If I ever have an unintended discharge with any of my handguns I will claim it is because they were stored in the same safe as my 320. Then I will of course file a lawsuit.

quote:

Originally posted by sigfreund:
An unintentional discharge with a P320 was, ipso facto, the fault of the gun.
An unintentional discharge with any other firearm was the fault of the gun handler.
Nothing more needs to be known or said.

Please show us some data where Glocks are discharging (in the holster) at a rate anywhere close to the P320.

Even ICE reported an almost 500% increase in unintentional discharges after switching from the Glock to the P320.

"Internal documents from Immigration Customs Enforcement provide that unintended discharges skyrocketed when it switched its primary weapon from a Glock to the P320, with the P320 accounting for a nearly 500% increase in unintended discharges."

Yes, and the Los Angeles Sheriff’s Department experienced a 500% increase in negligent discharges when they switched from the Beretta 92 to the S&W M&P.

Whose fault was that? The people handling the guns or the guns?

The Beretta 92 was a double action pistol with a long heavy first shot. When agencies switched to striker fired pistols, there was a learning curve. In the case of ICE, they were already using striker fired pistols.
Beretta 92s also didn't have a reputation of firing in the holster.

quote:

Originally posted by Jupiter:

quote:

Originally posted by sigfreund:
An unintentional discharge with a P320 was, ipso facto, the fault of the gun.
An unintentional discharge with any other firearm was the fault of the gun handler.
Nothing more needs to be known or said.

Please show us some data where Glocks are discharging (in the holster) at a rate anywhere close to the P320.

Please show us some data where actual facts indicate that holstered P320 pistols are discharging without the trigger being pulled, OR even indicate that is possible!
I'll wait...

quote:

Originally posted by nhracecraft:

quote:

Originally posted by Jupiter:

quote:

Originally posted by sigfreund:
An unintentional discharge with a P320 was, ipso facto, the fault of the gun.
An unintentional discharge with any other firearm was the fault of the gun handler.
Nothing more needs to be known or said.

Please show us some data where Glocks are discharging (in the holster) at a rate anywhere close to the P320.

Please show us some data where actual facts indicate that holstered P320 pistols are discharging without the trigger being pulled, OR even indicate that is possible!
I'll wait...

Did you ever see me say anything about the P320 discharging without the trigger being pulled?
It's become obvious the only way to stop these fragile triggers from being pulled is to encase them in stainless steel, air and water tight containers. It seems to be the only handgun on the planet with this issue.

I've never really been in the camp that thinks P320s are going off on their own. IMO, the trigger system just doesn't have enough margin of safety for a duty weapon and the incidents we are seeing are reflecting that.

quote:

Originally posted by pedropcola:

I am so sick of your lying bs on this topic.

quote:

Originally posted by pedropcola:

“YouTube 'what if' videos are not what got us here in the first place. The unusually high rate of un-commanded discharges did.”

“So they were firing un-commanded in a holster?”

“We are talking about pistols having un-commanded discharges in a holster. I hope you know the difference between Glock/Sig/M&P leg and what is going on with the P320.”

“It would be great if you could provide some documentation that shows other pistols going off un-commanded in holsters at a rate anywhere close to those involving the P320”

If something causes the pistol to fire without the user intentionally pulling the trigger, that is a un-commanded discharge.
Keys, Pens, seatbelts, you name it. Because this is not happening with other models, the trigger needs to be considered.

AI Overview
"An uncommanded discharge is an unintentional firearm discharge that occurs without the user pulling the trigger, often due to mechanical issues or design flaws that allow the firearm to fire under normal movement or stress, separate from user negligence. While sometimes called a mechanical failure, it can also be attributed to a combination of design, wear, or environmental factors, like a pistol discharging in its holster or after being bumped. "

I carefully clean both the sear and striker with a q-tip and degreaser. Our super lubricants are not helping our 320's in this spacific area.

quote:

Originally posted by Jupiter:
It seems to be the only handgun on the planet with this issue.

It isn’t and incidents with other handguns have been posted in this thread.

quote:

Originally posted by Jupiter:
IMO, the trigger system just doesn't have enough margin of safety for a duty weapon and the incidents we are seeing are reflecting that.

And whose fault is that? The gun’s or the user’s? In incidents with other guns, it’s the user’s fault as you pointed out with the LASD’s transition from the Beretta 92 to M&P. You readily excused the issue as a difference in triggers between the two being a training issue. Why does the difference in triggers between a Glock and P320 shift the user’s responsibility to the gun? The gun didn’t pick the user; even in law enforcement agencies across the country that didn’t happen. Nor did the gun chose the holster, chose not to use a holster, or chose to use a weapon mounted light.

