[ARCHIVED THREAD] - IDPA bans the Sig P320 (Page 5 of 7)
|
Quoted: And an equal amount with boomer mentalities of mY sIg 32o nEvEr wEnT oFF None of my local clubs have banned the P320. Aside from the IDPA ones, if they want to stay IDPA affiliated I guess. Has any other clubs been getting form emails demanding they ban P320’s? I’ve gotten 3 emails (almost identical) in the last couple of hours. |
|
Quoted: We have no idea how many detonated. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/62477/IMG_4655_jpeg-3486538.JPG I could have sworn they had pictures of all the cartridges in there. |
|
Quoted: Quoted for truth. Sig's reaction likely has been overly defensive, but people have been happy to hate on Sig and the 320 since it beat Glock in the MHS trials. Actual faults with a small percentage of guns have been magnified into the idea that all 320s are waiting to blow up at any moment. Wouldn't be surprising in the slightest. The timing of the incident, coming so closely on the heels of the FBI reporting slamming, at least according to social media, the 320, was suspicious to me. 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. Quoted for truth. Sig's reaction likely has been overly defensive, but people have been happy to hate on Sig and the 320 since it beat Glock in the MHS trials. Actual faults with a small percentage of guns have been magnified into the idea that all 320s are waiting to blow up at any moment. Quoted: So rumor control is saying that AF death was not a UD, but a few Airmen fucking around, finding out and then trying to cover it up. Guess we'll find out. Curious what the social media response will be if it turns out an Airman actually pulled the M18 trigger. Wouldn't be surprising in the slightest. The timing of the incident, coming so closely on the heels of the FBI reporting slamming, at least according to social media, the 320, was suspicious to me. I just want to make sure I understand correctly. You are accusing the USAF of murdering an airman and staging it to look like an uncommanded discharge in order to bolster the FBI's report which essentially said the P320 might not be safe and further testing should be done. That is what you're saying, right? |
|
Quoted: Man please don't signal boost this obvious trash. USAF would not be inspecting all of their M18s for defects in the sear surfaces to cover up an idiot shooting another idiot. That screenshot is copium. Quoted: Quoted: So rumor control is saying that AF death was not a UD, but a few Airmen fucking around, finding out and then trying to cover it up. Guess we'll find out. Curious what the social media response will be if it turns out an Airman actually pulled the M18 trigger. Man please don't signal boost this obvious trash. USAF would not be inspecting all of their M18s for defects in the sear surfaces to cover up an idiot shooting another idiot. That screenshot is copium. No, no, post it far and wide, and point out it's unconfirmed, and there's no report of Airman Snuffy in the pokey. Meme their desperation, it means they don't know what the problem is and they're too afraid to admit it. Which means they don't know how many guns are affected, but they're afraid it could be enough to sink them. |
|
Quoted: I'm actually referring to the local ranges that host USPSA/IDPA matches, not the shooting sport organizations themselves. It's the private owners/BoDs of ranges that have to take into account how they could be legally liable for a 320 mishap on their range. I think the next shoe that will drop will be insurance companies that cover ranges sending out letters. I'm betting those letters will inform the ranges that in lieu of the reports of 320 "uncommanded firings" and determinations from the FBI/USAF/Major PDs/IDPA, etc., etc. that they will not cover the range for any liabilities due to a 320 incident. I figure that’s what our corporate office is waiting on. Insurance has caused us to implement most of the rule changes made since I’ve worked there. I still see a lot of 320s on the range but none in a holster. We’ve had a major influx of trades in the past week or so with the 320 being replaced by a Macro or Flux or a 48. There are way more 320 in the used case than any other gun and it’s not even close anymore. |
|
Quoted: I just want to make sure I understand correctly. You are accusing the USAF of murdering an airman and staging it to look like an uncommanded discharge in order to bolster the FBI's report which essentially said the P320 might not be safe and further testing should be done. That is what you're saying, right? Quoted: 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. Quoted for truth. Sig's reaction likely has been overly defensive, but people have been happy to hate on Sig and the 320 since it beat Glock in the MHS trials. Actual faults with a small percentage of guns have been magnified into the idea that all 320s are waiting to blow up at any moment. Quoted: So rumor control is saying that AF death was not a UD, but a few Airmen fucking around, finding out and then trying to cover it up. Guess we'll find out. Curious what the social media response will be if it turns out an Airman actually pulled the M18 trigger. Wouldn't be surprising in the slightest. The timing of the incident, coming so closely on the heels of the FBI reporting slamming, at least according to social media, the 320, was suspicious to me. I just want to make sure I understand correctly. You are accusing the USAF of murdering an airman and staging it to look like an uncommanded discharge in order to bolster the FBI's report which essentially said the P320 might not be safe and further testing should be done. That is what you're saying, right? Glock/Smith/CZ/Beretta/Ruger is paying off the AFOSI! 
