Safety with any platform comes down to proper handling. IIRC even the squeeze-cocking P7 had some ND issues with the NJ State Police because under stress officers would finger the trigger and squeeze with all four, not just the lower three.


https://www.swatmag.com/articl...egligent-discharges/

quote:

In 1976, the New Jersey State Police adopted the HK P7, a squeeze cocker. This required you to squeeze the front strap when you gripped the pistol. After all, you will do this naturally…. Once you squeezed it to the rear—about 10 to 11 pounds worth—the gun was cocked. All that was required was to press the 4.5-pound trigger to the rear. It sounded viable, and it really was a beautiful gun, but the agency had a rash of NDs.

It seems that when people are startled, they clench their fist and all of the fingers. And if the trigger finger happens to be resting on the trigger, an ND will occur. The sympathetic squeeze response has been known for a long time. It wasn’t that the gun was bad, it was that people were not trained as well as they should have been.

Safeties get bumped off or users forget to put them on. Users forget to decock DA/SA guns. Users allow the trigger to get fouled when holstering and shoot themselves in the leg. Users use the wrong (or just outright crappy) holsters. Some people (including trained professionals) have absolutely abhorrent handling practices and will ND with anything, no matter what you give them or how much you train them. There's no magical hardware solution to a people problem.

^^^ Agreed.

Yes, it all sounds good. People and training vs the hardware.

What amount of force in pounds will it take to activate a trigger and fire a shot on a non manual safety SIG P320 or SIG P365, or even a Glock without the NY1 or NY2 trigger? 4 to 6 pounds? 7?

What amount of force in pounds is needed to activate a trigger and fire a shot with virtually any DA/SA HK, DA/SA SIG or double action revolver? Just about double what is listed above?

That's hardware, and not people or training.

quote:

Originally posted by cee_Kamp:
Yes, it all sounds good. People and training vs the hardware.

What amount of force in pounds will it take to activate a trigger and fire a shot on a non manual safety SIG P320 or SIG P365, or even a Glock without the NY1 or NY2 trigger? 4 to 6 pounds? 7?

What amount of force in pounds is needed to activate a trigger and fire a shot with virtually any DA/SA HK, DA/SA SIG or double action revolver? Just about double what is listed above?

That's hardware, and not people or training.

Yes and no. The poor handling still has to be present, and is still the root cause of an ND, because the trigger still has to get pulled for the gun to fire regardless of the amount of force necessary to create a discharge. It's still a people problem. A heavier trigger might reduce the number of NDs, but it's not going to stop them. It's hard to quantify how many people have been saved from the consequences of their poor handling by an additional 4-5lbs of trigger pull, or an exposed hammer, but I'm sure it's some. This also raises the question of how many of those people didn't even realize that they screwed up, experienced no consequences, and actually reinforced their complacent poor handling practices, making a future ND even more likely.

All that said, I agree that a heavier trigger does provide more safety margin. My Glock 43X has a NY1 trigger spring in it, both for that reason and because it reduces the felt "wall" mid-pull, which is a characteristic of the Glock trigger that I really don't like. I'm personally not keen on pocket-carrying a striker-fired pistol, or shoving one down the front of my pants, but I am ok doing so with a DA revolver, due to the longer heavier pull and the lack of mechanical pre-load on the springs in a true DAO action. It just makes me feel better knowing that I don't have a cocked pistol pointed at my junk or major arteries, so I absolutely get what you're saying.

I carry a P320 for work, sometimes off-duty, and shoot one in competition. I feel perfectly safe doing so, but I also handle that thing extremely cautiously and intentionally. Finger is always off the trigger until ready to shoot, gun NEVER gets pointed at critical body parts, my gear is set up to make sure the gun is protected when in the holster and there's nothing dangly to snag on when re-holstering, and I always slow down and look to make sure it's clear before the gun goes back in. I know what little pressure it takes to make it fire, and it's 100% up to me to make sure that doesn't happen when I don't want it to. If I ever do ND with it, that'll be on me, not the gun. And if anything, hopefully the habits that have been reenforced and ingrained from handling that gun have made me safer with other platforms as well.

quote:

Originally posted by cee_Kamp:
Yes, it all sounds good. People and training vs the hardware.

What amount of force in pounds will it take to activate a trigger and fire a shot on a non manual safety SIG P320 or SIG P365, or even a Glock without the NY1 or NY2 trigger? 4 to 6 pounds? 7?

What amount of force in pounds is needed to activate a trigger and fire a shot with virtually any DA/SA HK, DA/SA SIG or double action revolver? Just about double what is listed above?

That's hardware, and not people or training.

Gee, how do you feel about making cars harder to drive for sober people to cut down on DUIs?

