unconstitutionally vague and inconsistent with the Second Amendment, arguing there's no historical tradition of banning commonly owned pistols because criminals can illegally modify them with devices already banned under existing law. The complaint also raises a First Amendment claim — the statute criminalizes "advertising" a convertible pistol without defining the term, potentially turning a dealer's website listing or spec sheet into a felony.

"Connecticut wrote a criminal law broad enough that even the police unit overseeing firearm dealers allegedly cannot explain what it bans."

What's next: A ruling on the TRO request could come before the October 1 effective date. If the court doesn't act in time, Connecticut dealers will have to decide whether to keep GLOCKs on the shelf and risk a felony, or pull compliant inventory based on a law nobody — including the state — can currently explain.