Sig Sauer P320 - Self Discharge Reports

Status
Not open for further replies.
That was the biggest "question" I was alluding to.

I am waiting to see that reenactment combined with the technical assessment of the weapon.

I am sorry the incident happened but my "spider sense" is tingling that a few pieces of information are missing/questionable.

Yes, I'm wondering if there is some kind of strange incompatibility of the holster and pistol being mated together that causes something to happen when grasped and moved in a certain way - ? Definitely could be a root cause analysis challenge.
 
Yes, I'm wondering if there is some kind of strange incompatibility of the holster and pistol being mated together that causes something to happen when grasped and moved in a certain way - ? Definitely could be a root cause analysis challenge.

You can bet someone will investigate that because its the sole basis of his claim
 
Some people should not own guns./ Let alone carry them

So you think there has never been any gun that has gone off when it shouldn't have, even when handled correctly?
 
I can not think of such a scenario..can you or anyone else on here?

I can't either. As far as a defect I'm not familiar with this model. I'm assuming it's a striker fired design. If that is the case I would imagine the only way for it to discharge without pulling the trigger is a defective sear. I have never heard of one of those failing.
 
So you think there has never been any gun that has gone off when it shouldn't have, even when handled correctly?

I'm never going to say "never" but I thought about that as you wrote it and honestly ( assuming a properly functioning and maintained weapon) I have never heard of an incident where a weapon just "went off"- have you?
 
I'm never going to say "never" but I thought about that as you wrote it and honestly ( assuming a properly functioning and maintained weapon) I have never heard of an incident where a weapon just "went off"- have you?

My comment was "gun that has gone off when it shouldn't have " ... which means if it was manipulated in such a way that it went off when it shouldn't have. In the case of the Sig Sauer P320 that would be when the holster was manipulated with the gun still in the holster and the trigger never being touched by a finger.

I'm not talking about a gun just laying on a table with nobody handling it and it just goes off. I'm sure many reading this forum are familiar with the Remington 700 trigger mechanism issue - that's an example. There has even been members on this forum who owned Remington 700s and said they experienced their 700s going off when they shouldn't have (ie, when the safety was moved from 'safe' to 'fire' and finger wasn't even on the trigger).
 
Last edited:
I'm never going to say "never" but I thought about that as you wrote it and honestly ( assuming a properly functioning and maintained weapon) I have never heard of an incident where a weapon just "went off"- have you?

No.

I can only think of one time in my life where cocked and locked was my normal and it was during the 92 Riots in LA.

4wd - The other loudest sound is a lump in fart.
 
The two loudest sounds:

Bam when it should have been click
Click when you really needed bam

On this list is a decock that sounds like a dry fire. (Ruger p85)

Not what you want when de-escalating.......
 
My comment was "gun that has gone off when it shouldn't have " ... which means if it was manipulated in such a way that it went off when it shouldn't have. In the case of the Sig Sauer P320 that would be when the holster was manipulated with the gun still in the holster and the trigger never being touched by a finger.

Yeah I knew that's what you meant but I can see a case like this pushing that envelope ( solely based on the wording in the complaint)

If I accept the plaintiffs word as written in his complaint, this weapon just did "magically" fire and that's difficult for me to believe and accept except in the case of a physically damaged weapon ( which is not in the claim)

Using simply logic, if it could fire with such "gentle manipulation" then one would have legitimately wonder why it wasn't "firing' like this from the day it was bought and never noticed before.

Its rare for any mechanical device to just 'up and break" and I don't believe this weapon did based on the claim as written.
 
Yeah I knew that's what you meant but I can see a case like this pushing that envelope ( solely based on the wording in the complaint)

If I accept the plaintiffs word as written in his complaint, this weapon just did "magically" fire and that's difficult for me to believe and accept except in the case of a physically damaged weapon ( which is not in the claim)

Using simply logic, if it could fire with such "gentle manipulation" then one would have legitimately wonder why it wasn't "firing' like this from the day it was bought and never noticed before.

Its rare for any mechanical device to just 'up and break" and I don't believe this weapon did based on the claim as written.

That's what an in depth investigation is for. Per the lawsuit, his wasn't the only one that discharged in a similar manner.
 
That's what an in depth investigation is for. Per the lawsuit, his wasn't the only one that discharged in a similar manner.

I saw them but without vetted documentation and a degree of proof that they directly pertain to the reason his weapon fired they will most likely be stricken as hearsay and prejudicial.

I've seen several times people tried to stack a claim with all sorts of "supporting claims" until the judge made his first ruling. (lawyers know this too but they have to show something for all those billable hours). Its just noise.

Its like the old saying:

If you have the law- pound the law

if you have the truth- pound the truth

If you have "stuff"- pound the table

All I see so far in that claim is undefined sabre rattling at this point.
 
Doesnt pass the grandad test - did the weapon load and cock itself?

Methinks no.....

It was loaded, cocked, and ready to fire and someone barney fifed it...
 
It was loaded, cocked, and ready to fire and someone barney fifed it...

No more proof that happened then proof it went off when it shouldn't have. There are a lot of guns that are carried loaded and cocked (with or without an actual safety engaged), so that's not an excuse for a firearm going off in some other way besides a trigger pull.

I'm sure anyone here who had a firearm discharge when they didn't pull the trigger would have a different viewpoint.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom