FREE e-Newsletter
Important News - Hot Topics
Get them Now!

Tactical Pants - Galls
A popular choice for public safety professionals, the Galls Tactical Pants are...

Top News

Judge: Paralyzed L.A. Cop Can Sue Glock

July 31, 2012  | 

A state appeals court reinstated a lawsuit against Glock filed by a paralyzed Los Angeles Police Department officer who claims the pistol didn't have adequate safeguards.

Enrique Chavez was paralyzed from the waist down after his 3-year-old son shot him with his G21 service pistol.

Chavez claimed the accidental discharge occurred because the pistol had a light trigger pull and did not have a grip safety that the shooter must deactivate before firing, reports the San Francisco Chronicle.

Comments (39)

Displaying 1 - 39 of 39

Darwin @ 7/31/2012 2:39 PM

Welcome to California, where our state tree is the 'Outstretched Palm'. Obviously this isn't Glocks fault but they will still have to pay out. At least he won't be able to have anymore kids. Darwin.

DHunter @ 7/31/2012 3:23 PM

1. glock doesnt hav a light trigger pull 2. why does your 3 year old son have access to a loaded Glock. why do we continually allow people to try to get paid for their own brainfarts.

Paul D. Haslam @ 7/31/2012 3:35 PM

It's a sad day when a three year old has access to a police officers weapon. Suck it up officer. It's your fault the kid had the gun in the first place. I have two Glocks and I haven't been shot by anyone! Stop the blame game!

max @ 7/31/2012 5:37 PM

Normally I respect all law enforcement officers for their service to our communities and continue to do so... However this dumbass just didn't make the cake in this case. Blaming glock for being shot by your own son because you didn't clear and lock up your service weapon???? This is just karma to your stupidity! Good thing your no longer able to be a lame excuse as an LEO on the streets of LA anymore because if you make mistakes like this, who knows what you'll screw up on when it really matters to many peoples lives'.

Tschako @ 7/31/2012 5:40 PM

I just can't let this go by. I hope Glock puts all it's resources and lawyers up against this idiot and breaks him financially. And, STOP CALLING THIS AN ACCIDENTAL DISCHARGE! He left the gun where the kid had access to it, and the kid fired it intentionally. He is responsible, and Glock (and the rest of it's customers) doesn't have to pay for his stupidity.

Chief Bill @ 7/31/2012 5:48 PM

I cannot and refuse to believe that a dept of this size did not have the at home safety training for the officers in recruit school. Most all dept's worth their salt have policy/procedure to secure your service/off-duty weapons. So a 3 yoa kid is at fault for you violating policy....let's get off the crazy train.

AusFost1 @ 7/31/2012 5:51 PM

So wrong on so many levels. He should be charged for child endangerment, failing to secure a gun, having it loaded, and the list goes on. You can't legislate against stupidity. Hopefully the courts won't reward stupidity either.

Don W @ 7/31/2012 5:56 PM

Pull up your skirts Nancy, YOU shot yourself; your kid is the one who will be the victim for the rest of his life. Are you going to sue him?

Walt @ 7/31/2012 5:58 PM

This guy makes our entire profession look bad. Why isn't he sueing the holster maker for not having enough retention(s) guess is his irresponsible behind didn't have it holstered, let alone out of the reach of a child.....Bafoon.

Tschako @ 7/31/2012 6:13 PM

This gets worse after you read the SF newspaper article. Chavez' kid got the gun from under the car seat while Chavez was stopped at a red light! He not only wasn't strapped in a kiddie seat, but Chavez had an opportunity to control him and didn't. Now he wants a handout from Glock!! What an embarrassment as a LEO, especially an LAPD LEO!

R ISAACS @ 7/31/2012 6:14 PM


Jason Barnes @ 7/31/2012 6:16 PM

I hope the jury has more sense than the judge. The Glock functioned exactly as designed; it was the cop's brain that had a severe malfunction. I hope for a proper result, but it's California, so who knows what will happen.

Vbdep @ 7/31/2012 6:25 PM

Maybe he should sue the car manufacturer for not have a seat low enough that the kid couldn't reach under. This guy's a real dumbanus. It didn't happen in the line of duty by a criminal so he shouldn't be getting a pension. I hope not. But please do not let him have a concealed weapons license. He's already proven he can't take responsibility of a firearm.

