quote:

Originally posted by pedropcola:


I have deleted more typed responses on this thread than I have in a long time. Back to decaf.

Many times, if you read a post from me, it’s the 3rd, 4th or 5th attempt at it. Many times I post something, reread it and ask myself “is it even worth it?” And delete it with no comment.

I was a people person until people got involved.

quote:

Originally posted by jljones:
Many times, if you read a post from me, it’s the 3rd, 4th or 5th attempt at it. Many times I post something, reread it and ask myself “is it even worth it?” And delete it with no comment.

You just described my posting here to a "T".

That’s why my post count is so low

Oh, my.

While we're waiting to hear from 'The True Authority' here's some historical words from Bruce Gray re: the P320...

Originally posted on August 09, 2018 in this thread --> https://sigforum.com/eve/forum...100045544#2100045544

quote:

Originally posted by Grayguns:
The P320 is now the most thoroughly engineered, revised, tested and proven-reliable service pistol system in history. Don’t even talk to me about anything else in that realm because nobody else has put their products through the wringer like SIG (and their humble associates) have.

It is a completely confirmed fact that despite however much testing they did and how thoroughly engineered, revised, tested and proven-reliable service pistol system in history it was, and the testing the gov't pistol trials did, and the beta testers did that the P320 was not drop safe. Bruce's comments don't negate that. So it had at least one flaw. So Sig fixed it. yea it was an odd circumstance and every new gun has teething issues, so no big deal really. But the whole point of this thread there is some chance that a similar fault exists. I have read all the suits and personally believe that these are all user induced discharges, but that's just me. Just because Bruce opined in 2018 does not negate the possibility there is a flaw. The suit requests for a mandatory safety are just legal posturing IMO.

^^^Sooo, what are you saying...That since at one time there was the existence of a 'flaw' completely unrelated to ANY potential 'accidental discharge', that forever more there is some chance of a possibility there is a flaw?

And, for the record, Bruce Gray's comments were made a year AFTER the Voluntary Upgrade!

Regarding the 'whole point of this thread', the OP asked about the function of the Manual Safety of the M17. Later the thread drifted into 6+ pages of Mental Masturbation re: why people continue to shoot themselves with the P320. Included were numerous posts from quasi-experts, as if those posting here were some sort of special committee formed to generate a report to SIG recommending design changes to finally make the P320 'safe'!

All that said you are spot on that that 'these are all user induced discharges'!

quote:

Infringed

posted December 31, 2022 10:28 PM Hide Post
^^^Sooo, what are you saying...That since at one time there was the existence of a 'flaw' completely unrelated to ANY potential 'accidental discharge', that forever more there is some chance of a possibility there is a flaw?

And, for the record, Bruce Gray's comments were made a year AFTER the Voluntary Upgrade!

Regarding the 'whole point of this thread', the OP asked about the function of the Manual Safety of the M17. Later the thread drifted into 6+ pages of Mental Masturbation re: why people continue to shoot themselves with the P320. Included were numerous posts from quasi-experts, as if those posting here were some sort of special committee formed to generate a report to SIG recommending design changes to finally make the P320 'safe'!

All that said you are spot on that that 'these are all user induced discharges'!

Well,the answer to “Why people keep shooting themselves with the 320?” really is kind of central to answering his initial question as to whether a manual safety will protect him from these unintended discharges. If as I believe, that the overwhelming majority of these discharges are due to something exerting pressure on the trigger, then the answer is, yes a manual safety will afford you some protection. If on the contrary, the underlying cause is something mechanical such as a goobered safety lever spring combined with crossed sear springs that could apparently occur with some of the pre mid 2019 models, then the answer would be no, a manual safety would not provide any protection against that.

To return to the original question (sort of), time was when one of the many firearms safety rules was that manual firing inhibitors (aka “safeties”) should never be relied upon to absolutely prevent an unintended discharge. Do they provide an extra margin of safety: yes. Do they usually work: yes. Do they eliminate the need for proper gun handling: no.

