[ARCHIVED THREAD] - IDPA bans the Sig P320 (Page 3 of 7)
|
Quoted: Quoted: And Sig still refuses to admit fault and still stands by the 320.
Ackchually... https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/33962/Screenshot_20250731-084218-575_png-3597750.JPG So, Sig proved in court that their own pistol is defective and unsafe to use, and the guy should have known better? WOW!! |
|
Well, banning guns without completely understanding the issue, just for supposed safety is not exactly something new. Gun control by the gun community, never thought we would get to that point, but here we are. Makes one wonder what is really behind all the 320 emotionally driven bias… Not giving Sig a pass, just pointing out the obvious bias and what it is leading to. |
|
Quoted: Well, banning guns without completely understanding the issue, just for supposed safety is not exactly something new. Gun control by the gun community, never thought we would get to that point, but here we are. Makes one wonder what is really behind all the 320 emotionally driven bias Not giving Sig a pass, just pointing out the obvious bias and what it is leading to. Im not entirely sure you can call it bias when there are multiple documented cases of these weapons having uncommanded discharges that have resulted in injuries and a fatality. Whether or not we know EXACTLY what the cause is doesnt change the fact that these guns are unsafe. |
|
Quoted: Im not entirely sure you can call it bias when there are multiple documented cases of these weapons having uncommanded discharges that have resulted in injuries and a fatality. Whether or not we know EXACTLY what the cause is doesnt change the fact that these guns are unsafe. Quoted: Quoted: Well, banning guns without completely understanding the issue, just for supposed safety is not exactly something new. Gun control by the gun community, never thought we would get to that point, but here we are. Makes one wonder what is really behind all the 320 emotionally driven bias Not giving Sig a pass, just pointing out the obvious bias and what it is leading to. Im not entirely sure you can call it bias when there are multiple documented cases of these weapons having uncommanded discharges that have resulted in injuries and a fatality. Whether or not we know EXACTLY what the cause is doesnt change the fact that these guns are unsafe. Not to mention the lawyers trying to sue the organization if someone gets hurt or killed claiming they should have known these guns were dangerous and continued allowing them to compete. |
|
Someone, at some point is going to make absolute bank on the P320... Once these things become paperweights and no one can pay someone else to take one, someone will come along and develop some update for the FCG that converts it to some other mechanism that's 'safe'. If it's a drop-in or easy conversion, they stand to make a LOT of money. |
| I was done with sig after they couldn't even get importing a SG 55x rifle for the US market done without turning it into a tapco fucked abortion. Not everything has to have a damn AR style stock. Just give us a simple semiautomatic copy of the military issued weapons. Let the aftermarket cater to the retards who want tapco'ed out piles of shit. |
|
Quoted: Im not entirely sure you can call it bias when there are multiple documented cases of these weapons having uncommanded discharges that have resulted in injuries and a fatality. Whether or not we know EXACTLY what the cause is doesnt change the fact that these guns It cannot be stated that they are 100 percent truly unsafe, without knowing EXACTLY what the cause is. They do APPEAR to be unsafe, but there is no 100 percent definitive proof, yet. The mystery remains and leads to emotionally based assumptions. |
|
Quoted: Im not entirely sure you can call it bias when there are multiple documented cases of these weapons having uncommanded discharges that have resulted in injuries and a fatality. Whether or not we know EXACTLY what the cause is doesnt change the fact that these guns are unsafe. That and the entire way Sig is handling it is disgusting. |
|
Quoted: It cannot be stated that they are 100 percent truly unsafe, without knowing EXACTLY what the cause is. They do APPEAR to be unsafe, but there is no 100 percent definitive proof, yet. The mystery remains and leads to emotionally based assumptions. Quoted: Quoted: Im not entirely sure you can call it bias when there are multiple documented cases of these weapons having uncommanded discharges that have resulted in injuries and a fatality. Whether or not we know EXACTLY what the cause is doesnt change the fact that these guns It cannot be stated that they are 100 percent truly unsafe, without knowing EXACTLY what the cause is. They do APPEAR to be unsafe, but there is no 100 percent definitive proof, yet. The mystery remains and leads to emotionally based assumptions. Is basic observation and logical deduction emotion driven? |
|
Quoted: Is basic observation and logical deduction emotion driven? Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Im not entirely sure you can call it bias when there are multiple documented cases of these weapons having uncommanded discharges that have resulted in injuries and a fatality. Whether or not we know EXACTLY what the cause is doesnt change the fact that these guns It cannot be stated that they are 100 percent truly unsafe, without knowing EXACTLY what the cause is. They do APPEAR to be unsafe, but there is no 100 percent definitive proof, yet. The mystery remains and leads to emotionally based assumptions. Is basic observation and logical deduction emotion driven? Only if you don't like the P320. |
|
