Gun rights YouTuber Liberty Doll says New Jersey’s attorney general is demanding Glock sales records from firearm dealers as part of a lawsuit against the gun manufacturer, raising serious privacy concerns for gun owners across the state.
In a recent video, Liberty Doll said New Jersey is one of the states trying to sue Glock under a public nuisance law, and that the discovery process has now expanded into subpoenas sent to federal firearm licensees, or FFLs.
According to Liberty Doll, the subpoenas demand records involving Glock handgun sales going back a decade.
“Do you own a Glock in the state of New Jersey?” she asked. “If so, the attorney general wants to know and is demanding FFLs give up the records.”
But Liberty Doll argued that the request is more troubling than it first appears, because New Jersey may already have much of this information through its handgun permitting system.
A Lawsuit Against Glock Expands
Liberty Doll said the lawsuit was filed in 2024 under then-Attorney General Matthew Platkin, but the current attorney general, Jennifer Davenport, has continued the effort.
The case is tied to public nuisance claims against Glock, and according to Liberty Doll, Davenport’s office has sent subpoenas to gun shops as part of discovery.
Those subpoenas, she said, seek records for Glock handguns sold to New Jersey customers over the past 10 years.
That is a broad request. A decade of sales records could include large amounts of customer data, dealer communications, inventory information, and business records between FFLs and Glock.
Liberty Doll said the issue is not only what the attorney general wants, but why she is seeking it through the lawsuit.
“The New Jersey AG already has access to this data,” Liberty Doll said.
She argued that New Jersey’s pistol permitting system acts like a registry, even if the state does not call it one. Because handgun sales require paperwork that includes details about the buyer and firearm, Liberty Doll said the state can already search its own system for Glock owners.
“So why demand it as part of discovery?” she asked.
Her answer was simple: because records gathered in litigation could become part of a public lawsuit.
The Privacy Concern
Liberty Doll said the real fear is that gun owner information could be exposed publicly if it becomes part of court filings or discovery material.
She credited News2A with first breaking the story and warning that the subpoenas could dox gun owners by exposing personally identifiable information.
According to Liberty Doll, the subpoenas went out May 11 to numerous FFLs and required the information by June 15. Some dealers received them later, while others were still waiting as the subpoenas continued arriving at gun shops.
She also noted that none of the FFLs receiving subpoenas had been named as defendants in the lawsuit.
That is part of what makes the situation feel so invasive. These dealers are not accused in the lawsuit, based on Liberty Doll’s description, yet they are being asked to produce wide-ranging information connected to their customers and Glock sales.
Liberty Doll explained that New Jersey handgun transaction forms include the date of sale, the name and address of the buyer, the type of firearm, manufacturer, importer, caliber or gauge, model, and serial number. She said those forms must be sent to the state police superintendent within five days of a sale.
However, she said those records are supposed to remain private outside of law enforcement purposes.
Putting similar data into lawsuit discovery, she argued, changes the risk.
“Anyone and everyone can have access to it,” Liberty Doll said.
What The Subpoenas Reportedly Demand
Liberty Doll said News2A reviewed copies of the subpoenas and reported that the attorney general’s demands included documents showing all sales and transfers of Glock handguns from FFLs to New Jersey customers.
The subpoenas also reportedly asked dealers to identify what portion of those Glock sales or transfers went to civilians rather than law enforcement customers.
According to Liberty Doll, the requests also sought documents showing how dealers received Glock inventory, contracts or agreements between the dealer and Glock, communications with Glock about sales or marketing, and communications about switches or the capacity of Glock handguns for automatic fire.
She emphasized that switches are illegal and not marketed or sold by lawful FFLs.
That part of the request is interesting because it shows the lawsuit’s likely theory. The state appears to be tying Glock handguns to concerns about illegal conversion devices, while critics like Liberty Doll argue that lawful sellers and lawful owners are being dragged into a fight over criminal misuse.
