Glock lost a potential customer today

[Fallschirjmäger]

Is there any consideration here to the way "disable veteran" is applied to those suffering with severe mental health problems after their service? Hear me out:

1. It certainly isn't appropriate for Glock to inquire as to the affliction that places a person in the "disabled veteran" category. Medical records are and should be private, so there's no way for them to know why a person is disabled.

Why would the term be inappropriate? The service member is/was a veteran, the service member has a disability and because of the nature of the disability its lifetime. This is the word the military uses to classify its lifetime commitment to someone who has served honorably and to whom they continuing support beyond the normal commitment ... retirement.

When did Glock, or any representative thereof inquire about anyone's disabilities?
They closest they come is limiting the program to retired military, not medically retired military. In the civilian world, a police officer who suffers a broken back or other debilitating injury is also medically retired.. iow he collects disability.

 

[flhrci]

Problem is the OP is lying. He's not only not entitled, he's also not really disabled by his own admission, and he's cheating the system.

(OP, no diss intended, lots of cheating in that system, yours is probably mild).

Get a part-time sit-down job, buy the firearm and be glad nobody here knows who you are and reports you.

Also, I would not let a hissy fit deter me from buying the firearm that is best for the job. It's like saying 'I don't like that seat-belt manufacturers are liberals, so I'm not wearing one'. Stupid. Pick your battles carefully, which means avoiding shooting your own foot. HTH

Wow, have not had any one call em a liar before. Wow. Anyways, you are entitled to your opinion. The VA says I am disabled by THEIR definition, not mine. The VA says you get a certain percentage of your base pay for having had a broken leg during your service even if it fully healed. Is that cheating the system? It is an entitlement. Geesh.

I do work btw! I have said that. I am not a lazy person sitting by the tv all day on my butt doing nothing. I work. I want to work. I want a better job than I have now. I have dreams an aspirations like others. The money I have gotten has kept me from living on the streets. I have medical insurance and do not use the VA medical services I am entitled to which is on the taxpayer's dime. I pay for my medical insurance and that is my choice to do so. VA medical qualifies under Obamacare as insurance so I really could use the VA and not buy insurance. Some may ask why I am doing it this way when I could get free care? I dunno. I just am.

But again you are entitled to your opinion. Just please understand the VA's definition of disabled is different than the regular medical establishment.

One more thing Maverick9, you let me know when you turn down some money such as a rebate on some fancy gun or electronics purchase when you know you are entitled to have it. Let me know.

David

 

[wimwag]

I was all set to buy a Glock soon and I had heard about the Glock Blue Label program this weekend. Discounts for "Those who qualify include:

Sworn Law Enforcement officers, including Federal, State, County, & City (Includes retired L.E. officers with "retired" credentials)
EMT’s, Fire Fighters, Volunteer Fire Fighters, and Paramedics
Military personnel including Reservists and National Guard with I.D. (Includes retired Military with "retired" credentials)
Corrections Officers, including Parole and Probation Officers
State Licensed Security Companies (Loomis, RAM, etc.)
State Licensed Armed Security Officers
Court Judges, District Attorneys and Deputy District Attorneys
LE Academy Cadets with enrollment documentation from the Academy"

Because they did not specifically cover me as being Honorably discharged and a disabled veteran but not retired, I sent in an inquiry about it.

This is the message I sent with my other info: "Disabled Veteran. Was honorably discharged but not retired. Would like to know if I qualify for the program. Thanks "

This is the response I got back: "Unfortunately not." The response comes off as rude to me and I know that other gun manufacturers would give me a discount if requested. I do not normally go after these discounts but it is a significant discount. I don't get it.

Goodbye Glock for devaluing my service and alienating part of your target demographic. Hello Smith and Wessen and Springfield Armory.

I used to boycott Ruger for discriminating against motorcyclist employees on their health insurance policy but they changed their tune on that. Money talks....

David

Hey man, I don't qualify either. I find it a little insulting that one can serve his country and lose his job as a result of injuries sustained and just because he doesn't get the little (Ret) credential behind his name he doesn't qualify for a discount...but a corrections officer does. Considering the sheer number of privately owned prisons in this .country and that they generally don't carry guns inside those walls and even LEO need to be disarmed before entering...yeah its an insult.
Don't be too cross, there are much better guns out there than Blocks. Try buying a used one if money is tight. I know new comes with a warranty, but armed is armed. Good luck.

