The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Conference Center > Law and Civil Rights

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old August 1, 2012, 04:58 PM   #1
Glenn E. Meyer
Staff
 
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 15,698
Let's sue Glock!

http://www.policeone.com/legal/artic...-to-sue-Glock/

So this guy has a gun in the back seat which his kid could find and then shoots him. Shouldn't he be prosecuted for allowing a kid access to the gun? If the kid shot himself, won't prosecuting Daddy be legit?

Whose fault is this one?
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc.
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...05_Feature.htm
Being an Academic Shooter
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...11_Feature.htm
Being an Active Shooter
Glenn E. Meyer is offline  
Old August 1, 2012, 05:07 PM   #2
Gunnut17
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 21, 2012
Location: Earth
Posts: 394
Sue glock because one of their guns was left around and someone got hurt?

That's like suing a car manufacturer because one of their cars was used in a hit-and-run.
__________________
________(====()_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-,
I_iiiii__/'''''''''[{]''''''''{_)_)_)_)_)_}========

"|Pistol calibers| all suck, so pick the one you shoot best."
Gunnut17 is offline  
Old August 1, 2012, 05:12 PM   #3
Tom Servo
Staff
 
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 10,357
Quote:
Whose fault is this one?
Wait. Let me think, here. Multinational corporation with gobs of cash...

Yep! Sue Glock! They were criminally negligent by virtue of not having put a warning label on the gun itself advising against its use by anyone ten and under.

Glock may settle. They've done that routinely in the past, even when they haven't been at fault. Of course, that's before the "victim" made a huge deal of it in the media, so they may choose to stand and fight on this one.
__________________
Sometimes it’s nice not to destroy the world for a change.
--Randall Munroe
Tom Servo is offline  
Old August 1, 2012, 05:16 PM   #4
Stressfire
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 16, 2011
Location: Ohio
Posts: 1,497
Quote:
Enrique Chavez, who claimed his service pistol, a Glock 21 handgun, had a light trigger pull and lacked a grip safety, an attached device that requires deactivation before firing.
Wouldn't such features make this weapon not included on California's "Safe Gun" list? If not, maybe it should be. Thankfully this man (and his progeny) are around to show us the error of our ways.
__________________
"The best diplomat I know is a fully charged phaser bank" - Montgomery Scott
Stressfire is offline  
Old August 1, 2012, 05:29 PM   #5
CWKahrFan
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 3, 2010
Posts: 1,801
Yeah, well... We all know the usual script with these dramas... Some ambulance-chasing lawyer approaches the guy and talks him into filing the lawsuit on spec so with nothing to lose and a "maybe" to make some $ he says "OK".

No big deal.
__________________
What did Mrs. Bullet say to Mr. Bullet? ... "We're having a BeeBee!"...

IF THE SHOE FITS, WEAR IT!... IF THE GUN FITS, SHOOT IT!
CWKahrFan is offline  
Old August 1, 2012, 06:15 PM   #6
RamItOne
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 24, 2011
Posts: 983
The grip safety on my 1911 has got to be much lighter than a flocks tigger pull. I can buy the argument making an extra step to fire but not that a grip safety would be too stiff for the kid.



From Glenn's link

The California Second Court of Appeal said Tuesday a jury could conclude a grip safety strong enough to withstand a 3 year-old's grasp "would minimize the risk of accidental discharge without undermining performance," and in a 3-0 ruling, allowed the case to continue.
RamItOne is offline  
Old August 1, 2012, 06:48 PM   #7
Isk
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 28, 2011
Location: Alaska
Posts: 181
Interesting that they went with the grip safety argument instead of the thumb safety. It isn't clear if they are making a negligence or products liability claim on this.
__________________
The possession of arms is the distinction between a freeman and a slave. -James Burgh
Isk is offline  
Old August 1, 2012, 07:12 PM   #8
sigcurious
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 25, 2011
Posts: 1,755
@Stressfire, by current standards yes, but guns already on the list get to stay on the list as long as the maker keeps paying the state even if they don't meet the most current revisions. Beyond that it was his service pistol, not a personal pistol, and even then LEO are exempt from the list in CA.

It's completely his fault, I'm just glad the kid is young enough that he likely won't remember shooting his own father.

It is a misdemeanor or felony to allow a child to access a firearm in California depending on the outcome of that access, but I'm guessing since he was an officer at the time the DA didn't bring charges. It was probably viewed as a tragic accident rather than gross negligence and child endangerment.

