quote:

Originally posted by RX-79G:
2. He did not talk to whomever reported an AD in Dallas or know who it is.

It is a little hard to talk to someone that doesn't exist.

Bruce has said that they don't exist and yet you continue to insist that they do

quote:

4. The Dallas PD official that withdrew the P320 did it because of an unidentified special document.

I'm not sure I'd ever call the Owner's Manual a "special document"...perhaps an oft unread document or, in this case, an misunderstood one

quote:

Originally posted by RX-79G:
I don't think I've said anything that even vaguely disagrees with Bruce Gray. Have I?

Apparently you don't think so. Most everyone else seems to have figured it out, though.

I believe this whole thing is several sources quoting and mis-quoting and misunderstanding each other, 'round and 'round and 'round, 'til everyone is dizzy.

Moreover, DPD cannot very well "recall" pistols that they did not issue, in the first place. (DPD approved the P320 for individual officers to purchase, and carry, on duty.)

I have no dog in this hunt. I own no P320 pistols, and only kept one SIG, my long-time P229R DAK duty pistol, when I stopped carrying .40 pistols almost two years ago. (.40 Snap & Whip is not kind to aging hands/wrists.) I believe I looked at all the "sources" objectively.

All I know is, if you own a P320 you will die. I will give you 50 bucks for yours, just to save you. I'm like that.

quote:

Originally posted by RogueJSK:

quote:

Originally posted by Bigboreshooter:
Has Glock ever won a LEO contract where they were NOT the low bidder?

Yes. Ours.

Sucker!

quote:

Originally posted by RX-79G:
Is it so strange to wonder what that legacy language could be, having caused such a fracas?

No, because those of us who have been using SIGs since the beginning know what that language was...it isn't like it's a secret

quote:

You are 100% correct that it is impossible to talk to someone who doesn't exist. Especially when the reporter who spoke to that person doesn't want to speak to you. But it is also impossible to speak to someone that you don't know who they are. But one way or another, you have to decide that someone isn't telling the truth, because it isn't possible for everyone to be right. Is the reporter lying, his source, the department? Anyone curious?

Obviously not, because:
1. The only one claiming to have a "source" about an AD/ND is the original reporter
2. Everyone else has been consistent about there having been no incident
3. I've known Bruce for over 20 years and I trust his credibility in this matter

quote:

As I said, I don't know if anything happened or what happened. All I've pointed out is that there are some oddities that Sig ought to address to clean the story up. And for some reason that makes me persona non grata.

You are very consistent in your approach to these kinds of things, so I'm somewhat surprised by your reaction to a common outcome

quote:

Originally posted by RX-79G:

quote:

Originally posted by 9mmepiphany:
[QUOTE]
No, because those of us who have been using SIGs since the beginning know what that language was...it isn't like it's a secret



3. I've known Bruce for over 20 years and I trust his credibility in this matter

When did I question Bruce's credibility? What does his credibility have to do with whether there is someone claiming an AD or not?


And could you please let me know what the legacy language is? I've only owned two Sigs and the M11s we were issued, so I am not as familiar with the language you refer to. I just glanced through the old P220, P225, P226 manual and didn't see anything applicable.

Did you read Bruce's most recent post in this thread?

He said, "There was no incident, ND, or failure of a P320 of any sort that prompted the memo by Lt. Williamson. DPD does not have any in their inventory, has never tested it, has only a couple officers carrying it so far, and none have had any issues...In the article, the author reports that an anonymous reliable source within DPD stated that a P320 ND'd during training, among other inflammatory implications that proved not to be true."

If you're not impugning his credibility, I don't know how you can continue to dwell on this unless you missed the aforementioned post. There was no incident of any sort. Full stop.

DPD does not issue the gun and has never had an issue with any 320 carried by an officer.

If you believe the messenger, there can be no carrying on past that point.

You've been shown through direct quotation what "legacy text" in the manual caused this guy's heartburn--and provided with comparanda from Glock manuals, etc. that show it's obviously plain ole lawyer speak (implying that the DPD armorer or whoever he is went off half-cocked).

What more is to say?

quote:

What more is to say?

Don't worry. He will come up with something.

I propose a CUT for RX-79G: "Nit-Picker Par Excellence!" Because, if anybody can pick nits, it sure is RX-79G.

