[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Sig M18 might have just killed an Airman (Page 19 of 28)
|
Quoted: Do they have a round chambered on the M4s? Quoted: Quoted: The USAF doesn't train Israeli carry. The M18 is not being carried and all the local defenders have their M4, even on the gate. Do they have a round chambered on the M4s? If so, I hope they aren't reloading the same round over and over again. |
|
Quoted: Has SIG put out an official statement about it yet? I haven’t read through the whole thread yet, so apologies if it was already covered. Just a brief statement on social media that they sympathize for the deceased Airman and are cooperating with the investigation. |
|
TWZ has a pretty good article on the current situation with air crews etc. Nothing ground breaking but I enjoyed the pics. |
|
Quoted: They seem to be a nice firearm if it wasn't for the safety issue. Quoted: Quoted: USAF SP here, our desk sergeants were issued shoulder holsters. Sad situation and I wish the gun tuber guys would not put Kills Airman in there titles. I bought my son and m18 for Christmas a couple of years ago, he doesn’t carry it he doesn’t trust it and neither do I. I’ve shot it a bit and it’s really nice and accurate. When I dry fire it you can see the slide move as the trigger is pulled I believe there is definitely a flaw and not simple carelessness. They seem to be a nice firearm if it wasn't for the safety issue. Yes they are, loved mine Just not enough to carry it anymore. 
|
|
Quoted: TWZ has a pretty good article on the current situation with air crews etc. Nothing ground breaking but I enjoyed the pics. They also link the FBI report. Interesting read. |
|
Quoted: For those of you paying attention to the process going on here, it's worth noting the incident occurred in the early morning hours (implying midshift, though not stated) of July 20. Today is the 25th, which also implies there is no video or eye witness. I say this because the stand-down hasn't progressed past Global Strike Command, the parent MAJCOM of the wing and squadron, which almost certainly would have occurred if there was conclusive evidence a holstered pistol sitting static on a desk suddenly and randomly fired. Someone mentioned the other day that the Army has the lead on the weapon tear down, because they were the lead procurement agency. I have no idea if that's true, but it does kind of pass the sniff test. If true, five days would seem like a lot of time to test both the incident pistol and the others in the squadron, and to also immediately have issued a stop-use if they had found an obvious problem. I've read several articles that claim the other branches (and some civilian orgs) are watching this investigation closely, so this shouldn't be a long, drawn out affair. I mentioned mid-shift because I'm curious why a probable SrA (E-4) would be assigned desk sergeant duties. We had a serious problem in maintenance with NCOs and SNCOs drifting to day shift...especially SNCOs, leaving young Airman to run the show on mids. We ended up prohibiting engine runs, aircraft jacks and hangar tows on mid shift at one mx group for just that reason. Missile base cop has a reputation for not being a high-demand assignment, it's reputedly kind of dull for the most part. Again, I would recommend waiting for the results of the OSI investigation, which will be looking at all the human factors involved here. Take that for what it's worth. How sure about that are you? We haven't seen official memos, but there are USAF guys in this thread that are outside Global Strike, but that have seen the M18s get sidelined at their installations. |
|
Quoted: We have a couple pages of that nonsense in this thread.  Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: The internet Sig defenders have certainly been silent. Surprisingly, they have not been quiet on Twitter. They are still in full Simp mode quite a few of them are trying to place the blame on the airmen for setting the holstered gun down facing towards him. You also have the usual, it hasn’t happened to me so it’s fine and these are all user error. We have a couple pages of that nonsense in this thread. It's not nonsense to say that following gun safety rules would have saved his life. Get back to me when the investigation comes out -- I can almost guarantee you it will say something very much like that. |
|
Quoted: This thread is getting ridiculous. “He would’ve been fine if he followed all 87 rules of gun safety”. Yes, that’s true, but it ignores the whole issue that guns are firing when the triggers aren’t being pulled, and that’s a major issue even if people aren’t getting hurt. This is like Remington 700 triggers all over again. Deny the problem and shift the blame to the user, all to save 25-ish cents per gun. Millions of people can say, “I never had my 700 go off unexpectedly”, but it was an issue for those that had it happen. just 1. |
|
Quoted: It's not nonsense to say that following gun safety rules would have saved his life. Get back to me when the investigation comes out -- I can almost guarantee you it will say something very much like that. Well who cares if the guns just go off by themselves then? Just tell your guys to be safer. Guns just go off sometimes. 
