latest Sig 320 spontaneously discharge

[Kruel J]

If we started seeing story after story about Glock NDs and lawsuits and such you better believe that I would at least entertain the idea that there may be issues. I would NOT say that its all BS based on just my experience and round count. Hell it doesn't even have to be Glock...any firearm I own.

 

[DirectDrive]

I don't know what that means.

I ETA-ed to that post

 

[Kruel J]

I ETA-ed to that post

Ah gotcha, happens to me all the time.

 

[Koda]

If we started seeing story after story about Glock NDs and lawsuits and such you better believe that I would at least entertain the idea that there may be issues. I would NOT say that its all BS based on just my experience and round count. Hell it doesn't even have to be Glock...any firearm I own.

but we have.
This is one of the parts thats inconsistent to me, Glock NDs and lawsuits are well documented.

 

[Kruel J]

but we have.
This is one of the parts thats inconsistent to me, Glock NDs and lawsuits are well documented.

Recent is the key word. You should go back and read this thread.

 

[Member 53328]

but we have.
This is one of the parts thats inconsistent to me, Glock NDs and lawsuits are well documented.

And they have been fixed and are no longer current.

One platforms past doesn't validate the shortcomings of another platform in the present. By acknowledging that Glock had issues in the past you are confirming/agreeing the P320 has issues is in the present.

 

[Koda]

And they have been fixed and are no longer current.

what got fixed? Glock fixed their triggers? What was wrong with Glocks design?

 

[Kruel J]

what got fixed? Glock fixed their triggers? What was wrong with Glocks design?

Glock hasn't had lawsuits for NDs in years. And the ones they did have were from when striker-fired guns were just gaining traction and their new innovative design was questioned due to lack of external safety switch. Their triggers were never broken, and if Sig took their idea of the trigger safety they might not be having issues.

For the cheap seats, one has nothing to do with the other.

 

[Member 53328]

what got fixed? Glock fixed their triggers? What was wrong with Glocks design?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1998/11/18/armed-and-unready/419a50bf-23b0-4175-93ee-33211044c8df/

There are multiple lawsuits in the past against Glock for NDs yet they are all human error.

 

[Koda]

Recent is the key word. You should go back and read this thread.

One platforms past doesn't validate the shortcomings of another platform in the present. By acknowledging that Glock had issues in the past you are confirming/agreeing the P320 has issues is in the present.

Im lost on this past vs present position.
Im not arguing the Glocks were defective in design.

Glock hasn't had lawsuits for NDs in years. And the ones they did have were from when striker-fired guns were just gaining traction and their new innovative design was questioned due to lack of external safety switch. Their triggers were never broken, and if Sig took their idea of the trigger safety they might not be having issues.

For the cheap seats, one has nothing to do with the other.

then the past vs present argument is moot. The trigger dongle thingy isnt the deal breaker here, the argument this whole time has been that Sigs are defective not "less safe".
and it was proven the officer didnt have his gun holstered correctly.
Were going into another full circle, Im continuing to not see the consistency in the arguments against Sig... so im probably going to back out of the conversation again.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1998/11/18/armed-and-unready/419a50bf-23b0-4175-93ee-33211044c8df/

There are multiple lawsuits in the past against Glock for NDs yet they are all human error.

?
this doesnt confirm the Sig is less safe than a Glock, it just points to that huge elephant in the closet the manual safety..........

"The D.C. department liked the lack of an external manual safety, calling that "a paramount consideration" in selecting the Glock, according to the department's Firearms Training Manual. Officers accustomed to firing revolvers that lacked an external safety -- which included the entire D.C. force -- could more easily switch to the Glock than to a pistol that required them to learn how to disengage the safety before shooting, the department reasoned."
(this seems like the most obviously wrong decision but thats another subject. )

 

[DirectDrive]

If we started seeing story after story about Glock NDs and lawsuits and such you better believe that I would at least entertain the idea that there may be issues. I would NOT say that its all BS based on just my experience and round count. Hell it doesn't even have to be Glock...any firearm I own.

I think SIG is in a much better position than the lawyers and their clients.
They can't show spontaneous combustion, in every case the trigger is pulled after years of trying to prove otherwise.
SIG is their slot machine - sooner or later this has to pay off !
But why is it just P320 ?

