SIG P-320, redux...

[mhayd93]

I can't wait until these sig-wielding departments switch back to Glocks and then have the same issues. I personally have no dog in the fight, as I think the Sig P320 is one of the most overhyped, uninspiring plastic pistols to hit the market in the modern era; it's widespread adoption by the military and law enforcement is a textbook example of "who's in bed with who" politicking.

Glock-obsession and fanboying is annoying, but at least Glock has an undeniable and basically unrivaled pedigree. The P320 skipped the line, which I think is why the Sig haters are so vitriolic and are guided by emotions when it comes to reports of "uncommanded discharges" involving the 320. They want it to be the gun's fault, and so will jump through all kinds of illogical hoops to satisfy their desires.

These "accidental discharges" are clearly user error; likely as a result of poor weapon's handling when holstering or unholstering the firearm. In some cases, they are probably also just the result of stupidity, aka a classic negligent discharge.

If there truly was a fatal design flaw that caused the P320 to go off just by incidental motion, there should be way more cases out there by law enforcement, military, and civilians alike. It should also be ridiculously easy to "recreate."

 

[lucusloc]

If you choose to carry it then carry it and leave it at that. The problem is people are insecure and feel attacked. If you're carrying it clearly you have made your decision. Everybody that decides not to carry should be given the same respect as the person that decides to carry it.

Except that is not what is happening here at all, people are defending Sig because this is actually an attack against gun ownership in general with Sig as the weak link used to break the chain.

Let look at the facts:

• The "gen 1" P320 had a legitimate issue. It was a very specific issue that no contemporary standardized testing would ever detect, but it was still a real, reproducible issue. Sig admitted fault* and has undergone a rigorous program to repair and replace all gen 1 guns with the fixed gen 2 models.

*Yes we can quibble about the tone of their response and all the legalese and deflection they used in their press releases. I do not care for that either. But that does not change the fact that they fixed the problem as soon as it was identified and at their own cost for every gun shipped. Something something actions vs. words.

• Sig has been sued for multiple "gen 2" mishaps, they settled a few (probably for pennies on the dollar compared to the cost to litigate), won a few others and lost two. Every single one that went to litigation ultimately resulted in the plaintiff admitting the trigger was pulled. The two they lost were on the basis of a design feature common to virtually all modern pistols. Specifically they lost because the guns lacked a manual safety that would prevent the gun from going off when the trigger was pulled. Zero case have been lost on the basis of a "defect" specific to Sig.

• As far as I can tell every single one of these cases has been brought by a single law firm that specializes in targeting large companies and extracting huge settlements either thorough continuous litigation, very public class-actions or just a general public smear campaign. Their two victories (if they stick post appeal) lay a template for going after every other modern pistol manufacturer on the market, and if you think they will not exploit that after the have milked Sig for all they can get I have a bridge to sell you.

And that is all just the litigation side of things. We also have "the meme wars" over Sig, as we see here constantly. The issue here is that while everyone is entitled to their own opinions, they are not entitled to their own facts. Just look at the comments, we have people who cannot fathom how a holster and handcuffs are the problem because they cannot replicate it with their own setup, when the link posted clearly shows exactly how it could happen with the departments setup right in the video (3:25 in the video). Yes, they do have holsters with a gap large enough to fit various bits of handcuffs into the trigger area. It is right there with photographic evidence. But we had to have a huge back-and-forth about it because "Sig haters" apparently have a problem with posted evidence. I am not even bothering to quote because this is not a problem unique to this person, this thread or even this forum. It happens everywhere, because posting a meme or snide comment is easier than checking the actual posted evidence for potential issues not Sig related.

Every single one of these incidents could have happened with a not-Sig, assuming the same variables (bad holster, poor training etc.). But scapegoating Sig is still easier, because there is inertia behind it. "Haha Sigs suck!" is an easy joke to make, largely because it has been made before. But people are making it not realizing the liability it is creating for the gun community as a whole. I am already starting to see anti-gun groups latch onto this as a reason to ditch the PLCAA. They are calming that the reason Sig is having so much luck "dodging responsibility" is because of that law. Never mind the insanity of that argument, they just point to "hey, even the gun community thinks they are getting away with it!" and that argument works with low information people. "Just look at all the memes!"

