quote:

Originally posted by nhracecraft:

quote:

Originally posted by DirectDrive:

quote:

Originally posted by nhracecraft:
Is it me, or are the multiple different holsters worn by the Officers in that video. I believe I'm seeing three different holsters there...

Looks like different flavors of Safariland.
The holster in question looks like a drop-leg, single strap.

If I were king, I wouldn't allow a drop-leg holster.
And depending on the pistol, possibly no WML holsters.

It's definitely NOT a 'Drop-Leg' Holster...NO Thigh/Leg strap either! Between the dark uniforms, black holsters, and poor contrast due to the lighting in the background, it's hard to tell exactly what Holster it is, but it's definitely belt mounted. Further, due to the fact that the Pistol wasn't fully seated in the Holster and the Retention Hood is open, assuming it's Safariland, it's difficult to determine if it's a Low-Ride, or Mid-Ride version either.

I can see one strap on his leg in one of the still photos taken from the video.
Very hard to see at full speed.

^^^Please provide a screen capture, or post the still photo and point it out then. I haven't seen that in any of the stills I've seen, including those in SIG press Release, and those in the video(s) linked in this thread. I've watched the video a 1/4 playback speed more than a dozen times, pausing frequently to look for details re: the holster in question. I'm NOT seeing it! It would appear that nobody has seen this but you either...Certainly nobody else has made a similar comment on the subject.

quote:

Originally posted by nhracecraft:
^^^Please provide a screen capture, or post the still photo and point it out then. I haven't seen that in any of the stills I've seen, including those in SIG press Release, and those in the video(s) linked in this thread. I've watched the video a 1/4 playback speed more than a dozen times, pausing frequently to look for details re: the holster in question. I'm NOT seeing it! It would appear that nobody has seen this but you either...Certainly nobody else has made a similar comment on the subject.

I'm looking for it.
It's a single strap, not like a low riding 2 strap military rig.
Safariland makes them.

ETA
Can't find it now.
In any event, not really important to the incident.

I have a Safariland Level II Holster (Retention Hood only) for a SIG P320 (full size) mounted on a Mid-Ride UBL w/ QLS System Adapter and a single Thigh/Leg Strap. I know exactly what you're talking about, but I'm NOT seeing it!

Sig’s response:

https://www.concealednation.or...off-while-holstered/

quote:

Originally posted by Maestro:
Sig’s response:

https://www.concealednation.or...off-while-holstered/

Actually already posted on previous page. Nice coda, though.

Okay, the gun was not all the way down into the holster. BUT, dig the weasel-speak from Sig:

"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 (did not provide) SIG SAUER with an opportunity to assist in the examination of the involved firearm.

Sure, give it all over to Sig for examination. I'm sure they'll make an honest assessment and get to the truth-of-the-matter, LOL. Please explain to us WHAT contacted the trigger, "...as has been seen in other incidents."

Was it the same holster as this gal was wearing at the 2:00 mark?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EdRHKDTPht4

It certainly was not what this detective was wearing....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HODW0F4eXmo&t=82s

...nor this competitor..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FBjo62vSYZk&t=3s

Look, most of us recall when Glocks first came on strong into LE. There was a learning curve where the troops no longer had 12-16lb triggers requiring a long, rolling pull. Many, many oopsies back-in-era. However, striker-fired is the norm now. If this is a booger-hook issue, why aren't there comparable numbers of such occurrences going on with platforms like Glock, the M&P, the APX, CZ-P10 series, Ruger SR, or American? If it's a holster issue, again...why no problems with the other brands when carried in those SAME make/model holsters. Hmmmmmm?

What should SIG say? “Yeah, your officer was a dumb ass and we don’t need to see the gun to know that it didn’t go off by itself”? How would that go over in court?
“Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, the company is so arrogant that they wouldn’t even inspect their defective product, and they knew what they would find. By not inspecting it themselves they could just claim that our expert didn’t know what he was talking about.”

Any reputable manufacturer will offer to inspect what is claimed to be an unsafe product even if they are convinced that it wasn’t unsafe. And if not them, who? One of those “experts” who have consulted and testified on behalf of someone who’s already sued SIG? Someone who focuses on one supposed design defect while studiously ignoring other features? They’re going to be less biased?

