In July of 2006, Enrique Chavez, a policeman in Los Angles, California, was driving his then 3-year-old son, Collin, to his grandfather's house. The boy was not in a car seat and Chavez had forgotten that he left his service pistol, a Glock handgun, loaded and unlocked in a holster underneath the front seat. At a red light, Collin picked up the handgun and shot his father in the back. Chavez was left paralyzed by the injury.
Chavez sued Glock claiming the gun lacked adequate safeguards against an accidental discharge because it had a light trigger pull, thus allowing the 3-year-old to shoot the gun, and did not have a manual safety or a grip safety, a device attached to the pistol grip that the shooter must deactivate before firing.
A Los Angeles judge dismissed the case but the Second District Court of Appeal reinstated the case on Tuesday.
Glock has argued "that they had no duty to design a firearm that an unsupervised 3-year-old could safely play with when left loaded and unsecured by a trained police officer who had ignored every warning and instruction he had read about firearm storage safety."
Post a Comment