We’ve extensively covered the hysteria surrounding lawsuits claiming that the SIG SAUER P320 pistol is prone to “uncommanded discharges” (see our posts here and here). When you look into the details of what’s been claimed and what actually happened in a great many of the lawsuits, you quickly reach the conclusion that these are mostly law enforcement officers who negligently discharged their firearms and are trying to save their jobs.
Last week a video circulated on social media showing a holstered P320 discharging while a Montville, Connecticut police officer scuffled with a suspect. Watch the video here . . .
Officer’s gun randomly goes off during arrest in Montville, CT.
It was a Sig and the chief has already ordered 35 new Glocks for the department.
What do you think caused that?
(No sound on the video) pic.twitter.com/ouql74tq3a— Donut Operator 🍩 (@DonutOperator) July 28, 2023
There’s no sound with the video, but it appears that the pistol discharged when the officer carrying the P320 bumped into another officer to his right.
While the Montville, Police Department apparently refused SIG SAUER’s attempts to investigate the incident, SIG has analyzed the available video frame by frame and concluded that the pistol wasn’t fully seated in the officer’s Safariland holster and the protective retention “hood” was not over the gun at the time.
The company has issued the following statement . . .
SIG SAUER has the following statement relative to a reported unintentional discharge from an officer at the Montville, CT Police Department on Monday, July 24, 2023:
“We have seen the news reporting of the incident involving a P320 discharge at the Montville (CT) Police Department. We are confident, as is the case in all instances, that when the factors and evidence are reviewed this will be proven to be an unintentional discharge as a result of inadvertent contact with the trigger, and that the pistol did not fire without a trigger pull.
In reviewing the video footage of this incident currently available, it appears that the involved firearm was not fully seated in its holster and the holster retention hood was not fully closed over the pistol at the time of discharge (images below). This improperly holstered condition would have left the firearm’s trigger exposed and vulnerable to actuation. Even if properly holstered, the features of the involved holster allow for foreign object intrusion and interaction with the trigger, as has been seen in other incidents.
We regret that the involved agency jumped to conclusions regarding the cause of this discharge without first carefully examining the footage of the incident and providing SIG SAUER with an opportunity to assist in the examination of the involved firearm.
The P320 model firearm is used effectively and safely every day, by both civilians and armed professionals. Despite years of litigation and extensive discovery, no one has ever been able to replicate a condition under which the P320 could discharge without a trigger pull, and experts who have attempted to assert such a claim have been repeatedly thrown out of court as unqualified and/or unreliable. Three separate federal courts (in the matters of Frankenberry v. SIG SAUER, Mayes v. SIG SAUER, and Hilton v. SIG SAUER) have concluded that the two experts who have proffered a theory of uncommanded discharge are unfit to testify in court because they are unqualified and/or their opinions are untested and unreliable. In the only case regarding a P320 discharge to proceed to a full trial (Guay v. SIG SAUER), a jury of 12 rejected these experts’ unproven and unscientific theory, and found unanimously in favor of SIG SAUER. SIG SAUER stands behind the proven safety and reliability of the P320.”
Goes to show you that if you carry a pistol with no safety in a ready-to-shoot condition, make sure you have a holster where, when the firearm is fully seated, the design does not allow trigger actuation while in the holster. I have a great Alien Gear P320 Shapeshift holster that makes me confident during shooting drills that I won’t shoot my leg off when initially grabbing the pistol from the holster.
MrMax, Horse pucky! Thousands of police and civilians carry a pistol with no built in safety that has to be turned off to be able to shoot with no problems of any kind. That fact is as the article says, in this recent case the gun was NOT properly secured in the holster and the sergeant on his left bumped the gun with his left forearm. It was the holster and the bump that caused the discharge. The Chief of Police in this instance clearly did not examine the videos that were taken as the incident went down. The officer whose gun it was, is responsible for not properly seating his gun in his holster. If he had, the gun would have never discharged.
Here is a FACT for you to chew on. The safety of any firearm is in between the ears of the person carrying the firearm.
Um, I think that is exactly what he said. He didn’t say anything about a manual safety, only that the holster should cover the trigger. Your rant is misplaced.
Agree.
agreed
look at the “sig sauer” breakdown. The first still shot of the officer shows a fully seated p320 in a level 3 holster. the shine IS the hood, hoods dont lock IF the gun isnt fully seated. The second and third still pics of the officer are literally pointing at the tourniquet mounted on the front of the safariland holster. Standard issue as you can see by looking at the other officers holsters in the video. Sig is trying everything to save themselves and blame it on the officer. Simply put, the p320 is not safe and should be fixed. why dont you hold yourselves accountable. there’s little to no error for cops.
Tom, sorry but you can not tell from the video that the gun is not properly seated UNTIL the Sergeant with his left forearm strikes the but of the gun. Carefully watching you will see that the gun moved when hit by the forearm.
Mark N Excuse me, “sir” but where in my “rant” did I mention the words “manual safety.” The fact is that no matter whether or not a particular firearm has a “safety”, the real safety is in between the ears of the shooter.
If you knew anything about the holster that that department has its officers issued/use you would know that there is a “hood guard” on the holster which if the gun is not properly seated in the holster can EASILY catch on the trigger guard causing a discharge. Also the “locking mechanism” inside the holster which prevents someone from taking your firearm away from you if the gun is jostled inside the holster when NOT PROPERLY seated can also get inside the trigger guard and cause a negligent discharge.
No, “sir”, my “rant” is not misplaced. It is based on knowledge of both the SIG P320 and the Safariland 6360 ALS®/SLS MID-RIDE, LEVEL III RETENTION™ DUTY HOLSTER, which I carry.
So before you “rant”, maybe you should check to see if the poster know what he is talking about?
So, in other words, if you use the p320 and you fail to ‘holster it’ properly, you could shoot yourself? Uh, I think I’ll stick with what I got. I could throw my piece at a wall 100 times safely.
There was a similar series of issues and complaints about Glocks when they first came out, as I recall.
I’d have thought much of the relevant training, procedures and habits learned on Glocks would carry over to most other striker fired pistols. So perhaps there is an issue with SIG 320s; perhaps not. I don’t know, and I am not about to make the call either way.
Regardless, though, with the number of high quality, affordable duy pistols on the market today, one has to ask, why not choose something else? If there is a real problem this would address it; if not, well, it’s not like it’s a major sacrifice in reliability, capacity, etc. to go with a different vendor.
“There was a similar series of issues and complaints about Glocks when they first came out, as I recall.”
That was due to the nature of the new design, where the gun stays pre-cocked with one in the chamber. I’m guessing back then the people picking them up and not seeing a hammer treated them like a hammer-fired with the hammer down. So, they were expecting a trigger pull on the long and heavy side.
Surprise! 🙁
That Sig will go down as a design that has a permanent ‘taint’ to it on the used market…
Geoff, bottom line, in this most recent case, the gun is NOT at fault. The officer is for not properly seating his SIG in the holster.
I’ve sid it before and I will say it again, “The safety of any firearm is in between the ears of the shooter.”.
