New 2 July 2020 SIG P320 Lawsuit and P320 Concerns

[jd950]

Maybe don’t put a gun with a short light trigger pull in a soft pocket instead of a holster ?

Also, if the plaintiff firearms experience is so extensive, why isn’t it detailed?I

I know nothing about the case and am not attacking nor defending the P320: just commenting on your question. This is pretty clearly language from a civil case Complaint. The proper format for allegations in a Complaint are simple declaratory statements such as that one. No explanations or details are needed or generally appropriate there. That comes later. So, nothing can be read into the lack of details in what is depicted.

After writing the above, curiosity got the better of me and although i did not look at the Bosher case, I do see where there are seven more plaintiffs who seem to have filed suits against Sig in February.

[HCM]

I know nothing about the case and am not attacking nor defending the P320: just commenting on your question. This is pretty clearly language from a civil case Complaint. The proper format for allegations in a Complaint are simple declaratory statements such as that one. No explanations or details are needed or generally appropriate there. That comes later. So, nothing can be read into the lack of details in what is depicted.

I’m familiar but usually there is some brief explanation / justification for the claim.

For example, in the lawsuit that was the basis for this thread, an individual made a similar claim based on having been a Marine and a corrections officer.

In my experience, the weaker, the argument the less they say.

Given the half truths, innuendo, and even a few outright lies found in most of these complaints, Color me skeptical.

[HCM]

I know nothing about the case and am not attacking nor defending the P320: just commenting on your question. This is pretty clearly language from a civil case Complaint. The proper format for allegations in a Complaint are simple declaratory statements such as that one. No explanations or details are needed or generally appropriate there. That comes later. So, nothing can be read into the lack of details in what is depicted.

After writing the above, curiosity got the better of me and although i did not look at the Bosher case, I do see where there are seven more plaintiffs who seem to have filed suits against Sig in February.

Here’s the thing, there are dozens of 320 lawsuits.

However, to date, SIG has not lost or settled in any suit involving a post June 2019 320. And unlike the original drop safe issues which were readily repeatable, none of these dozens of plaintiffs have been able to recreate their claimed issue in post incident testing.

[jd950]

Here’s the thing, there are dozens of 320 lawsuits.

However, to date, SIG has not lost or settled in any suit involving a post June 2019 320. And unlike the original drop safe issues which were readily repeatable, none of these dozens of plaintiffs have been able to recreate their claimed issue in post incident testing.

I understand. My point, really was just that the lack of such details in a complaint neither (to me) support nor refute the claims made. Generally speaking, when I see these suits, it is not readily apparent what vintage gun they are referring to, and I don't usually have enough interest to try and figure it out. I sort of assume that most of these are post-upgrade guns by now, but that maybe not.

The bump in the road that I have trouble with is that even though there are numerous other popular striker-fired guns (S&W, Glock, Walther, Springfield, HK and even the P365 from Sig, to name some), it just always seems to be the P320 that is involved. Maybe there is just a disproportionate number of incompetent users carrying the P320. I don't know. But, I come back to what I have said before...there is nothing the P320 does that some other gun can't do, so why bother with it, unless one has no choice?

I used to think this would eventually get sorted out one way or the other and the P320 would be gone or conclusively "cleared." Increasingly, I am not sure that will ever happen, at least until the military moves to something else.

[HCM]

I understand. My point, really was just that the lack of such details in a complaint neither (to me) support nor refute the claims made. Generally speaking, when I see these suits, it is not readily apparent what vintage gun they are referring to, and I don't usually have enough interest to try and figure it out. I sort of assume that most of these are post-upgrade guns by now, but that maybe not.

The bump in the road that I have trouble with is that even though there are numerous other popular striker-fired guns (S&W, Glock, Walther, Springfield, HK and even the P365 from Sig, to name some), it just always seems to be the P320 that is involved. Maybe there is just a disproportionate number of incompetent users carrying the P320. I don't know. But, I come back to what I have said before...there is nothing the P320 does that some other gun can't do, so why bother with it, unless one has no choice?

I used to think this would eventually get sorted out one way or the other and the P320 would be gone or conclusively "cleared." Increasingly, I am not sure that will ever happen, at least until the military moves to something else.

There’s plenty of other incidents with the other striker fired platforms. They just don’t get the same level of public attention.

I think there’s several factors that play, people don’t like to take responsibility, people are greedy and smell, a payday, and there a bit of “missing white woman” syndrome where 320 issues simply get more attention due to past drama fueling future drama.

[Mitch]

There’s plenty of other incidents with the other striker fired platforms. They just don’t get the same level of public attention.