Capt David-Ret LA County @ 7/31/2012 6:31 PM

Just another way the liberal Calif. courts try to put the screws to firearms manufacturers. Guy is a lincoln-adam-mary-edward. Must have been the last of his graduating class.

[email protected] @ 7/31/2012 6:51 PM

First. I am no fan of Glocks. Don't like the feel nor the looks. That said, I hope Glocks lawyers clean this a**holes clock and his sleezeball lawyers. This clown should have never made the force or had kids do to his moronic behavior with weapons & kids in vehicles. No car seat, no secure place for his duty weapon and no sense. Hope the jury tosses this one way out.

baj @ 7/31/2012 7:52 PM

The judge should do the right thing throw this out, now or be over ruled by another judge, then scold the both the judge and former officer for their inadequacies.

Hopefully summary judgement will prevail. This is clearly the fought of the officer, but a lame ass lawyer sees an opportunity to make a name for himself. I am curious to know who is paying for the officer's lawyer.

The officer has nothing to lose, how much lower can you go after blaming your 3 year old son and the weapon manufacturer for his own mistake?

Dude do the right thing an own it, then get on with life.

No ones fault, but your own.

russ @ 7/31/2012 7:56 PM

When i bought my glock, they gave me a safety lock for incidents like this. Its sad the officer is paralyzed... But had he done adequate storage of the firearm this likely could have been prevented.

Ricardo @ 7/31/2012 7:57 PM

kkkkkkk stupid COP, he want take the pressure from his shoulder and blame his "Pistol" Glock kkkk. The State of California and Glock should sue him back for stupidity and break the first rule for someone have gun in home (leave your gun where unauthorized person have access) and for not use the lock witch coming with his gum (by law all guns sale in California coming with free lock).
Sorry officer! don't loose your time trying sue no one, try to use your time to educate other Police Officer how to properly secure your duty gun when you off duty. You are the only one guilt in this case. Good Luck!

Bam @ 7/31/2012 9:31 PM

As a current supervisor for the involved department, I feel sorry for the officer, but feel strongly that he caused the incident. He put the gun under his seat with no holster, his kid was not in a child seat and he knew that glock does not have a "safety" like a Smith. He purchased the gun knowing this and LAPD training states that there is NO SAFETY on any gun, only a decocking lever. Even if it was a Smith, LAPD does not use the decocker as a safety, period. LAPD has had Glocks for years and semi autos since 89, with very few "Negligent Discharges." There are no accidental discharges at LAPD. I personally do not know the officer, but this is all a money thing and I don't think he will get a dime. Move on, get another job and love your family.

Bam @ 7/31/2012 9:32 PM

BTW, local courts denied the officer's claim and he appealed.

hank hill @ 7/31/2012 10:22 PM

sad for chavez but why oh why did he keep the gun where a 3 year old could get at it! this dumazz is luckey darwin did not get him.

hank hill @ 7/31/2012 10:25 PM

ps judge is also a nut for giving ok for lawsuit to go on.

Scoul74 @ 8/1/2012 2:27 AM

Why isn't Chavez being prosecuted for not storing a firearm in a manner to prevent this from happening. Liberal Cali has a law on the books for Chavez's negligence? A Local LEO may face this charge because he left his weapon accessible and his son's friend got it and killed the officers son. If Chavez did win his suit (and I doubt it) how much is he going to donate to gun safety classes? I'm sorry it happened to him, but with his way of thinking I'm not sorry he's not on the street.

“You may make mistakes, but you are not a failure until you start blaming someone else”

HankG @ 8/1/2012 3:10 AM

Please God, can all the people who responded to this article in a sane, logical fashion please, please move into my neighborhood (especially Darwin, I like the way he thinks and he's funny!).

We ALL know things like this shouldn't happen and if they do, that's tough, you don't run crying, blaming someone else for your own stupidity and then expect a huge payday as a result!

Gwebb @ 8/1/2012 4:45 AM

In Indiana is is a Class C Felony to recklessly alow a child access to a firearm. Anytime there is a child or a idiot adult that can get to your weapon, it is not the gun's fault.

Ty @ 8/1/2012 7:06 AM

Wow. That's Rediculous. How did that kid have a loaded weapon. It's the dads fault for leaving a loaded weapon sitting where a 3 year old can get it.

Mike @ 8/1/2012 8:05 AM

When posting messages, why do most people throw proper grammar out the window by abbreviating words, misspelling words or forgetting to use periods and capitalization. It makes the person who does the posting look like a moron.