1) Well, it's not just P320 - P320 is getting the media coverage because :
2) SIG arrogance - yes, the record would indicate this
Not offering a MS safety option
Not using a trigger shoe dingus
Not doing a full-blown safety recall (for the drop safe issue)
3) So many LEO's reporting ND's - these are pros - it must be the gun !
Some depts have no P320 issues, yet others are a mess
4) Lawyer-created myth of spontaneous discharge - this gun is a menace to society !
No other gun has ever had that accusation that I know of - creates intrigue in court of public opinion
5) The US Military has this pistol - SIG has armed our military and police forces with an unsafe pistol !
6) Anti-gun "news oulets" stoking the Get SIG fire with their slanted reporting

Note the title of this thread and the lawyer-speak verbiage that gets repeated in these threads.
The jury has spoken !

 

[DirectDrive]

And they have been fixed and are no longer current.

One platforms past doesn't validate the shortcomings of another platform in the present. By acknowledging that Glock had issues in the past you are confirming/agreeing the P320 has issues is in the present.

No, not confirming.
Comparing the accusations and seeing that they are similar.

 

[Member 53328]

Im lost on this past vs present position.
Im not arguing the Glocks were defective in design.


then the past vs present argument is moot. The trigger dongle thingy isnt the deal breaker here, the argument this whole time has been that Sigs are defective not "less safe".
and it was proven the officer didnt have his gun holstered correctly.
Were going into another full circle, Im continuing to not see the consistency in the arguments against Sig... so im probably going to back out of the conversation again.


?
this doesnt confirm the Sig is less safe than a Glock, it just points to that huge elephant in the closet the manual safety..........

"The D.C. department liked the lack of an external manual safety, calling that "a paramount consideration" in selecting the Glock, according to the department's Firearms Training Manual. Officers accustomed to firing revolvers that lacked an external safety -- which included the entire D.C. force -- could more easily switch to the Glock than to a pistol that required them to learn how to disengage the safety before shooting, the department reasoned."
(this seems like the most obviously wrong decision but thats another subject. )

So if they didn't ND with revolvers that don't have a safety then why are they NDing with a Glock that also doesn't have a safety?

Are we saying that they were used to having their finger on the trigger before they were supposed/safe to do but because of a heavy trigger pull they didn't go off? Are we saying the revolver made them lazy and complacent?

Tool mechanics doesn't substitute safe gun handling skills. Your point proves that. They got lazy and complacent cause the revolver was forgiving. The Glock just highlighted their poor firearm safety skills. Cause a Glock is not as forgiving as a revolver.

 

[Member 53328]

No, not confirming.
Comparing the accusations and seeing that they are similar.

True. Yet one is system is much more temperamental when outside forces are put into play.

To "compare" you have to "confirm" that they both had/have issues.

Again….. I am not saying the P320 just goes bang.

 

[Koda]

So if they didn't ND with revolvers that don't have a safety then why are they NDing with a Glock that also doesn't have a safety?

Are we saying that they were used to having their finger on the trigger before they were supposed/safe to do but because of a heavy trigger pull they didn't go off? Are we saying the revolver made them lazy and complacent?

Tool mechanics doesn't substitute safe gun handling skills. Your point proves that. They got lazy and complacent cause the revolver was forgiving. The Glock just highlighted their poor firearm safety skills. Cause a Glock is not as forgiving as a revolver.

and this is what continues to perplex me. If we are saying this is a training issue, which I agree, then its not a gun design issue, which has also been proven. The Sig is safe to carry as any other manual safety-less gun is.

 

[Member 53328]

and this is what continues to perplex me. If we are saying this is a training issue, which I agree, then its not a gun design issue, which has also been proven. The Sig is safe to carry as any other manual safety-less gun is.

It's safe in its static form.

Let me just put it this way. My personal opinion and why I moved away from carrying the P320. The P320 is awesome, great gun to shoot (especially the X5 Legion which is what I used to AIWB carry). But I look at all factors when I choose a gun to carry on a daily basis. I get to choose. A lot of LEOs don't get a choice. They carry on duty what the agency issues them.

When I select a carry gun of course I run it through its paces. Making sure it's accurate, dependable and safe. I also factor in the fact that I live in a real world. I don't live on a flat range where all forces are predictable, predetermined, and controlled. I know that there is the potential in having to use my firearm (I pray to God I never have to). I also don't live in a fantasy that a self defense scenario is some clean event. It's not just IDPA where I have my hands up and quick draw and put rounds on target and show clear. There is a real probability that I will be real close and very much hands on. I may get tripped, slammed on my back, beat, kicked, etc. I carry appendix in a holster that retains the gun simply by tension/friction. There is a possibility my gun could come loose, ride high (like in the original video in this post) or completely fall out and end up bouncing across the pavement.