Here is another, right out of the NRA’s training courses: “A safety is a mechanical device prone to failure.”
“Geoff, bottom line, in this most recent case, the gun is NOT at fault.”
The reality is, the public at large *believes* it’s defective, even when it isn’t, and that perception won’t change.
The taint will still be there…
I think that if you bother to do some research you will find that the “between the ears safety” is much more prone to failure.
GEOF, as usual though as you well know the public is a) ill-informed and b) lacking in the proper knowledge to evaluate such instances. It is up to people who have the requisite knowledge to inform the public in spite of the false information out there. I repeat the officer was negligent, should be reprimanded and retrained. Switching to GLOCK pistols is NOT the answer.
RonBow, sorry, but you can’t make any device made by a human “idiot proof”. SIG P320 is a fine firearm and is only as safe as the person using it.
Walter I’m not familiar enough with the p320 and not at all with that safariland holster.
But any holster that has things that can possibly protrude enough to activate the trigger if the weapon isn’t seated completely is unsafe. Essentially if all it takes is a minor bump to do it.
Tired, I am well acquainted with the Safariland holster in question as I carry it with my GLOCK when I serve papers. (I wear a uniform and a police type rig). The locking mechanism of the holster (this is a level III retention holster) has a locking device which holds the gun at the trigger guard in the holster so that is can’t be drawn without depressing a “thumb lever” on the inside of the holster. It is my contention that MOST LIKELY, 1) the firearm was NOT properly seated in the holster so that it barely touched the locking mechanism (I have had this happen but caught it because each time I holster, I CHECK to see it is properly seated. It is part of my holstering procedure which I do each time I take my gun from the safe and holster it.) 2) WHEN the Seargeant’s left forearm stuck the butt of the pistol, it caused the gun to cant slightly to the right causing the locking mechanism to discharge the firearm.
A) The Officer should NEVER have been directed by the Sergeant to assist with the detainee as he was armed inside the PD station. This is a violation of procedure for handling a detainee in custody. i,e.: the Sergeant is negligent.
B) The Officer should have checked to see that his handgun was properly seated in his holster when he went to put it on. (Most officers do not take their duty firearm home and keep it in their locker on a shelf in that locker (not in their holster). In this respect the Officer is also negligent.
“any holster that has things that can possibly protrude enough to activate the trigger if the weapon isn’t seated completely is unsafe“
Correct. Why all the complex mechanicals for retention?
Why not a simple thumb brake holster like we’ve been using for decades?
And frankly, the so-called ‘safe action’ striker fired pistols intended for use by individuals who are constantly physically tussling with suspects is a bad idea.
I think people have been seduced by the idea of a quick shot with a light trigger pull and actual safety is a distant third.
MINOR Miner49er. First of all do you have any clue what you are talking about? I did not think so.
Second, the Safariland Holsters in question, are LEVEL III retention. Do you have any idea what “retention” means?
Third, it is clear from the video (if you bothered to watch is) that the firearm was NOT properly seated in the holster. It is further clear that the officer because he did not properly seat the firearm in the holster, is NEGLIGENT. Not the gun nor the holster. Nothing made by man is idiot proof. When holstering with this or any LEVEL III holster, you are supposed to make sure it is seated properly by attempting to draw it from the holster without depressing the thumb release. CLEARLY, the officer did not do this. The “safe action” in this case was not at fault, nor was the pistol nor was the holster.
Do you have any more questions? Feel free.
Back in the 80’s when the Glocks took law enforcement by storm and there was a flood of NDs there were a lot of officers reholstering or drawing with fingers on the trigger.
Reportedly, and I cannot speak to the veracity of this, 1911 training used to include applying pressure to the trigger immediately and continuously until a shot was fired and firing the first shot by depressing the safety.
Pirate. you are 100% correct. The bottom line is that the officers in the cases you cite were NEGLIGENT and it as not the fault of the firearm. BOTTOM LINE. You do NOT put your finger inside the trigger guard until the gun is pointed in the direction you intend to fire. Returning the gun requires the index finger to be on the side of the frame of the gun OUTSIDE the trigger guard.
Generally, police were moving from. 38 or .357 revolvers, and the long, heavy double action trigger covered a lot of sloppy handling. Some revolver holsters didn’t even bother to cover the trigger guard. Many incidents occurred when reholstering with the finger on the trigger and then pushing hard into the holster. In response, Glock came out with “New York” springs that booster trigger pull to 8# or 12#.
The number of NDs will go up in proportion to the number of units in service. Maybe there’s a mechanical issue, maybe a training issue, maybe no issue at all. But 1000 monkeys at 1000 typewriters. . .
Those cases were mostly a LONG time ago. The vast majority of the instances of what became known as Glock Leg were cases of officers holstering the Glock 17 with their finger still inside the trigger guard. This happened largely due to three factors:
1) These department were almost entirely transitioning from double action revolvers to the Glock 17
2) Glock invented the fake term “Safe Action” to hide the fact that the Glock pistols were basically a single action pistol (at that time many police departments had formal policies against officers carrying any single action handgun).
3) Glock pitched the Glock as being basically the same sort of point-and-shoot firearm as the double-action revolvers they were trying to replace. Their sales pitch to police departments emphasized the ease of transitioning and the minimal amount of training that would be needed.
Guns don’t magically pull their own triggers. Some are not “drop safe” (the early P320’s accused of that, so don’t drop your gun.) but triggers are not spring loaded to pull themselves. If you place something against a trigger a move it or the gun, expect the gun to do what it was designed to do. Any gun that fails to discharge is not a firearm, but an expensive brick. BTW, didn’t Gen 1 and Gen 2 Glocks have issues with premature firing? AKA N.D,’s( user induced of course )
Why oh why do major gat maker’s get a pass on “defective” gats? From excuses about bad firing pins to another report about glock er sig “going off” I guess the vast majority of comments on TTAG will blame the user & not the gunz. Never shot a 320 but I have shot a 365. I don’t “get” the hype🙄
The gun in question, either as a general design or a specific instance of component failure or tolerance stack-up, can be defective. The user may have pulled the trigger inadvertently, or otherwise misused the tool in a way that resulted in it firing.
Both can be true.
@former. I’m not a SIG fanboy although I own 3 of their guns. In fact I’m a big critic of SIG’s policies, mostly around the P365 and their failure to admit the firing pin breakage issue and failure to go into battery on early (1-6 month) production guns. I waited over a year to get a revised P365 and it’s the one I carry 95% of the time. If you don’t “get the hype” before you dismiss SIG, borrow a P226 or a P220. I have S&W, Glock, Beretta, SIG, FN and Ruger, the SIG’s are head and solders above them all. Just my humble opinion.
MB I don’t care. I’m retired & not made of $. I’ve gotten several Taurus’s to work well in the last dozen years of gat ownership. Ditto 2 Keltecs. I’d never reccomend Keltec as they have serious QC problems. If you waited a year for Sig to “do the right thing” that’s on you. I’ve had bad experience’s with several vehicle’s in 50years of driving & will trash them to whomever is in earshot. Peace out!