(Aside to the target of my derision: Yes, this is a discussion forum. But when there's reams of evidence to conclude the discussion, and the "evidence" that started it turns out to have been apocryphal, at best, reasonable people tend to stop. You're like a dog with a bone on this thing--only the bone's long gone. In fact there may never have been a bone, in the first place.)

I own Four SIGs, a P229R, a P250, and two P320s (full size and compact).

The owner's manual for all four have the same warning:

"WARNING - DROPPED PISTOL

If dropped the pistol may fire. Keep the chamber empty unless actually firing.

ANY FIREARM MAY FIRE IF DROPPED."

I have two P320 manuals that came with two different pistols that were acquired about a year and a half apart. The first pistol was acquired not long after the introduction of the P320.

The P250 of course predated the P320 by years. Its manual has exactly the same warning.

The P320s owned by members of the Dallas PD were privately acquired. There is no reason to believe that the manuals that came with those pistols is any different from the manuals that came with mine.

Unless the Dallas PD officer that experienced the panic attack had some sort of special "double secret" manual with different language, the warnings quoted above from what you call the "current manual" is the only language that has existed regarding this dropped pistol warning.

I was offering this information not to be contentious, but to answer a question you asked yesterday in a post 6 posts above.

quote:

Originally posted by ensigmatic:
I propose a CUT for RX-79G: "Nit-Picker Par Excellence!" Because, if anybody can pick nits, it sure is RX-79G.

Personal attacks are never a good thing in a public forum. You've been on the Internet long enough (since Usenet) to know that?
 

TTAG posted then pulled an article where they dropped a brand new P320 from a very specific way and were able to get it to fail a few times.

I tried responding but it got pulled down by the time I got done typing. Maybe cuz their video link didn't work. If they did get it to fire, I wonder if it's because the trigger is traveling with inertia or the sear and striker safety are bouncing. If it's the trigger, I'd think adding a stupid dingus blade would be all that's needed. Frankly I wouldn't add one. I'd just avoid dropping the pistol while holding it by the corner of the trigger guard and carefully dropping it a specific way.

Screenshots:

I dunno. The article didn't go back up for me. There is a different one: http://www.thetruthaboutguns.c...lowing-drop-testing/

Does Omaha outdoors sell any series 70 1911s?

The Omaha Outdoors video:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?fe...utu.be&v=ch7si_VQsGA

Quite interesting. FYI.

quote:

Originally posted by henryaz:

quote:

Originally posted by ensigmatic:
I propose a CUT for RX-79G: "Nit-Picker Par Excellence!" Because, if anybody can pick nits, it sure is RX-79G.

Personal attacks are never a good thing in a public forum. You've been on the Internet long enough (since Usenet) to know that?

*shrug* Gotta call 'em like I see 'em. He was picking nits.

Sometimes that's warranted. In this case he appeared to be picking nits solely to avoid losing the argument. It had become tedious.

quote:

Originally posted by BuddyChryst:
TTAG posted then pulled an article where they dropped a brand new P320 from a very specific way and were able to get it to fail a few times.

Now maybe we have something.

quote:

Originally posted by Chris17404:
The Omaha Outdoors video:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?fe...utu.be&v=ch7si_VQsGA

Quite interesting. FYI.

And reasonable.

How about.........just not dropping your handgun? In 48 years of handling, carrying and shooting handguns, I only recall "dropping" one.

In 2002 my issued HK USP40 fell out of its holster in the head. It landed on its hammer on the tile floor. No ND. One slightly bent hammer spur.

This appears to be much ado about.......nothing. My 0.02 Regards 18DAI

quote:

Originally posted by 18DAI:
How about.........just not dropping your handgun? In 48 years of handling, carrying and shooting handguns, I only recall "dropping" one.

In 2002 my issued HK USP40 fell out of its holster in the head. It landed on its hammer on the tile floor. No ND. One slightly bent hammer spur.

This appears to be much ado about.......nothing. My 0.02 Regards 18DAI

The only problem now is, if only one or two of the thousands of 320's out there does this and someone is injured, Sig will have a huge problem on their hands. Especially with this video release.

Unfortunately, from a company standpoint, they must build products for the lowest common denominator. While most handgun folks aren't likely to drop their loaded pistols, Manufacturers, must take into consideration joe average butterfingers.

Cause he is the one that will cost them millions.

TXPO

I wonder if a GLOCK would survive the same drop tests without firing?