If you're irresponsible, that's on you!

Status
Not open for further replies.
coloradokevin

coloradokevin

Member
Joined
Mar 22, 2008
Messages
3,285
A friend just e-mailed me an article about a lawsuit that is currently pending against Glock. Apparently a former LAPD officer (now paralyzed) is suing Glock for a lack of safeties, after he negligently left his loaded weapon laying around (unholstered) in the presence of his 3-year-old child. The child shot the man in the back while playing with the gun as dad drove, and the man now believes that he should be compensated for the fact that there was no grip safety on the pistol.

Lawsuits like this set a really bad precedence. It originally sounded like this lawsuit wasn't going to get to court, but apparently it is now (thanks to an appellate court ruling on this two-year-old case). Although I know I'm preaching to the choir here on THR, I still think more people in our society need to own up to their own mistakes, and take responsibility for their actions. Thank goodness the young child wasn't injured due to his father's negligence.

As a police officer myself, this story really irritates me. This guy had enough training (and supposed common sense) to know not to leave a gun laying around like that. He's a negligent fool, not a victim.


Article - July 24th, 2012

San Francisco Chronicle said:
A state appeals court on Tuesday reinstated a lawsuit against gun manufacturer Glock Inc. by a Los Angeles policeman who was paralyzed from the waist down when his 3-year-old son shot him with his service pistol.

Enrique Chavez claimed in his lawsuit that the Glock 21 lacked adequate safeguards against an accidental discharge because it had a light trigger pull and did not have a grip safety, a device attached to the pistol grip that the shooter must deactivate before firing.
Click to expand...
 
It's my understanding that he put the loaded pistol, unholstered, under the seat.

I wouldn't do that with a pistol with a thumb safety and a grip safety, even if I wasn't putting an un-carseated 3 year old in the back seat.

I mean, me, I?

I'd be too embarrassed to tell anyone what I did, never mind take it to court.
 
Yep.

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=670001

Check out how Frank compares this incident to a similar one that took place in Washington state. In the later, the gun owner was held responsible for leaving the misused gun unsecured. I guess it is an illustration of our lawsuit addicted society which believes that the consequences of their behavior are always the fault of someone else.
 
The officer was DRIVING when he was shot? meaning that to got to the gun under the seat, his 3-yr old had to be unbuckled/ un carseated? and playing with a gun... I can't get past this... I can't even render opinion on the lawsuit... i can't render a civil opinion about this parent.
 
In Texas you can do some hard time for leaving a firearm around a child, if there is a discharge. I don't know the details, but I think the law was intended to protect kids, but it might apply in this case as well.
 
The guy is now paralyzed, with huge doctor and rehab bills, major remodeling to his home to make accessibility easier because of his new handicap and the loss of his occupation(re: income) because of the injury. He is grasping at straws and probably is hoping to get a sympathy settlement from a jury of antis. He is most likely being motivated to do this by a ambulance chasing snake of a lawyer that specializes in these types of cases. Funny that even tho the alleged victim was a Los Angeles LEO, the lawyers firm is in New Yawk.

It amazes me how folks that are so stupid that they put their 3 year old child in the backseat of a vehicle without the required car seat or even the use of a seatbelt, allow the same child unrestricted access to a loaded firearm and then want to blame someone else when they get shot. Thank God the kid didn't kill himself.
 
That man was a danger to himself and others. Putting a child in the back seat without the legally required car seat, with access to a gun. . .that's irresponsible to the extreme. THEN he has the audacity to sue Glock over it.
 
I tripped over a wet floor sign after the floor dried, so it was the only hazard there. Should I sue the store I was in? I'm kidding about the "should I sue" but I really did trip over it ;)

I agree. Personal responsibility is something lost in our sue-happy nation. There are even videos of old women slowly lowering themself to the ground to then cry "I fell" and sue stores just because the store had a spill that hadn't been taken care of yet. There's a woman who sued the estate of a boy who was hit by a train, because the kid's flying body parts hit her and knocked her down at the next platform, causing a few broken bones. I just don't get it.
 