|
|
Quoted: I figure that’s what our corporate office is waiting on. Insurance has caused us to implement most of the rule changes made since I’ve worked there. I still see a lot of 320s on the range but none in a holster. We’ve had a major influx of trades in the past week or so with the 320 being replaced by a Macro or Flux or a 48. There are way more 320 in the used case than any other gun and it’s not even close anymore. So who made the call to accept all those P320s in trade
|
|
At FLETC (Federal Law Enforcement Training Center) in Glynco/Brunswick, GA, within the FAD (Firearms Division) this is currently THE topic of conversation and there's no shortage of people advocating for the removal of the 320/variants from being authorized on Center. That would be a monumental decision of significant undertaking but not the first time they took a safety related stand; banning the Blackhawk Industries SERPA holster years ago is the recent example that comes to mind. There's definitely FIs (Firearms Instructors) that do not want to see that happen, but they are significantly outnumbered by those that do and the tide seems to shift more towards banning them on a daily basis, but the ultimate decision to do so will originate from DC, regardless of what anyone there thinks. That being said, at this point if there's ONE UD/ND on Center, I could see them banned the following day. The risk does not outweigh the reward and there are extremely risk adverse there... Outside of deadlining them on the MIL side of the house, if FLETC were to do that it would clearly signal the death knell for the 320/variants and arguably Sig itself. The PTB/politicians/political appointees that would make that decision are keenly aware of that and will not make it lightly. |
|
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. Repeated well-documented holster pops with unmodified guns means they’re unsafe. Figuring out exactly how they’re failing and fixing it is Sig’s problem. A gun isn’t a criminal defendant entitled to proof beyond reasonable doubt, and we’ve seen enough incidents that the presumption that these are caused solely by user error is unsustainable. |
|
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 Yep, Sig is complete trash. |
|
Quoted: At FLETC (Federal Law Enforcement Training Center) in Glynco/Brunswick, GA, within the FAD (Firearms Division) this is currently THE topic of conversation and there's no shortage of people advocating for the removal of the 320/variants from being authorized on Center. That would be a monumental decision of significant undertaking but not the first time they took a safety related stand; banning the Blackhawk Industries SERPA holster years ago is the recent example that comes to mind. There's definitely FIs (Firearms Instructors) that do not want to see that happen, but they are significantly outnumbered by those that do and the tide seems to shift more towards banning them on a daily basis, but the ultimate decision to do so will originate from DC, regardless of what anyone there thinks. That being said, at this point if there's ONE UD/ND on Center, I could see them banned the following day. The risk does not outweigh the reward and there are extremely risk adverse there... Outside of deadlining them on the MIL side of the house, if FLETC were to do that it would clearly signal the death knell for the 320/variants and arguably Sig itself. The PTB/politicians/political appointees that would make that decision are keenly aware of that and will not make it lightly. Something you heard personally or do you have a source? There are a lot of smart guys at FLETC. I hope some of them are attempting to do the following:
|
|
Quoted: No, no, post it far and wide, and point out it's unconfirmed, and there's no report of Airman Snuffy in the pokey. Meme their desperation, it means they don't know what the problem is and they're too afraid to admit it. Which means they don't know how many guns are affected, but they're afraid it could be enough to sink them. Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: So rumor control is saying that AF death was not a UD, but a few Airmen fucking around, finding out and then trying to cover it up. Guess we'll find out. Curious what the social media response will be if it turns out an Airman actually pulled the M18 trigger. Man please don't signal boost this obvious trash. USAF would not be inspecting all of their M18s for defects in the sear surfaces to cover up an idiot shooting another idiot. That screenshot is copium. No, no, post it far and wide, and point out it's unconfirmed, and there's no report of Airman Snuffy in the pokey. Meme their desperation, it means they don't know what the problem is and they're too afraid to admit it. Which means they don't know how many guns are affected, but they're afraid it could be enough to sink them. From @packinheavy in one of the million other SIG threads. We received an email Monday stating we could return to normal M18 ops and that we could also suspend the inspections as it had been determined that the incident was due to improper procedures and not a mechanical failure. There are rumors floating around on the net if you go looking for them. |
|
Quoted: Online retailers have already begun removing them from available inventory. It's just a matter of time, now. Quoted: Quoted: I wonder how long before psa pulls them off the shelves? I bet they’re the first. Online retailers have already begun removing them from available inventory. It's just a matter of time, now. 