I think I still hold the same opinion that I did at the beginning of this mess; I dislike the design of the P320's internal components and I strongly suspect that the platform has problems with quality control (and maybe more), but I still think it's unlikely that they are the culprit behind these NDs. Even if they are, it will be very difficult to prove culpability in a court of law, which I believe is ultimately a good thing; I don't believe our legal system should compromise its rigorous standard of proof for any short-term benefit.

quote:

Originally posted by MacGyver:
I strongly suspect that the platform has problems with quality control

In what ways; what is your basis of knowledge? Anything beyond suspicions?

And assuming you are right, how does that affect unintentional discharges due to mishandling the guns?

Somebody is not getting that.

quote:

Originally posted by sigfreund:
In what ways; what is your basis of knowledge? Anything beyond suspicions?

The reported number of parts breakages experienced by P320 users strikes me as disproportionate. I've also seen close-up pictures of rough, sloppy, and uneven engagement surfaces of the striker leg and sear. I wouldn't consider any of that to be "hard evidence", but I do think it raises questions.

quote:

Originally posted by sigfreund:
And assuming you are right, how does that affect unintentional discharges due to mishandling the guns?

I don't think it does, or at least not to any large degree. I implied as much in the post you originally replied to.

quote:

Originally posted by MacGyver:
but I still think it's unlikely that they are the culprit behind these NDs

By "they", I meant: the design of the P320's internal components and the platform's issues with quality control.

I have read that within five or ten years, that cars will use AI, onboard processors, sensors, and internet connectivity for deciding if a driver seated in the car is capable of the driving task.
Much like the devices fitted into vehicles operated by convicted DWI drivers. Typically court ordered and monitored.
That being said, I don't like that technology, because like all technology, it can fail. Thus keeping a potentially sober driver from legitimately driving if a technology failure occurs.

The same train of thought applies to smart guns, those designers/makers claim they can determine whether the person holding the smart gun is, or is not the legitimate user.
Here again, that technology could fail, and could deprive a legitimate smart gun owner/user of operating the smart gun they purchased, or were forced to buy.

We have discussed the striker fired handguns and the other non striker fired handgun choices. Everyone has an opinion. But we aren't forced to buy a particular design of handgun. Not yet anyway.
At least now, here in the USA, we can purchase a wild array of different handgun types/designs. We can buy what we as the individual perceive as the best choices for ourselves, and for our needs & uses.
Unless of course if you live in California with the CA DOJ approved list, or in a State that has adopted cruciform striker fired design gun bans.

I believe that non striker fired handguns give a slight increase in safety against a wide array of potential accidental discharges. Poor gun handling, entrapped clothing, bad holsters, etc.
Many others believe the same thing and base their handgun purchases upon their personal beliefs.

Many others believe that striker fired handguns have a sufficient level of safety, and also believe it's strictly a training/practice issue or the lack of, making that choice sufficient for their usage.
Those that believe striker fired handguns are sufficiently safe for their perceived needs, then those are the handguns they purchase, carry, and shoot.
Sometimes striker fired handguns are issued, and then the choice is mandated for the users, vs a choice. LE & Mil.

So simply buy, carry, and shoot what you believe will work for you. At least for now, we still can make that individual choice.

Remington 700 bolt action rifles, when you drill down into the basic design, is striker fired. Except it's called a firing pin, not a striker.
They also have some past history with uncommanded discharges. I own and use a pile of them regularly, and very carefully treat them as a product with a known history of uncommanded discharges.
The difference being, the 700 rifle will never point at my body parts or slid into a holster. It's also much easier to keep it pointing away from you vs a holstered handgun.

I also own a collectable Baby Browning in .25ACP. Yes it's striker fired and I believe generally considered NOT drop safe.
I have carried it in a pocket holster several times, always with the chamber empty.
It's more of a novelty and collectable piece than a serious carry choice. The DAO Seecamp .32ACP is a much safer carry choice vs the Baby Browning.

The non striker fired crowd has their beliefs, and base their purchase and usage choices on their beliefs.
The striker fired crowd is the same, and they also base their handgun buying choices on their personal beliefs.

Hey, it gives us something to argue about!

quote:

Originally posted by MacGyver:
I implied as much in the post you originally replied to.

Missed that, thanks.

Where are you seeing the photos of the issues you mentioned?

https://drive.google.com/file/...Yr22YdLH6M3Eb-0/view
https://drive.google.com/file/...pLSObYXM9tRBv4p/view

There was also a YouTube video that had some more closeup pictures showing the poor-quality surfaces, but I can't find that one anymore (I saw it earlier last year).