@former. I’m retired also, for many years, every dime I have I worked hard for. I don’t buy crap vehicles because my life and others on the road are worth the expense. Same with firearms. I don’t buy crappy cars or guns and I expect the manufacturer to correct issues that arise in anything mechanical. I don’t buy Chrysler or Kia cars and Taurus or Keltec firearms because those manufacturers have proven they can’t fix problems with their products. My life and others around me are worth the added expense. You should value yourself more, you are worth the expense.
You don’t “get” the “hype” because you are completely clueless about firearms and are just trolling TTAG
MB, I have stated in previously, the officer in this most recent case was negligent in that he did not properly seat his SIG in the holster. If he had the gun would not have ever discharged as depicted in the video.
100% agree, this was a negligent discharge, and the officer needs to be reprimanded and retrained. The citizens spent a lot of money on his firearm, holster and other equipment and his training. I expect patrol cars to get banged up in use, I don’t expect the officers to be abusive and negligent with them, same goes for the firearms.
MB, AMEN! I’m a retired NYS DOCCS Sergeant and have seen some of my own officers do stupid things with a firearm. The Chief of Police in the instant instance needs to be retrained as well as he clearly did not review the video appropriately. I would also say for the record, that his training rituals in his department are totally DEFICIENT.
Citizens are no different. They need to go to training and practice with their preferred handgun at least monthly. I train weekly. But then I carry professionally.
Too many people (some here) DEPEND on the GUN to be safe. Gun safety is in between the ears, not something on the gun.
This is a COMMON problem. There are now two videos of P320s discharging in police officer’s holsters and one video showing it discharge in a competitor’s holster.
I personally witnessed two out-of-battery discharges, both with injury to the shooters, during competitions.
Let’s not forget that video of a P320 going off when tapping the back of the slide with a hard object.
https://youtu.be/veI5NsDqG9E?t=197
I think that the cop’s gun discharged when the back of the slide ran into a piece of his fellow officer’s kit. But I’m just one opinion on the internet. Take with a grain of salt.
Ken, ONLY a blithering idiot would use a hammer on the back of any striker firing pistol.
Plastic mallet != hammer.
Only a blithering idiot would conflate one as the same as the other.
Walt I saw them go off when dropped as well (why the DOD has a manual safety and different spring weights). Love the design overall but it does have failure points similar to Glocks but with fewer (by 1 or 2 depending on version in question) fail-safes. Ultimately you are correct that training and conscientious are the best safety but honestly more is needed the 320 than other options.
Ken, I don’t care if it was a “plastic hammer” or not. It is still downright stupid!
SAFE, I own both GLOCKS and a SIG P320 M-17. If someone is to careless as to drop his handgun of any make, then he is the problem not the gun. No safety is “failsafe.” Right out of every NRA training course is these words: “A safety is a mechanical devices prone to failure.”
I guess we will just have to agree to disagree.
Walt agree with the sentiment but shit happens and the military tends to see a lot of stupid shit and SIG had to redesign as a result of the initial failure. As to safeties manual and otherwise of course they can fail so can triggers, primers and pressure bearing components. Ultimately on larger numbers of incidents they “can” reduce negligent discharges if enough safety measures are otherwise followed in a less than ideal situation. Train for the best and design to reduce failure when that falls short.
BREAKING: TTAG Test Shows P320 Striker-Fired Pistols Are Not Drop-Safe
https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/breaking-ttag-tests-show-p320-striker-fired-pistols-are-not-drop-safe/
SAFE, “Shit happens” when people do not exercise due caution when handling a firearm. I’ve seen too many accident that occur with a firearm out of down right stupidity in their handling. I agree with that term “negligent discharge.” No matter what you do to try to make a gun “safer”, you can’t take human nature out of the equation. And as I pointed out, “a safety is a mechanical device that is PRONE to failure.
Unfortunately, there are too many people who think all they have to do is strap a gun on and they think they are an “expert”. As we both know there is no such thing as a “expert” because no one knows everything about any particular subject.
Any person who says he does not need more training and/or practice is someone I would not go to the range with. As a matter of fact, I don’t want to be in the same county as that guy/gal when they handle a gun of any kind.
Walt I have had to view the issue both from your perspective as well as from the bean counters side. There are no absolute fixes only mitigation factors. Training is a huge part of it but like safety training can fail through lax standards or poor discipline. Safetys can fail sure but statistically be it police military or anything else the people will fail safety standards before anything mechanical a wide majority of the time. With that said poor designs of safeties, holsters, internals can increase the likelihood of a careless moment being a dangerous one. Basically it’s never just one thing especially when you have to review data sets to find trends. And we often have repeats of similar issues over decades.
SAFE, I have to disagree. I do not believe in THE INSTANT CASE, that the gun or the holster was at fault. There are NO absolute fixes to prevent a negligent discharge. Safety is in the mind of the shooter. It is not a mechanical device on the gun (rifle, handgun, or shotgun).
I once was helping a female officer with her draw of the handgun. At the time, the NYS DOCCS was using the S&W Model 10 revolver, which as you know has NO SAFETY. As she drew, she repeatedly put her trigger finger inside the trigger guard. I counseled her REPEATEDLY to the point where I threatened to tape a tongue depressor to her trigger finger. On the VERY next draw she again put her finger inside the trigger guard as she was removing the gun from her holster and shot herself in the hip. the bullet traveled all the way to the rear of her thigh. Of course the NYSP investigated as did the Dept IG. She was of course found at fault with no fault to me, I have said it repeatedly here and in the classes I teach on firearms, safety is something in between your ears, not a mechanical device on a firearm.
“ONLY a blithering idiot would use a hammer on the back of any striker firing pistol”
Yeah, it’s not like an LEO is likely to be tussling with someone and in the struggle the exposed rear of the slide be smacked by a person or gear…
I think it’s clear that striker fired pistols are not appropriate in environments where there are likely to be forceful impacts to the holstered weapon.
MINOR MIner49er. Oh, no? “It isn’t likely that a LEO is likely to be tussling with someone and in the struggle the exposed rear of the slide by smacked by a person or gear”? Clearly you not only don’t know what you are talking about , but you have never been in a tussle with anyone while you were carrying a firearm.
Please do every one a big favor. Get some experience before you open your big mouth or put your fingers to the keyboard.
That is prior to the voluntary repair. Should it have been a recall, probably, but that’s a business decision, not a technology one.
Even in the case of drop or hammer, the trigger was heavy enough to actuate and cause the discharge. So, the trigger is still moving, which makes the gun go off as it should. The lighter weight (physical mass not trigger pull) has effective, or at least largely, resolved that issue.
The other big difference between the P320 and Glock is that the P320 striker is fully cocked with the slide movement versus the Glock that is only partially cocked. The upside is that the P320 has a much lighter trigger break. Downside, each potential owner can be the judge.