Liberty Doll said the demand also included documents about the marketing or advertising of Glock handguns to New Jersey customers.
For ordinary gun owners, that may sound like inside legal paperwork. But for dealers, gathering 10 years of records could be costly and time-consuming, especially if the request is not narrowed.
Liberty Doll said some FFLs suggested it could take a year or longer to assemble everything being demanded.
The Attorney General’s Office Pushes Back
After News2A contacted the attorney general’s office for comment, Liberty Doll said the office responded that not all FFLs were receiving subpoenas.
However, she said the office did not disclose what criteria it was using to choose which dealers were being targeted.
A spokesperson also reportedly said the requests were not seeking information about individual purchasers or personal identifying information about purchasers.
Liberty Doll disputed that framing, saying the subpoenas reviewed by News2A did not appear to match the attorney general office’s public statement.
She also said FFLs and their attorneys did not interpret the subpoenas that way.
Later, Liberty Doll said News2A received a letter from a private law firm conducting the subpoenas on behalf of Davenport’s office. That letter, according to Liberty Doll, sounded more limited and claimed the state was not seeking individual customer data.
But again, Liberty Doll said that did not match the subpoena language as she understood it.
She suggested the attorney general’s side may be changing its tone after backlash from gun rights groups and media coverage.
That is the heart of the dispute. The attorney general’s office says it is not seeking personal purchaser information. Gun-rights critics say the actual subpoenas appear broader than that and could expose sensitive records if not narrowed or blocked.
Why The Records Matter
Liberty Doll said the situation is especially troubling because New Jersey already has access to handgun sale data through its own system, but that information is supposed to be limited to law enforcement use.
In her view, the lawsuit could become a backdoor way to move private gun owner information into public view.
She said people could either believe the attorney general never intended to gather Glock owner information, or believe the backlash caused her office to soften its position.
Liberty Doll clearly leans toward the second explanation.
The concern is not imaginary. She pointed to past examples where gun owner information became public, including a newspaper publishing an interactive map of permit holders and California exposing gun owner information, including law enforcement and judges.
Those examples matter because once personal information is made public, it cannot truly be pulled back. A name, address, and firearm record are not small details. In the wrong hands, that information could put people at risk of harassment, burglary, or worse.
Even people who support lawsuits against gun companies should be able to see the privacy issue here. Litigation should not become a dragnet for personal customer data unless there is a clear, narrow, and lawful reason for it.
A Fight To Watch
Liberty Doll said she does not see how Davenport’s office would win if it tries to obtain and publicly expose information it already holds in a protected law enforcement system.
She argued that the information is not supposed to be disclosed outside law enforcement purposes, and that trying to obtain it through a public lawsuit creates a different legal problem.
The broader story is about more than Glock.
It is about whether a state can sue a gun manufacturer and then use that lawsuit to pressure dealers into producing sweeping customer-related records. It is also about whether gun owners can trust that records created through state-mandated firearm paperwork will remain private.
Liberty Doll said she will continue watching the situation.
For now, the fight appears to be over the scope of the subpoenas, the intent behind them, and whether private gun owner information could end up exposed through litigation.
The attorney general’s office says it is not seeking individual purchaser data. Liberty Doll says the documents and dealer concerns suggest something much broader.
That gap is where the controversy lives.
If the subpoenas are truly only about aggregate data, the state can make that clear in binding language. If they are broad enough to sweep up names, addresses, serial numbers, and customer records, then gun owners and dealers have reason to be alarmed.
As Liberty Doll framed it, New Jersey already knows who bought handguns through its own system. The real question is why the state would need that information again in a public lawsuit against Glock.
A former park ranger and wildlife conservationist, Lisa’s passion for survival started with her deep connection to nature. Raised on a small farm in northern Wisconsin, she learned how to grow her own food, raise livestock, and live off the land. Lisa is our dedicated Second Amendment news writer and also focuses on homesteading, natural remedies, and survival strategies. Lisa aims to help others live more sustainably and prepare for the unexpected.