Another YouTube video I saw in that same time period, which I'm also having trouble finding now, showed that inserting playing cards between the slide and the frame (i.e. reducing or eliminating the vertical play between the two components) changed the sound of the striker being released, leading one to conclude that the physical contact between the engagement surfaces of the sear and striker leg had changed as a result. Based on that video, I speculated that the P320 possibly had an inherent design flaw by virtue of being based upon the preceding, hammer-fired P250. Hammer-fired pistols by definition do not require as strict tolerances, with respect to the vertical play between slide and frame, as striker-fired pistols do. Therefore, the speculation on my part was that maybe SIG had failed to consider this distinction, and that the claimed issue of the striker unexpectedly releasing was simply being caused by the P320 being built to the same standards as its predecessor, which to SIG's credit, was a relatively trouble-free product. The concerns raised about the material quality and quality control of the relevant P320 parts (sear, striker, etc.), if true, would only add fuel to the fire, so to speak.

Regarding trigger "dinguses": they might help prevent some unintended shots from, say, drawstrings becoming entangled, but not when the finger or other object is placed directly on the trigger, as evidenced by "I'm the only one professional enough" guy with his Glock. Their primary purpose is as a drop safety, to prevent the trigger from moving rearward, thus firing the gun, when impacting a floor or the ground. And yes, the pre-recallvoluntary upgrade 320 could fire if it hit exactly right. This is still a different issue from a human physically pulling the trigger, and has zero to do with firing without touching the trigger.

quote:

Originally posted by Graniteguy:
The military M17/M18 units have a manual safety.

Most 320's in the civilian markets do not have a manual safety. The same with the Law Enforcement sector.

I would expect ND's/AD's to be significantly lower with M17/M18 military models vs. standard 320's.

The manual safety has zero effect on the uncommanded discharges. The uncommanded discharges do not rely on the movement of the trigger. The negligent discharges do, of course.

quote:

Originally posted by Trendar5:
The manual safety has zero effect on the uncommanded discharges. The uncommanded discharges do not rely on the movement of the trigger. The negligent discharges do, of course.

I hate to break it to you, BUT...There is NO SUCH THING as an 'Uncommanded Discharge'

^^^Why not? I mean yeah, I think everyone should just stick to the blanket term “unintentional discharge” and the two subcategories “accidental discharge” (mechanical issue with the gun) and “negligent discharge” (user error). But “uncommanded” is just a synonym for “unintentional” in English.

I think Trendar5 should have said “accidental discharges” instead of “uncommanded discharges”, given the context of his post, but I totally agree with him; if the problems I am talking about above (or similar) actually exist, the manual safety won’t help one bit (i.e. the P320’s manual safety blocks the trigger and can therefore help mitigate NDs, but ADs are a different story).

PR damage has been done to the 320.

Youtube content creator make $ for making viral videos. The more views they get, the more $ they can make.

If the P320 is as flaw as the allegation and the rampant rumor has made it out to be, it should not be that hard for any of these thousands of creator to duplicate that feat on camera. Doing so would guarantee a large payday. All we have gotten so far are example of manipulations to bypass all the safety. The early P320 issues were able to be duplicated and Sig addressed that.

But for a population of gunowner, they have made up their mind about it. They don't remember about past identical situation like the Audi 5000 claim of sudden acceleration? Drivers claiming the cars did it on their own. Toyota also had allegation. All were shown to be driver error. Glock had this issue.

Personally, I have added several P320 into my collection due to some of these fire sales. I have even rotated out some of my home defense guns to these as I have 'spares'. To each their own. I think like the Glock ND in the 90s, and the Audi 5000, this too will pass.

Frankly, I am shocked that the content creators haven't been trying to revive the hysteria.

quote:

Originally posted by nra-life-member:
PR damage has been done to the 320.

Yep.

It no longer matters to a wide swath of people how many lawsuits Sig wins and how many times the design is proven to be without fault.

The damage is done and the negative impression of the P320 is already cemented in their minds.

(Like a newspaper that publishes a front page article that's inaccurate, but which everyone sees, and then publishes a retraction buried in the back pages that nobody sees.)

This is especially evidenced in social media spaces like Reddit and the YouTube comments section. Any mention of a P320 in a post/video leads to a flurry of downvotes, and a horde of folks frothing about how dangerous the design is and cracking multitudes of jokes about getting shot by your own P320.

The truth no longer has the capability to overcome the group consensus.

A lot of Youtube channels seemed delighted to get any excuse to run Sig down. These channels mimmic the behavior they see in the mainstream media - Bad news travels faster than good news. Those that do issue some kind of retraction will bury it in the last minute of a 20 minute rant about a different topic so its not likely to cause a problem for them.