Quoted: It cannot be stated that they are 100 percent truly unsafe, without knowing EXACTLY what the cause is. They do APPEAR to be unsafe, but there is no 100 percent definitive proof, yet. The mystery remains and leads to emotionally based assumptions. If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, chances are it is not a hippopotamus. |
|
Quoted: What does this picture mean? Quoted: What does this picture mean? Attached File |
|
Quoted:Makes one wonder what is really behind all the 320 emotionally driven bias… Video of these things going off in holsters with no one touching them and nothing in the holster, with multiple eye witnesses. Enough of these over a long enough period of time, and you get a bias against a very poor quality gun with a very stupid design from a company that specializes in very stupid designs run by a felon arms trafficker that is suing people for not using their guns. Now, is that bias wrong, or right? It's right of course. Is there anything that would have made people question their bias? No of course not, quite the opposite. It was discovered yesterday that a little bit of debris can reliably set the striker off with a jiggle of the slide. It was previously discovered that the striker safety did not work - which fact ALONE disqualifies this gun from carrying with a round chambered. Sig also discovered that vibrating the gun released the striker, and published those findings in court - which ALONE disqualifies this gun from carrying with a round chambered. Then Sig said to never carry the gun with a round chambered by updating their manual. With all of these facts, you have to wonder what kind of emotionally driven bias would result in someone defending this gun or this abysmal embarrassment of a company. |
|
Quoted: Im not entirely sure you can call it bias when there are multiple documented cases of these weapons having uncommanded discharges that have resulted in injuries and Whether or not we know EXACTLY what the cause is doesnt change the fact that these guns are unsafe. Quoted: Quoted: Well, banning guns without completely understanding the issue, just for supposed safety is not exactly something new. Gun control by the gun community, never thought we would get to that point, but here we are. Makes one wonder what is really behind all the 320 emotionally driven bias Not giving Sig a pass, just pointing out the obvious bias and what it is leading to. Im not entirely sure you can call it bias when there are multiple documented cases of these weapons having uncommanded discharges that have resulted in injuries and Whether or not we know EXACTLY what the cause is doesnt change the fact that these guns are unsafe. FIFY. 
|
|
well, the only real fix is for SIG to fire the managers/pr flacks that put the company in this position. AND figure out why a tiny fraction of the millions of P320 sold are having uncommanded discharges and fix them all. hopefully not replacing the trigger group. the first is more important actually in the long run. edited to fix schizophrenic composition interrupted by annoying coworker during lunch. |
|
Quoted: That and the entire way Sig is handling it is disgusting. Quoted: Quoted: Im not entirely sure you can call it bias when there are multiple documented cases of these weapons having uncommanded discharges that have resulted in injuries and a fatality. Whether or not we know EXACTLY what the cause is doesnt change the fact that these guns are unsafe. That and the entire way Sig is handling it is disgusting. ZERO respect for SIG for this reason. |
|
Didn't you get the email? SIG SAUER P320 Information P320 Safety Information Recently, there have been a number of reports and claims regarding the safety of the P320 pistol and its use by the U.S. Military and law enforcement agencies. We understand you may have questions. We want to address your concerns and provide you with full, complete, and accurate information. SIG SAUER has ALWAYS and will continue to put the safety and security of the U.S. Military, the law enforcement community, our consumers, and the public first. To this end, we want to be sure concerned citizens have access to complete facts. The P320 pistol is one of the safest, most advanced pistols in the world -meeting and exceeding all industry safety standards. Its design has been thoroughly tested and validated by the U.S. Military and law enforcement agencies at the federal, state and local levels. In addition, the P320 has been rigorously tested, and is currently in use by militaries and law enforcement agencies around the world. FBI Testing and Report A recently publicized internal report from the FBI’s Ballistic Research Facility (BRF) created some confusion and raised questions about the safety of the P320. The FBI prepared this report for the Michigan State Police after an officer was involved in an accidental discharge. SIG SAUER engineers met with the FBI and Michigan State Police on several occasions to review the report and the incident. Ultimately, the FBI conducted a more detailed, repeatable, and comprehensive battery of testing using compatible equipment. The subsequent testing resulted in zero instances of failures and the Michigan State Police are now confidently issuing officers P320 based pistols. The FBI BRF have yet to make any official claims or statements regarding the safety of the P320 pistol or any of its variants. However, we are urging the FBI BRF and FBI Director Kash Patel to release a full and complete testing and evaluation report on their updated P320 safety testing. Department of Homeland Security An internal memo from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS)/ U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) was recently posted online stating the agency was halting its use of the P320. Many online media outlets immediately sought to attribute this to the above referenced FBI BRF report, which is incorrect. DHS has never raised any safety concerns about the P320 