One complaint I read was the claim that the dual engagement points of the P320 sear was a liability because if the striker lug vibrated off the first (for some unknown reason) and the safety lever didn’t stop the striker (for some unknown reason), then when the striker was stopped by the second intercept point, the gun would be “dead” and couldn’t be fired. Okay: Then we have a failure to fire malfunction, and what does any minimally-trained officer do then? Hmmm…. (I’ll leave the answer as an exercise to the student.)

So if the point isn’t clear, SIG shouldn’t have put a second engagement point on the sear to prevent the gun from firing unintentionally because if it gets to that point the gun (supposedly) can’t be fired at all until the striker is reset by manually cycling the slide.

But if we’re going to ask why other guns don’t have the problem, what about has been asked about the P320? Why is it only LEOs whose guns seem to go off by themselves? I suspect the reports are a form of confirmation bias. As an example I’ve used before, if a rookie cop walked into his chief’s office and claimed that his Glock had gone off by itself, he’d be laughed out of the place, if not fired on the spot. Once a product gets a reputation that’s picked up in the popular consciousness, that grows on itself.

“What the hell happened?
“I don’t know why it fired; it just seemed to go off by itself.”
“Yeah, those P320s have that problem. Do a Google search.”
“Hey, chief, everyone else is having the same problem. It wasn’t anything I did.”

Ultimately, though, if we believe a P320 can discharge without its trigger being pulled, how is that possible? Explain, step by mechanical step how the internal safety features can be defeated without that’s being done. No, “Well, anything possible,” “I’m not smart enough to understand it myself, but a guy who claims to be a mechanical engineer says it can happen,” “Gremlins who hate SIG and love Glock.” None of that: an actual explanation. (I keep waiting.)

What was responsible for the other reported incidents? I don’t know, but as with many other mysteries in life, the lack of an explanation isn’t an explanation. When they can be explained on the basis of the gun’s design which I have examined carefully myself, then I’ll be convinced.

Yea, I totally disagree victorlouis. Sig was spot on in their response. The fact that you are ok with candy coating the gun wasn’t even fucking holstered is telling. Say that out loud and see if we take you seriously. “The gun wasn’t in the holster”. Plus they are right, all those WML holsters by necessity have a big ass hole to allow the WML to fit. I’m just your average dumbass but even I can see that this isn’t a good compromise in a gun/holster combo.

The PD in question didn’t do ANYTHING right. They immediately blamed the gun. Ignored the holster. Immediately bought new guns like that will solve this idiotic training issue. Ignored the safety features being bypassed. Ignored this ignoramus not holstering his gun. Probably to avoid a lawsuit which they won’t avoid because now everybody can basically see it was that single officers fault. Not the gun, not the holster, the guy. Do we need to go back to leather thumb breaks again?

Let me ask you- do you think this would have happened in the pistol had been a Glock? Everything else exactly the same, but a Glock instead of a P320.

Partially-cocked striker instead of fully-cocked, and the trigger dingus. What happens then?

If your answer is 'no' or 'probably not', then the pistol is a factor, is it not?

The holster in this instance appears to be Safariland 7-series with the ALS/SLS locking system. The item that SIG references in the their press release as part of the holster's security system( and seems copied almost verbatim from a Yankee Marshal youtube video) is actually a TQ mounted to the leading edge of the holster. Regardless if the ALS bale and/or optics hood was open or closed has no bearing on how the firearm sits in the holster.

I've used the exact same setup ( only for a G45MOS w/RMR) for some time now. The pistol is sitting in the holster as it should.I can't tell you what caused that pistol to discharge, but in this instance it isn't the holster, it's security features or how the pistol was seated in the holster.

I see it asked all the time.
Why is it just P320 having all these ND issues and associated lawsuits ?
There are more Glocks in the wild, why don't we see Glock with all the ND's ?