We get those nifty cable locks thanks to California law(I still haven't found a use for them, maybe if I had a tiny bike), perhaps he should have utilized one, or any of the many other options to properly secure a firearm from a child.
sigcurious is offline  
Old August 1, 2012, 07:15 PM   #9
Strafer Gott
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 12, 2011
Location: New Mexico
Posts: 1,128
A dollar or a donut, take your pick it's about safe trigger and/or lack of externals. Can you really get whacked for being too user friendly? Tell me if I'm out of line here, is it ergonomics or safety at issue?
The guy should be grateful if a judge would call it poetic justice and be done.
Strafer Gott is offline  
Old August 1, 2012, 08:35 PM   #10
jmortimer
Junior member
 
Join Date: January 24, 2010
Location: South West Riverside County California
Posts: 2,763
My fellow ambulance chasers will take a weak case like this one with big damages over a great case with small damages all day long. That is all that is going on here, trip and fall lawyer with big general and special damages case and idiot client. Would not surprise me if this was filed in Los Angeles Central Division (Downtown) Superior Court. All in all, unfortunately, this is a "great case."

Last edited by jmortimer; August 1, 2012 at 09:02 PM.
jmortimer is offline  
Old August 1, 2012, 09:32 PM   #11
Al Norris
Staff
 
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,317
Glenn, I caught this a couple of weeks ago over at Calguns.net. We had a large thread on this, back in 2008, before we shut down the L&P forum:

LAPD officer shot by his son sues gun maker

It should come as no surprise that a CA appellate court decided the ex-cop could sue, based upon the lack of safety on a Glock... A gun that can't be purchased in CA, unless you are LE.
__________________
National listings of the Current 2A Cases.
Al Norris is offline  
Old August 1, 2012, 09:36 PM   #12
teeroux
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 12, 2006
Posts: 1,492
You know whats really worse than him sueing. That this is the character of a man that was working as a Law Enforcement Officer. I'm LE and I would be so ashamed for what I represent over an incident like that happening, much less to ever try a suit as if it wasn't my own fault.
teeroux is offline  
Old August 1, 2012, 10:33 PM   #13
sigcurious
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 25, 2011
Posts: 1,755
@Al, Gen 3s are on the roster. Gen 4s are not, however they can still be single shot exempted. But given the time of this it was a Gen 3 or older, g21 anyway.
sigcurious is offline  
Old August 1, 2012, 10:33 PM   #14
MTT TL
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 21, 2009
Location: Quadling Country
Posts: 1,801
I am not familiar with the "Can't be fired by a 3 year old" safety standard. I am familiar with the "Don't leave your loaded gun where your 3 year old can find it and play with it" rule however. But if Glock can be found 10% at fault that might pay the lawyer fees....
__________________
Proxima est Mors, Malum Nullum adhibit Misericordiam
MTT TL is offline  
Old August 1, 2012, 10:42 PM   #15
TXAZ
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 5, 2010
Location: TEXAS!
Posts: 1,397
1) It's a tragedy
2) Who left the gun out
3) What state was this in?...

Between the 9th Circuit frequently overturned decisions and the thought processes commonly found in California, is this really a surprise?

California, sprechen zie Tort Reform?
__________________
!أنا لست إرهابي
TXAZ is offline  
Old August 1, 2012, 11:36 PM   #16
Al Norris
Staff
 
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,317
Sigcurious, thanks for that reminder!

Way too many snags in CA gun laws for any one person to remember, if you don't live there.
__________________
National listings of the Current 2A Cases.
Al Norris is offline  
Old August 2, 2012, 12:18 AM   #17
sigcurious
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 25, 2011
Posts: 1,755
I recently moved across the border to NV from CA, so they're still fresh.
sigcurious is offline  
Old August 2, 2012, 08:21 AM   #18
Jack_Bauer24
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 16, 2007
Posts: 139
Look at the state it happened in, need I say more.
__________________
"When the people fear the govt there is tyranny, when the govt fears the people there is liberty."
Thomas Jefferson
Jack_Bauer24 is offline  
Old August 2, 2012, 08:43 AM   #19
Stressfire
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 16, 2011
Location: Ohio
Posts: 1,497
Quote:
Originally Posted by sigcurious
@Stressfire, by current standards yes, but guns already on the list get to stay on the list as long as the maker keeps paying the state even if they don't meet the most current revisions. Beyond that it was his service pistol, not a personal pistol, and even then LEO are exempt from the list in CA.
I was being facetious more than anything

Quote:
We get those nifty cable locks thanks to California law(I still haven't found a use for them, maybe if I had a tiny bike), perhaps he should have utilized one, or any of the many other options to properly secure a firearm from a child.
I found a pretty good use for the one I got with my GP - it secures my gun and reloading room door when guests and their children visit
__________________
"The best diplomat I know is a fully charged phaser bank" - Montgomery Scott
Stressfire is offline  
Old August 2, 2012, 08:46 AM   #20
Spats McGee
Staff
 
Join Date: July 28, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 5,090
*Sigh* I oughta know to stay outta this, but I just can't resist . . .