|
|
Quoted: It varies, Air Force air crew carries 'em chambered. Quoted: Quoted: I’m guessing the .mil would have more sigs going off but generally troops aren’t carrying with a round in the chamber It varies, Air Force air crew carries 'em chambered. Basically everyone does. This isn't 1960 anymore. |
|
Quoted: For those of you paying attention to the process going on here, it's worth noting the incident occurred in the early morning hours (implying midshift, though not stated) of July 20. Today is the 25th, which also implies there is no video or eye witness. I say this because the stand-down hasn't progressed past Global Strike Command, the parent MAJCOM of the wing and squadron, which almost certainly would have occurred if there was conclusive evidence a holstered pistol sitting static on a desk suddenly and randomly fired. Someone mentioned the other day that the Army has the lead on the weapon tear down, because they were the lead procurement agency. I have no idea if that's true, but it does kind of pass the sniff test. If true, five days would seem like a lot of time to test both the incident pistol and the others in the squadron, and to also immediately have issued a stop-use if they had found an obvious problem. I've read several articles that claim the other branches (and some civilian orgs) are watching this investigation closely, so this shouldn't be a long, drawn out affair. I mentioned mid-shift because I'm curious why a probable SrA (E-4) would be assigned desk sergeant duties. We had a serious problem in maintenance with NCOs and SNCOs drifting to day shift...especially SNCOs, leaving young Airman to run the show on mids. We ended up prohibiting engine runs, aircraft jacks and hangar tows on mid shift at one mx group for just that reason. Missile base cop has a reputation for not being a high-demand assignment, it's reputedly kind of dull for the most part. Again, I would recommend waiting for the results of the OSI investigation, which will be looking at all the human factors involved here. Take that for what it's worth. I don't think we even know it was his gun at this point, do we? |
|
Quoted: Well who cares if the guns just go off by themselves then? Just tell your guys to be safer. Guns just go off sometimes. Quoted: Quoted: It's not nonsense to say that following gun safety rules would have saved his life. Get back to me when the investigation comes out -- I can almost guarantee you it will say something very much like that. Well who cares if the guns just go off by themselves then? Just tell your guys to be safer. Guns just go off sometimes. 2 things can be true at the same time. Some people can walk and chew gum both at the same time, I know it's rough concept. It can be true that the 320 is a shit gun that goes off by itself, and it can also shockingly be true that one should also follow gun safety rules and so doing might save their life. |
|
Quoted: For those of you paying attention to the process going on here, it's worth noting the incident occurred in the early morning hours (implying midshift, though not stated) of July 20. Today is the 25th, which also implies there is no video or eye witness. I say this because the stand-down hasn't progressed past Global Strike Command, the parent MAJCOM of the wing and squadron, which almost certainly would have occurred if there was conclusive evidence a holstered pistol sitting static on a desk suddenly and randomly fired. Someone mentioned the other day that the Army has the lead on the weapon tear down, because they were the lead procurement agency. I have no idea if that's true, but it does kind of pass the sniff test. If true, five days would seem like a lot of time to test both the incident pistol and the others in the squadron, and to also immediately have issued a stop-use if they had found an obvious problem. I've read several articles that claim the other branches (and some civilian orgs) are watching this investigation closely, so this shouldn't be a long, drawn out affair. I mentioned mid-shift because I'm curious why a probable SrA (E-4) would be assigned desk sergeant duties. We had a serious problem in maintenance with NCOs and SNCOs drifting to day shift...especially SNCOs, leaving young Airman to run the show on mids. We ended up prohibiting engine runs, aircraft jacks and hangar tows on mid shift at one mx group for just that reason. Missile base cop has a reputation for not being a high-demand assignment, it's reputedly kind of dull for the most part. Again, I would recommend waiting for the results of the OSI investigation, which will be looking at all the human factors involved here. Take that for what it's worth. And while we haven't seen any memos leaked, we've seen people here commenting that they've been seeing gate guards with M4s instead of M18s at various non AFGSC bases. |
|