 

[mobiushky]

Wow, have not had any one call em a liar before. Wow. Anyways, you are entitled to your opinion. The VA says I am disabled by THEIR definition, not mine. The VA says you get a certain percentage of your base pay for having had a broken leg during your service even if it fully healed. Is that cheating the system? It is an entitlement. Geesh.

I do work btw! I have said that. I am not a lazy person sitting by the tv all day on my butt doing nothing. I work. I want to work. I want a better job than I have now. I have dreams an aspirations like others. The money I have gotten has kept me from living on the streets. I have medical insurance and do not use the VA medical services I am entitled to which is on the taxpayer's dime. I pay for my medical insurance and that is my choice to do so. VA medical qualifies under Obamacare as insurance so I really could use the VA and not buy insurance. Some may ask why I am doing it this way when I could get free care? I dunno. I just am.

But again you are entitled to your opinion. Just please understand the VA's definition of disabled is different than the regular medical establishment.

One more thing Maverick9, you let me know when you turn down some money such as a rebate on some fancy gun or electronics purchase when you know you are entitled to have it. Let me know.

David

Man... I was right with you until the bolded sentence. This is not an intent to make you feel sub-par or discount your service. I do appreciate that btw. The truth is though, you're not entitled to a rebate or a discount on a gun. You're welcome to ask for it, but when a private company chooses to give a discount to someone, that's their choice. It's not an entitlement. You're welcome to be upset and mad about not getting it, that's understandable. But it's not something anyone is entitled to. Glock isn't owned by the US .gov (thank goodness) and there is no law saying that any private company HAS to provide discounted services to Vets. Companies do it because they want to show respect and thanks. There is no entitlement.

Other than that, I was right with you on everything you said.

AS to your particular experience, well, every organization has to draw lines. No matter where the line is drawn there will be people who fall just outside the boundary. In your case, that seems to have happened. That's sad, but it's also a fact of life. There are other ways to get a discounted price on a Glock if you really want one. Look into used or factory refurbs. Some police depts also sell their out of service pistols. Or, choose another brand. If you really want a cheap price and are willing to do it, join GSSF. If you participate in GSSF for a year, you get a discounted rate on new Glocks from the factory. It's a pretty decent price too, somewhere in the $400-450 range as I recall. But that's a year away, so no reason to wait if you don't want to.

 

[flhrci]

Man... I was right with you until the bolded sentence. This is not an intent to make you feel sub-par or discount your service. I do appreciate that btw. The truth is though, you're not entitled to a rebate or a discount on a gun. You're welcome to ask for it, but when a private company chooses to give a discount to someone, that's their choice. It's not an entitlement. You're welcome to be upset and mad about not getting it, that's understandable. But it's not something anyone is entitled to. Glock isn't owned by the US .gov (thank goodness) and there is no law saying that any private company HAS to provide discounted services to Vets. Companies do it because they want to show respect and thanks. There is no entitlement.

Other than that, I was right with you on everything you said.

So maybe I misused the word entitlement in the last sentence. Anyway, I do not believe I am entitled to a discount from any company. It's a nice thing that can be done. That's all.

This has gotten a little more out of hand than I thought it would but I am up for a lively discussion occasionally.

Thanks to everyone about thanking me and others for our service.

David


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

 

[flhrci]

Hey man, I don't qualify either. I find it a little insulting that one can serve his country and lose his job as a result of injuries sustained and just because he doesn't get the little (Ret) credential behind his name he doesn't qualify for a discount...but a corrections officer does. Considering the sheer number of privately owned prisons in this .country and that they generally don't carry guns inside those walls and even LEO need to be disarmed before entering...yeah its an insult.
Don't be too cross, there are much better guns out there than Blocks. Try buying a used one if money is tight. I know new comes with a warranty, but armed is armed. Good luck.

Wasn't aware of the prison guard issues. Interesting.

David


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

 

[Fallschirjmäger]

Wow, have not had any one call em a liar before.

Flhrci, I'm sorry on my behalf for Maveric9's words, I think they were entirely uncalled for.

Hey man, I don't qualify either. I find it a little insulting that one can serve his country and lose his job as a result of injuries sustained and just because he doesn't get the little (Ret) credential behind his name he doesn't qualify for a discount...but a corrections officer does. Considering the sheer number of privately owned prisons in this .country and that they generally don't carry guns inside those walls and even LEO need to be disarmed before entering...yeah its an insult.