We really need to be smarter about this. Sig had a very real problem with the gen 1. Even Sig fanbois readily admitted this and demanded accountability. We got it. Sig fixed it. If there is a problem with the gen 2 we should demand those same standards be upheld. But to do that first you have to demonstrate there is a problem. The problem with the gen 1 was identified, and from there is was easy to reproduce. Now I do not know about you, but I have not seen many videos calming to have a repeatable problem with the gen 2, and the one I have seen are, to be perfectly blunt, complete BS. They manipulate the gun in a way that is functionally identical to pulling the trigger, thus bypassing the internal safeties explicitly designed to prevent discharge in that scenario. And yes, I followed along and repeated the entire process with my own gun just to make sure I understood their argument. And while your opinion may vary, this has only made me more confident in the new p320 design, because even if some of the internal safeties actually do fail, I still see no way for the sear to walk off on its own at all. The gun is explicitly designed to be walk-proof.

But all of this empirical testing means nothing to Sig bashers. Cheap memes and easy targets trump facts, logic and consequences. And no, this does not mean you have to like Sigs now. You are still free to not like them all you want. But we have to stop spreading misinformation. There is zero proof that the P320 goes off on its own. That is not an opinion, that is a solid fact. It is a fact that could change in the future, but at this point I am even skeptical that is possible at this point, given what I have learned about the design. But if you do want to contest that fact, then offer proof to the contrary. Demonstrate the problem so it can be fixed, just like it was the first time.

But for crying out loud, if you do not have any such proof then stop giving ammo to the enemy. Posting memes that "Sigs just go off!" and whining that Sig is not fixing a non-existent problem is damaging the entire gun industry. They will be using this as a model to go after other gun companies if it works well enough. Please consider the consequences, this is bigger than just your opinion now.

 

[lucusloc]

I can't wait until these sig-wielding departments switch back to Glocks and then have the same issues. I personally have no dog in the fight, as I think the Sig P320 is one of the most overhyped, uninspiring plastic pistols to hit the market in the modern era; it's widespread adoption by the military and law enforcement is a textbook example of "who's in bed with who" politicking.

Glock-obsession and fanboying is annoying, but at least Glock has an undeniable and basically unrivaled pedigree. The P320 skipped the line, which I think is why the Sig haters are so vitriolic and are guided by emotions when it comes to reports of "uncommanded discharges" involving the 320. They want it to be the gun's fault, and so will jump through all kinds of illogical hoops to satisfy their desires.

These "accidental discharges" are clearly user error; likely as a result of poor weapon's handling when holstering or unholstering the firearm. In some cases, they are probably also just the result of stupidity, aka a classic negligent discharge.

If there truly was a fatal design flaw that caused the P320 to go off just by incidental motion, there should be way more cases out there by law enforcement, military, and civilians alike. It should also be ridiculously easy to "recreate."

The P320 does have one party trick no one else has, and it makes it very attractive to large-scale adopters. That is the FCU, and how the frame/slide are completely decoupled from the functional internals. This means you can by one gun and configure it in about a million different ways with virtually no effort. Pull a pin, swap parts and you can go from everything from a sub-compact to a full fledged PDW. This makes the gun far more cost effective than even Glocks when it comes to diversified roles. The P320 can become virtually anything, all with the same gun on the same contract.

Now is this a party trick that most average gun owners will care about? Probably not. Most people will buy one gun, have one frame and slide and never swap anything. It will be functionally identical to every other gun out there. Why care about modularity if you will never use it?

But do not let this cloud your judgement on why the P320 is winning contracts; its unique features make it a standout for large contracts with virtually no peer in the market yet. You can bet that most companies that chase contracts are going to be trying to replicate this feature (while avoiding patents I am sure) as fast as they can. As soon as Glock, S&W, Berretta and all the rest can figureou out a viable FCU equivalent you can bet they will hype it as much as possible too.

The only question I have is can they develop something viable that does not run afoul of patents, or will we have to wait for these patens to expire before the rest of the industry follow suite (similar to what happend with the brownig action or the AR-15). Sig's FCU patent will expire in 2038, so we have some time yet to see how this sorts out.

 

[WillametteWill]

Except that is not what is happening here at all, people are defending Sig because this is actually an attack against gun ownership in general with Sig as the weak link used to break the chain.

Brilliantly stated.

I wish there were a wider understanding of this.

Nope. My last department had two instances (that I know of) where our newly issued pistols "went off" in holsters... both cases, drawstrings from jackets or other outergarments with little plastic doodads on the ends migrated into the holsters. Way more common than those that don't carry firearms for a living would know.,

Agreed, but since no one is making memes about all these instances, people just assume they are not happening. They are and always have been.