Quoted: This thread is getting ridiculous. "He would've been fine if he followed all 87 rules of gun safety". Yes, that's true, but it ignores the whole issue that guns are firing when the triggers aren't being pulled, and that's a major issue even if people aren't getting hurt. This is like Remington 700 triggers all over again. Deny the problem and shift the blame to the user, all to save 25-ish cents per gun. Millions of people can say, "I never had my 700 go off unexpectedly", but it was an issue for those that had it happen. The 4 rules provide redundancy, that should something go wrong, no one is seriously hurt or dies. Unfortunately with a carry piece, it can be hard to make sure "things you don't want to shoot" are not in the way. Depending on how you carry some things may be briefly in front of the muzzle (your leg, your foot, your ass, you dick, parts of your vehicle, parts of your house, people on the floor below the one you are on, etc.), this can't always be assured 100% of the time. This is why the user of a firearm should ideally be able to reasonably expect it not to go off without being operated in some way (trigger pull, cycling the action, etc.), and not just from a bump. If a weapon cannot be trusted in this manner, then it is not suitable for use. Where the gun was pointed in any given incident with the P320 is largely irrelevant to the fact that it may have design and/or QC flaws as well. Sort of like buying a car who's main brakes fail randomly, and there is no parking brake (manufacturer decided not to add it). The fact that you rear ended someone when you were driving 43 in a 35 is completely irrelevant to the fact that the manufacturer of the car is negligent. You driving the car after these issues are widely known, also would be negligent (or, if it is a vehicle provided by your employer, they would be). I too keep guns, even unloaded ones, pointed away from myself when they are sitting somewhere. It is true doing so could prevent a tragedy if said guns were to randomly go off. Though that possibility is extremely remote with pretty most weapons that I own (barring some freak accident like a lightning strike and it set off the round in the chamber or something very improbable like that). ETA::Imagine a police officer: "Dispatch, I cannot respond to the call since it came from a 2nd floor apartment, and my duty weapon would be pointed at the people in the 1st floor apartment and I'm afraid it may randomly go off". Absurd. Such a gun deserves to be melted to scrap metal and the plastic parts incinerated. |
|
Quoted: It's not nonsense to say that following gun safety rules would have saved his life. Get back to me when the investigation comes out -- I can almost guarantee you it will say something very much like that. Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: The internet Sig defenders have certainly been silent. Surprisingly, they have not been quiet on Twitter. They are still in full Simp mode quite a few of them are trying to place the blame on the airmen for setting the holstered gun down facing towards him. You also have the usual, it hasn’t happened to me so it’s fine and these are all user error. We have a couple pages of that nonsense in this thread. It's not nonsense to say that following gun safety rules would have saved his life. Get back to me when the investigation comes out -- I can almost guarantee you it will say something very much like that. Only if it's written by a fool. |
|
Quoted: It's very typical for desk sergeants to be SrA, but when they released his name they also released his actual duty position that night. He was an alarm system monitor, which is typically an A1C or SrA. And while we haven't seen any memos leaked, we've seen people here commenting that they've been seeing gate guards with M4s instead of M18s at various non AFGSC bases. But not all bases, and no official Air Force directive has been released...unless it's a double-secret service wide order. I have no doubt some wings are probably acting proactively, but there's no public evidence that the Air Force is directing a stand down. |
|
Quoted: But not all bases, and no official Air Force directive has been released...unless it's a double-secret service wide order. I have no doubt some wings are probably acting proactively, but there's no public evidence that the Air Force is directing a stand down. Quoted: Quoted: It's very typical for desk sergeants to be SrA, but when they released his name they also released his actual duty position that night. He was an alarm system monitor, which is typically an A1C or SrA. And while we haven't seen any memos leaked, we've seen people here commenting that they've been seeing gate guards with M4s instead of M18s at various non AFGSC bases. But not all bases, and no official Air Force directive has been released...unless it's a double-secret service wide order. I have no doubt some wings are probably acting proactively, but there's no public evidence that the Air Force is directing a stand down. It's being left to the discretion of commanders at various levels for everyone outside of AFGSC. There is no AF wide stand down. |
|
Every US military installation in the world is reading about this now, not just those who follow gun news. Commands at all levels are talking about it now as their subordinates who have to carry an M17/M18 are asking if it’s safe. With as many risk adverse leaders we have in the .mil nowadays, we may actually see some increased traction on this, only time will tell… Attached File |
|
Quoted: You're welcome, your post got me thinking... Quoted: Quoted: Thank you for a plausible explanation. You're welcome, your post got me thinking... Since it's not professional use the gun is empty empty when I pull the holstered gun off but the mechanics are the same. |
|
Quoted: Just quoting this to confirm and emphasize the lack of AF wide directive. Quoted: Quoted: It's being left to the discretion of commanders at various levels for everyone outside of AFGSC. There is no AF wide stand down. Just quoting this to confirm and emphasize the lack of AF wide directive. Who cares? |
|
