Glock being sued for having no safeties -

[jchen76@gmail.com]

http://www.ocregister.com/articles/gun-lawsuit-alleges-2089579-chavez-shot

LAPD officer shot by his son sues gun maker

A retired Los Angeles police officer paralyzed when his 3-year-old son fired his father's handgun while riding in the family pickup in Anaheim two years ago filed a lawsuit Wednesday against the gun's manufacturer.

Enrique Chavez, 37, of Anaheim, was off-duty when he was shot on July 11, 2006, while driving his Ford Ranger near Harbor Boulevard and La Palma Avenue. His son got a hold of his father's .45-caliber weapon while sitting in the back seat and shot him in the back, according to police reports. The son was not restrained in a safety seat.



The lawsuit alleges that Glock Inc.'s gun was dangerous because its safety device was "nonexistent or ineffective" at preventing an accidental shot.

Chavez, a 10-year veteran of the LAPD, is also suing the manufacturer of the gun holster and the retail stores that sold him the gun and holster. He bought the gun at the Los Angeles Police Revolver and Athletic Club and purchased a holster made by Uncle Mike's and Bushnell Outdoor Products from Turner's Outdoorsman.

The lawsuit alleges the defendants knew the safety device was defective and that 5.5 pounds of pressure on the trigger frequently results in accidental discharges. The lawsuit alleges product liability, breach of warranty and loss of consortium and seeks general, special and punitive damages and attorney fees.

A Glock spokesperson declined to comment, saying that the company has not yet seen or heard of the complaint.

Chavez was left paralyzed from the waist down.


There seems to be more to the story on how the 3 year old managed to get a hold the gun. I guess the officer couldn't sue his 3 year old.

[Black Majik]

I hope he loses. Blaming the company for his irresponsibility...

[ldivinag]

why can he sue himself?

after all he is responsible for all the actions of his kid...

[Kruzr]

Once again, an adult refuses to take responsibility for his own mistake and now needs to point the finger elsewhere. It is a tragic story but how many of us would leave a loaded gun in reach of an "unrestrained" 3 year old?

I'm curious if charges of child endangerment were filed. If this were to happen in your home, you would be charged with a felony.

The gun performed exactly as it was intended to.

[USN CHIEF]

The sad part is that he will actually win since it happened here in CA. I agree with you all in that he should not get any money for his neglect.

[bruss01]

The lawsuit alleges the defendants knew the safety device was defective and that 5.5 pounds of pressure on the trigger frequently results in accidental discharges.

IF YOU ARE PULLING THE TRIGGER THAT IS NOT ACCIDENTAL! THAT IS HOW IT IS SUPPOSED TO WORK!

[dfletcher]

I'm sorry, but if you leave an unattended 3 year old in the back seat of a car with a loaded handgun isn't it forseeable he could get his hands on the gun? Where's the DA on this - what happened to the "if you leave a loaded gun where a kid gets it" law? Shouldn't Dad be charged under that law? I didn't think there was an exemption for the kid injuring the person who owns the gun.

I don't know that he could somehow sue the kid, but I'll bet there's some unusual insurance angle to be had here.

I'm surprised he didn't also sue Hoppes & Gunslick for their role in making the gun function properly.

[Blwnbwtie]

idiots, this is like the mcdonalds coffee thing all over again.

[bwiese]

That Glock was sold in interstate commerce.

I think PLCAA will enter the playing field here: it was designed to stop BS things like this.

BTW, the father is guilty of a crime, why hasn't he been charged?

[RRangel]

This is exactly why the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act was passed in 2005. I think it's pretty negligent to leave a loaded firearm where a toddler can get it. If your job is to carry you should be up to speed on basic safety issues that goes especially for someone who has the job of law enforcement. Negligence is not "accidental".

[Slayer]

Wow, what a typical LEO/democrat. He leaves his son unrestrained in his truck, leaves his firearm within reach of the kid, the kid shoots him and now he wants to sue? He should be arrested and imprisoned.

Glock has a pretty decent safety - dont let a toddler pull the trigger and your kid wont cripple you!

[Vin496]

Isn't he supposed to be in jail under California law? I mean aren't you sentenced to life here(I know not the real sentence) if a child gets a hold of your piece and causes harm with it?

Isn't that what all these locks and safes are for. Somehow I think if he wasn't LEO this wouldn't even be a factor.

[sorensen440]

thats why I only let small children play with loaded guns that have saftey's

[rg_1111@yahoo.com]

It's NOT Glock's fault. It's the officer fault. Just another case of poor gun safety & handling.
If anything the officer should do some jail time. If any of us let our kids get ahold of a gun we would have to be responsible. It's the gun owner's fault.
Sorry the guy got shot.

[Two Shots]

The son was not restrained in a safety seat.
5.5 pounds of pressure on the trigger frequently results in accidental discharges.
Yea, Thats how triggers work, So easy that a 3 yr old can do it.. First the gun was in the backseat with the kid, How does that make the manufacturers,Retail store the problem? Seems like a careless parent. The The guy should have had it in his imediate possesion not in the back seat, If the safety (If the guy had put it on) was on the kid had figured out how to take the safety off after removing it from the Holster without dad noticing. I hope the courts throw this out and make him take parenting classes. It's sad he's paralyzed but it's his fault and no one elses. I feel for his son, He'll live his life knowing he shot his dad.

They didn't mention if he'll sue the ammo company or his firearms instructor back at the Academy and don't forget his wife she was the one that got pregnant and gave birth. It's everyones fault, I was a Victim.