Someone tells me that their P320 discharged on its own, in the holster, with no external action, I will tell them very plainly that they're full of shit.

One would need to be a real idiot to believe it.

Many moons ago when Gus Grissom blew the space capsule prematurely, causing it to flood and sink, he said "I don't know. It just fell off." Nobody believed him.

Cause and effect. The P320 doesn't just discharge. It's one thing to have a negligent discharge, another to try to pawn it off on the manufacturer or design as an excuse, and still another to double down and turn it into a lawsuit.

If there's shame to be had, it's on the dumbasses who discharged their weapons and then blamed everyone but themselves.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: sns3guppy,

There is an interesting video that I found recently that details the issue which could be at the core of this lawsuit:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...iknnkhniFzkw&index=1

Seems there may definitely be a design issue at fault. While NDs are by definition caused by the operator, lets not forget that there are Humans designing the pistols. There IS a possibility that a design flaw can cause true accidental discharges. We should not just dismiss any and all claims out of some sense of internet bravado because "guns never go off on their own."

As proven in this thread AND admitted by the Sig, they DID have a drop-safety issue, despite many on this thread dismissing any claims and proof as if someone was calling their baby ugly.

quote:

Originally posted by Michael J. Shannon:
Having read the body of the lawsuit against Sig and
the included extensive list of law enforcement officers and agents who suffered injuries from the
P-320 discharging WHILE IN THE HOLSTER WITH NO
TRIGGER ACTION BY THE OFFICERS/AGENTS, I will NOT
be carrying either of my P-320s, but will resume carrying my P-229's. It's no wonder why my career
employer (US Secret Service) left Sig for Glock.
Can you imagine an agent with the President having such a holstered weapon as a P-320 discharge IN IT's Holster; thereby injuring the President as well as the agent? My P-320's hereby will only go
to the outdoor range; unholstered. One of them is
the Wilson Combat Sig. What a shame!

Given that most police officers are not "gun guys," and having seen a number of cases put forward already which were clearly operator error by operators who couldn't admit error, I'm reluctant to believe most, if any of those claims.

I've said this before, I'm skeptical given the number of P320 pistols out there. Why isn't there hundreds of reports of NDs. Several police departments in my area issue the P320 and I've seen allot of 320 pistols used in IDPA (post pandemic).They are out there being carried in holsters every day. The P320 doesn't have a trigger safety like the M&P or Glock design. If anything gets caught in the trigger guard it's easier to have a discharge.

I watched the video lordhamster posted. My impression is that it establishes that if you depress the trigger, the P320 will fire. The trigger can be depressed if a P320 is moved about while it is in a holster.

It seems that this can happen with any handgun. Variables would be the how far the trigger has to be depressed to fire the handgun and the amount of pressure required. You'll want a longer / heavier trigger pull on a carry v. target handgun.

The video show that the P320 XFive requires a short, relatively light trigger pull to fire.

In any event, holster choice becomes critical.

Well, I watched the video in hopes of gaining some additional info on this issue.
After going on about various component measurements and how far they travel or move within the gun, the dude says that a faulty or poorly fitted holster can discharge the gun.
Now.... There is a revelation! I cant speak for others, but I thoroughly test any holster I use for a striker gun prior to putting it into service. And I dont cheap out on my holsters either.
And our video producer makes much ado about the size of of the sear and its engagement in the 320. I wonder if he has ever looked at the sear engagement surfaces of a 1911?

The video makes assumptions and provides measurements which are incorrect, and the underlying premise of the video is also incorrect.

The measurements taken are presumed to intersect, which is to say, the video states that movement of the components in the frame are directly proportional to movement of components in the slide (on the striker); this is not true, and ignores the gap between the slide and frame, and the fact that the slide rides upward, bearing against the underside of the rails, not on top of them, thus creating more distance between the two. The amount of travel of the trigger to cause disengagement is greater than what the video suggests.

Can a poor holster choice cause a firearm discharge? Of course; not just in the P320, but other firearms. A look at the NYPD negligent discharge history will show that a number of those occurred while holstering the weapon...in Glocks. An issue arose with the federal flight deck officers issued HK .40 pistols, and the choice of holster, and means of locking that holster. The result was a pilot who shot a hole through the cockpit.

The video makes assertions and suggestions and statements with facts not in evidence; the insinuation is that if this is true then that is true, and if that is true, then the pistol discharges...but the premise is inaccurate, rendering the conclusion questionable at best.

