quote:

There’s the one story and video with the guy whose testicle was shot off that claims it was in an appendix carried IWB holster. I’d like to read the results of whatever investigation there was in that one. For example, what kind of holster? Was it really a P320? Did he really have a holster? We just get a video reporting to be something, but there’s nothing to back it up.

According to the article I read, that guy wasn't even using a holster. The outcome was predictable.

https://www.cambridgeday.com/2...-first-of-two-cases/

quote:

A Boston federal court jury found Wednesday that guns bought by the Cambridge Police Department for officers in 2018 – and replaced this year in a controversial decision – were designed defectively and that the faulty design caused injuries to a patrol officer. But the jury did not award damages to the officer, Jacques Desrosiers, for the horrific injuries he suffered when his gun fired accidentally, because jurors decided he used his weapon “unreasonably.”

Desrosiers was carrying his Sig Sauer P320 gun under his belt, without a holster, when it went off while he was adjusting its position without touching the trigger, his suit said. The shot caused severe wounds. The jury decided against the New Hampshire gun maker on three issues: The Sig Sauer P320 gun had a defective design; the defective design caused Desrosiers to be hurt; and the company failed to give adequate warning of the design flaws.

Jurors went on, though, to agree with the company’s defense that the lack of adequate warnings did not cause the officer to get hurt. They also found that Desrosiers used the gun despite “knowing that it was defective and dangerous and was injured as a result.” These findings meant that the jury did not award damages as a matter of law.

I just don’t see a reason for the MSP members to try to exaggerate or “cover things up.” I think I can state fairly confidently that no cop is going to get in trouble if they had a key near their holster and the gun went off. Even if that were the case and I’m in no way conceding that it was, so what - the cop is NOT going to get in trouble for it. They were in no way acting reckless and I highly doubt that having a key near your holster violated any sort of policy.

Also in the interest of fairness, I’ll say that the fact that the FBI was able to get the 320 to fire in the holster when a key got in there would be enough, in and of itself, for me to forbid the use of the 320 for an LEO if I were the chief or other decision maker for an agency. I don’t see any of my Glocks, 1911s, Staccatos or any other duty type pistol I own firing in that scenario. In a life and death situation, I don’t expect anyone - cop or not, military or not, whomever, to act with the same strict adherence to firearms safety as you would expect at an IDPA or USPSA match. If a pistol is so intolerant of less than perfect handling then it has no place in a police officer or soldier’s holster.

quote:

If a pistol is so intolerant of less than perfect handling then it has no place in a police officer or soldier’s holster.

Doesn't matter how many times this is stated or how obvious it is to some of us.
Sig is going to die on a hill called P320.

quote:

Originally posted by Lt CHEG:
If a pistol is so intolerant of less than perfect handling then it has no place in a police officer or soldier’s holster.

Agreed and this conclusion is not predicated on having to prove what no one has been able to prove.

I’m not saying the MSP folks were trying to cover anything up at all or had any reason to. If that’s what they said, they may very well believe it which is why I brought up my Rapala to the neck story. Just like the airman story, we don’t have all the information. It seems clear to me the MSP was satisfied with the results of investigation they did to continue and complete transitioning to the P320. I can’t imagine they concluded the gun just went off, decided no big deal, and carried on like nothing happened.

As far as the other claims, like the class action suit, I’d definitely put money on most of those being people willing to say anything for their big pay day, cover their asses, or whatever. Look at the guy in Tampa: Northrop. Proven in court that what he claimed happened did not happen. Also has a history of suing people. Or the guy who won $11,000,000 now down to only $1,000,000 because the $10,000,000 in punitive damages were vacated. The guy had it unholstered in a pocket of his athletic pants as he was going down some stairs and admitted the trigger got pulled.

quote:

Originally posted by 92fstech:
According to the article I read, that guy wasn't even using a holster. The outcome was predictable.

But that’s not what the internet said. Pages about 17-20 in this thread even. The story was posted as an example of a P320 that just went off, but yet again, additional information proves that wrong.

quote:

Originally posted by trapper189:
But that’s not what the internet said. Pages about 17-20 in this thread even. The story was posted as an example of a P320 that just went off, but yet again, additional information proves that wrong.

Yep. So far the three lawsuits that Sig has lost have all been about people doing things that would be generally considered unsafe by any reasonable person with a basic understanding of how guns work. Play stupid games win stupid prizes. Guns are dangerous and if you don't handle them with appropriate care, the consequences should be entirely on you.

These three lawsuits prove nothing about actual mechanical defects in the P320 design (every lawsuit to date that has attempted to do that has failed)...but they're starting an alarming pattern of allowing the government to dictate specific firearms design features through civil litigation. For some reason a large portion of the gun community seems to be overjoyed about this. I think a lot of people are missing the bigger picture because of their desire to stick it to Sig.

Explain to me how Sig can include a POS holster like this, with a gaping hole large enough to drive a truck through, believes this is safe but a Safariland duty holster is not? No telling how many of these are out there. With all the finger pointing by Sig, you would think they would look in the mirror first. It's not even a light bearing holster for God's sake. Maybe they believe keys, pens, shirt tails, seat belts, etc.,etc. getting caught in holsters only happen to folks in Law Enforcement.