In this case, it's not about guns inside the walls, it's about former convicts with a possible grudge encountering a prison guard outside the guard line, or gang members resentful that one of their own is incarcerated and looking to 'get even' with a guard, or just plain trying to influence other guards by murdering one of them to send a message.
Also applicable to probation officers and their former or current 'customers.'

 

[wimwag]

Flhrci, I'm sorry on my behalf for Maveric9's words, I think they were entirely uncalled for.



In this case, it's not about guns inside the walls, it's about former convicts with a possible grudge encountering a prison guard outside the guard line, or gang members resentful that one of their own is incarcerated and looking to 'get even' with a guard, or just plain trying to influence other guards by murdering one of them to send a message.
Also applicable to probation officers and their former or current 'customers.'

Yes but if medically retired soldiers don't get them, why should corrections officers?

 

[mobiushky]

So maybe I misused the word entitlement in the last sentence. Anyway, I do not believe I am entitled to a discount from any company. It's a nice thing that can be done. That's all.

This has gotten a little more out of hand than I thought it would but I am up for a lively discussion occasionally.

Thanks to everyone about thanking me and others for our service.

David


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

Can I ask, do you have any credentials that would show service? Like ID or something? I would imagine if you provided some kind of verifiable ID they would be more willing to offer the discount. I read the list and it really seems that the issue is more one of proof than retired or not. I could be wrong, this is just the sense I get from the wording.

 

[wimwag]

Can I ask, do you have any credentials that would show service? Like ID or something? I would imagine if you provided some kind of verifiable ID they would be more willing to offer the discount. I read the list and it really seems that the issue is more one of proof than retired or not. I could be wrong, this is just the sense I get from the wording.

Maybe supply them with a short DD214. It won't state the reason for discharge, just the basics.

 

[Fallschirjmäger]

In this case, it's not about guns inside the walls, it's about former convicts with a possible grudge encountering a prison guard outside the guard line, or gang members resentful that one of their own is incarcerated and looking to 'get even' with a guard, or just plain trying to influence other guards by murdering one of them to send a message.
Also applicable to probation officers and their former or current 'customers.'

Yes but if medically retired soldiers don't get them, why should corrections officers?

I'm sorry, I thought I had explained that.


Are there former enemy combatants that are likely to meet a medically retired veteran and want to exact revenge upon them?
Are there former felons or other convicted criminals that are likely to encounter a corrections officer at the local mall or Sack'o'Suds and want to exact revenge upon them?

Are there friends of current or former enemy combatants that are likely to encounter a medically retired veteran and commit violence against that veteran out of a desire for revenge or to send a signal to other medically retired veterans?
Are there friends of incarcerated or released felons that are likely to encounter a corrections officer and commit violence against that corrections officer out of a desire for revenge or to 'send a signal' to other corrections officers?

Which, in your estimation is more likely, a corrections officer in California encountering a released, convicted felon who recognizes him...... or a medically retired veteran encountering a member of Hezbollah or Al-Qaeda who remembers him personally?

 

[mobiushky]

I'm sorry, I thought I had explained that.


Are there former enemy combatants that are likely to meet a medically retired veteran and want to exact revenge upon them?
Are there former felons or other convicted criminals that are likely to encounter a corrections officer at the local mall or Sack'o'Suds and want to exact revenge upon them?

Are there friends of current or former enemy combatants that are likely to encounter a medically retired veteran and commit violence against that veteran out of a desire for revenge or to send a signal to other medically retired veterans?
Are there friends of incarcerated or released felons that are likely to encounter a corrections officer and commit violence against that corrections officer out of a desire for revenge or to 'send a signal' to other corrections officers?

Which, in your estimation is more likely, a corrections officer in California encountering a released, convicted felon who recognizes him...... or a medically retired veteran encountering a member of Hezbollah or Al-Qaeda who remembers him personally?

I'm sorry, but I have to say something here. What does any of this have to do with Glock's discount program? By this logic anyone living in a higher crime area should be getting a discount as well.

We need to start with a fundamental understanding. No one has a "right" to a discount. No one. LEO, .Mil, Ice cream truck driver, doesn't matter. Glock, a company, has extended an offer to some people to provide a discount for their products. That offer is not extended to everyone. They get to decide to whom they extend that offer. The idea that a crazed former prisoner would go after a guard doesn't even factor into that decision. The problem is, anytime a company does something like this they open the door to abuse. People posing as ice cream truck drivers to get the discount. SO, they have to set guidelines to try to prevent that. No matter what the guidelines, someone is going to be on the other side of that line. If they require some form of proof of qualification, that's their right as a company. And if a perfectly valid person steps up but for whatever reason can't provide that proof, they are well within their right to refuse.

