^Thank you for your input, I guess we'll agree to disagree. Yes, both can go bang, but I still contend it's a matter of degree of likelihood. With a huge population size, it becomes a matter of statistical probability, and even a small difference can be an issue.

quote:

Originally posted by kkina:
^Thank you for your input, I guess we'll agree to disagree. Yes, both can go bang, but I still contend it's a matter of degree of likelihood. With a huge population size, it becomes a matter of statistical probability, and even a small difference can be an issue.

I'm not an expert, gunsmith, armorer or speaking for any of my clients. The Glock tab triggers are designed "to protect against firing if the pistol is dropped or the trigger is subjected to lateral pressure."

I think we can say the voluntary upgrades do solve the drop issue at the unique angle. I'm not sure that we can identify any P320 issues specific to lateral pressure. So, I don't think a tab trigger would solve any perceived issue with the P320. (Note the safety on the M17 and M18 was a requirement of the project by the military.)

I think the rare instances where we have seen discharges within the holster are related to external objects that don't belong in the holster getting into the holster. Movement of clothing or movement of the object within a holster pulls the trigger. We seem to have found Canada had issues since they simply elected to skip the "buy the correct accessories for your guns" step in the purchasing process.

Does your "order of safety" or "degree of probability" mentioned in a previous thread consider the accidental discharges at Step 6 of the Field Strip Instructions for a Glock?

When I'm working on the line, I call out trigger finger issues and muzzle discipline. But another big one that makes me stop shooters is T-shirts, pull cords and other stuff that can get in there.

quote:

Does your "order of safety" or "degree of probability" mentioned in a previous thread consider the accidental discharges at Step 6 of the Field Strip Instructions for a Glock?

Sorry, I don't understand what your question means.

The drop safety issue is of course an entirely different problem that appears to be solved.

I still don’t really trust mine, but I have a data point that at least my 320 RXP Xcarry is fairly safe. I carry strong side left handed with a Crossbreed holster. Last January I slipped on the ice and landed hard right on the holster. No issue. I had carried it for about 4 months before that and a few months after. I make sure I wear it crawling under the car to change the oil, working on my motorcycle and while doing lawn work. I still really like a thumb safety and feel twitchy when I change from my 365 with a thumb safety back to my 320. I don’t know why I can’t get my brain to relax on this topic, but I think it’s mostly the chatter on the topic over ruling my experience.

quote:

Does your "order of safety" or "degree of probability" mentioned in a previous thread consider the accidental discharges at Step 6 of the Field Strip Instructions for a Glock?

Sorry, I don't understand what your question means

I think he's talking about the fact that you have to pull the trigger in order to field strip a Glock. Pretty much every agency in our county except for a couple of really small ones have been carrying the P320 for about 5 years now. There have been no NDs with any of those P320s to my knowledge. I do, however, know of two holes in the local county building that were caused in the last 15 years by officers trying to field strip Glocks.

So is the P320 safer than the Glock because it requires you to remove the magazine and lock the slide to the rear before it will let you take it down (and doesn't require a trigger pull to do so)? I mean, just locally I've got two holes where there shouldn't be from Glocks, and none from P320s.

Personally, I don't blame the design of the Glock. It's operator error...do stupid stuff, get stupid results. Just like the guys not exercising proper trigger discipline with their loaded P320s.

I know you have to pull the trigger of a Glock to take it down, and that it sometimes ends in an AD, but that has nothing to do with this specific conversation. When I said that Glocks are relatively safer than some other pistol, I was referring only to inadvertant trigger pulls whilst handling, NOT while field-stripping. Different topic, why bring field-stripping into this?

I didn't, Steve 495 did...but I agree with his point. Both are issues of gun handling, not issues of design. Holstering and takedown are both administrative functions, and an ND in either situation is unacceptable.

The gun is designed to discharge if the trigger is pulled with the slide in battery and a round in the chamber.

If the user shoves the gun into his holster without checking for and clearing any obstructions and one of those obstructions pulls the trigger, the gun is going to go off. That's what it's designed to do. If the user didn't want the gun to go off, he should have made sure the trigger wasn't getting pulled while he re-holstered.

The same goes for the Glock field-stripping scenario. If the user pulls the trigger to take the gun down without first clearing the chamber, it's going to discharge. If the user didn't want the gun to discharge, he should have cleared the chamber before he pulled the trigger.