Even the cheapest paddle holsters on the planet do a better job of covering the trigger than the ones Sig includes with some of their dingus and manual safety free pistols.

quote:

Originally posted by Jupiter:
With all the finger pointing by Sig, you would think they would look in the mirror first.

And that right there is the reason many in the gun community "seem to be overjoyed"
It's Sig gaslighting that most in the gun community take issue with.

If Sig appears to accept any responsibility or remotely acknowledges a possible issue, they can kiss the .mil contract goodbye. It's all about the $$$$.
Ethics are a thing for some of us.

Meanwhile in DC ARNG will be carrying their M17's. Likely in Condition 3.
if not what could go wrong? - Murphy

quote:

And that right there is the reason many in the gun community "seem to be overjoyed"
It's Sig gaslighting that most in the gun community take issue with.

So maybe they're assholes. I'm not disagreeing with that. They've certainly behaved as such on more than one occasion. And yes, those factory-provided holsters Jupiter posted are garbage and I'm pretty sure I've thrown a couple away. However, I don't know of any lawsuits or NDs related to those holster designs specifically.

My point is are we doing more harm than good by bringing the courts into this? I understand people are mad. But is the satisfaction of seeing Sig get smacked around in court worth the potential consequence of putting the government in a position to dictate what features are or aren't included in any future handgun design? That's how you get stuff like the "California Compliant" list.

Anybody who's pulled the trigger on a P320 knows what it takes to make that happen. It's not a secret and doesn't require any deep knowledge of the internal workings of the gun to understand that. If you're going to carry one, it's on you to make sure that only happens when you want it to. That includes knowing the limitations of your holster, and not letting foreign objects come into contact with the trigger.

quote:

Originally posted by 92fstech:
However, I don't know of any lawsuits or NDs related to those holster designs specifically.

If you go by Sig's own rhetoric regarding foreign object access to the trigger, these holsters are dangerous and should be recalled. This is the only P320 holster I own. After evaluating the pistol, it wasn't worth upgrading to something better.

Oh they're assholes alright.
Look into some of the employee complaints. Quite eye-opening.

Blackwater, you need to stop with the insults against SIG. This kind of thing accomplishes nothing useful.

Just what exactly is the problem? Tell me, please. Why, out of all the people in this forum, do you stand out as having such a problem with SIG-Sauer?

Specifically, what are the causes for this attitude of yours on the subject? I think that at this point, I have a right to know. There have to be specific reasons for your hatred of the company.

Specifics, please

quote:

They also found that Desrosiers used the gun despite “knowing that it was defective and dangerous and was injured as a result.” These findings meant that the jury did not award damages as a matter of law.

Sig can run with that for years…

“Oh, you shot yourself with a P320? Sorry, a court has found that you should have known the gun was defective and dangerous…”

That’s a bad place to be.

quote:

Originally posted by Blackwater:
Oh they're assholes alright.
Look into some of the employee complaints. Quite eye-opening.

I have never had a problem with Sig Sauer and have dealt with them since 1990. Even when I have needed parts for discontinued models, they have suggested sources that could help me.

One time I needed a de-cocking lever spring for a P232 (after they were discontinued and before I discovered “Jack First”). Customer service contacted their custom shop and (I was told) fabricated a new one which they gave me for free. Fifteen years later, I am still using that pistol.

I just bought a used P320 Compact 9mm made in 2022. I cleaned it (learning a lot about this model) re-assembled it, and can not wait to get to the range with it. Admittedly I do not plan on using it as my EDC at this time, but it seems like a really nice weapon. I support Sig Sauer with all their efforts to resolve the issues with the use of this P320 pistol family.

Trooper Joe

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.

Tell me, please.

The evidence of gaslighting is obvious and the examples are too numerous to count.

Sig violations of ITAR and illegal shipment of arms is an example of questionable ethics.
That clear enough for you on why I have my opinion?

quote:

Originally posted by Blackwater:
That clear enough for you on why I have my opinion?

You need to cool your jets. It's your opinion alright, but you keep sticking it in this thread with what amounts to a tantrum. If you had expressed it once, twice, thrice - no problem, but you keep hammering away at it and I have spent more than enough time dealing with your constant complaint about SIG. I'm the last person around here you need to be pulling this "I have the right to my opinion" shit. Try acknowledging that I've had to come back to this with you more than once, instead of stating the obvious.

You're welcome to continue participating in this thread, but your comments need to be substantive. You have made your personal feelings about SIG crystal clear, and there is no reason to state them any further.

quote:

Originally posted by PASig:
Air Force command returns M18 pistols to service after force-wide inspections

Excerpts:

…"a month after one of the guns killed an airman”…

Literally and figuratively: the bottom line:

““A review of weapon discharges in [Air Force Global Strike Command] showed that none were attributed to weapons malfunction,” the command said in the statement announcing the return of the pistols to service."

I sent IDPA the Task and Purpose story page. If they can inspect thousands of pistols and find no issues, maybe this data will help IDPA return the P320 to competition.

I know, fear of litigation drives behavior more than facts.

The IDPA sent back the same e-mail they sent to me earlier. No change. They continue to be risk averse, in spite of the inspections by the AF and the return of the pistol to service.