[ARCHIVED THREAD] - SIG Banned!! (Page 2 of 3)
|
Quoted: Quoted: Wow thanks for sharing. I was about to pick up a P320 but I’ll look at other options instead. https://i0.wp.com/www.technollama.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/trolling.jpg 100% troll. |
|
Quoted: Because the Officer will enjoy being covered by their department if they shoot someone. If you want to be covered by their lawyers, and their money, you get to carry the guns they say you can and hopefully they make you qualify with them. Quoted: Quoted: How the hell can an employer ban you from carrying something while OFF Duty? Because the Officer will enjoy being covered by their department if they shoot someone. If you want to be covered by their lawyers, and their money, you get to carry the guns they say you can and hopefully they make you qualify with them. This. |
|
Quoted: If juries already don’t convict for most of the fuckups cops do on purpose… what makes you think they’ll be held liable for shit that happens outside their immediate control? How’s that going to work? Kick in the door at the wrong address serving a no-knock (for a nonviolent offender you could have rolled up driving home from work in broad daylight nonetheless) and smoke some scared shitless half-awake law abiding homeowner… no charges. Pistol goes off in a Walmart untouched because it’s a P320… someone wins the lottery. Quoted: Quoted: Why would an agency even consider the Sig320 at this point? Pretty easy for a jury to be convinced the police department is liable if an officer has a uncommanded discharge. If juries already don’t convict for most of the fuckups cops do on purpose… what makes you think they’ll be held liable for shit that happens outside their immediate control? How’s that going to work? Kick in the door at the wrong address serving a no-knock (for a nonviolent offender you could have rolled up driving home from work in broad daylight nonetheless) and smoke some scared shitless half-awake law abiding homeowner… no charges. Pistol goes off in a Walmart untouched because it’s a P320… someone wins the lottery. Ha, you’re not wrong except I was talking about the officer shooting themselves and suing. |
|
Quoted: or put them out of business and leave us with civilian friendly Glock Quoted: Quoted: Good. Glad to hear this. Hopefully it will push SIG to fix the issue over letting more people get hurt. This. |
| +1 |
|
Quoted: How the hell can an employer ban you from carrying something while OFF Duty? I'm required by policy to carry off duty while in my agencies jurisdiction. Gun must be a .380 or larger and i must have qualified with it on our off duty/backup course of fire. I can choose not to comply, but if I am found in violation, I can be disciplined up to and including termination. |
|
Quoted: When will the military stop rising it, seeing as how it isn't reliable in adverse conditions and all? Quoted: Quoted: It's slow, but the dominoes are starting to fall. When will the military stop rising it, seeing as how it isn't reliable in adverse conditions and all? When's the last time the mil dropped something because it didn't perform as expected? |
|
Quoted: Washington State banned it too, if I remember correctly. Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: My Sheriff just banned the Sig P320 from off duty carry and from the range. It’s a good size agency. Over 600 officers. Ohio really doesn't like SIG. The training academy's that have banned it - Ohio. Your PD that just banned it - Ohio. Washington State banned it too, if I remember correctly. You are correct. |
|
Quoted: May be showing my ass, but a genuine question - do cops have a duty to act even if off duty that a civilian does not? Quoted: Quoted: That’s BS. An off duty cop shouldn’t ever have ANY additional indemnification that a private citizen doesn’t anyways. Likewise, the department should not be held liable for actions of officers outside the line of duty. May be showing my ass, but a genuine question - do cops have a duty to act even if off duty that a civilian does not? Yes, every public safety entity has a duty to act rule. Fire, EMS, Police. And the best part, Good Samaritan laws don’t apply. So you’re fucked if you screw up. |
|
Quoted: Even if a police chief secretly thinks Sig is awesome, who's going to buy p320s now? They're a huge liability and Glock and Smith and Wesson make the same thing. Heck Springfield's Croatian guns are fine. Quoted: Quoted: It's slow, but the dominoes are starting to fall. Back to DA/SA we go then. 