Both are human failures, not failures of the gun or it's design.

FWIW, Glocks did the snag-on-reholster-shoot-yourself thing, too..."Glock Leg" was a term before the P320 even existed. Poor gun handling has consequences.

ETA: "Glock Leg" definition from Urban Dictionary, dated 2008: https://www.urbandictionary.co...php?term=Glock%20leg

Well, this brings me back to my original point. I never said it wasn't a handling problem vs. a gun design problem. I said it's both. It's careless handling/holstering on a gun that is more prone to inadvertant trigger pulls in the first place, as compared with a half-cock striker gun, namely Glock in this example.

Both. Did I mention it's both?

(And yes, I know it was Steve495 who made the original comment.)

So if I understand your logic, you think that a gun going off when somebody pulls the trigger (either by their finger or some other object that is in the holster) that is a "design" defect?


Saying that a gun is prone to ND's because the trigger will fire a bullet if pulled. Hmmm. Yea, that is a real head scratcher. Any gun suffers from the "problem" of going off if the trigger is pulled and it is loaded.

I know your point is "I said it's both". The problem is the half of your "point" is and I quote, "a gun that is more prone to inadvertent trigger pulls".

That whole sentence is nonsensical. If you pull the trigger that is on the guy behind the trigger. No design in the world can stop a bullet from firing if you "inadvertantly" pull the trigger. That is the very definition of NEGLIGENT discharge. You are very close to saying that an ND is actually the fault of the gun. What?

It's not both. If you pull the trigger that is absolutely 100% on you. We are right back at "it just went off". Nope, you "inadvertantly" pulled the trigger, whatever the fuck that actually means.

So yes, I disagree with your assessment. This is a handling problem.

Would you carry around and/or holster a DA/SA pistol in single-action mode?

I wouldn't and I don't but I don't get how in any way that relates to all of this. The holsters I use for DA/SA guns will insure the trigger isn't pressed when holstered, so I don't see any practical safety difference when holstered. And if some hypothetical law made me carry it that way not really concerning, its when actually handling the gun that it might bother me but that's not the discussion point, so you'll have to help me on this.

quote:

Originally posted by kkina:
Well, this brings me back to my original point. I never said it wasn't a handling problem vs. a gun design problem. I said it's both. It's careless handling/holstering on a gun that is more prone to inadvertant trigger pulls in the first place, as compared with a half-cock striker gun, namely Glock in this example.

Both. Did I mention it's both?

(And yes, I know it was Steve495 who made the original comment.)

Can you tell the difference between a 5lb trigger pull and a 6-7lb trigger pull when you're working the trigger? I imagine that one might be able to when exercising the fine motor skills and concentration required to execpute a proper trigger press with a single finger.

How about when you're inserting the weapon back into your holster? That's a gross motor skill that engages the muscles of your whole hand and arm, and suddenly that 2lb difference becomes a lot less noticeable...I know it would likely be imperceptible to me, even if I was going slow and taking my time.

So when I'm not exercising due regard and something snags my trigger on a reholster, there's no fundamental difference between striker-fired guns. The Glock, the XD, the Walther, the Sig...any one of them will end up going bang, and they've all done it. Many times. Maybe putting your thumb over the hammer on a DA gun with a long trigger pull will give the attentive user enough warning to stop before he sends a round through his leg, and maybe not, but none of the striker platforms offer that option by the nature of their design. The P320 is actually readily available from the factory with a manual safety if the user prefers that configuration, which is more than I can say for the Glock or XD (I think SAI did offer one on the XD at one time, but I've never personally seen one so-equipped). Personally, I won't carry a gun with a manual safety, but the option is there for those who want it.

I have kind of a hybrid view of the whole unintended discharge issue with the P320. I believe there was initially an issue revolving around the fact that prior to mid 2019, the 320 had a safety lever return spring which if it got goobered up could keep the safety lever in the up position, disengaging the striker block.

Additionally, it appears that some pre mid 2019 sears had dimples instead of posts for the sear springs, which apparently could result in the sear springs getting crossed. Current production 320s do not have these. There is a very good thread on Pistol Forum, that goes into great detail regarding this issue.

Having said that, in my humble opinion, I think we are going to ultimately find that the overwhelming majority of the unintended discharges are going to be the result of someone or something exerting pressure on the trigger. It does not take much movement of the trigger to disengage the striker block, and to reach the break. Sig Mechanics did a very good video on how much movement it takes to disengage the striker block and fire the weapon.