I have Glocks and Sigs. My P320 has had thousands of rounds through it and multiple drops in classes with movement. No self-discharges. Maybe I just got lucky, but it won’t stop me from using the hell out of my P320.
Dude, NO gun is absolutely drop safe. In the video that you refer the person dropping the firearm does so intentionally with the rear of the slide downward. I also have to wonder how many times they dropped the gun before they got it to discharge. One thing I have found about YOUTube, is that a lot of their vids are staged to fit the agenda of the person making the vid.
IN spite of what some people do and or say, a gun is not a toy and has to be respected for the damage they they can do. When I teach my courses, the syllabus calls such “accidental discharges”. I edit that out of my presentation and refer to such as “NEGLIGENT DISCHARGES”. Using the term “accidental” implies that what happened is beyond human control HORSE PUCKY!
Hey Walter. I didn’t give an opinion about anything. I posted that for informational purposes. You’re welcome to draw your own conclusions. For someone who says there is no such thing as an expert, you sure do present yourself as one.
“a lot of their vids are staged to fit the agenda of the person making the vid.”
Walter, do you understand that the people who made that particular video are the same people that run this site? Are you calling them frauds?
“Using the term “accidental” implies that what happened is beyond human control HORSE PUCKY!”
Have you ever fallen down, or have you ever heard of someone who has fallen down? Have you ever heard of someone being hit by a vehicle through no fault of their own? I can’t imagine actually paying money to listen to someone as arrogantly out of touch as you are.
DUDE, On the contrary, but there are some people who have MORE knowledge than others about any given subject.
The people who made this “video” may or may not be frauds. I don’t know for sure. But the people who made the vid were not the people who posted the article.
Sure, I have fallen down and when it happened unlike you clearly, I was at fault. Sure a person can be hit by a car. The person hit may or may not have contributed to the incident but that does not mean that someone was NOT negligent.
Speaking of arrogance. you might want to examine yourself. I am far more in touch with reality apparently than you.
“But the people who made the vid were not the people who posted the article.”
Thank you Walter for demonstrating exactly how out of touch with reality you really are. The dead give away that the video I linked to was made by the same people who wrote this article is that it is linked to another TTAG article! How dense do you have to be to miss that? Dan Zimmerman, who posted the article we are now commenting on, can be seen in said video. You implied that TTAG has an anti-Sig Sauer agenda.
“Sure, I have fallen down and when it happened unlike you clearly, I was at fault.”
Thank you again Walter for reinforcing just how far out of touch you are. You were the one claiming that accidents don’t happen, not me. My entire point was that we aren’t fully in control of what happens in life because accidents happen! Seriously. How dense do you have to be to not understand that?
“you might want to examine yourself.”
I merely posted a link to another TTAG article that demonstrates that the P320 is capable of firing without pulling the trigger. I offered no commentary. I offered no opinions. You took that opportunity to claim that the video could be fraudulent because they have an agenda. You were the one who claimed that quote: “accidental implies that what happened is beyond human control. Now you’re trying to say that I said I’m so fully in control of my surroundings that I never fall down? You are an absolute fool and a liar.
“I also have to wonder how many times they dropped the gun before they got it to discharge.”
I’m the one that dropped it. The gun went off the very first time and then again and again.
Jw I have a lot of respect for you not cutting and editing the intro and initial reaction out. The surprise really drove home how unexpected and dangerous that issue could be.
DUDE Speaking of being out of touch. The Video is from the Police Dept which got on the Youube. The one on this article is from Youtube which someone copied to Twitter. Have a great day.
That is correct ACCIDENT don’t happen. Someone is always at fault. That makes it a mishap (the Navy term).
A definition : ac·ci·dent
noun
1.
an unfortunate incident that happens unexpectedly and unintentionally, typically resulting in damage or injury.
“he had an accident at the factory”
Similar:
mishap
misfortune
misadventure
mischance
unfortunate incident
injury
disaster
tragedy
catastrophe
contretemps
calamity
blow
trouble
problem
difficulty
casualty
2.
an event that happens by chance or that is without apparent or deliberate cause.
For your further edification if you want to use the term accident, go right ahead but it does not mean that there was NO negligence involved. So who is out of touch now? Three guesses and the first two don’t count.
That is correct I did say that the vid you speak of COULD HAVE BEEN A FRAUD perpetrated by someone with an agenda. Can you prove to the contrary? The term accident is used by a lot of people who do not want to accept responsibility for the occurrence. I think as most people interrupt the word, it is an attempt to duck responsibility.
So what you are telling me is that you INTENTIONALLY dropped a gun (you did not say what make or model) on its rear and it discharged each time?
Do me a favor. Don’t come to any range where I am shooting. You are UNSAFE! just making such a statement.
Wow. Just wow. Everyone here understands except poor old Walt. Walter, the original comment I made which you replied to was a link to a TTAG video, made by TTAG. One of the people in said video even chimed in. You really don’t know what you’re talking about. If you want to talk about the other videos, then leave me out of it. You brought me into it talking about the TTAG video, you dolt.
“For your further edification if you want to use the term accident, go right ahead but it does not mean that there was NO negligence involved.”
So if a drunk driver hits you, it’s because you were negligent? You truly are a piece of work, Walt.
I went back and checked. Walter, here is how you started this thread:
“Dude, NO gun is absolutely drop safe. In the video that you refer the person dropping the firearm does so intentionally with the rear of the slide downward.”
Then, here is what you said directly above:
“DUDE Speaking of being out of touch. The Video is from the Police Dept which got on the Youube. The one on this article is from Youtube which someone copied to Twitter. Have a great day.”
Walter, you weren’t talking about the police dept video when you started this thread. You either can’t keep up with your own conversation that you started, or you realized your mistake and now you’re “playing” dumb.
Dude, clearly your ability to comprehend what I wrote is at best wanting. Are you trying to sell that the video mysteriously appeared on Youtube? ROFLMAOBT!
Now be a good little boy and go to your corner.
“ROFLMAOBT!”
What are you 13?
Walter, you drug me into this. I never gave any opinion about any video. I posted a link to a video by TTAG. They have a Youtube account. They post videos on said Youtube account. You implied that the video was staged. You implied they were frauds. I called you on that, and then you started talking about the police video. I NEVER ONCE COMMENTED ON THE POLICE VIDEO, YOU IDIOT. As a matter of fact, I never commented on the TTAG video except to point out the obvious which was that it was indeed an official TTAG video. I’ve talked real slow like to explain it to a very confused Walter.
And here you are apparently still confused. It’s amazing. It really is. You’re like a right wing lil’ d. I’m embarrassed for you at this point.
Clearly you don’t know enough about guns to comprehend that your claim of two “out of battery discharges” (if true) would be completely different from any claims of an “uncommanded discharge” because those two situations are mutually exclusive due to the design of the firearm.
Any gun can have what you are calling an “out of battery” discharge — some are actual out-of-battery discharges but far more are problems that occurred with the pistol in battery due to ammunition problems. The few that are actually out-of-battery tend to be due to either improper maintenance or mechanical failure of the firearm, not defective design (unless you are one of the clowns who believes that ALL firearms are inherently “defective” because all mechanical devices can break).