I think there’s several factors that play, people don’t like to take responsibility, people are greedy and smell, a payday, and there a bit of “missing white woman” syndrome where 320 issues simply get more attention due to past drama fueling future drama.

All of this and let’s be honest, it’s an unforgiving gun. That doesn’t mean it spontaneously goes off, but it tolerates very little bullshit from the end user before it makes a loud noise.

[AMC]

All of this and let’s be honest, it’s an unforgiving gun. That doesn’t mean it spontaneously goes off, but it tolerates very little bullshit from the end user before it makes a loud noise.

Easier to shoot means easier to shoot.

Sharks don't smell Glock or S&W blood in the water.....but smell Sig blood from 3000 miles away.

In addition, knuckleheads have been incentivized to do this by internet douchebaggery. I just recently heard about an off-duty ND at my old place by an officer. The day after the incident he came to work and wrote a memo documenting that the gun, a Sig 320, has a known problem of spontaneous discharges that's well documented by the courts, so it wasn't his fault. Clue #1 was that knuckleheads was still carrying the '320' IWB as he typed the memo at work (which NO ONE seemed to have an issue with). Clue #2 was that the gun....wasn't a 320! It was a 365.

[HCM]

All of this and let’s be honest, it’s an unforgiving gun. That doesn’t mean it spontaneously goes off, but it tolerates very little bullshit from the end user before it makes a loud noise.

This is accurate in my experience.

[HCM]

Easier to shoot means easier to shoot.

Sharks don't smell Glock or S&W blood in the water.....but smell Sig blood from 3000 miles away.

In addition, knuckleheads have been incentivized to do this by internet douchebaggery. I just recently heard about an off-duty ND at my old place by an officer. The day after the incident he came to work and wrote a memo documenting that the gun, a Sig 320, has a known problem of spontaneous discharges that's well documented by the courts, so it wasn't his fault. Clue #1 was that knuckleheads was still carrying the '320' IWB as he typed the memo at work (which NO ONE seemed to have an issue with). Clue #2 was that the gun....wasn't a 320! It was a 365.

He didn’t even know what type of gun he was carrying, but the affidavit for his lawsuit will describe him as having “ Extensive firearms experience.”

[call_me_ski]

Have we discussed a potential problem with reassembly?

I stole this from Reddit: user u/flatbreadcrisis

Possible Cause for P320 Accidental Discharges: Reassembly Error State

The Sig P320 can be assembled with the trigger group in an 'error state', in which the sear can drop unexpectedly and the trigger reset mechanism may malfunction.

\*\* Edit: link to pic of slide lock interacting in this way where the issue lies: There an extension on the trigger that has to push up but is blocked by a bar the disassembly lever moves into place. When the disassembly lever is rotated back, in order for that bar to move back forward out of the way the slide lock lever has to move upwards so a notch can slip back into place in a hole in the slide lock.


Second Pic showing sear engagement when it shouldnt:

Let's assume the slide is off of your P320 Pistol. The correct reassembly is as follows:

1. Put the slide on the rails
2. Pull the slide all the way to the rear
3. **Engage The Slide Hold to Lock the Slide Rearward By Pressing It Upwards (This is the critical step)**
4. Flip the disassembly lever and release the slide.

This is the correct reassembled state for the gun. However it is possible to get problems by simply doing this instead:

*3. Hold the slide to the rear manually with your hands, and leave the slide release in the downwards position.(this is wrong)*

While holding the slide back, you flip the lever and the gun will reassemble fine, and the trigger will appear to work. It may be a dead trigger at first, but a quick rack of the slide recocks and it seems fine. **However**\*\*,\*\* **by failing to push the slide release upwards at any point, the trigger is now in an error state**. It will remain so until the slide release is pushed upwards. In this state, the gun can be set off even by a firm shake, most commonly if the user pulls the slide part of the way back, then releases it forward (Similar to how you may check the chamber for a live round, not wanting to eject it.)

The trigger feels a bit squishy and off, not the usual pressure and firm snap but still you can hear the striker drop when pulled, and to an unsuspecting user it seems normal.In this state, a user could then put a magazine in the gun, then rack the slide, chambering a round, all without engaging the slide lock upwards. They would then pull the slide part ways back to inspect that a live round was in the chamber, setting the sear even more precariously than a full rack seems to, then maybe holster the gun. A sharp bump or shake is sufficient to often drop the sear in this state and set off a round.

The solution is simple, pull the slide all the way back again, and push up on the slide lock. You will hear a firm click as the trigger resets to a correct state. But it's pretty scary that you could end up in this state without ever having done anything apparently wrong. Most other guns you may be used to like Glocks don't require this critical step for their trigger upon reassembling.