The Serpa holster is an example of one that's disapproved in many locations. I've been to a number of ranges, and classes, in which I was told right off the bat, no serpas. I don't use one, so that's fine with me.

Out of the thousands and thousands of holster presentations and return to holster with the variations of the P320 that I own, carry, shoot, etc, that my family carries and shoots, and even the P365 sitting in my pocket, I've het to see a single case that would have caused concern, or caused a negligent discharge. Most certainly, none of my P320's (or P365's) have discharged on their own.

With far more of these pistols in civil hands than police, why is it that the lions share of the incidents all happen with police?

I dunno. It' just went off. On its own. No idea. Very mysterious. Couldn't possibly have been me. No way. There must be a valid scapegoat. A poor carpenter blames his tools, but I'm a good carpenter...with tools that operate on their own. Yeah, that's the ticket. Right...

quote:

Originally posted by sns3guppy:
[W]hy is it that the lions share of the incidents all happen with police?

That is a puzzle, is it not?
Even allowing for the fact that police are more likely to have unintentional discharges in settings where they must be reported and can’t be covered up, plus the fact that they often handle their guns more often than non-LEOs, it does seem very odd that we’re not hearing about their happening to non-LEOs. It would be interesting to know how many LE agencies have adopted the P320 thus far, but just guessing, I suspect that it’s still a relatively small number.

It would also be interesting to know, however, why there are as many reported incidents as there are. Could it be that agencies that currently issue the P320—like one I’m familiar with—transitioned from Classic line SIGs or similar guns (whatever that might be) that were more forgiving of mishandling and operator error? If so, could we be seeing a replay of the problems many agencies experienced way back when Glocks were being widely adopted?

quote:

Originally posted by sigfreund:

quote:

Originally posted by sns3guppy:
[W]hy is it that the lions share of the incidents all happen with police?

That is a puzzle, is it not?
Even allowing for the fact that police are more likely to have unintentional discharges in settings where they must be reported and can’t be covered up, plus the fact that they often handle their guns more often than non-LEOs, it does seem very odd that we’re not hearing about their happening to non-LEOs. It would be interesting to know how many LE agencies have adopted the P320 thus far, but just guessing, I suspect that it’s still a relatively small number.

It would also be interesting to know, however, why there are as many reported incidents as there are. Could it be that agencies that currently issue the P320—like one I’m familiar with—transitioned from Classic line SIGs or similar guns (whatever that might be) that were more forgiving of mishandling and operator error? If so, could we be seeing a replay of the problems many agencies experienced way back when Glocks were being widely adopted?

My agency transitioned from P229 da/sa to G22 w/o additional training.

quote:

It would also be interesting to know, however, why there are as many reported incidents as there are. Could it be that agencies that currently issue the P320—like one I’m familiar with—transitioned from Classic line SIGs or similar guns (whatever that might be) that were more forgiving of mishandling and operator error? If so, could we be seeing a replay of the problems many agencies experienced way back when Glocks were being widely adopted?

Our agency transitioned to the P320 from DA/SA and DAK P229s. Several other agencies in our county did the same...including the two big ones (County and City). We did a brief familiarization in the gun...explaining how it operates and showing officers how to take it down for cleaning and maintenance. Then we had a range session for practice and quals.

Safe handling of the P320 is EXACTLY the same as the P220/P226/P229: keep your booger hook (and anything else) off the bang switch until you're ready to fire. Always treat it likes it's loaded, never point it at anything you don't intend to destroy, and know your target and what it beyond it.

The only two LE NDs I know of in this county in the past 15 or so years were Glocks (a lot of guys carried them as backups)...and both of those were a result of poor gun handling, not a problem with the design of the weapon.

quote:

Originally posted by 92fstech:
both of those were a result of poor gun handling.

Yes, that was the point I was making by stating that some guns are “more forgiving of mishandling and operator error,” so thanks for reenforcing it. For some reason stating that obvious fact annoys many people, but it is nevertheless true as was demonstrated by the increase in unintentional discharges in agencies that transitioned from revolvers to Glocks long ago. Those major transitions happened so far in the past that most shooters today are ignorant of the fact, but some of us oldsters remember the stories clearly.

No inanimate object is at “fault” for how it’s used, or misused, but, to cite just one example, anyone who doesn’t understand that a power saw is less forgiving of mishandling or operator error than a hand saw is more likely to be injured than someone who does appreciate the former’s dangers.