and ICE has since extended their existing contract with SIG SAUER another two years. Since DHS has yet to comment publicly correcting their improperly leaked memo, or any statements questioning the safety of the P320, we are now urging ICE to release all information on P320 testing. SIG SAUER is honored to continue aiding ICE in their mission to protect America. U.S. Air Force M18 There was a recent tragic incident at F.E. Warren Air Force Base in Wyoming which resulted in the death of an Airman. Because the incident involved the discharge of a (P320 based) M18 pistol, the Air Force is actively conducting an evaluation of M18 pistols within the specific Command where the incident happened. This cautionary step is standard procedure. We proactively offered assistance to the U.S. military as they investigate the incident. Contrary to several online reports, (P320 based) M17 and M18 pistols remain on active duty with all branches of the U.S. Military, including the U.S. Air Force, defending freedom around the world. We have absolute confidence in the U.S. Military’s ability to conduct a thorough investigation and report their findings. As we learn more information about the investigation, we will continue to provide updated information. P320 Range and Training Bans Following several of these inaccurate reports, a number of ranges, training providers, and training facilities made the reactionary decision to ban the P320 and its use in their facilities. We are actively working to provide these individuals with accurate information along with a detailed understanding of the P320 and its safety features. If you are impacted by a P320 range or a training provider ban, we urge you to reach out to SIG CUSTOMER SERVICE: 603-610-3000 Option 1 or send a message here so we can clarify any misinformation and provide the truth. The P320 CANNOT, under any circumstances, discharge without the trigger first being moved to the rear. This has been verified through exhaustive testing by SIG SAUER engineers, the U.S. Military, several major federal and state law enforcement agencies, and independent laboratories. This video provides a detailed view into all of the various safety features of the P320 and provides a detailed explanation of how the safety system works; for further information on the P320 please visit here. As with any gun, the P320 will discharge if the trigger is pulled to the rear. Accordingly, SIG SAUER continues to remind its customers, employees, and the public to employ all safe gun-handling practices as spelled out in detail in our product manuals. The SIG SAUER Academy remains a resource to customers, employees, and the public in offering various firearms safety courses. We respect the public’s concern and are actively working to provide as much information as possible. We sincerely thank you for your continued support of SIG SAUER and urge anyone with additional questions or concerns regarding the P320 and/or safe firearms handling to reach out to our customer service team. |
|
Quoted: Probably a good question. Many people have not only sworn off the P320 but the company itself due to how they have handled this. I have four Sig pistols. I have Sig red dots and weapon lights. They will never see another penny from me. If a large enough number of people do the same, they could be in for a whoopin' Of course, much has to do with military contracts i suppose |
|
Quoted: Well, banning guns without completely understanding the issue, just for supposed safety is not exactly something new. Gun control by the gun community, never thought we would get to that point, but here we are. Makes one wonder what is really behind all the 320 emotionally driven bias… Not giving Sig a pass, just pointing out the obvious bias and what it is leading to. Attached File Attached File |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Well, banning guns without completely understanding the issue, just for supposed safety is not exactly something new. Gun control by the gun community, never thought we would get to that point, but here we are. Makes one wonder what is really behind all the 320 emotionally driven bias… Not giving Sig a pass, just pointing out the obvious bias and what it is leading to. /media/mediaFiles/sharedAlbum/this-gif-793.gif /media/mediaFiles/sharedAlbum/Thats_true-729.gif Quoted: Video of these things going off in holsters with no one touching them and nothing in the holster, with multiple eye witnesses. Enough of these over a long enough period of time, and you get a bias against a very poor quality gun with a very stupid design from a company that specializes in very stupid designs run by a felon arms trafficker that is suing people for not using their guns. Now, is that bias wrong, or right? It's right of course. Is there anything that would have made people question their bias? No of course not, quite the opposite. It was discovered yesterday that a little bit of debris can reliably set the striker off with a jiggle of the slide. It was previously discovered that the striker safety did not work - which fact ALONE disqualifies this gun from carrying with a round chambered. Sig also discovered that vibrating the gun released the striker, and published those findings in court - which ALONE disqualifies this gun from carrying with a round chambered. Then Sig said to never carry the gun with a round chambered by updating their manual. With all of these facts, you have to wonder what kind of emotionally driven bias would result in someone defending this gun or this abysmal embarrassment of a company. |
|
Quoted: Well, banning guns without completely understanding the issue, just for supposed safety is not exactly something new. Gun control by the gun community, never thought we would get to that point, but here we are. Makes one wonder what is really behind all the 320 emotionally driven bias Not giving Sig a pass, just pointing out the obvious bias and what it is leading to.  It sure as hell SOUNDS like you're giving SIG a pass and not even looking at the evidence. |