Sig already acknowledged the drop issue with the P320 and yes it has been remedied. But the trigger is too light for me and I could easily see something happening like what happened in the video during an altercation. Factor in the issues in the past and what is happening currently I don't want a P320 pointed at my junk if I have to go hands on with someone. I don't want the trigger to be exposed during a fight. I'm not comfortable getting kicked or taking a knee to the stomach or getting pushed to the ground with a P320 right there. It may be my personal apprehension but the platform is like a ticking bomb for me.

I've lost a gun out of a holster in the past while jumping a fence. I nervously watched it hit the ground. What if there was a stick or a branch and the trigger got hung up and it discharged, or discharged on impact. I've been in physical altercations and I know things can go sideways in a hurry. I try to plan as much as I can for what could happen and if I can eliminate the worry of the gun going off unindented (even if it's just for my own confidence/comfort) I will. I will always attempt to control the factors I can, cause there are a myriad of factors that are completely out of my control.

Sorry it was long winded. But that's why I won't carry a P320. It's not cause it's not "safe" it's just not safe enough for for me.

 

[WillametteWill]

So if they didn't ND with revolvers that don't have a safety then why are they NDing with a Glock that also doesn't have a safety?

Are we saying that they were used to having their finger on the trigger before they were supposed/safe to do but because of a heavy trigger pull they didn't go off? Are we saying the revolver made them lazy and complacent?

Tool mechanics doesn't substitute safe gun handling skills. Your point proves that. They got lazy and complacent cause the revolver was forgiving. The Glock just highlighted their poor firearm safety skills. Cause a Glock is not as forgiving as a revolver.

Most resources I have read and LEO range folks I have spoken with indicate NDs about doubled when going from revolvers to Glocks (this was the case documented in Washington DC as well).

Sure, some can be attributed to being lazy and complacent. But most IMHO are based on the situation including stressful environments, movement, startle response, trigger confirmation (checking to make sure the trigger is still there even though you will swear you are not doing this...good European study on this), slip/capture events, interlimb response, slip/trip/fall and other factors.

I know you have more experience operating in areas where these can be a factor than most folks. It is much easier to keep fingers of triggers in day to day life and on the range. We can and should keep training, but we also be pragmatic enough to recognize that fingers will find triggers on devices that are specifically designed for the trigger finger to be on the trigger. Especially true during some fecal matinee.

 

[Koda]

Sorry it was long winded. But that's why I won't carry a P320. It's not cause it's not "safe" it's just not safe enough for for me.

ah, got it now. I think what I failed to connect was the personal preference part. I was stuck on the whole defective Sig idea. Not long winded, good write up. I agree too. For me its also why I prefer a manual safety, as a personal preference.

 

[Member 53328]

Most resources I have read and LEO range folks I have spoken with indicate NDs about doubled when going from revolvers to Glocks (this was the case documented in Washington DC as well).

Sure, some can be attributed to being lazy and complacent. But most IMHO are based on the situation including stressful environments, movement, startle response, trigger confirmation (checking to make sure the trigger is still there even though you will swear you are not doing this...good European study on this), slip/capture events, interlimb response, slip/trip/fall and other factors.

I know you have more experience operating in areas where these can be a factor than most folks. It is much easier to keep fingers of triggers in day to day life and on the range. We can and should keep training, but we also be pragmatic enough to recognize that fingers will find triggers on devices that are specifically designed for the trigger finger to be on the trigger. Especially true during some fecal matinee.

If we can train ourselves to switch off a small lever (safety) during a stressful event then we should be able to in return train ourselves to keep a finger off the trigger in a stressful event.

I do feel for the guys who lived, breathed and carried revolvers and then were forced to transition to a SF platform. Those are two very different worlds and accidents were guaranteed to happen. The amount of training to reroute your brain when using a different platform would be extensive and knowing LE training it wasn't nearly enough before making a drastic platform change.

 

[RX-79G]

You haven't looked very hard.
Glock unintentional discharges are widely documented.
I've never looked for M&P UD's but I know that LA County had a rash of M&P UD's in the 2014/15 timeframe.
It was a transition period for LA County, just like with this Montville dept.

Any everyone seems to agree that Glock discharges are because of the light trigger, not because the gun doesn't work as designed. Which is what they are saying about the SIg.