“The [Sig P320] is safe and effective, any claim to the contrary is dangerous misinformation.”
Sig Sauer, probably.
I’m a bit wary of Sig’s assessment of the video. Even if the pistol was only 80% inserted into the holster and not fully seated (though apparently enough to at least partially cover the trigger housing and not draw attention from the wearer or any other officer as a dangerous situation), how can a mere “bump” against another officer activate the trigger into a full pull to discharge the weapon? A bump against which part of the officer’s gear, body, or clothing? Touching which part of the first officer’s gun? There’s insufficient information in this article with which to make a assessment to concur with what Sig is claiming.
I remain suspicious of Sig Sauer products.
I foresee another potential hole in Sig’s explanation. If the officer’s handgun was not fully seated in his holster (thus exposing the trigger for actuation and discharge), then why didn’t the recoil of the shot send the handgun out of his holster and flying to the ground?
It seems to me that if the handgun is unholstered far enough to expose the trigger to actuation from an external object, it is unsecure enough to fly out of the holster if it discharges.
“…why didn’t the recoil of the shot send the handgun out of his holster and flying to the ground?”
Egg-zactly. I thought of this immediately after posting my earlier comment, but didn’t follow up with another to mention it. Glad you pointed it out.
@,hax
Simple. The discharge moved the SLIDE back. The slide was in frictional contract with the inner surface of the holster, hence transferring the recoil force to the holster, so that the holster moves back with the slide.
And probably actually imparting forward force to the frame…
I HAZ did you watch the video in the most recent case?
Yes.
HAZ then you should have seen the Sergeant’s forearm strike the butt of the SIG. That is what caused the discharge as the gun was NOT seated in the holster properly. If you watch the vid SLOWLY you will note this.
I am not say that it’s not possible for a SIG to discharge due to the design of the gun. i am saying in this case that is NOT the case.
Video quality and angle isn’t sufficient for me to make that same determination you did. And even if a second person’s forearm comes into mild contact with a first person’s holstered (even if not completely) gun, the result of an ND makes me want to consider avoiding that manufacturer’s entire line of weapons, as well as the holster’s manufacturer. This type of ND should never occur.
I remain skeptical of this ND and Sig products overall.
“the Sergeant’s forearm strike the butt of the SIG. That is what caused the discharge as the gun was NOT seated in the holster“
So the forearm strike on the butt of the weapon pushed the weapon deeper into the holster and caused it to discharge?
So if the officer had pushed his gun the rest of the way into the holster it would’ve discharged as well?
That doesn’t seem like a good design…
MINOR Miner49er. NO, the firearm was JOSTLED i.e.: pushed to the side which caused the locking mechanism to engage the trigger. Again, I can see that reading is not your strong point. The locking mechanism in the Level III retention holster engages the firearm to insure it cannot be drawn by anyone but the person on whom the holster is wearing the holster. It did not “push the weapon deeper” but to the side where it engaged the locking mechanism because it was NOT properly seated in the holster. Is it clear to you now? Or should I put it in baby talk for you?
I’m a big fan of safeties on carry guns for this reason. It’s not hard to train the swipe off move and helps keep a small mistake from becoming a huge issue.
Bb, “A safety is a mechanical device prone to failure.”
On that note Walt could you take a look at this when you get a chance and let me know what you think? Hadn’t considered what it suggests and would like your take on it’s possibilities. https://worldsbestguns.wordpress.com/2023/07/31/the-p320-problem/
SAFE I read the article. It is very technical in nature but it leaves out one contention that I have made. And that is that the officer did NOT properly seat the gun in the holster. If the gun had been properly seated, then there would be little at best chance for the negligent discharge. SIG P320 is a striker fired pistol as it ALL GLOCKS. The Chief of Police is swapping out one striker fired pistol for another. Using this article’s premise of what he thinks occurred he is just trading one “problem” for the very same problem.
It is MY CONTENTION that with the SAFARILAND holster that was in play there, that because the gun was not PROPERLY SEATED that the striking of the handgun by the SERGEANT’s left forearm against the butt of the gun jostled the gun into either the hood of the holster or the “locking” mechanism in the holster causing the discharge. Neither the gun nor the holster were in this case defective. I am not speaking to any other case where it is alleged that the gun fired itself.
So no possibility of twisting/torque of the fcu to trigger a release of the firing pin with the firearm taking a side or diagonal impact?
*in this case, I did just confirm it can be done with a vice so yet another thing to forward for review.
Grip safeties?
Not sure it could be worked in the fcu design well. Not a bad idea but I wonder if either a longer trigger squeeze distance or Glock style trigger safety would be more efficient approaches.
Here’s what happened: Looking at the design of that model holster, the part where the loop is snapped is higher than the rest of the holster. With the gun only partially in the holster and the trigger above the snap, when the officer stood up with the other officer standing over him, the butt of the gun got caught under the duty belt of the 2nd officer and since the 1st officer was moving up and away, the butt was pulled out and pushed down causing the trigger to catch on the snap location and firing the gun. I can see how someone in an awkward position could cause that to happen when trying to holster the gun quickly. My feeling is that the holster needs to be redesigned so the trigger cannot catch on the snap location. I could be wrong, of course, but that’s how it looks to me.
Spot on!
Hardshell is best, with these designs, in any case.
What happened to me – cutting a survey line in hardwood brush, I saw a moccasin. Being intolerant of this animal in work areas, and bored, I unholstered my pistol. Upon re-holstering, a small stub attached to a standing sapling slipped into the trigger guard such that pushing the pistol into the holster pushed back on the trigger, HARD.
That said, it was a Colt 1911, and the 100 year old safety systems prevented what would have been a very nasty situation, had a gun with no manual safety or only a blade safety been involved.
Spot on! Hardshell holster is optimal.
Here is what happened to me – cutting a survey line in hardwood brush, l saw a moccasin – being intolerant of them in work areas, l unholstered my pistol. Upon re-holstering, a stub slipped into the trigger guard such that pushing the gun into the holster, push back on the trigger. HARD.
It was a Colt 1911, and the manual safety was ON, so a very nasty situation was avoided.
Had l had a Glock/Sig, etc, an accidental, and serious injury would have been certain.
Oops. Sorry!
Why the Montville, Police Department apparently refused SIG SAUER’s attempts to investigate?
Because it would demonstrate their lack of training and that officer’s negligence. If you really want the truth, dig deeper. If you want the quick answer of money, keep everything hidden.
Because Sig is not an honest broker in this situation and everyone knows it. Hundreds of defective discharges to date and Sig continues to try to get its hands on the gun and “inspect” it so that they can declare it to be “fine” and once again blame law enforcement officers (called “pigs” now by various sig fanboys on yankee marshal propaganda site) whose lives are at risk. This is cult like behavior
The Case That’s Going to Tie Both of ATF’s Hands Behind Its Back. (Chevron Doctrine)
fyltge.