Some of us are old enough to remember when “keep your finger off the trigger” wasn’t something that was stressed when handling revolvers, because the long, heavy double action pull made it unlikely that merely touching or applying a small amount of pressure to the trigger would cause a discharge. The same is true of a DA/SA Classic line SIG if the hammer is decocked. And although the rules are the same regardless of the type of gun being handled, it’s a fact of life that people learn what they can get away with, and sometimes their habits and practices push to those limits.

It’s not a design fault or defect of the Glock or its countless imitators that touching their triggers is much more dangerous, but it is something that needs to be stressed. If it isn’t, an increase in accidents among new users of such guns like the P320 is to be expected. My comment was mere speculation, but it would still be interesting to know if I’m right.

In a ridiculous mania to make bubble wrap safe, we hear cries that every pistol must be drop-safe, despite current production designs like CZ's and 1911's that aren't. So, sig recalls a million pistols, makes them "drop safe" for people who can't control their ability to strike the pistols with hammers.

We recently had a thread about the evil nature of the CZ Shadow; despite being in use around the globe by competitive shooters, with great success, the inability to look at a holster and subsequent fumbling of the ball led numerous posters to call out the satanic, evil nature of the shadow, call for its banning, make the bad noise stop. E V I L.

Here, we have the P320, dredged from the depths of hell, a ticking time bomb, ready to explode in the holsters of (police only), nearly always detonating when officers least expect it...when they're in a locker room or by a truck bed, removing their gear (with the weapon in the holster, apparently...who does that??). Clearly the P320 is a terrorist plot, not a product that should be within a thousand yards of a school, church, bible, or human flesh.

The double action revolver doesn't have a safety. Just a long trigger pull. The Beretta has a long pull, and a safety. Lots of them. It's bristling with them, inside and out. The Glock has less obvious safeties, but it's got them, and yet people call for adding a safety on the outside. God protect them from themselves, because they're incapable...add a safety. The 1911 comes with one or two or three, depending on the iteration, though some suggest the grip safety is overkill and a few 1911 versions have done away with it completely. The there's the P320.

The P320 is like a 1911 in that while it's only available for condition 1 or condition 3; it's always in a "cocked" condition, it's either empty, or it's loaded and cocked, akin to single action cocked, with no safety. No grip safety. No trigger safety. No frame or slide mounted safety. Just the operator and his or her finger. The responsibility comes back to the operator. The pistol is ready to rock and roll, a single action pistol (ne: striker fired), fully cocked, nothing to get in the way of a shot, with a short, light trigger, short reset, no operator controls to fumble, not particularly tolerant of bad handling, or bad behavior. The gun is not idiot proof. It's ready to fire. All the time.

In a world that woiuld like delivery rooms to wrap babies in bubble wrap and keep them that way until 85 years later when it's removed to fit them for a padded coffin, the P320 puts the onus back on the operator to be a safe pistol. If the operator is unwilling or incapable, the operator should choose to operate something else. Like a block of wood.

quote:

Some of us are old enough to remember when “keep your finger off the trigger” wasn’t something that was stressed when handling revolvers, because the long, heavy double action pull made it unlikely that merely touching or applying a small amount of pressure to the trigger would cause a discharge.

While I am a revolver guy, I'm only 35 and came up on the classic DA/SA P-Series. Trigger discipline was ALWAYS stressed in our training, and I have always handled any firearm in that manner, no matter how heavy or light the trigger is. In my experience it's been a good rule to live by...I'm far from a perfect person, but so far abiding by that rule across the board has kept me from blowing holes in anything that I didn't intend to.

The two NDs that I mentioned above both would have happened regardless of pull-weight or mechanical safeties. They were both intentional trigger pulls on what the officer thought was an unloaded gun.

quote:

In a world that woiuld like delivery rooms to wrap babies in bubble wrap and keep them that way until 85 years later when it's removed to fit them for a padded coffin, the P320 puts the onus back on the operator to be a safe pistol. If the operator is unwilling or incapable, the operator should choose to operate something else. Like a block of wood.

Hit the nail on the head right there!

quote:

Originally posted by 92fstech:
I'm only 35 ....