 

[1775usmc]

Except that is not what is happening here at all, people are defending Sig because this is actually an attack against gun ownership in general with Sig as the weak link used to break the chain.

Let look at the facts:

• The "gen 1" P320 had a legitimate issue. It was a very specific issue that no contemporary standardized testing would ever detect, but it was still a real, reproducible issue. Sig admitted fault* and has undergone a rigorous program to repair and replace all gen 1 guns with the fixed gen 2 models.

*Yes we can quibble about the tone of their response and all the legalese and deflection they used in their press releases. I do not care for that either. But that does not change the fact that they fixed the problem as soon as it was identified and at their own cost for every gun shipped. Something something actions vs. words.

• Sig has been sued for multiple "gen 2" mishaps, they settled a few (probably for pennies on the dollar compared to the cost to litigate), won a few others and lost two. Every single one that went to litigation ultimately resulted in the plaintiff admitting the trigger was pulled. The two they lost were on the basis of a design feature common to virtually all modern pistols. Specifically they lost because the guns lacked a manual safety that would prevent the gun from going off when the trigger was pulled. Zero case have been lost on the basis of a "defect" specific to Sig.

• As far as I can tell every single one of these cases has been brought by a single law firm that specializes in targeting large companies and extracting huge settlements either thorough continuous litigation, very public class-actions or just a general public smear campaign. Their two victories (if they stick post appeal) lay a template for going after every other modern pistol manufacturer on the market, and if you think they will not exploit that after the have milked Sig for all they can get I have a bridge to sell you.

And that is all just the litigation side of things. We also have "the meme wars" over Sig, as we see here constantly. The issue here is that while everyone is entitled to their own opinions, they are not entitled to their own facts. Just look at the comments, we have people who cannot fathom how a holster and handcuffs are the problem because they cannot replicate it with their own setup, when the link posted clearly shows exactly how it could happen with the departments setup right in the video (3:25 in the video). Yes, they do have holsters with a gap large enough to fit various bits of handcuffs into the trigger area. It is right there with photographic evidence. But we had to have a huge back-and-forth about it because "Sig haters" apparently have a problem with posted evidence. I am not even bothering to quote because this is not a problem unique to this person, this thread or even this forum. It happens everywhere, because posting a meme or snide comment is easier than checking the actual posted evidence for potential issues not Sig related.

Every single one of these incidents could have happened with a not-Sig, assuming the same variables (bad holster, poor training etc.). But scapegoating Sig is still easier, because there is inertia behind it. "Haha Sigs suck!" is an easy joke to make, largely because it has been made before. But people are making it not realizing the liability it is creating for the gun community as a whole. I am already starting to see anti-gun groups latch onto this as a reason to ditch the PLCAA. They are calming that the reason Sig is having so much luck "dodging responsibility" is because of that law. Never mind the insanity of that argument, they just point to "hey, even the gun community thinks they are getting away with it!" and that argument works with low information people. "Just look at all the memes!"

We really need to be smarter about this. Sig had a very real problem with the gen 1. Even Sig fanbois readily admitted this and demanded accountability. We got it. Sig fixed it. If there is a problem with the gen 2 we should demand those same standards be upheld. But to do that first you have to demonstrate there is a problem. The problem with the gen 1 was identified, and from there is was easy to reproduce. Now I do not know about you, but I have not seen many videos calming to have a repeatable problem with the gen 2, and the one I have seen are, to be perfectly blunt, complete BS. They manipulate the gun in a way that is functionally identical to pulling the trigger, thus bypassing the internal safeties explicitly designed to prevent discharge in that scenario. And yes, I followed along and repeated the entire process with my own gun just to make sure I understood their argument. And while your opinion may vary, this has only made me more confident in the new p320 design, because even if some of the internal safeties actually do fail, I still see no way for the sear to walk off on its own at all. The gun is explicitly designed to be walk-proof.

But all of this empirical testing means nothing to Sig bashers. Cheap memes and easy targets trump facts, logic and consequences. And no, this does not mean you have to like Sigs now. You are still free to not like them all you want. But we have to stop spreading misinformation. There is zero proof that the P320 goes off on its own. That is not an opinion, that is a solid fact. It is a fact that could change in the future, but at this point I am even skeptical that is possible at this point, given what I have learned about the design. But if you do want to contest that fact, then offer proof to the contrary. Demonstrate the problem so it can be fixed, just like it was the first time.