|
|
320 is now an insurance disaster. You allow someone to use one in a comp, it goes off shooting them, they sue you for allowing it. That's best case. Worst case is it kills someone else and the whole estate comes after your organization. Pretty soon every range is going to be saying "nope". |
|
Quoted: Something you heard personally or do you have a source? There are a lot of smart guys at FLETC. I hope some of them are attempting to do the following:
Both. From current FAD/FIs, as recently as yesterday. It's been the subject of water cooler talk for a while now but once the Air Force Airman was killed last week it's at fever pitch. The FBI BRF report has (1) arguably raised more questions than answered and (2) well, it's the FBI and if you think that GD'ers are no fans of the Feebs, you haven't met the vast majority of other feds...!  Whether or not they do as you're suggesting, which is an excellent idea, remains to be seen, but I can see the whole "don't start none won't be none" mantra raising it's ugly head, which will work...right up until someone there UDs and gets hurt or worse. |
|
Quoted: I figure that’s what our corporate office is waiting on. Insurance has caused us to implement most of the rule changes made since I’ve worked there. I still see a lot of 320s on the range but none in a holster. We’ve had a major influx of trades in the past week or so with the 320 being replaced by a Macro or Flux or a 48. There are way more 320 in the used case than any other gun and it’s not even close anymore. If I was Glock.. Shirts and Hats and coupons would be handed out at every range. |
|
Quoted: No merit in court? Are you unaware that Sig just lost in court? https://i.imgur.com/OHRQXuK.jpeg |
|
Quoted: I am aware. I'm saying they could sue even if it was an ND and they were trying to make money of it because of the reputation of the pistol. Quoted: Quoted: No merit in court? Are you unaware that Sig just lost in court? https://i.imgur.com/OHRQXuK.jpeg And lawyers aren't free. They're very much the opposite of free. Having to defend a lawsuit like that can cost tens, if not hundreds of thousands, especially if there is an injury or death involved. |
|
Quoted: From @packinheavy in one of the million other SIG threads. Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: So rumor control is saying that AF death was not a UD, but a few Airmen fucking around, finding out and then trying to cover it up. Guess we'll find out. Curious what the social media response will be if it turns out an Airman actually pulled the M18 trigger. Man please don't signal boost this obvious trash. USAF would not be inspecting all of their M18s for defects in the sear surfaces to cover up an idiot shooting another idiot. That screenshot is copium. No, no, post it far and wide, and point out it's unconfirmed, and there's no report of Airman Snuffy in the pokey. Meme their desperation, it means they don't know what the problem is and they're too afraid to admit it. Which means they don't know how many guns are affected, but they're afraid it could be enough to sink them. From @packinheavy in one of the million other SIG threads. We received an email Monday stating we could return to normal M18 ops and that we could also suspend the inspections as it had been determined that the incident was due to improper procedures and not a mechanical failure. There are rumors floating around on the net if you go looking for them. Even if this is true, if they're like most company/agency 'investigations" they got as far as the Sgt taking the holster off his duty belt, and then putting it down with the barrel pointed at himself, and went, "well, that's two violations of procedure. Doesn't really matter what happened next. We have enough to find him at fault. We're done. Case closed." |
|
Quoted: Last time I check buy it now auctions for Sig P320's. Screen shots are from 7/24/2025 https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/41568/A_GB_7-24-2025-3598085.jpg https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/41568/GB_7-24-2025-3598086.jpg $225 for that X-Carry was tempting. Someone snapped it up. 4, possibly 5 have not had the "voluntarily upgrade" done |
|
Quoted: From @packinheavy in one of the million other SIG threads. Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: So rumor control is saying that AF death was not a UD, but a few Airmen fucking around, finding out and then trying to cover it up. Guess we'll find out. Curious what the social media response will be if it turns out an Airman actually pulled the M18 trigger. Man please don't signal boost this obvious trash. USAF would not be inspecting all of their M18s for defects in the sear surfaces to cover up an idiot shooting another idiot. That screenshot is copium. No, no, post it far and wide, and point out it's unconfirmed, and there's no report of Airman Snuffy in the pokey. Meme their desperation, it means they don't know what the problem is and they're too afraid to admit it. Which means they don't know how many guns are affected, but they're afraid it could be enough to sink them. From @packinheavy in one of the million other SIG threads. We received an email Monday stating we could return to normal M18 ops and that we could also suspend the inspections as it had been determined that the incident was due to improper procedures and not a mechanical failure. There are rumors floating around on the net if you go looking for them. He claimed he saw that email, but he also claimed he was the one that heard it was horseplay. Problem is that after he claimed there was that email going around, additional Air Force units pulled their M18’s from service. They wouldn’t be expanding the sidelining of M18’s if that email was true. |