Yes, incidents seem to happen more often with P320 users. I’d like to know the actual rate of incidents by user populations. Obviously, it not a difference of 1 incident per 10 guns vs 5 incidents per 10 guns. Is it 1 incident per 10,000 guns vs 5 incidents per 10,000 guns? A 500% increase from .01% to .05%.

quote:

Originally posted by trapper189:
It isn’t and incidents with other handguns have been posted in this thread.

I've yet to see any proof other handguns are discharging inside duty holsters at a rate anywhere close to the P320 in this thread.
Maybe you could post a video montage showing other pistols doing the same thing. Since Glocks have been out much longer and used way more often, there should be a ton of them just like the P320.

quote:

Originally posted by trapper189:
And whose fault is that? The gun’s or the user’s? In incidents with other guns, it’s the user’s fault as you pointed out with the LASD’s transition from the Beretta 92 to M&P. You readily excused the issue as a difference in triggers between the two being a training issue.

You're right. I guess we could add hair triggers to duty weapons and blame the officers if something goes wrong.
No one is excusing anything. I'm merely pointing out how a fully cocked pistol without a grip/manual safety or trigger dingus, with a short relatively light trigger pull is more susceptible to this type of incident. Deep down, you know it is too. So how about you come over for the big win and push Sig to add the dingus and maybe save the platform?

quote:

Originally posted by trapper189:
Yes, incidents seem to happen more often with P320 users.

We wouldn't be here without it.
Enough so that the largest agency in the country ditched it.

You are being ridiculous. Your argument is ridiculous.

If you had an officer come to you who said “my gun just went off because while holstering it I got my keys in the way” what would you call that?

Everyone in the sane world would and historically has called that a NEGLIGENT Discharge (ND). You apparently would pat this guy on the back and say “it’s ok that was an uncommanded discharge, totally different”.

You are making a clearly nonsensical distinction. I think you know it but for some reason can’t just back away from your original position.

People have and continue to have ND’s with Glock style weapons. There just isn’t anybody stupid enough at this point to try and blame it on being “uncommanded”. Sigfreund made that point quite well a page or so up. I made the joke myself that if I had an ND I would pray it was with a 320 because then I could pretend it wasn’t my fault.

Edited to add. I guy a few posts above used the term “unintended discharge”. Once again, a distinction without any relevance. It’s not an unintended discharge it’s an ND. You guys are using non standard terms to lessen the impact of the mistake. It’s called negligence for a reason. You get distracted you weren’t paying enough attention it’s YOUR fault. Not some oops I spilled coffee moment. You shot a gun without thought or responsibility. Negligence. There is no need to add watered down clarifications that don’t change the fact that you allowed your gun to fire through your faulty actions.

quote:

Originally posted by pedropcola:
You are being ridiculous. Your argument is ridiculous.

We're good as long as you don't start quoting Tolstoy.

Hilarious.

I cannot believe the moderators of this great forum do not close this ridiculous thread.

Respectfully submitted,

Trooper Joe

Many of us are looking for factual information on this topic, and this thread is normally good at providing that.

It also keeps this topic from spilling out into other threads.

Sprinkled in the last ten pages I found these quotes. I am not sure whet I am learning about the P320 platform from these. If anything, they sort of create a “block” from actual learning.

1) You are being ridiculous. Your argument is ridiculous.

2) Hate is a strong word.
I don't like their lack of ethics and gaslighting.
Don't play games with me.
I asked you for specifics. Three times in my post, I asked you for specifics.
Now, I've tried reasoning with you, and I've tried admonishing you, and you keep doing the same thing. I have earned the right for a straight and clear answer from you, with specifics.

3) Intellectual dishonesty. That’s what this thread is full of.

4) You watch your fucking mouth. Don't you ever disparage this forum or its members.

5) For the THIRD FUCKING TIME...Just in case you missed it!

I still think this forum is too good for these kinds of statements.

TJ

And I think you are too sensitive. A couple of those comments were mine. I stand by them. If you tell an outright lie, a complete untruth, then you deserve to be called out for it.

^^ I claim #5...AND it was ENTIRELY Justified.

And to be clear, the member that the quote/post was directed at had actually ignored that specific info that was being posted for the third time on two previous occasions. That individual had posted on the same page as the two previous postings, and as 'pedropcola' indicates, if people are going to intentionally ignore factual info that contradicts the conjecture (hate?) they're promulgating in order to promote a false narrative, they deserve to be called out for it!

Well you have always been problematic nhracecraft. lol

Did you ever sell your dad's house down here?