I have both a M17 and a M18, and I am very comfortable carrying either. I do like the fact that they both have a manual safety, due to the fact that as I stated before that I believe that most of these UDs are due to something exerting pressure on the trigger, and the manual safety will prevent the trigger from moving should that happen. Just my two cents.

quote:

Originally posted by hrcjon:
I wouldn't and I don't but I don't get how in any way that relates to all of this. The holsters I use for DA/SA guns will insure the trigger isn't pressed when holstered, so I don't see any practical safety difference when holstered. And if some hypothetical law made me carry it that way not really concerning, its when actually handling the gun that it might bother me but that's not the discussion point, so you'll have to help me on this.

Good morning forum. Hope you had a wonderful Christmas.

What I'm saying is that the P320 trigger behaves mechanically like a DA/SA pistol in SA mode. It is easy to press, whether intentionally or otherwise. "Otherwise" being accidental manipulation of the trigger, an AD. (No, I certainly hope no-one carries that way.)

As far as holsters, I don't believe these things are going off by themselves while in holsters. It's happening as the weapon is being holstered (or perhaps unholstering). A finger, a piece of clothing. I doubt if anyone wants to appear even partly liable in an AD, especially in an official report, so the story becomes "it went off by itself in the holster".

quote:

Can you tell the difference between a 5lb trigger pull and a 6-7lb trigger pull when you're working the trigger? I imagine that one might be able to when exercising the fine motor skills and concentration required to execpute a proper trigger press with a single finger.

How about when you're inserting the weapon back into your holster? That's a gross motor skill that engages the muscles of your whole hand and arm, and suddenly that 2lb difference becomes a lot less noticeable...I know it would likely be imperceptible to me, even if I was going slow and taking my time.

How does it matter what the user feels? It's how the gun behaves. Not sure what you're getting at.

quote:

So when I'm not exercising due regard and something snags my trigger on a reholster, there's no fundamental difference between striker-fired guns.

That's where we disagree. Both are striker guns, but the trigger on the 320 is different than say a Glock. It is more susceptible to an accidental pull. I went into this in more detail in a previous post.

quote:

Having said that, in my humble opinion, I think we are going to ultimately find that the overwhelming majority of the unintended discharges are going to be the result of someone or something exerting pressure on the trigger. It does not take much movement of the trigger to disengage the striker block, and to reach the break. Sig Mechanics did a very good video on how much movement it takes to disengage the striker block and fire the weapon.

I have both a M17 and a M18, and I am very comfortable carrying either. I do like the fact that they both have a manual safety, due to the fact that as I stated before that I believe that most of these UDs are due to something exerting pressure on the trigger, and the manual safety will prevent the trigger from moving should that happen. Just my two cents.

The above is exactly what I'm saying.

Heres a fun anecdote:
The son in law of a GF managed to kill himself with a Glock. The idiot put it fully loaded into some kind of a backpack, that had all kinds of other stuff in it. He tossed the backpack onto a bed and bang! The Glock discharged and he was killed.
Regardless of make or model, striker guns require proper safety procedures to a greater degree than other trigger types. Even the 1911 can require greater awareness for safe carry. When my PD transitioned to the P229 from the S&W 4043, I had to stress use of the decocker, since I had guys putting cocked 229s back in their holster after shooting.
It all comes down to proper safe handling, no matter what the gun may be.

I would think this theory would find some level of support. It offers not only an explanation of what's happening, but a definitive solution that already exists (manual safety on all P320s).

(BTW, I think calling it a design "defect" or "flaw" is too strong a term for this fine firearm. I would call it a "design weakness".)

It could well explain why we have not heard of any of these unintended discharges with the M17 or M18. At least I haven’t heard of any. If anyone else has, please chime in.

On a DA gun. Revolver or auto. Everything has to work right for the gun to fire.

On the fully cocked Striker guns and SA Autos (even my beloved 1911). Everything has to work right for the gun to not fire.

All the stored energy is there. On, for example, the 365, there are a lot of things that would need to go wrong for it to go bang without the trigger being pulled. Could it happen, internal parts out of spec. Something flex’s. Who knows. I think the Sigs are, unquestionably, designed to be as safe as possible.