I was reading about this case today, Senator Cruz filed an amicus in it. Case involves a regulation that at first required fishing vessels to have a government inspector aboard; the new regulation required the fishermen to also pay the inspector’s salary! There have been calls for the Supreme Court to overrule Chevron deference for years, and the court in the last term suggested that it may be willing to do so due to bureaucratic overreach that has resulted in regulatory agencies legislating without Congressional oversight. You know, just what the ATF has been doing.
“the new regulation required the fishermen to also pay the inspector’s salary!“
Right, much better to let the taxpayer pay for the inspector…. Really?
Don’t you think the industry should be the ones to bear the cost, we wouldn’t need an inspector if the industry hadn’t already screwed up enough times to warrant constant surveillance to prevent accidents that hurt workers and make sure the catch is handled properly to prevent spoilage that would make the customers sick.
I can see Dettelbach doing a face palm, and probably cussing, because he knows precisely how tenuous AFT’s policies are, and these other bureaucrats in their own fiefdoms are ruining it for all of them. And, I don’t feel sorry for him.
IF the Sig had a flat face trigger chances are it caught on something during all the shenanigans leading to picking up a perp who was unable to walk.
The video shows how quick an AD can happen. And with that said here it is again, How to make a Trigger Plug for most Glocks. Truth be told Glocks are known to have triggers that can invite an AD. If you do not need a plug or find it beneath you then truck on. If you are someone who really is not ready for a Glock, etc. it can help…
Begin with a verified cleared firearm. Using the bulbous portion from a Tire Valve Stem and a bench grinder install a bolt in the base of the portion and shape for a light friction fit.
A commerical version is also available…
https://ndzperformance.com/saf-t-blok-glock-trigger-saftey-block-rh-post-98-saft-70121/
I plan on putting a Glock safety on my old G-19. They make an excellent add-on unit that is like the one Glock put on their submission guns for a US military contract that they didn’t win. I won’t wear any pistol IWB without a manual safety and the G-19 is too puny to be carried OWB open carried IMHO. My own rules, others can do as they please but without a safety the Glock is worthless to me. I’ve owned it since new back in the early 90’s and put around 10k through it. I actually graduated from that to a 1911 which I like much better but I don’t ever sell guns. I’ll keep this one around and make it safe so I can use it as a backup/extra gat that I would feel comfortable lending out to a beginner shooter in a SHTF situation.
I saw where Glock designed the military submission gun with a manual safety. Is that part available from Glock or is it aftermarket? You can add or remove the safety on any M&P 2.0 fairly easily. I wonder if the Glock would require other modifications to make it work?
Still shilling that garbage lol let me know when a glock goes off in a holster without something disengaging the safety like what happens with the sig. I will wait.
No room for error on a safety that requires using your trigger finger inside the trigger guard. Think “SERPA.”
So do you think a pencil eraser would work on my P320?
I just deleted my post on this issue because it seems like a waste of time. The consensus seems to be that the gun has a problem.
All I can say is that I’ve broken the gun down and checked every component, If the gun is firing itself, I can find no clues as to how it is happening.
Can only guess easier to fire than a glock so may have a narrower margin of safety with oddball jostling one may see in rigorous use. No expert opinion here just a wild ass guess.
Yes. Fully-cocked striker. Poor gun handling.`
Building on that would the shape of the trigger be more likely to catch on the inside walls of the holster during vigorous jostling on the SIG vs the Glock typically?
SA/DA problem solved.
Never heard of this problem with SCCY pistols.
Just saying…
ThE PoLiCe ArE TrAiNeD To UsE GunS.
Seriously though, make k-frames great again. There’s wisdom and good engineering to DA/SA pistols quite frankly.
Many unintentionals have occurred re-holstering revolvers. Many!
Over how long a timeframe with how many involved and with what observed influence of training? You are not wrong in your statement but the context means a lot with this sort of assessment.
Historical fact. The problem was especially rank in the era of wheelguns with slicked-up actions and wide trigger shoes combined with expensive leather holsters.
Ah more context and a good bit of possible issues, expensive leather being the sort to be flexible enough to get into the trigger guard during reholstering? If so saw a lot of similar issues with Glocks before kydex became more ubiquitous and even then booger hook on bang switch bad when holstering a firearm.
PATHETIC: Gun Controllers claiming victory for Gun Shop closure.. However, there is a SLIGHT problem. (Note: ATF investigated and didn’t find any thing that substantiated Chicago claims. Chicago had nothing to do with the closure, the owner is closing because he is retiring)
I use Safariland retention holsters and it’s a frequent occurrence that my pistol won’t go all the way in when holstering. it’ll can’t just a bit and not seat completely. Easy enough to correct if you’re paying attention. Which everyone carrying a gun is, right?
Absolutely! Especially when trying to handcuff a suspect in the middle of a melee.
/sarc
IMO – Sounds like Safariland has work to do.
Shire, very true.. And when a person is seating the firearm into the holster of any KIND the person should exercise DUE CAUTION.
XZX, The Safariland 6360 ALS®/SLS MID-RIDE, LEVEL III RETENTION™ DUTY HOLSTER is an excellent police type III. Like any piece of equipment you can not make it idiot proof. The bottom line is if you have to draw using this holster, draw quickly and put is away SLOWLY with caution. You can’t make anything “idiot proof”.
So your rig ain’t safe unless the user is perfect. but you have that covered so to hell with anybody else… Got it!
Sure sounds like a basic design flaw to me.
XZX, What? that is the second most convoluted statement I have heard to date. The rig is not “unsafe.” The person using the rig is NOT exercising due caution. Safety is in between the ears. Not a device on a firearm.
So now it’s the hood of a holster and saying the pistol is not full seated. Pictures shows nothing of the sort and hood not be over just turns it into a level 1 holster. In any case there should not be a discharge of the firearm and the fact that Sig made such a bold statement shows exactly why the PD wants an independent investigation that is not handled by a company that has a vested interest and bias.
I believe SIG’s response was after the PD refused the investigation. Regardless of the actual cause, with the widespread reports of SIG P320 self-discharges, the gun in question should be investigated by the manufacturer.
SIG, It could have been the hood of the holster. But what really happened is the officer did not properly SEAT his firearm in the holster. More than likely it was either the hood of the holster or the locking mechanism inside the holster which when it was jostled (not being seated properly) caused the negligent discharge.
Fact is you can’t make any made man device “idiot proof”. The officer was negligent and need to be retrained and reprimanded.
2A Victory Passes House!
look at the “sig sauer” breakdown. The first still shot of the officer shows a fully seated p320 in a level 3 holster. the shine IS the hood, hoods dont lock IF the gun isnt fully seated. The second and third still pics of the officer are literally pointing at the tourniquet mounted on the front of the safariland holster. Standard issue as you can see by looking at the other officers holsters in the video. Sig is trying everything to save themselves and blame it on the officer. Simply put, the p320 is not safe and should be fixed. why dont you hold yourselves accountable. there’s little to no error for cops.