But for crying out loud, if you do not have any such proof then stop giving ammo to the enemy. Posting memes that "Sigs just go off!" and whining that Sig is not fixing a non-existent problem is damaging the entire gun industry. They will be using this as a model to go after other gun companies if it works well enough. Please consider the consequences, this is bigger than just your opinion now.

 

[mhayd93]

Except that is not what is happening here at all, people are defending Sig because this is actually an attack against gun ownership in general with Sig as the weak link used to break the chain.

Let look at the facts:

• The "gen 1" P320 had a legitimate issue. It was a very specific issue that no contemporary standardized testing would ever detect, but it was still a real, reproducible issue. Sig admitted fault* and has undergone a rigorous program to repair and replace all gen 1 guns with the fixed gen 2 models.

*Yes we can quibble about the tone of their response and all the legalese and deflection they used in their press releases. I do not care for that either. But that does not change the fact that they fixed the problem as soon as it was identified and at their own cost for every gun shipped. Something something actions vs. words.

• Sig has been sued for multiple "gen 2" mishaps, they settled a few (probably for pennies on the dollar compared to the cost to litigate), won a few others and lost two. Every single one that went to litigation ultimately resulted in the plaintiff admitting the trigger was pulled. The two they lost were on the basis of a design feature common to virtually all modern pistols. Specifically they lost because the guns lacked a manual safety that would prevent the gun from going off when the trigger was pulled. Zero case have been lost on the basis of a "defect" specific to Sig.

• As far as I can tell every single one of these cases has been brought by a single law firm that specializes in targeting large companies and extracting huge settlements either thorough continuous litigation, very public class-actions or just a general public smear campaign. Their two victories (if they stick post appeal) lay a template for going after every other modern pistol manufacturer on the market, and if you think they will not exploit that after the have milked Sig for all they can get I have a bridge to sell you.

And that is all just the litigation side of things. We also have "the meme wars" over Sig, as we see here constantly. The issue here is that while everyone is entitled to their own opinions, they are not entitled to their own facts. Just look at the comments, we have people who cannot fathom how a holster and handcuffs are the problem because they cannot replicate it with their own setup, when the link posted clearly shows exactly how it could happen with the departments setup right in the video (3:25 in the video). Yes, they do have holsters with a gap large enough to fit various bits of handcuffs into the trigger area. It is right there with photographic evidence. But we had to have a huge back-and-forth about it because "Sig haters" apparently have a problem with posted evidence. I am not even bothering to quote because this is not a problem unique to this person, this thread or even this forum. It happens everywhere, because posting a meme or snide comment is easier than checking the actual posted evidence for potential issues not Sig related.

Every single one of these incidents could have happened with a not-Sig, assuming the same variables (bad holster, poor training etc.). But scapegoating Sig is still easier, because there is inertia behind it. "Haha Sigs suck!" is an easy joke to make, largely because it has been made before. But people are making it not realizing the liability it is creating for the gun community as a whole. I am already starting to see anti-gun groups latch onto this as a reason to ditch the PLCAA. They are calming that the reason Sig is having so much luck "dodging responsibility" is because of that law. Never mind the insanity of that argument, they just point to "hey, even the gun community thinks they are getting away with it!" and that argument works with low information people. "Just look at all the memes!"

We really need to be smarter about this. Sig had a very real problem with the gen 1. Even Sig fanbois readily admitted this and demanded accountability. We got it. Sig fixed it. If there is a problem with the gen 2 we should demand those same standards be upheld. But to do that first you have to demonstrate there is a problem. The problem with the gen 1 was identified, and from there is was easy to reproduce. Now I do not know about you, but I have not seen many videos calming to have a repeatable problem with the gen 2, and the one I have seen are, to be perfectly blunt, complete BS. They manipulate the gun in a way that is functionally identical to pulling the trigger, thus bypassing the internal safeties explicitly designed to prevent discharge in that scenario. And yes, I followed along and repeated the entire process with my own gun just to make sure I understood their argument. And while your opinion may vary, this has only made me more confident in the new p320 design, because even if some of the internal safeties actually do fail, I still see no way for the sear to walk off on its own at all. The gun is explicitly designed to be walk-proof.