|
Quoted: He claimed he saw that email, but he also claimed he was the one that heard it was horseplay. Problem is that after he claimed there was that email going around, additional Air Force units pulled their M18’s from service. They wouldn’t be expanding the sidelining of M18’s if that email was true. Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: So rumor control is saying that AF death was not a UD, but a few Airmen fucking around, finding out and then trying to cover it up. Guess we'll find out. Curious what the social media response will be if it turns out an Airman actually pulled the M18 trigger. Man please don't signal boost this obvious trash. USAF would not be inspecting all of their M18s for defects in the sear surfaces to cover up an idiot shooting another idiot. That screenshot is copium. No, no, post it far and wide, and point out it's unconfirmed, and there's no report of Airman Snuffy in the pokey. Meme their desperation, it means they don't know what the problem is and they're too afraid to admit it. Which means they don't know how many guns are affected, but they're afraid it could be enough to sink them. From @packinheavy in one of the million other SIG threads. We received an email Monday stating we could return to normal M18 ops and that we could also suspend the inspections as it had been determined that the incident was due to improper procedures and not a mechanical failure. There are rumors floating around on the net if you go looking for them. He claimed he saw that email, but he also claimed he was the one that heard it was horseplay. Problem is that after he claimed there was that email going around, additional Air Force units pulled their M18’s from service. They wouldn’t be expanding the sidelining of M18’s if that email was true. I very much doubt Packinheavy would steer us wrong. And information - and RUMINT travels at different speeds across organizations. If there's an airman in the brig, we'll know soon enough. We also know there's a significant issue w/ the SIG P320's FCU, whether god forbid an airman shot another airman, or an airman was shot by a P320 UD. |
|
Quoted: "The U.S. Army awarded a $580 million contract to Sig Sauer in 2017 to replace the M9 pistol with the M17 and M18 model", They will not cancel easily. $580M is a lot of money. It's just taxpayer money, with no accountability for shitty decisions made with it. No biggie. |
|
Quoted: I very much doubt Packinheavy would steer us wrong. And information - and RUMINT travels at different speeds across organizations. If there's an airman in the brig, we'll know soon enough. We also know there's a significant issue w/ the SIG P320's FCU, whether god forbid an airman shot another airman, or an airman was shot by a P320 UD. Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: So rumor control is saying that AF death was not a UD, but a few Airmen fucking around, finding out and then trying to cover it up. Guess we'll find out. Curious what the social media response will be if it turns out an Airman actually pulled the M18 trigger. Man please don't signal boost this obvious trash. USAF would not be inspecting all of their M18s for defects in the sear surfaces to cover up an idiot shooting another idiot. That screenshot is copium. No, no, post it far and wide, and point out it's unconfirmed, and there's no report of Airman Snuffy in the pokey. Meme their desperation, it means they don't know what the problem is and they're too afraid to admit it. Which means they don't know how many guns are affected, but they're afraid it could be enough to sink them. From @packinheavy in one of the million other SIG threads. We received an email Monday stating we could return to normal M18 ops and that we could also suspend the inspections as it had been determined that the incident was due to improper procedures and not a mechanical failure. There are rumors floating around on the net if you go looking for them. He claimed he saw that email, but he also claimed he was the one that heard it was horseplay. Problem is that after he claimed there was that email going around, additional Air Force units pulled their M18’s from service. They wouldn’t be expanding the sidelining of M18’s if that email was true. I very much doubt Packinheavy would steer us wrong. And information - and RUMINT travels at different speeds across organizations. If there's an airman in the brig, we'll know soon enough. We also know there's a significant issue w/ the SIG P320's FCU, whether god forbid an airman shot another airman, or an airman was shot by a P320 UD. This. Standby for more info. |
|
There's a ton of Sig P320s on GT distributors GunBroker account for auction. I count 52 up for auction currently as of this posting. https://www.gunbroker.com/item/1117706952 https://www.gunbroker.com/item/1117728115 https://www.gunbroker.com/item/1116971576 https://www.gunbroker.com/item/1118700649 |
|
Quoted: I very much doubt Packinheavy would steer us wrong. And information - and RUMINT travels at different speeds across organizations. If there's an airman in the brig, we'll know soon enough. We also know there's a significant issue w/ the SIG P320's FCU, whether god forbid an airman shot another airman, or an airman was shot by a P320 UD. I just caught up on the other thread. I was thinking it was the other guy. I’ll admit that I was wrong with my assumption, so there may be some validity. |