Go | New | Find | Notify | Tools | Reply | |
| Big Stack |
There are now a lot of companies making fully cocked striker guns. Smith and Walther come immediately to mind, but I'm sure there are others. I'm not hearing about them having the same allegedly uncommanded discharge issues the SIG does. Of course these guns have trigger tab safeties or equivalent.
| |||
|
Prepared for the Worst, Providing the Best |
And this is where we disagree. You're suggesting a Californiaesque nanny-state type approach to a user problem...mandating changes to the design of the tool to better accomodate the negligence of some users. Mandating a manual safety on every P320 will likely prevent some NDs. No argument there. It will add a step and make it a little bit harder for some negligent people to accidentally shoot themselves with their own gun. It will also ruin the gun for a large number of us who have been safely carrying it in a defensive capacity for years. If I was ordered to put a manual safety on my P320 today, I would fight tooth and nail until they gave me something else without one. I also still contend that the safety-less P320 is practically speaking no more dangerous than other designs currently on the market.
My point was that when you're in the act of holstering, which is when most of these NDs occur, the minor differences in trigger pull weight and design are immaterial...you can't feel the difference. There have been plenty of instances of Glocks discharging under the same circumstances which demonstrate this point. Yes the tabbed trigger offers some theoretical safety benefits related to snagging in a hypothetical environment, but under real-world conditions negligent users shoot themselves while re-holstering both designs. This same issue has been coming up for years with various designs, back before the P320 even existed. It's nothing new. Just a couple of examples from a quick Google search: https://www.thefirearmblog.com...cidental-discharges/ https://www.latimes.com/opinio...-20150508-story.html Cops (and others) are still shooting themselves with Glocks and M&Ps, the P320 is just getting all the press right now because there's a lot of money in the contracts. Lawyers are banking on the idea that they can leverage the sullied reputation of the gun brought on by the early drop safety issues to convince a jury that knows nothing about guns to give them a payout, and sadly they probably will. | |||
|
| Member |
There have been allot of 320 AD/ND claims involving a holstered gun going off after some movement of the holster or the individual. Even the one on video of an officer getting out of a car involved him turning and getting out of the back seat while the firearm was holstered. More than likely, clothing or something in the holster and tension applied during movement. Ken Hackathorn recently did a video and when he brought out his WC P320 and it had a manual safety. He said he wouldn't carry a firearm like this w/o a manual safety. DPR | |||
|
| Freethinker |
Another vote in agreement. When an experienced shooter is firing a gun, he may feel the differences in the characteristics of a trigger’s mechanism: the degree and weight of the slack, the pull weight, the smoothness of the interaction between sear and hammer or striker, and whether there is a tab or hinged movement of the trigger. The drawstring or fold of cloth that enters the trigger guard inadvertently when holstering doesn’t feel any of that and doesn’t care in the slightest, except for the pull weight. Pull weight varies for at least a couple of reasons, but the only possible effect it can have on UDs is whether the force applied is sufficient to overcome its resistance. A 6 pound trigger will fire with 7 pounds of pressure regardless of the trigger design or how the pressure is applied. There is at least one documented instance of a DAK SIG being fired unintentionally when holstered for that reason. When something like that happens, it’s stark evidence that any gun without a manual safety can be fired inadvertently due to the user’s carelessness despite any reasonable weight and length of trigger pull.
As I’ve pointed out and why. It’s also been questioned whether the P365 has a different trigger mechanism that prevents the supposedly self-discharges that the P320 experiences. The answer is no: It’s the same in the same way both are similar to the triggers of other guns. If anything, the P365 is more likely to be carried inside the waistband (as I do) and therefore more likely to have a piece of clothing enter the trigger guard, so why don’t we hear those stories? Two explanations come to mind: there is no crowd ready to pounce on any report of a UD, and very likely because any knowledgeable shooter who is holstering for appendix or other IWB carry is going to be dam’ careful about how he does it. More P365s also have manual safeties and are therefore more forgiving of carelessness. ► 6.4/93.6 “Cet animal est très méchant, quand on l’attaque il se défend.” | |||
|
| Member |
While I like the manual safety that my M17 and M18 have, I realize that is my personal preference. Some prefer the 320 without a manual safety, and that is their prerogative. I do however, wish Sig offered more 320 choices with a manual safety, and not just the M17 and M18. | |||
|
Web Clavin Extraordinaire |
It's about the money and the headlines. SIG has won numerous LE and .mil contracts and is very much in the news--just like Glock was in the news a few decades ago when they snagged every LE contract out there. There are millions of 320s in circulation (in the same way there are millions of Glocks in circulation). Compare that to Walther or Springfield or whoever else produces a similar fully-cocked striker gun, and you'll find SIG has the vast majority of market share and thus the vast majority of press. (Not to mention statistically more chances that a round will go off unintentionally.) No lawyer is going to go after a small potatoes, no-name (that's not a dis at Walther, just a fact) company when SIG is on the menu. And no local news idiots are going to find a story to latch onto because none of those other companies have guns in LE holsters anywhere in the country. Deep pockets, notoriety and sheer number of guns in circulation just make SIG the target. More chances for idiots to shoot themselves, more dollary-doos to go after, more chance that the schlub reading the headline actually knows what "SIG" is ("hey, that's what my local cops carry! they'll all shoot themselves!"). As an anecdotal datum, I'll add that the action pistol/IDPA gang that shoots at my club has gone 320 crazy. For years, the guns on the line at our weekly practice sessions were Glocks or 1911s and an occasional CZ or S&W M&P (for those who weren't shooting race guns). For quite a long time, I was the only guy with a 320. Fast forward to now, probably 50+% of the guns on the line are 320s. I only really noticed it because I took a hiatus of a half a year and when I came back, I was wondering who these guys are with all the 320s. This shows that SIG is also getting into the competition world quite aggressively (X-5s abound in holsters at the club) and that a lot of people who put a lot of rounds downrange for the sake of competition don't give a hoot about the gun going off in their holster. It always seems to be confined to LE, which I think tells you something.... ---------------------------- Chuck Norris put the laughter in "manslaughter" Educating the youth of America, one declension at a time. | |||
|
| probably a good thing I don't have a cut |
The only other current P320 available with a manual safety is a compact model, 320C-9-BSS-MS-MA. | |||
|
Lost |
There you go. However, I am not suggesting 320s have trigger safeties (I actually hate those things). I'm suggesting that a safety protocol that already exists (manual safety) be implemented on all models. Thank you all for your input in this discussion. | |||
|
| Lost |
I'm not embossing barcodes on case headstamps, just implementing an already existing safety protocol. Those who dislike a manual safety can simply not use it. Even if its mere existence is objected to, a small price to pay for a higher level of safety. | |||
|
| Lost |
It's not what the shooters feel, it's how a mechanical device obeys the laws of physics. It's also not just pull weight, it's the force profile as the trigger cycles.