Tom, sorry but from the video you can not possibly tell is the gun is properly seated until you see the Sergeant’s left forearm strike the butt of the firearm at which if you look VERY closely you will see the gun move. And I beg to differ, if the gun is NOT properly seated (all the way in the holster with the locking mechanism in place) you can still move the hood over the gun.
More simple put the office was NEGLIGENT and should be reprimanded & retrained.
I thought hard about putting my 2 cents in, and decided this is an appropriate moment for a 25 cent opinion.
The Manual Safety v No Manual Safety has been beaten to death by both sides of the debate to the point, there’s nothing really new to add to either side’s claims.
In my over 55 years experience handling Firearms, 99% of NDs are operator error, or an issue related to operator error, wrong holster and so on. Police, as a general rule of thumb, have some of the most poor Gun Handling abilities one will ever witness.
The testing that goes on to induce a Negligent Discharge into a Firearm, has gotten ridiculous, ie, gun will discharge if operator, is suspended upside down, with one thumb up their a$$, while spanking their monkey, and a third party hits the rear of the slide with a 2# sledge held at a 20° angle perpendicular to the magazine’s feed lips, and so on.
This debate has gone on for most of my adult life, and I suspect it will go on long after I’m worm food.
P320 is the Remington 700 of the handgun world. No matter how many times it happens there’ll be an excuse and popularity still remains
Matt there is NO excuse. The officer was negligent in that he did not properly seat his firearm in his holster.
Had to be the gun’s fault, cause we all know that LEOs are highly trained professionals that never have NDs. For those Slo Joe Libturds out there, that is sarcasm.
StL, I like your sarcasm. Some of the most unsafe people I know with a firearm are police or correction officers.
S#!+ happens everyday to everybody. We can try to develop fail safes and create environments where safety is at the forefront, but if it’s gonna happen, it’s gonna happen. You cannot prepare for everything. How many Sigs do this per day compared to how many exist in active use on a daily basis? Everybody loves to be a Monday morning quarterback. Let me know when we go a full day without a mishap. There have been firehouses that have caught fire.
Walter, go get a sig p320, put it in the holster and try to close the hood on a safariland level 3. I can tell you 1st hand it wont close. The “experts” from sig are pointing to the tourniquet….they call it a hood. They point at the hood, in the first picture and say that the gun too high not seated. look at other pictures of the police officers from that town. the safariland level 3 with tourniquet mounted on the front is what they have. Gee by the look of it, slow the video down, and look at the other’s!!! Not one officer’s gun in the pd has a seated in the holster !!!! < that's sarcasm by the way.
TOM for your edification I OWN A SIG P320 M-17. I also have the SAFARILAND holster depicted in this vid. And YOU CAN CLOSE THE HOOD if the gun is not seated properly My contention is that when the SERGEANT’s forearm struck the butt of the handgun, it jostled the handgun and EITHER THE HOOD (which is that protruding part of the holster) (doubtful) got into the trigger guard and struck the trigger or (MOST LIKELY) the jostling of the handgun caused the locking mechanism which holds the gun in place when PROPERLY SEATED depressed the trigger and caused the NEGLIGENT DISCHARGE. The officer who lifted the legs of the detainee should NOT have had his gun in this scenario. When you are handling a detainee, NO OFFICER involved should be armed. His/her gun should be secured in a lock box in another room. THIS IS SOP in most departments. I also note that the SEREANT whose forearm struck the butt of the gun was also ARMED which would have been a violation of proper procedure.
Ipso facto, the officer is negligent, Not the Holster nor the gun.
I am not aware of Glock having an issue firing without the trigger being pulled. I am aware of DC Metro police in the 80s and 90s having been trained on revolvers forever leaving their finger on the trigger because they were taught that at the academy when revolvers were the gun of choice. There is now this video, and there is a video of a cop, on body cam, getting out of his car and he bumps his holstered 320 and it goes off. He is in the driver seat, his partner is the passenger. I like the 320 to an extent, and I carry a 365 often or an XL but I don’t understand why everyone defends the 320. If you are so dumb that you can’t understand that sig waits for a problem and responds, or does a rolling design change without updating the customer, or does a “voluntary upgrade” because they won’t admit it’s a recall is out of their mind at this point. As someone who owns a lot of Sigs and would never carry a 320 I am truly lost. The military warned them, different cop shops are saying they’re going off, now we have a video and many are still incapable of acknowledging what looks like a major defect. Oh and yes, of course, sig is blaming the holster and gun. Ill be messing with a safariland later to see if I can duplicate any of this. Why aren’t M&Ps and Glocks, which are widely carried by cops going off on videos?
I worry about the critical thinking skills of some gun owners. They seem unable to discern – from studying the video – that Sig is gaslighting gun owners the same way Taser Inc. defends their product. The first clear stills from both camera angles show the pistol is fully seated and the retention hood is up.
Sig is tripling down against the scores of cases brought in court that charge the pistol is prone to ‘uncommanded discharges’. You don’t see this happening to Glocks, Springfields, S&W, or even Taurus… Where there’s smoke, there’s fire!
I wish I could attach a picture. I went through the video and grabbed a screenshot from before the discharge that sure looks like the weapon is fully seated. I don’t know how it happens, but I don’t buy Sig’s explanation.
I think we have a pretty good idea of how it happens, if we just piece together the evidence that has been laid before us.
1. The Sig P320 fires when dropped. TTAG investigated and PROVED that to be true, anyone who says otherwise is either an idiot or a liar. It was proven, and after that, Sig came out with their farcical “voluntary upgrade”. We don’t know whether this officer’s gun had the “voluntary upgrade” or not.
2. The Sig P320 fires when the back of the gun is smacked. This is PROVEN by the video of the guy with the plastic mallet. It is also proven by TTAG’s drop test, which essentially boils down to the P320 being hit on the back of the slide.
3. The officer’s gun was almost certainly properly holstered, but even if it was loose, that doesn’t matter. The triggering (pun intended) event was when the back of the Sig P320 smacked into the other officer’s arm.
All this data is consistent. Sig made a faulty design, they refuse to fix it, and people who are victimized by this faulty design are being “blamed” as the cause of the fault.
Once upon a time, TTAG used to do investigative journalism, like the above-referenced drop test video. I wish they would again. But nowadays, it seems like they are content to repost an outrageously inflammatory press release from Sig. Farago never would have stood for it.
“The officer’s gun was almost certainly properly holstered, but even if it was loose, that doesn’t matter.”
Funny. I didn’t LOL but it did make me chuckle.
Not only do you not don’t know about the holster, but you also don’t know any of the other circumstances here (neither do I or anyone else right now.)
For the data to be consistent (whatever that means), the data must demonstrate that this sort of thing happens with more frequency than it does, not these one-offs. Here’s one thing for certain: if you take the 320 armorer’s course you will see that it is impossible for the gun to go off by itself. If you have a modicum of sense about how small machinery works, you can just take it apart yourself and study it. Something must cause the gun to fire: a part must be defective, something must be out of alignment, or user error.