I contend :

1) Well, it's not just P320 - I found some recent Glock ND issues and a class action for unsupported chambers (KABOOM)
But I didn't see the outrage as with the P320 ND's nor did I find the volume of ND's with other brands.
2) SIG arrogance - yes, the record would indicate this
Not offering a MS safety option
Not using a trigger shoe dingus
Not doing a full-blown safety recall (for the drop safe issue)
3) So many LEO's reporting ND's - these are pros - it must be the gun !
Some depts have no P320 issues, yet others are a mess
4) Lawyer-created myth of spontaneous discharge - this gun is a menace to society !
No other gun has ever had that accusation that I know of - creates intrigue in court of public opinion
5) The US Military has this pistol - SIG has armed our military and police forces with an unsafe pistol !
6) Anti-gun "news oulets" stoking the Get SIG fire with their slanted reporting

quote:

Originally posted by DirectDrive:
I see it asked all the time.
Why is it just P320 having all these ND issues and associated lawsuits ?
There are more Glocks in the wild, why don't we see Glock with all the ND's ?

I contend :

1) Well, it's not just P320 - I found some recent Glock ND issues and a class action for unsupported chambers (KABOOM)
But I didn't see the outrage as with the P320 ND's nor did I find the volume of ND's with other brands.
2) SIG arrogance - yes, the record would indicate this
Not offering a MS safety option
Not using a trigger shoe dingus
Not doing a full-blown safety recall (for the drop safe issue)
3) So many LEO's reporting ND's - these are pros - it must be the gun !
Some depts have no P320 issues, yet others are a mess
4) Lawyer-created myth of spontaneous discharge - this gun is a menace to society !
No other gun has ever had that accusation that I know of - creates intrigue in court of public opinion
5) The US Military has this pistol - SIG has armed our military and police forces with an unsafe pistol !
6) Anti-gun "news oulets" stoking the Get SIG fire with their slanted reporting

My responses:

When Glock came on the law enforcement scene in the 1980's and early 1990's, the internet wasn't a thing, at least nowhere near it is in the form it is today. I recall reading in the Washington Post about a number of Glock negligent discharges by D.C. Police. The were one of the first departments to adopt the Glock.

I believe the pistol used by the U.S. Military has a manual safety which could be preventing the occurrences we are seeing in law enforcement circles.

When Glock first hit the market, there were quite a number of unintended discharges. Three different departments around my agency had cops shoot themselves with Glocks. One agency was in a foot chase and shot a teenage car thief in the back, killing him, which was attributed to "sympathetic reflex" when the cop grabbed the kid from behind with his finger on the trigger. All these incidents were right after the PDs went from revolvers to Glocks. A Detective in my department shot himself in the hand with his new Glock. While seated in the squad room! And you may recall that early design Glock mags had easily dislodged base plates. Cops were snagging the base plates on seat belts and car doors. The magazine would then empty itself.
Why did all these incidents not spell doom for Glock? Our society was less lawsuit happy then. The media was less tainted and of course there was no internet.
The Glock Rep visited my department and my command staff was, of course, dazzled by the marketing and the offer of a killer trade in deal for our duty S&W 686s. The brass came to me and asked what it would take to make it happen. I told them to buy 300,000 rounds and assign each officer to me for 14 days for training to draw and move with absolute trigger discipline. And buy and mandate the use of a high security holster. That killed the deal. As time went on, we went with DAO S&W 4043s, which were awful and Qual scores with them took a nose dive. We dumped the Smiths quick and then went with the P229. And stayed with them for 15 years. About 5 years ago, the department bought... Glocks.
And I do feel the trigger "safety" feature of the Glock makes it more resistant to unintended discharge.
Last fun fact: The son in law of a friend was killed when he put a loaded Glock with an uncovered trigger into a backpack along with other items after a range session. He dropped the backpack onto the floor of his apartment and something inside the pack activated the trigger and the gun discharged, striking him in the head.
It's simple: Striker fired guns, regardless of design, need to be stored, handled and holstered with a greater degree of caution than other types of handguns.

Question about the military's use of the P320: Many of my contemporaries who were issued a pistol in the military in the 1911/Beretta have told me they often were instructed to carry the pistol in condition 3. When a 320 is being issued out in today's military, are they fully loaded with a round in the chamber? If they aren't, that plus a manual safety might be why we don't see this issue in the military. Also, although the military has bought many thousands of these pistols, how many are actually being carried on the daily?