1) It's a tragedy.
2) Leaving a handgun where a 3-yr-old can reach it is well into the realm of stupid.
3) If the Glock design is defective, THOUSANDS of LEAs nationwide seem to have missed the memo.

BUT . . . in reversing the grant of a motion to dismiss, the appellate court is just saying that a jury could find for the plaintiff. Nothing more. There are plenty of ways for Glock to establish some measure of fault (perhaps even 100%) on the part of the Plaintiff, but I'm not convinced that no jury could reasonably find that the design is defective.
__________________
A gunfight is not the time to learn new skills.

If you ever have a real need for more than a couple of magazines, your problem is not a shortage of magazines. It's a shortage of people on your side of the argument. -- Art Eatman
Spats McGee is offline  
Old August 2, 2012, 10:20 AM   #21
Glenn E. Meyer
Staff
 
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 15,698
I wonder if Glock will settle on the sly. I know of another case where a cop got killed, supposedly because of the box post KB. Never went to trial.

Also, if Glock wins - they still might cough up some dough. Ruger has done that.
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc.
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...05_Feature.htm
Being an Academic Shooter
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...11_Feature.htm
Being an Active Shooter
Glenn E. Meyer is offline  
Old August 2, 2012, 10:57 AM   #22
Botswana
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 4, 2012
Posts: 203
This is one of the reasons I did not go for the Glock. I want a mechanical safety. Even that is not going to completely stop an incident like this.

Any weapon should have been properly secured if there was a chance someone could get access to it, especially someone who may not have the understanding of how dangerous a firearm can be.

A Glock especially so. I don't know if the officer chose to carry a Glock or it was issued, but either way he should have been aware of specific advantages/disadvantages of that weapon.
Botswana is offline  
Old August 2, 2012, 11:27 AM   #23
cannonfire
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 12, 2010
Location: Georgia
Posts: 497
I think he would have a better chance of suing the LAPD for issuing him that weapon, not the manufacturer. Either way, he's an idiot on so many levels that I do not feel a bit of sympathy for him. If anything the incident happened to turn out the right way in that the kid was not shot.

You are an LEO, you know gun safety (or should) and you leave your issued weapon where a kid can get it? Where's the holster? Why was the gun in the back seat? Why was your child able to reach it from a car seat? Was the child in the car seat?

Honestly, it would not surprise me if the guy took the magazine out, didn't clear the weapon and was letting the kid play with it in the back, thinking he was using it as a toy.

On that note, do Glocks have magazine safeties?
__________________
Segui il tuo corso e lascia dir le genti - Dante

Blaming guns for crime is like blaming the planes for 9/11
cannonfire is offline  
Old August 2, 2012, 11:31 AM   #24
jmortimer
Junior member
 
Join Date: January 24, 2010
Location: South West Riverside County California
Posts: 2,763
Can't sue employer - it may be work related and if so he could file a workers' compensation claim.
jmortimer is offline  
Old August 2, 2012, 11:31 AM   #25
Tuzo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 14, 2007
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 724
Love California

Lived there for ten years and love the place. However, there is a lack of common sense in the judicial and political systems. Negligence is sometimes punished and sometimes rewarded.

Example:
More than 20 years ago two lawsuits were settled/won that should never have been.

First, robber fell through a school skylight and suffered injuries. While serving jail time for breaking and entering, he sued the school district for installing an unsafe skylight and won. I believe this happened in the Sacramento area.

Second, a San Francisco bicycle rider was struck and injured at an intersection by a right of way vehicle. This was at night and the rider was wearing dark clothes. Nishiki bicycle manufacturer was sued and settled the case for more than $1 mill based on negligence for not explicitly providing instructions stating that a bicycle needs lights for night time operation.

Too sad for both the father and son in this case. But truly, the firearm is not at fault.

Last edited by Tuzo; August 2, 2012 at 12:24 PM.
Tuzo is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:45 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.15284 seconds with 9 queries