So, what happened here? I cannot see anyone hitting the back of this officer’s pistol, it simply is not apparent to me. Am I saying it didn’t happen? No. Perhaps that is what happened. I’m saying that my eyes don’t see it. If that is what happened, however, I am skeptical that the force from that other person was comparable to the force used in the plastic hammer test or drop test videos from years ago. Am I saying it was impossible? No. I’m saying that based on this video, I question that assumption, and if evidence proves otherwise, so be it. What the hell do I care? I have no personal stake in any of this.
What I do see is an officer bending down, I see a tight belt, I see a gun that may or may not be seated properly and I see a surprise reaction from everyone after it goes off. I have a lot of questions about all those things, and other things I haven’t listed. Otherwise, there are too many unknowns to understand what precisely happened right now. Does the 320, in certain environments, under certain circumstances, become unsafe? I don’t know. It should be looked into.
If the gun were as flawed as you think it is, we would not see 10s of these allegations, we would see thousands of them, and they could be replicated. I know of zero (0), exact recreations of this recent, alleged, unintentional discharge, no-trigger-pull phenomenon. That wasn’t the case with the drop issue.
If you were really the fan of investigative journalism as you pretend to be, you would not draw a conclusion as you have, you would ask more questions, you would not know the answers ahead of time. But that’s not how you roll. You prance around on your high horse pretending to understand what is impossible to fully understand right now.
The problem with investigative journalism is no one will pay for it. Fund it, and you will be swamped with Peter Parkers and Clark Kents.
I watched the vid several times. There is no point in time when I can say that the pistol is “properly seated”. I can see the pistol grip riding above the holster, I cannot see the retaining flap actually covering the pistol. Some enhancement would be nice, but seriously, it appears that the pistol is loose in the holster from the beginning of the video.
My takeaway is “Macho Man Fail”.
JFC – this is the biggest circle jerk of fudds I have ever seen.
SIG makes quality firearms, but good firearms can’t make up for bad training, bad habits and shady lawyers. Moreover, the sheer volume of SIG pistols issued to thousands of police officers in multitudes of law enforcement agencies with varying budgets, equipment and training standards, can lead to these types of issues. Glock had a similar experience in the 80’s and 90’s, which caused USATODAY to run editorials demanding that Glocks be banned outright due to inherent safety issues that USATODAY stated was a design flaw in the trigger mechanism. Because SIG has deep pockets suing them is easy and somewhat sensational news-wise, filing lawsuits is a quick way to garner attention and possibly an out of court settlement. I own and carry a SIG P320 X Compact in a Milt Sparks IWB holster, and I’ve never had a “problem” or “incident” with it. I also carry a Glock 19 in a Milt Sparks IWB holster as part of my carry rotation, once again without “incident”. Remembering the four rules of firearms ownership/use/carry could prevent many of these types of situations from happening in the first place.
I don’t see any need to attack Sig’s lawyers. They are nice people.
I don’t GAS if the gun is not properly in the holster. A gun should not discharge with that little contact. This is an unsafe weapon in my opinion.
It is concerning but figuring out the extent of the issue (training, trigger, holster, internals, or other tbd issues) or combination thereof will be very important in figuring out what can/should be done. With that said I will guess the risk assessment parameters are likely to be updated.
I see the Sig fanboys are out in force – – again. Sadly it will take an LEO fatality on video before you people will concede that your beloved wonder pistol has severe design and manufacturing defects.
Walter, were you there?!? it was in the front lobby of the police department, which is open to the public, not the lockup . If you read the original news release the subject was in the front lobby stealing prescription medication when he was apprehended, thus no you are incorrect…the officer was in the right to be armed up. The gun was fully seated with the hood closed. Sig is making the accusations that the hood was open clearly pointing at the Tourniquet!!!! Sig also says the PD did not want any help from them. After an incident or shooting of this caliber, the officers firearm is taken to a firearm unit for eval, standard protocol. I’m not sure how else to explain it.
Tom, I don’t have to be here. The video says it all. The detainee was in mechanical restraint. No officer dealing directly with him should have been ARMED. This is PROCUDURE 101. Once he was cuffed up there was NO need to have an officer armed with him.
It is MY contention that the :hood can be pulled back into the “locking” position and the gun NOT seated properly. You see I have a SAFARILAND holster like this one and carry with it ever day I work.
So what if the PD said they did not want help from SIG? Is that supposed to mean something? Yep, the firearm is taken to a firearm unit. NO kidding. Have you seen the report from the firearm unit? (Incidentally it would have been the Conn SPs who would have done the eval as the Montville PD is too small to have such a unit.
I am not sure how else to explain it.
Walter, you have obviously never been to that police department. So your saying, as soon as the subject was detained, (still NOT in lockup mind you) should not be handled by an armed officer?!?!?! what kind of backwards police force did you work for?!?! you saw a 16 sec clip of what happened. Sure Walter….”on scene with a subject… hes detained, No armed officers are to move him to lockup”. Its pointless stating the facts to people who THINK they know but just backseat quarterback. You all just wait for the full report to come out, I guarantee you will be 100% wrong along with Sigs professional “statement”. I just hope this doesnt happen to one of you and end up hurting someone. Seriously what would you do if that happened to to you?
WRONG, Little Fella. I am a retired State Corrections Sergeant who also have 10 yrs as a police officer.
No, I said that in this case, the detainee was cuffed. At this point anyone added to the scrum should hand off his firearm . Now it is really time for you to start to pay attention.
THIS COMMENT SECTION IS NOW CLOSED.
Hmm…
Well….shit. It was worth a try.
walter…..yeah thats not how it works. Not sure what state department you worked for or pd but thats probably the dumbest SOP ive ever heard of. ” while on scene with a cuffed subject, hand your firearm off”. I’m done attempting to educate you with facts, its pointless. I feel like I’ve lost brain cells listening to your rant.
Tom, your opinion is of little value. I worked for a couple of police departments and was a sergeant in NYS DOCCS. Your facts are of course in your own mind as you have never worked in a PD. You have a good day now.
I am not a fan of striker fired pistols. I much prefer a SA/DA hammer fired pistol. Being able to see the hammer is down and that long trigger pull for the first shot adds a bit of safety. Unfortunately they are hard to find in the sub compact genre.
Most of the striker fired pistols either lack a manual safety or it’s not ambidextrous (I’m a leftie). For me a trigger safety is not much of a safety. I think more manufacturers should put grip safeties like what’s on my Springfield Armory 9mm XD subcompact Mod II or ambidextrous thumb safeties.
Just bought a S&W CSX for this very reason. Awesome little gun with full ambi controls. I’m a lefty too but I practice w/both hands so safety on both sides is perfect. I don’t know why more people don’t demand it of the manufacturers.
W
https://www.google.com/url?q=https://m.youtube.com/watch%3Fv%3DB2qDiKXIJsE&sa=U&ved=2ahUKEwiKmOW08dmAAxURjYkEHYr8B7YQtwJ6BAgFEAE&usg=AOvVaw2sa1mc2iQPi9-k0jlEqPNZ