Then there was the long-ago philosophy that giving pilots parachutes would make them more likely to let their expensive planes crash rather than doing everything possible to save them. A friend was told by her tech-savvy son that protective bump cases on smart phones were unnecessary because they just encouraged people to be more careless in how they handled them. And have we ever heard someone say about a gun, “Don’t worry, the safety is on,” or “It’s unloaded”? If someone believes that using a gun safety eliminates the need for proper handling, then he shouldn’t be allowed to have a gun at all.

That said, I nevertheless would want a parachute if I were a military pilot, I have a protective case on my phone, and I use safeties if the guns have them. But my P320s don’t have them. Now.

SIG Mechanics is exploring the process of converting P320 receivers to accept manual safeties, and depending upon what he finds and how difficult the process turns out to be, that might be something I’d do. Manual safeties do have potential drawbacks, and I probably wouldn’t want one if I were a uniformed LEO carrying the weapon in a good duty holster. For me and the way I carry, however, they would provide a bit of extra peace of mind, and it’s something I will consider.

Since I carry and prefer a DA/SA pistol with a decoct only and no safety I personally don't want a safety on my P320... just confuses me...

I think the biggest problem we have with the public's persecution of gun safety is the average persons and I mean most gun owners handling of firearms.... it is hard not to 'sweep' when handling a gun... I see it constantly .... and have even been caught at it myself after over 200 hours of formal training...

I teach a short simple class once a year on firearms safety and point out to the folks in the class that the best thing about the four rules is you actually have to break two of them for a bad thing to happen.

quote:

Originally posted by Blume9mm:
I teach a short simple class once a year on firearms safety and point out to the folks in the class that the best thing about the four rules is you actually have to break two of them for a bad thing to happen.

As an instructor myself, I would be leery of explicitly stating that to such a class. Knowing what I do about human nature, I would expect some to think, “No worries about that one. I’m following the other ‘three.’” Once we’re in the habit of breaking one rule, breaking another becomes much easier.

quote:

SIG Mechanics is exploring the process of converting P320 receivers to accept manual safeties, and depending upon what he finds and how difficult the process turns out to be, that might be something I’d do.

Hasn't this already been figured out? There are places offering to do the conversion but cutting out the indent on the FCU to install the safety.
AB Prototype is one of them. There is a guy on Gunbroker that does it as well.

I personally think (a dangerous activity, I admit) that ALL of these unintended discharges were user-induced in some form. Whether any of them actually involved their hand{s} being anywhere close to the trigger bow however remains to be seen.

I recall SIG had once cited that improper non-P320 specific holsters being used by certain LE departments was a root cause early on in the discharge debate. I also recall there was once a bodycam video of an unintended discharge happening when an officer was initially giving chase to a suspect in his cruiser, but was about to proceed on foot as the suspect abandoned his getaway car. The discharge occurred as the officer was about to extract himself out of his cruiser, during the moment when his body was turning towards the door. In the video (which most inconveniently I can't find anymore), the RH'ed officer's 'trigger' hand was nowhere close to the gun when the gun discharged. The accompanying article described a hole in the cruiser's floor was the result, and I clearly heard the officer's surprised exclamation after his P320 went off ("WTF" or "WTH"...I don't exactly remember which).

The time frame of this post and video was during the period of time when SIG was generally claiming the fault for these discharges was due to the use of non-P320 holsters, which apparently ISN'T a thing with this latest spate of unintended discharges.

Admittedly I've long wondered about SIG's strategy of not using some sort of inertia block linkage directly on the trigger bow ala Glock (or Springfield at the time), since they first showed the P320 at SHOT with both flavors, one with a trigger 'safety' and one in the config that they ultimately went to. I also long figured SIG chose what they chose because they DIDN'T want to look like they were copying their intended chief rival, Glock. However that was back around 2014 (I think), and as the market has since shown the so-called "Glock Way" is what just about every other major gun manufacturer has done with their own newly minted striker-fired pistols, from CZ to Walther. About the only other striker gun I can immediately think of that doesn't use some sort of trigger bow locking mechanism is Bersa's BP9, definitely a minor player in this end of the market. Hmm...maybe everyone else (the manufacturers) knows something that SIG doesn't, or at least refuses to acknowledge?