|
|
If you have any factual details on bans, that information is being collected in this tech forum: https://www.ar15.com/forums/Handguns/Master-P320-index-thread-NO-opinions-allowed-post-links-and-data-only/14-216492/ |
|
Quoted: Washington State banned it too, if I remember correctly. Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: My Sheriff just banned the Sig P320 from off duty carry and from the range. It’s a good size agency. Over 600 officers. Ohio really doesn't like SIG. The training academy's that have banned it - Ohio. Your PD that just banned it - Ohio. Washington State banned it too, if I remember correctly. Yep, and Shitcago too. https://morninganswerchicago.com/chicago-police-officers-barred-from-carrying-popular-sidearm-amid-safety-concerns/ |
|
Quoted: I know that's the fuddlore, but its not true. They do in fact have a duty to act, just not a duty to any particular individual. I guess the SCOTUS is fuddlore, eh Elmer? https://www.barneslawllp.com/blog/police-not-required-protect/ |
|
Quoted: I guess the SCOTUS is fuddlore, eh Elmer? https://www.barneslawllp.com/blog/police-not-required-protect/ No, you and whoever you believed, just didn't understand the decision. |
|
Quoted: When's the last time the mil dropped something because it didn't perform as expected? Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: It's slow, but the dominoes are starting to fall. When will the military stop rising it, seeing as how it isn't reliable in adverse conditions and all? When's the last time the mil dropped something because it didn't perform as expected? There have been a couple of times. Off the top of my head, there's the Sgt York and the M-10 Booker Mostly happens after everyone gets paid, or are embarrassed though like the LCS program. |
|
Quoted: How the hell can an employer ban you from carrying something while OFF Duty? Owning a defective weapon has nothing to do with race, religion, sex, etc. It is not a legally defendable position in the eyes of the law. A close friend was not allowed to carry any weapon off duty in his county except for his issued p220. He also was not allowed to carry his p220 off duty outside of the county. People shouldn't be surprised when a job that gives people god-like powers sometimes has those same powers turned against them 
|
|
Quoted: SIG going out of business will not be good for the gun community. But they do need to do a recall to fix this issue and pay the people they have hurt. When I quit teaching 24 years ago. Glock had over 100 pending lawsuits for Glock leg. They survived. SIG will too. But they need to resolve the issue and help those they have hurt. Quoted: Quoted: or put them out of business and leave us with civilian friendly Glock SIG going out of business will not be good for the gun community. But they do need to do a recall to fix this issue and pay the people they have hurt. When I quit teaching 24 years ago. Glock had over 100 pending lawsuits for Glock leg. They survived. SIG will too. But they need to resolve the issue and help those they have hurt. Thanks to shyster lawyers (no offense guys ), anyone can sue for almost anything. How many won because of defective and unsafe weapons? Having defective and unsafe weapons slipping through is not what's going to push Sig over the edge. Being complicit in a conspiracy to cover things can. The longer this stretches out, the worse it'll get. |
|
Quoted: Thanks to shyster lawyers (no offense guys ), anyone can sue for almost anything. How many won because of defective and unsafe weapons? Having defective and unsafe weapons slipping through is not what's going to push Sig over the edge. Being complicit in a conspiracy to cover things can. The longer this stretches out, the worse it'll get. Oh I agree. But they have the money. Just add up what they have made on the P320 using military contract price numbers. They have sold over 3.5 million P320s. Its mind boggling how much they have made. |
|
Quoted: They don't have a duty to act when on duty, SCOTUS has ruled on that a couple of times. Quoted: Quoted: May be showing my ass, but a genuine question - do cops have a duty to act even if off duty that a civilian does not? They don't have a duty to act when on duty, SCOTUS has ruled on that a couple of times. Wrong, a duty to act is not a duty to protect. Go read the SCOTUS ruling. |
|
Quoted: How the hell can an employer ban you from carrying something while OFF Duty? If you're carrying solely on your police authority, which comes from your agency, they can absolutely tell you what you can and cannot carry off duty. You would most likely be fine criminally, but civilly it could cause some issues for you, as well as administratively. If you get a CCW permit you can always argue you were carrying on that and not on your badge if the agency tries to jam you up for carrying an unauthorized weapon. |
|
Quoted: It’s not uncommon for police departments to have very specific off duty carry requirements that have to be met. Luckily the ones I’ve worked for did not have any but plenty of them do. I know our local departments require you to qualify with any off-duty carry guns you plan on carrying under your badge (effectively a CCW with no no-carry zones). If they banned P320's from the police range then you couldn't qualify with them and therefore can't carry them off-duty. |
|
Quoted: How the hell can an employer ban you from carrying something while OFF Duty? Worked for a 3500 officer dept and a 17 officer dept. Larger one we bought all our own weapons and had to qualify with anything we carried on or off-duty. Guns were only limited by caliber and action type (9mm/38 thru .44 mag/45 acp, and DA revolver, SAO, DA/SA and Striker). Smaller agency said "here's your G19 and you'll love it on duty and off-duty." I hated the G19. |
|
Quoted: How the hell can an employer ban you from carrying something while OFF Duty? Before Constitutional Carry, if you carried off duty with a badge, the weapon had to be approved and an annual qual with the weapon. That is reason why a lot of the gun guy cops got civilian concealed weapon permits to carry off duty. Along with some agencies only allow an officer to have one verified off duty weapon for carry. Also before LEOSA other states did not recognize other states LE credentials to carry off duty but had reciprocity with a civilian CCW permit. <---maintains civilian CCW permit for off duty carry. ETA: And by policy I'm required to carry off duty, carry my badge and a communication device while inside my jurisdiction. |
|
Quoted: Even if a police chief secretly thinks Sig is awesome, who's going to buy p320s now? They're a huge liability and Glock and Smith and Wesson make the same thing. Heck Springfield's Croatian guns are fine. So, let's consider a VP9, PDP, Echelon, or Glock compared to the P320. What does the P320 do better than any of those (besides maybe more "aftermarket customization")? I imagine that the P320 shoots well enough, but it just seems heavy compared to a lot of otherwise comparable products at that price point. |