Any guns I own are in my immediate possession when loaded. PERIOD. Never underestimate the curiosity of a kid or the lack of responisibilty someone will take when wrong. Never ever underestimate the caliber of individual some policemen turn out to be.
Too bad for this guy's mistake and too bad he is unwilling to take the blame for his foolishness. He should be happy he is alive; it could have been worse.
 
He is grasping at straws and probably is hoping to get a sympathy settlement from a jury of antis. He is most likely being motivated to do this by a ambulance chasing snake of a lawyer that specializes in these types of cases.
Click to expand...
And from what I've seen the jury will see only that he is paralyzed now, and that means he gets a judgement. Were I on that jury, I'd hang it.

Sure I feel bad for him and his family. But we're fast becoming a nation that rewards stupidity in it's courts.
 
To me, it all comes back to personal integrity. I would bet this same individual would be looking to sue someone if the weapon DID have a safety and he was slow on his draw and got shot while trying to draw the weapon and deactivate the safety.

I'm in the mortgage business and see lots of income documentation and it amazes me how many people come in sporting some type of disability check. It's disheartening to see how many military members retire from service and claim (and are compensated for) "disabilities" like Irritable Bowel Syndrome (bad chow at the the mess hall?), Sleep Apneia or partial hearing loss. I have partial hearing loss and have never served in the military, it's called a-g-i-n-g. I personally know someone who will be getting a disability check from the VA for blowing out his bicep while lifting weights, not bombs or bullets but weights! Everyone "wants theirs" and think they are entitled to it. Takers verses Producers, read "Atlas Shrugged" by Ayn Rand.

Specifically back to firearms, yes, each one of us should be held accountableable for every round that comes out of that tube. But that is not how society works these days.
 
Last edited:
Plan2Live, please read this web page. Sleep apnea isn't what you think. I'm 58 and have suffered from apnea as long as I can remember. I've had 5 surgical procedures for apnea and use a CPAP machine.

http://www.aaoms.org/sleep_apnea.php


Mods: Sorry this isn't directly gun related but health is too important to allow disinformation.
 
He' s not going to get anything, it would not be in Glocks best interest to even give him , medical costs, since it would set a president for every guy who had one of their pistols.
 
If he wins we should all get together and sue him in a class action suit for making the cost of new Glocks go up
 
This is what happens when people loath accepting responsibility for their own actions. It becomes easy, especially with a liberal court, to place the blame anywhere but where it squarely belongs. I read the story and have followed it somewhat. I was not aware the idiot was driving.

When it comes to gun safety mechanisms it is hard to make anything foolproof as fools are very ingenious people. What needs said is:

We are sorry but the State of California regrets to inform you that you are paralyzed because you were stupid.

Ron
 
I also thought that in CA if you leave a gun unsecured and a child uses it to hurt someone that you can go to prison? Was I misinformed? And if it is a law, then how come he wasn't prosecuted?
 
That goes for just about every state, I know it's wriien in black and white in the FL gun laws.
 
Civil cases are not about right and wrong, or even who is at fault. They are about who can pay the biggest judgement.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

CountGlockula
  • Locked
LAPD officer shot by his son sues gun maker
2 3 4 5 6
Replies
133
Views
6K
Carl N. Brown
Carl N. Brown
hps1
  • Locked
Connecticut Supreme Court Allows Sandy Hook Parents’ Lawsuit against Gun-Maker to Proceed
Replies
3
Views
504
Frank Ettin
Frank Ettin
CountGlockula
  • Locked
Lawsuit aims to test Iowa's concealed weapons law
Replies
17
Views
1K
X-Rap
X-Rap
W
  • Locked
Firearms Carry On Atlanta Trains
Replies
0
Views
285
wishin
W
F
  • Locked
California Court: reasonable jury could conclude Glock design faulty
2
Replies
48
Views
2K
Frank Ettin
Frank Ettin
Back
Top