But all of this empirical testing means nothing to Sig bashers. Cheap memes and easy targets trump facts, logic and consequences. And no, this does not mean you have to like Sigs now. You are still free to not like them all you want. But we have to stop spreading misinformation. There is zero proof that the P320 goes off on its own. That is not an opinion, that is a solid fact. It is a fact that could change in the future, but at this point I am even skeptical that is possible at this point, given what I have learned about the design. But if you do want to contest that fact, then offer proof to the contrary. Demonstrate the problem so it can be fixed, just like it was the first time.

But for crying out loud, if you do not have any such proof then stop giving ammo to the enemy. Posting memes that "Sigs just go off!" and whining that Sig is not fixing a non-existent problem is damaging the entire gun industry. They will be using this as a model to go after other gun companies if it works well enough. Please consider the consequences, this is bigger than just your opinion now.

+1 It really is the same level of emotional decision making that gun grabbers use to advance their agenda!

 

[Koda]

Nope. My last department had two instances (that I know of) where our newly issued pistols "went off" in holsters... both cases, drawstrings from jackets or other outergarments with little plastic doodads on the ends migrated into the holsters. Way more common than those that don't carry firearms for a living would know.,

Garment drawstings were breifly mentioned in a DH1 class I took years ago. Ive mentioned it a few time to others and the idea has always been met with rejection (especially with expensive name brand clothing). I can see officers thinking the same thing.
Do police department outerwear utilize drawstrings? Im curious if this is part of the training (to cut them off or select another clothing choice)??

 

[1775usmc]

Garment drawstings were breifly mentioned in a DH1 class I took years ago. Ive mentioned it a few time to others and the idea has always been met with rejection (especially with expensive name brand clothing). I can see officers thinking the same thing.
Do police department outerwear utilize drawstrings? Im curious if this is part of the training (to cut them off or select another clothing choice)??

Cut them b!tches off and toss them in the trash. Certain jackets have actually come up with a solution for these were they are sewn into an upright position above the edge of the jacket and keeping out of the way. That's not a common feature though.

After loosing multiple tools due to the bungee that runs around the waist line I cut them off every new jacket I buy. YMMV.

 

[Koda]

Cut them b!tches off and toss them in the trash. Certain jackets have actually come up with a solution for these were they are sewn into an upright position above the edge of the jacket and keeping out of the way. That's not a common feature though.

After loosing multiple tools due to the bungee that runs around the waist line I cut them off every new jacket I buy. YMMV.

I did a practice draw with a drawstring coat just to see what would happen and the results were comical and scary how bad it effs up your draw.

Yet most ive mentioned this to refuse to cut them off.
Now back to WML and other improper holster designs its not unrealistic at all a drawstring could land inside the trigger area.
Which also demonstrates that any other object could get in there.

I looked at pics of the WML duty holste you linked to earlier and the gap is huge....

 

[1775usmc]

I did a practice draw with a drawstring coat just to see what would happen and the results were comical and scary how bad it effs up your draw.

Yet most ive mentioned this to refuse to cut them off.
Now back to WML and other improper holster designs its not unrealistic at all a drawstring could land inside the trigger area.
Which also demonstrates that any other object could get in there.

I looked at pics of the WML duty holste you linked to earlier and the gap is huge....

Well it's alien gear and they don't produce quality. Makes sense why they go hand in hand with the P320.

WML duty holsters will always have a bigger gap to accommodate the light. So either we train cops better and look over their gear/clothing through a microscope (which the Watch Commander or Patrol Supervisor should be doing before each shift) or take their lights away. Or just leave it as is and the issue will continue. The job/gear comes with risks. You can mitigate a lot of them but bad things will always find a way.

There are things that could definitely make the P320 safer. No one can deny that. A simple trigger safety would be huge. I don't understand why SIG doesn't implement some kind of safety on the trigger. It baffles me.

 

[lucusloc]

Well it's alien gear and they don't produce quality. Makes sense why they go hand in hand with the P320.

WML duty holsters will always have a bigger gap to accommodate the light. So either we train cops better and look over their gear/clothing through a microscope (which the Watch Commander or Patrol Supervisor should be doing before each shift) or take their lights away. Or just leave it as is and the issue will continue. The job/gear comes with risks. You can mitigate a lot of them but bad things will always find a way.

There are things that could definitely make the P320 safer. No one can deny that. A simple trigger safety would be huge. I don't understand why SIG doesn't implement some kind of safety on the trigger. It baffles me.

View attachment 2066787

And that criticism does not apply to Glock, Beretta, S&W etc. because why? They all have the exact same "problem;" if you pull the trigger they go off.