|
Quoted: Well, banning guns without completely understanding the issue, just for supposed safety is not exactly something new. Gun control by the gun community, never thought we would get to that point, but here we are. Makes one wonder what is really behind all the 320 emotionally driven bias… Not giving Sig a pass, just pointing out the obvious bias and what it is leading to. People get banned from ranges and matches for unsafe conduct. I’ve seen it happen. Can doing so be construed as “gun control?” The P320 is developing a rather unfortunate track record, and an incident at a range or match may result in denial of insurance claims knowing they are potentially defective. A denied claim for a gun club could very likely put the club or organization in jeopardy. Not knowing the exact issue is exactly why they can’t be considered safe. |
|
Quoted: People get banned from ranges and matches for unsafe conduct. I’ve seen it happen. Can doing so be construed as “gun control?” The P320 is developing a rather unfortunate track record, and an incident at a range or match may result in denial of insurance claims knowing they are potentially defective. A denied claim for a gun club could very likely put the club or organization in jeopardy. Not knowing the exact issue is exactly why they can’t be considered safe. Quoted: Quoted: Well, banning guns without completely understanding the issue, just for supposed safety is not exactly something new. Gun control by the gun community, never thought we would get to that point, but here we are. Makes one wonder what is really behind all the 320 emotionally driven bias… Not giving Sig a pass, just pointing out the obvious bias and what it is leading to. People get banned from ranges and matches for unsafe conduct. I’ve seen it happen. Can doing so be construed as “gun control?” The P320 is developing a rather unfortunate track record, and an incident at a range or match may result in denial of insurance claims knowing they are potentially defective. A denied claim for a gun club could very likely put the club or organization in jeopardy. Not knowing the exact issue is exactly why they can’t be considered safe. You're a gun control supporting racist if you ban P320s according to the fan club now. |
|
Quoted: Have there been any occurrences with the 320 in competition? Quoted: Quoted: That’s a huge hit. I know a ton of competitors who shoot the 320 and shoot all kinds of matches from local, state and regional. Have there been any occurrences with the 320 in competition? Yes. There was a couple videos in the beginning from competitors. One was a fat dude and it looked like his shirt got in the trigger. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Well, banning guns without completely understanding the issue, just for supposed safety is not exactly something new. Gun control by the gun community, never thought we would get to that point, but here we are. Makes one wonder what is really behind all the 320 emotionally driven bias Not giving Sig a pass, just pointing out the obvious bias and what it is leading to. /media/mediaFiles/sharedAlbum/this-gif-793.gif /media/mediaFiles/sharedAlbum/Thats_true-729.gif |
|
Quoted: Well, banning guns without completely understanding the issue, just for supposed safety is not exactly something new. Gun control by the gun community, never thought we would get to that point, but here we are. Makes one wonder what is really behind all the 320 emotionally driven bias… Not giving Sig a pass, just pointing out the obvious bias and what it is leading to. I suspect what is behind it, is the fact that the average person doesn't like the near daily occurrence of hearing about, or watching videos of, cops and servicemen getting shot in the leg and or die. |
|
Quoted: Let’s hope USPSA follows suit. You're going to have to hope pretty hard. Sig is a title sponsor of various USPSA Nationals matches, and also advertises in their magazine. This kind of thing comes with contracts, and USPSA might breach a contract if there's some stipulation that the parties do not defame each other. And it's not like Sig doesn't have a history of being litigious about this or anything. I mean, they wouldn't sue a state police academy for banning the P320 would they? Add to this the history of obvious financial misconduct by the BOD and generally cozy relationships with sponsors (like board members and others getting free ammo from Federal as just one example.) Here's what I think the threshold is for USPSA making any sort of move, at all:
|
|
Quoted: You're going to have to hope pretty hard. Sig is a title sponsor of various USPSA Nationals matches, and also advertises in their magazine. This kind of thing comes with contracts, and USPSA might breach a contract if there's some stipulation that the parties do not defame each other. And it's not like Sig doesn't have a history of being litigious about this or anything. I mean, they wouldn't sue a state police academy for banning the P320 would they? Add to this the history of obvious financial misconduct by the BOD and generally cozy relationships with sponsors (like board members and others getting free ammo from Federal as just one example.) Here's what I think the threshold is for USPSA making any sort of move, at all:
This is exactly correct. |
|
Quoted: Michael J Fox dual wielding 320s would look like that forest destruction scene from Predator Quoted: Quoted: Bruh, the Sig don't need no switch, naw mean. You just shake it like it's hot. Michael J Fox dual wielding 320s would look like that forest destruction scene from Predator Attached File |