And that is why you were probably taught differently than how those of us over twice your age were taught—or not taught—originally.
Despite the horror stories we still hear on occasion, firearms safety is one of many things that has generally improved over the years, especially among armed professionals like law enforcement officers. I started teaching as a professional law enforcement firearms instructor late in life, but you were still a teenager when that was. Even by then, though, attitudes toward safety had been changing significantly for at least a decade.

But yes, it doesn’t matter what sort of trigger a gun has, if it’s pulled deliberately, it’s supposed to fire.

I definitely agree with you...and it's actually pretty enlightening to hear you describe it in the way that you did. I guess I just kind of figured that "the 4 rules" have always been.

I've been lucky to have a number of older shooting mentors and instructors over the years, and every single one of them has practiced and taught those same rules. And I have witnessed several of them enforce them through decapitating and shitting down the necks (verbally) of trainees who dare violate them. As a rookie I was more scared of facing the wrath of some of those guys than I was of getting shot...but it served to firmly entrench the lessons they were trying to impart!

quote:

Originally posted by 92fstech:
I guess I just kind of figured that "the 4 rules" have always been.

Not only do I remember when it was only 3 rules, I remember when no one thought anything about having one's trigger finger on the trigger....I want to say it was in the 60s, but it might have been earlier.

When I started in LE, in the late 70s, our issued holsters had exposed triggers. The old Clam Shell holster required the user to insert their finger into the trigger guard to release the pistol

sns3guppy,

Respectfully, I think you’re really going a little bit overboard, especially considering the history of the gun. Plenty of people laughed and said it was crazy and made the same/similar statements in support of the gun when the initial “firing when dropped” issue came out. Sig was dishonest about it and people ended up with egg on their face. People got shot and hurt from a gun that was supposed to be drop-safe and wasn’t.

Not saying one way or another but there sure is a lot of smoke again so it wouldn't surprise me if there was an issue. All I’m saying is the gun and frankly, Sig, no longer get the benefit of the doubt. In my personal opinion, the gun isn't safe. Has never been safe, and its borderline criminal negligence for Sig to make a gun with a trigger pull that light and short with no safety tab on the trigger. Also don’t forget they Sig knew of issues long before they finally admitted it and let metric tons of guns go out to consumers that could go off when dropped.

I'm well aware of Sig's deception, including coming on this website to lie about it, and to lie about the failures in the P365.

I also own and shoot a number of P320's (and P365's), and had them pre-"upgrade" and shoot them post-"upgrade." I gave P320's to each of my kids. I carry them.

If you wish to fear the boogy-man, and distrust the P320, have a ball. The P320 does not go off on its own. Such arguments are bullshit.

The bullshit is thin cover for the inability to admit to fault. Those who claim it went off on their own are, quite simply, full of shit. Operator error. Nothing more.

What does the lack of a so-called “safety” tab on the trigger have to do with the safety of the P320? I know of nothing about such tabs that would have kept the pre-“upgrade” pistols from firing if dropped or struck just right. As far as I can determine, such tabs’ only purpose is to prevent the trigger itself from moving under inertia if, for example, the gun were dropped from a helicopter and landed just right. The trigger tabs I’m familiar with don’t affect the rest of the trigger or striker mechanism. If a trigger tab had been all that was necessary to fix the P320 problem, why did SIG go to all the trouble of changing so much else? Trigger tabs certainly don’t keep people from having accidents with Glocks: If the trigger and its tab are pressed to the rear, by the user’s finger or something else like a drawstring, flap of loose clothing, a bit of floppy holster leather, or anything else, the gun will fire—just as it’s designed to.

If someone thinks a trigger “safety” tab will prevent a gun from going off by itself when holstered or even dropped from a normal handling height, he must know something about them that I don’t, and I’m eager to learn what that is.

As most of us will readily admit, SIG has a problem with getting new products fully right. One would think that they would have learned their lesson by now and wouldn’t have to be recalling rifles to fix their triggers at this point. In the case of the P320, though, that wasn’t obvious at the beginning when the first reports started surfacing. The original design was reported by very knowledgeable outsiders to have been extensively proofed with the usual drop tests. After I heard of the problem, I tried without success to get my pre-upgrade pistol to discharge by dropping it, so it’s not surprising that the early reports were met with skepticism.

At this point, however, what reason do we have to believe that the P320 isn’t safe? Do we really believe that there aren’t countless YouTubers who would love to be the one to discover and demonstrate that the gun would go off without pulling the trigger if it were pounded on or dropped just right, or someone called it bad names or insulted its mother?