[wabenzi]

Cop shot by 3 year old sues Glock.

The Associated Press
07/09/2008 10:39:23 PM PDT


LOS ANGELES—An off-duty Los Angeles police officer who was hurt after his young son accidentally shot him in 2006 filed a lawsuit Wednesday against the manufacturer of the gun involved in the accident. Enrique Chavez of Anaheim was shot in the back by his 3-year-old son after the boy grabbed his father's Glock 21—a .45 caliber semi-automatic pistol—from the back seat of his pickup truck.
The lawsuit, filed in Superior Court, alleges that Glock Inc.'s gun was dangerous because its safety device was "non-existent or ineffective" at preventing an accidental shot.
Chavez, 35, is also suing the manufacturer of the gun's holster and the retail stores that sold him the gun and the 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 attorneys fees.
Calls made after business hours to the defendants were not immediately returned Wednesday night.

 

[Habu]

GOOD GRIEF! What an idiot! How the heck did his kid get the gun in his little hands, and why is THAT Glock's fault?!?

How about this: THROW ENRIQUE IN THE SLAMMER, FOR FRAKKIN' NEGLIGENCE!:steamed:

Tell me, tell me this crap is goin' nowhere.........

 

[JoshuaC]

Shame he didn't get hit in the head. It would of been awesome to see him zipping around like a balloon with a hole in it.

 

[MySiK26]

im sorry but if there is any kid in my home that is too young to comprehend gun safety, in my opinion 10 or under generally...then the gun is either ON me or in a gun safe... That is 100% his fault....use common sense people.

 

[Rakkasan]

It's California, he will win the lawsuit. :upeyes:

 

[misterlawyer]

I have only one thing to say:

www.overlawyered.com

 

[glockwontdie]

im sorry but if there is any kid in my home that is too young to comprehend gun safety, in my opinion 10 or under generally...then the gun is either ON me or in a gun safe... That is 100% his fault....use common sense people.

+2 (the wife and i) no matter the situation. locked in a bolted down safe or on you. once you set it down or leave it that is your responsibility sitting out there. to bad he probably didn't learn a thing about responsibility over his firearms from this situation.

 

[JavelinaAg]

. . . and the notion of personal responsibility continues to erode away in this country. :upeyes:

 

[bhp9mm]

its his fault for leaving a loaded gun in the back seat iam glad he was shoot and not the kid

 

[Wasatch]

A Glock Talker named Lewsid 13 said it best in a similar thread in Carry Issues:

The good old U-S-of A, the land of the negligent and the home of the unaccountable.

This guy should be prosecuted and sentenced for reckless endangerment of a child -- for not securing his 3-year-old in a moving vehicle, and for allowing that same child to handle his duty gun. Friggin' moron. :steamed:

 

[Vitamin G]

Wow... just, wow.

 

[glockwontdie]

. . . and the notion of personal responsibility continues to erode away in this country. :upeyes:

Amazing how few and far you actually see someone accept responsibility for their wrong doings and inappropriate actions:couch:

 

[3/325]

"Only the police should have guns."

 

[G19AR15]

OK, so can anyone tell me WHY this moron isn't being prosecuted for allowing his kid to get ahold of the gun, not to mention not being belted in?
If it were you or me....
This is where the NRA should step up and put pressure on the State's Atty. to do their job and bring charges.

 

[akgunnut]

What the hell was the gun doing in the back seat with the kid anyway? The anti-gunners say that only cops should have guns....... alrighty then!

 

[MN44]

And you hear people complaining about Glock 21 grip being to big, obviously it wasn't fat enough for a 3 year old.

 

[RONSTAR]

Thats the dumbest god damn thing Ive heards in a while thankfully he survived.

 

[w4004p]

WOW. first of all - will 5.5# of pressure fire a stock Glock? i though 5.5# connector meant a total trigger pull of close to 8#

so... he leaves a charged Glock in a cheap holster within reach of a toddler and it's Glock's fault?!?! he should be charged, criminally. the holster thing had me curious at first, i was wondering if it was in his duty rig, in which case (STILL NEGLIGENT), but cause for concern as far as retention holsters go.

btw- it doesn't say the kid wasn't strapped in, the weapon could have been within reach of the child while he was in his car seat.

either way - the guy's a tool, thank God the kid is uninjured.

 

[Armchair Commando]

I think he should be charged with Felony Child Endangerment.

 

[Gaston G]

This lawsuit is a joke. The owner of the firearm has commited "Criminal storage of a firearm" under California penal code 12035(b)(1):

"(b)(1) Except as provided in subdivision (c), a
person commits the crime of "criminal storage of
a firearm of the first degree" if he or she keeps
any loaded firearm within any premise which is
under his or her custody or control and he or she
knows or reasonably should know that a child is
likely to gain access to the firearm without the
permission of the child's parent or legal guardian
and the child obtains access to the firearm and
thereby causes death or great bodily injury to
himself, herself, or any other person."

I am neither a parent nor a LEO, yet I am fully aware of this law in effect in CA given California's gun control laws.
This is something I HAD to learn, like any other handgun buyer in CA, even before I could take delivery of my first handgun.
Please tell me that this guy is now an ex-LEO.

As for defects or questions on safety features, the trigger was pulled in this case and the G21 functioned as intended.