Exactly. If it's happening to Glocks, how much more so for the 320 with its easier-to-press trigger. Yes, it's a small difference. As any statistician could tell you, when population size goes up, small differences do matter. | |||
|
| Prepared for the Worst, Providing the Best |
Not the case. Manual safeties can get inadvertently engaged. It's happened to me plenty of times on the range with guns that I own but don't carry...usually with the result of exposing an embarrassing flinch  . And that's not even a stressful situation. If it's on the gun, you need to train to disengage it. I'd prefer not to have to do that on a defensive tool that may need deployed on a split-second's notice, especially when there are plenty of great options available without one. I want it as simple as possible. | |||
|
| Lost |
Gotta disagree with you there, Sigfreund. The fold of cloth or whatever "feels" it in the sense of obeying the laws of both physics and ergonomics. It's not just pull weight, it's where and how that weight occurs. | |||
|
| Lost |
Fair point. But I think it still needs to be balanced against an overall safety issue. Make the manual safety end-user removeable. Or offer un-safetied 320s as an option. Let's also remember that ALL military versions come with safeties. Definitely a split-second matters situation. | |||
|
| Prepared for the Worst, Providing the Best |
The military uses handguns very differently than civilian LE or CCW holders, and have very different requirements. They spend a lot more time with rifles, and the bulk of their training is on those platforms. The handgun is a secondary weapon. For Civilian LE and private CCW holders, it's our primary. It's on our person at all times, and likely the only tool we have to work with when stuff goes suddenly sideways and the rifle is still out in the parking lot locked in the rack in our car, in the gun safe, or under the bed. What works for the military doesn't necessarily equate to what's best for the rest of the world. But I do agree that options are good, and the guns should be available with a manual safety for those who prefer it. I just don't like the idea of mandating it. | |||
|
| Lost |
| |||
|
| I swear I had something for this |
Massad Ayoob has always thought a Glock should have a manual safety all the way back to the 80's. | |||
|
| Member |
Last I looked there were around 45 lawsuits against Sig. Here is video of a police officers 320 firing in the holster. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HODW0F4eXmo There is atleast two others that I know of. No other brand has had this many suits for the same issue. It may be bogus, maybe not. With all the lies and shenanigans Sig has pulled over the years with the 365 and 320 problems nothing would surprise me. Until concrete proof surfaces I'm not risking my leg/butt/junk. | |||
|
| Freethinker |
I was expecting to see a video of a gun in a holster and lying on a table and going off by itself. The discharge in the video is of a gun being carried in a holster by a plain clothes officer and whose clothing covers the gun. There is no way to determine from the video if there was something in the holster along with the gun that could have contacted the trigger. Guns—mostly Glocks—firing in the holster like that when the trigger was contacted by a part of the clothing that covers the gun has been reported for decades, and long before the P320 existed. The video therefore tells us nothing that hasn’t been known since guns have existed: The gun will fire regardless of who or what pulls the trigger. But thanks for the video. As I say, I was expecting some sort of revelation, and once again that was lacking. As usual. These are the sorts of flawed examples that people trot out to prove their arguments, but which simply demonstrate how weak and unproved they still are. And my perennial question that never elicits so much as an acknowledgement, much less an answer: If the P320 is capable of being fired without the trigger’s being pulled, what is the mechanical explanation for that process? I.e., how do the mechanical parts of the action permit that to occur? What causes the sear to release the striker while simultaneously moving the striker safety out of position to permit the striker to move forward to hit the primer without pulling the trigger? Cite examples and show your work. ► 6.4/93.6 “Cet animal est très méchant, quand on l’attaque il se défend.” | |||
|
| Big Stack |
You do realize that, in particular, Smith & Wesson is a larger manufacturer than SIG Sauer. Smith makes about 50% more pistols a year than SIG does (this is from 2020 ATF reporting.)
| |||
|
Member |
Can you share the stats on the other firearms makers? I only googled Glocks and found a number of lawsuits against Glock. Not pointing out Glock, it was just a first search. Until a problem is found, it is operator error. Living the Dream | |||
|
| Powered by Social Strata | Page 1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 12 |
 | Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
|
© SIGforum 2024