TBOW426 @ 8/1/2012 8:26 AM

Just have to add my two cents worth even though previous posts are spot on. WHAT A DUMB ASS! I feel for him, but he did it to himself. A Glock has three safeties, but the most important safety is not attached to the weapon. It is called a BRAIN! Don't allow unauthorized access to your weapons. End of story!

corp134 @ 8/1/2012 8:29 AM

This shooting happened while Enrique Chavez was driving, not at home. The California Vehicle Code mandates that any child under four be secured in a car seat yet his son who was in the back seat of the vehicle managed to obtain the handgun from a bag Chavez had the duty weapon in. Chavez did not have control over his weapon and left it within the immediate reach of the boy. The only way the boy could hav egooten it was to have not be in the car seat.

Mark @ 8/1/2012 8:43 AM

You have to be kidding. The officer should be charged with Child Endagerment. Two counts one for allowing your 3 year old child accsess to your service wepon and one count for not having your child in a car seat. This was no accident, the triger was pulled it is NEGLIGENCE. I am not a fan of the Glock weapons system. I think they are inherantly unsafe due to the fact that you have to pull the trigger to take the weapon apart for cleaning. I much prefer the Spingfield XD. But this situation is not Glocks fault. It is time to step up and take responsibility for your own actions.

Johnny @ 8/1/2012 8:59 AM

I feel that anytime an Officer is injured someone should have to pay for it, unfortunately Glock is the one held responsible.

Bill @ 8/1/2012 12:16 PM

Why would anyone with an once of street experience put their gun under the seat? Why didn't he educate his kid? I know the kid is 3, but even a 3 yr old can be taught not to touch something.

Curt @ 8/1/2012 4:14 PM

Another incompetent parent teams up with another whore lawyer to demand that an innocent and blameless party pay for his failures and stupidity! So typically Californian!

Angie @ 8/2/2012 11:14 AM

And it's M&M and Snickers fault because I'm fat.. It's crappy it happened, but take responsibility for you own actions. Really, there could be charges for not having it secured so the 3 yr old couldn't get to it...but that would be crappy too.

Walkin trails @ 8/4/2012 1:07 PM

Hope that kid doesn't suffer any permant damage as a result of dad's brilliant firearms safety strategy.

JimA @ 8/7/2012 8:59 AM

First of all, sorry that someone was hurt by a gun discharge. But this is not an "accidental discharge" due to a Glock problem. It is a discharge caused by human error. Not a three year-old's error. The father had an error. So, sue your kid, you idiot! Leave Glock alone. It is not their fault!

Doug @ 8/17/2012 10:34 PM

First of all a standard Glock trigger is 5.5 pounds (not all that "light"). Most (all?) states have laws about children being secured in an approved safety seat of some type. And then you have the laws about safe storage of firearms, and it seems like California has some of the most restrictive laws in that area. I am sorry that Mr. Chavez suffered such a serious injury, but from the information in the article, he could have prevented the entire incident from happening. Glock makes pistols that are safe and reliable when used properly (follow the normal firearms safety rules).

Doug @ 8/17/2012 10:35 PM

First of all a standard Glock trigger is 5.5 pounds (not all that "light"). Most (all?) states have laws about children being secured in an approved safety seat of some type. And then you have the laws about safe storage of firearms, and it seems like California has some of the most restrictive laws in that area. I am sorry that Mr. Chavez suffered such a serious injury, but from the information in the article, he could have prevented the entire incident from happening. Glock makes pistols that are safe and reliable when used properly (follow the normal firearms safety rules).

marcus @ 12/21/2012 2:26 AM

So did this illustrious officer only notice the absence of a grip safety after he got shot?
Is this like the Haven PD that blamed glock when a ROUND exploded? Never mind the pistol wad by and large intact, and the pistol cant make the brass turn to shrapnel.
Anyways, last question. Is this the standard of training for local police?

Join the Discussion

POLICE Magazine does not tolerate comments that include profanity, personal attacks or antisocial behavior (such as "spamming" or "trolling"). This and other inappropriate content or material will be removed. We reserve the right to block any user who violates this, including removing all content posted by that user.

Other Recent News

Walther Issues Safety Recall for PPS M2 Pistols
Walther Arms Inc. has recently discovered a potential safety issue with certain PPS M2...

Police Magazine