 

[1775usmc]

And that criticism does not apply to Glock, Beretta, S&W etc. because why? They all have the exact same "problem;" if you pull the trigger they go off.

Trigger safety.

P320 doesn't have it.

 

[Koda]

Trigger safety.

P320 doesn't have it.

Its woryh noting a trigger safety only prevents inertia discharge, it doesnt prevent obstructions from pulling the trigger.

 

[1775usmc]

Its woryh noting a trigger safety only prevents inertia discharge, it doesnt prevent obstructions from pulling the trigger.

Not true. You have to pull from the center of the trigger blade. If something grabs the slide of the trigger and the lever is not depressed the trigger will not engage. No matter how hard you pull.

It has to be direct. With that said could something still get wrapped around the front of the trigger… sure. But it's a whole lot harder to engage the trigger.

 

[Koda]

Not true. You have to pull from the center of the trigger blade. If something grabs the slide of the trigger and the lever is not depressed the trigger will not engage. No matter how hard you pull.

It has to be direct. With that said could something still get wrapped around the front of the trigger… sure. But it's a whole lot harder to engage the trigger.

You have to pull from the center on all triggers.
Lots of NDs with Glocks because people thought their trigger tab prevented pulls so they tossed their loaded glocks in gym bags, backpacks, or pockets, etc

 

[1775usmc]

You have to pull from the center on all triggers.
Lots of NDs with Glocks because people thought their trigger tab prevented pulls so they tossed their loaded glocks in gym bags, backpacks, or pockets, etc

I had multiple P320s. You can easily pull the trigger with pressure on one side or the other.

Again quit changing the subject or the parameters. We are talking about guns in holsters. Not floating around some retards bag. That's simple natural selection. Let's not complicate it.

Apparently this is a hard concept for to understand without photos. I'll do my best to assist once off work. Pulling a Glock out at work right now would be frowned upon.

 

[lucusloc]

Trigger safety.

P320 doesn't have it.

You mean the Glock trigger dongle? A good chunk of guns don't have it. And I fail to see how they would help in a situation where the trigger is depressed.

Trigger dongles do not reliably prevent FOD trigger activation, because that is not what they are for. FOD activation can be identical to a trigger activation, which includes depressing the "trigger safety." Indeed they are a drop safety (per Glock, not sure what other manufacturers consider them safeties against), and only marginally protect from FOD, in as much as the FOD does not interact with the safety itself (if it does the safety is automatically defeated by the FOD).

Hell, these limitations have lead many people to question if such "safety devices" are even worth including at all as their efficacy as a drop safety is also dubious. They naturally fall out of the way in the most common orientation for drop-discharges. The original Sig P320 drop discharge issue, for a relevant example, probably would not have been prevented by a trigger safety as the safety would have been right in line with the impact forces too, thus ensuring it would deactivate itself right at the critical moment.

Trigger safeties can mitigate some edge cases, but they are no substitute for properly controlling the trigger (or a proper trigger safety, for that matter). Apparently another good argument for their removal is some people's false sense of security concerning them.

 

[Dirty Cary]

Glock leg was a thing way before the p320 was around..

 

[Koda]

Whats "FOD"?

 

[1775usmc]

You mean the Glock trigger dongle? A good chunk of guns don't have it. And I fail to see how they would help in a situation where the trigger is depressed.

Trigger dongles do not reliably prevent FOD trigger activation, because that is not what they are for. FOD activation can be identical to a trigger activation, which includes depressing the "trigger safety." Indeed they are a drop safety (per Glock, not sure what other manufacturers consider them safeties against), and only marginally protect from FOD, in as much as the FOD does not interact with the safety itself (if it does the safety is automatically defeated by the FOD).

Hell, these limitations have lead many people to question if such "safety devices" are even worth including at all as their efficacy as a drop safety is also dubious. They naturally fall out of the way in the most common orientation for drop-discharges. The original Sig P320 drop discharge issue, for a relevant example, probably would not have been prevented by a trigger safety as the safety would have been right in line with the impact forces too, thus ensuring it would deactivate itself right at the critical moment.

Trigger safeties can mitigate some edge cases, but they are no substitute for properly controlling the trigger (or a proper trigger safety, for that matter). Apparently another good argument for their removal is some people's false sense of security concerning them.

No sh!t Sherlock. Again. Not talking about fingers here. I'm talking about guns in holsters being activated by foreign objects and outside elements.