What I DO know is that the Glock system is simple, in both design and implementation. SIG's fix for their drop-safe issue is clearly less so. That the Glock Way also has the benefit of better (though not entirely) keeping the gun from going off with an edge snag of the trigger bow is a definite plus...for Glock and all of the rest who also went down that particular rabbit hole. The P320 and P365 can't make that claim, no matter how how anyone likes their trigger and considers it superior (in pull, at least) to that of a Glock although I will contend that both Walther and Canik, who both use the Glock Way, have trigger actions that are superior in feel and action to the SIG's.

We all are fully aware that the vast majority of LE officers and military personnel carry their sidearms open, whereas us civilians carry concealed, primarily IWB. I'm wondering if by carrying IWB, that form of carrying restricts the amount of potential motion of the firearm enough that extraneous bumps and twists of the carrier's body won't cause their P320 to potentially shift around in its holster, especially as the holster flexes with age and use. I know I've CRACKED AND BROKEN Kydex/rigid holsters in the past, and that with any rigid holster that uses screws as part of its retention strategy have had those very same screws back out over time, causing an increasing amount of 'looseness' to the retention to occur. However to my very human brain, the actual perception of this loosening isn't particularly noticeable since it happens so gradually over time. With my latest holster, a Stealthgear Revolution, its loosening became only apparent as its screws that holds the Kydex to the hybrid backer were backed out to a point and were then loose enough to turn with a fingernail. Before that, I hadn't even noticed just how loose the retention had become, simply because it was so slow and gradual at getting to that point.

Then a similar thing happened after I made the checking of the holster's fasteners a regular thing, when the Kydex developed a small crack at one of the folds in the material, and increased the looseness in retention as the crack grew in size rather quickly. This one was on me, because I apparently failed to notice the crack early on and chalked up the loosening happening to one or two of the screws also backing out again at the same time.

However since I carry a Glock, apparently I don't have to worry quite as much as I might otherwise if I carried a bulkier P320. But again it would have been with IWB carry, and so I reiterate whether that form of carry where the gun is somewhat firmly up against the carrier's body restricts the potential motions enough of the gun, even while it's in a failing holster.

Anyways that's MY miscellaneous ramblings for this day. Do with it as you will, or just ignore it; I'm good with it either way. But while I at it, I also think that as much as some want to blame SIG Sauer for these issues, I do believe that ALL holster makers who make gear for the P320 and P365 ALSO need to at least somewhat worry about whether their designs and products over time may become that 'root cause' of the unintendedly discharging. I'd bet that their collective rainy day funds are nowhere close to being as big as SIG's.

One final thing: I have noticed that when proofing my texts, I tend to uses commas A LOT. Hmm, I'll have to keep an eye on that...

EDIT: I've also noticed that my brain thoughts move much faster than my typing speed. Apologies for any missing words that you might come across. Another thing to watch for, I guess...

That will work 100% of the time with folks who are 100% infallible.

Many things are inherently dangerous when one does not respect ALL of the appropriate safety precautions re: use/handling, or they do stupid things! Some people shouldn't use chainsaws, or steak knives, or drive fast cars lest they hurt themselves or others. Firearms are no different, especially 'single action' firearms! Just sayin'...

I agree. Proper firearm handling will always be the primary safety mechanism to prevent NDs. But, for those of us who are fallible, some additional safety mechanisms are a welcome addition.

quote:

Originally posted by jljones:

quote:

Originally posted by pedropcola:


I have deleted more typed responses on this thread than I have in a long time. Back to decaf.

Many times, if you read a post from me, it’s the 3rd, 4th or 5th attempt at it. Many times I post something, reread it and ask myself “is it even worth it?” And delete it with no comment.

I was a people person until people got involved.

Yep, normal procedure, I'd have 50,000+ posts if it wasn't for pondering the "is it worth it" question regarding the value of engaging on some posts

OK, let's make a list of all the members who hold back on posting because we idiots are getting on your last nerve.

It's gotta be tough, huh? And you're susceptible to carpal tunnel syndrome because of all that face-palming you do.

We've got a few members on the list already. Who else wants to be included? The least we can do is to acknowledge the great burden you guys shoulder and the sacrifices you make, living amongst half-wits.

I feel like I am at least a 3/4Wit.