At what point did this become, they deserve it more than you?

 

[Fallschirjmäger]

Absolutely.
You are correct, no one has a "right" to a discount. Rights can be demanded. In the case of the Glock discount this is a privilege. Privileges can can be extended to whoever a company or individual wishes. I can extend to you the privilege of entering my home unannounced should I wish, but you cannot claim that as a 'right'.

The right that Does exist though, is the right for Glock to price their products as they wish in a free, democratic market. To most firearms producing companies, that means law enforcement agencies get a discount that you and I don't get, we don't have that privilege. Glock also has the right to completely restrict their products from being offered to the civilian market should they wish to do so. In fact, Glock could refuse to sell their products to anyone whose name began with a letter "A through N" and it would be legally enforceable in court as the discrimination does not apply to any 'protected class.'

 

[EMNofSeattle]

for a two year GSSF membership you can have a blue label glock too....

I have at least 3 coupons for BL glock pistols, i've never spent a day as a cop or firefighter or soldier, they are also given to competitors.

the purpose is to incentivize people who already own/buy, or are likely to, to buy their gun or a new gun. a judge with death threats will feel the need for a gun, and here's glock with the offer for them. competitors may buy new guns in order to shoot new divisions, etc.

people who have to buy guns or who are more likely to want new ones are more likely to buy glocks if such a deal is extended....

 

[color of law]

I know that it comes as a shock to some, but a fact of life is, life is not fair.

Of course I'm blessed to carry a S&W.......

 

[WalkingWolf]

I know that it comes as a shock to some, but a fact of life is, life is not fair.

Of course I'm blessed to carry a S&W.......

I consider Glocks position fair, unless they are trying to influence a gov contract. I also consider that it is fair for anybody to pass them buy and buy a S&W or a Ruger. Or even a Kel-Tec.

Personally I could buy a Israeli Hi Power for less than the price of a discounted Glock. IMO the Hi Power is a far superior handgun.

 

[color of law]

It has nothing to do with fairness. Glock made a business decision. If someone does not like that decision then they can go buy enough stock in the company and make their feelings known to management. Money talks and sullbhit walks.

I think you are taking "life is not fair" out of context. "Life is not fair" has nothing to do with fairness. Social progressives want you to believe that an utopia can exist. Meaning that some are more equal than others. Equal treatment does not exist. Yes, man should strive for it, but it will never be achieved. And equal treatment does not mean equal outcomes.

Just sayin.

 

[WalkingWolf]

It has nothing to do with fairness. Glock made a business decision. If someone does not like that decision then they can go buy enough stock in the company and make their feelings known to management. Money talks and sullbhit walks.

I think you are taking "life is not fair" out of context. "Life is not fair" has nothing to do with fairness. Social progressives want you to believe that an utopia can exist. Meaning that some are more equal than others. Equal treatment does not exist. Yes, man should strive for it, but it will never be achieved. And equal treatment does not mean equal outcomes.

Just sayin.

Where did anybody say "life is not fair" or even the OP said he was treated unfairly. He was disappointed with his being excluded, that is his right to feel that way. AND IMO that is fair, it is the companies right to sell their product as they wish, that is fair. It is anybodies right to pass them by, and buy at a better price from another manufacturer, that is fair.

Fair in this case equals what is legal, if it is not then it might be illegal. My apologies you did not understand that.

 

[color of law]

Where did anybody say "life is not fair" or even the OP said he was treated unfairly. He was disappointed with his being excluded, that is his right to feel that way. AND IMO that is fair, it is the companies right to sell their product as they wish, that is fair. It is anybodies right to pass them by, and buy at a better price from another manufacturer, that is fair.

Fair in this case equals what is legal, if it is not then it might be illegal. My apologies you did not understand that.

I believe we are on the same page. I viewed the OP's disappointment as not being fair.

 

[Fallschirjmäger]

Goodbye Glock for devaluing my service and alienating part of your target demographic. Hello Smith and Wessen and Springfield Armory.

You know they both have incentive pricing similar to what Glock does, right? So do Noveske, Rainier Arms, Larue, Viking Tactical, Colt, Nighthawk Custom, Caspian, SIG, and H&K among others.

You may get stuck having to get a Kimber.

Speaking of discrimination and unfairness, did you know most grocery stores let their employees pay less for food? It's discriminatory, I tell ya.