There was a retired deputy/helo pilot that worked part time in my old LGS. Nice guy I always enjoyed talking to him. He quite unashamedly told me if his ND. He stuck his Glock up into his duty bag, noholster, and the antenna of his radio caught in the trigger @nd put a hole through his bag. No harm, no body found out about it. Striker guns need a bit different care and feeding routine so to speak. The lack of dingus and pull length makes the 320 more susceptible to these events. Glock is not immune just less susceptible. A Beretta 92 is even less susceptible. Lol

I can’t speak to the military part exactly but I can add this. I believe the days of giving empty guns or unloaded chambers is a thing of the past. My Lcpl son stands duty occasionally at a tiny backwoods base and they are full mag and chambered round with their M4’s. I suspect the same is true of the pistols but I don’t know that for sure.

quote:

Originally posted by sw4566:
Question about the military's use of the P320: Many of my contemporaries who were issued a pistol in the military in the 1911/Beretta have told me they often were instructed to carry the pistol in condition 3. When a 320 is being issued out in today's military, are they fully loaded with a round in the chamber? If they aren't, that plus a manual safety might be why we don't see this issue in the military. Also, although the military has bought many thousands of these pistols, how many are actually being carried on the daily?

1988: we carried the 1911 with an empty chamber per policy(while doing law enforcement with the USCG)
1990: issued the M9, policy said we were to carry with it loaded and the safety on safe, so you could flip the safety up while drawing.
2006: CG goes to the SigP229 .40DAK, carried loaded
Present day: USCG has received deliver of the Glock 19MOS for use, currently being distributed to the units. Same policy-loaded

quote:

Originally posted by MikeinNC:

quote:

Originally posted by sw4566:
Question about the military's use of the P320: Many of my contemporaries who were issued a pistol in the military in the 1911/Beretta have told me they often were instructed to carry the pistol in condition 3. When a 320 is being issued out in today's military, are they fully loaded with a round in the chamber? If they aren't, that plus a manual safety might be why we don't see this issue in the military. Also, although the military has bought many thousands of these pistols, how many are actually being carried on the daily?

1988: we carried the 1911 with an empty chamber per policy(while doing law enforcement with the USCG)
1990: issued the M9, policy said we were to carry with it loaded and the safety on safe, so you could flip the safety up while drawing.
2006: CG goes to the SigP229 .40DAK, carried loaded
Present day: USCG has received deliver of the Glock 19MOS for use, currently being distributed to the units. Same policy-loaded

Thanks! That provides some good insight.

quote:

Originally posted by sw4566:
Question about the military's use of the P320: Many of my contemporaries who were issued a pistol in the military in the 1911/Beretta have told me they often were instructed to carry the pistol in condition 3. When a 320 is being issued out in today's military, are they fully loaded with a round in the chamber? If they aren't, that plus a manual safety might be why we don't see this issue in the military. Also, although the military has bought many thousands of these pistols, how many are actually being carried on the daily?

Depends on the duty position, location, etc. MPs on the road carry with weapon fully loaded.

The reason for no manual safety is that the change to Glocks and similar pistols over the last 30 years has created an entire narrative about how a manual safety can get you killed because you will forget to deactivate it under stress and will only have enough motor control to pull a trigger.

Yet I have seen no actual evidence to support the claim that people carrying pistols with manual safeties "forgot" to deactivate them and subsequently were unable to fire their pistol when drawn. And this is with many decades of real word evidence of carry pistols with safeties. I'm not saying the evidence doesn't exist, only that after seeing many arguments against safeties, I have never seen supporting evidence presented.

My Self Defense 320's have safeties - Two M17 Bravos, and a Compact MS. The safety is intuitively placed and easily deactivate by a proper firing grip, and essentially the same as a 1911. Range-only guns don't have safeties.

But the travel and weight of a 320 trigger is about the same as a cocked classic Sig or 3rd Generation S&W. For as long as we worried about decocking to DA, safeties on SAO, True DAO, or even the P7 squeeze cocker, we are now fully comfortable with fully cocked striker pistols with 5 lb triggers because they have no visible hammer.