Quoted: Every US military installation in the world is reading about this now, not just those who follow gun news. Commands at all levels are talking about it now as their subordinates who have to carry an M17/M18 are asking if it’s safe. With as many risk adverse leaders we have in the .mil nowadays, we may actually see some increased traction on this, only time will tell… https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/207596/IMG_0259_jpeg-3594357.JPG This has nothing to do with being "risk adverse". I assume you don't understand ORM. Operational Risk Management. Risk is absolutely taken but it depends on the payoff or mission needs. Take that hill soldier is a thing and always will be but. Carry this gun on a peaceful installation even though it may randomly go off is not worth the risk. The M4 is the defenders' primary weapon so right now they should be carrying their M4 until the M18 shit is figured out. |
|
Quoted: It's being left to the discretion of commanders at various levels for everyone outside of AFGSC. There is no AF wide stand down. And commanders are being allowed to command. They all need to look at the ORM associated with their missions. I don't know of a single unit that is carrying their M18s right now. As mentioned in this thread, all appear to have deadlined the pistols and gone to their primary weapons, M4s. No prudent command would put an M18 on the side of the troops unless there is no other choice. If something were to happen the ramifications would be huge. What I suspect is; the M18 will stay for now but the services will retrain everyone to Israeli Carry while a new weapon systems is selected and procured. We pretty much have no choice because the M9s are gone in most places. The M4, when carried in garrison, is carried in what is basically Israeli Carry. There is no round in the chamber and if engaged, the defender has to charge the weapon. Of course, units that are expecting action have a round in the chamber with the safety on (M4). The M18 safety does nothing ensure the striker block works or act as a striker block itself. It just keeps the trigger from being pulled. I have looked at my 320 and may be on to one of the issues. As many know the slide has a lot of vertical play and with wear this could get worse. When a magazine is inserted it pushes the slide up, this decreases the engagement of the sear with striker. At some point that engagement "could" become so poor that the striker is allowed to release. With the shitty eyelash size striker block spring, I can see the striker falling and the striker block not doing its job. The vertical movement is caused by sloppy tolerances, the rails the slide rides on are just stamped steel that is bent over, they have somewhat sharp edges and wear the slide a good bit. |
|
Quoted: So having a questioning attitude is blaming him? It isn't natural and requires extra manipulation to remove a pistol from your hip, place it on a desk and have it end up pointed at yourself. How or why did he do it? Quoted: Quoted: Surprisingly, they have not been quiet on Twitter. They are still in full Simp mode quite a few of them are trying to place the blame on the airmen for setting the holstered gun down facing towards him. You also have the usual, it hasn’t happened to me so it’s fine and these are all user error. So having a questioning attitude is blaming him? It isn't natural and requires extra manipulation to remove a pistol from your hip, place it on a desk and have it end up pointed at yourself. How or why did he do it? some truth. While I am very much Fuck Sig - to your point, there is a general lack of concern where a gun is pointed once holstered. All the action sports that automatic DQ if you sweep yourself with a pistol, are super fine with a loaded pistol pointed at an artery, once its holstered. in this case, the holstered pistol was handled like a cased firearm, with little attention paid to where pointed, since holstered. This is standard and common with most people. it's not with me, but lots of people would totally set such down in a manner that at some point will result in a loaded gun pointed at them. And not think twice about it - it's holstered so totally safe. And with any other gun, I guess that may be true. It's why when this all started and it was fashionable here to be a fool blowing this off, when it was obvious something was amiss years ago; it wasn't a comfort to think how many here insisted to CHL such, and then sit down, potentially pointing that right at you. Same thing as this event. |
|
Cheyenne is our hometown, and we still subscribe to the Wyoming Tribune Eagle newspaper there. Here's an article that talks about the death of the airman. Cheyenne Frontier Days is going on this week, and what should be an enjoyable time has been tempered by this tragedy. One thing the article mentions that I had forgotten about is that the Wyoming Highway Patrol ditched the P320 a couple years ago due to an AD/ND/Uncommanded discharge of some kind. https://www.wyomingnews.com/news/local_news/air-force-pauses-use-of-m18-pistol-after-death-of-21-year-old-airman-at/article_c0389562-a406-466e-a854-157a9bb7c7ed.html CHEYENNE – The death of a U.S. Air Force service member at F.E. Warren Air Force Base this week has led to limited use of a military-issued handgun at several facilities while officials investigate how the weapon discharged. Airman Brayden Lovan, a 21-year-old defender assigned to the 90th Security Forces Squadron, 90th Security Forces Group, died Sunday in relation to a firearm discharge, according to a Thursday news release. F.E. Warren was his first assignment. “Our hearts are heavy with the loss of Airman Lovan,” said Col. Jeremy Sheppard, 90th Security Forces Group commander, in the release. “We mourn the loss of a valued defender, teammate and friend. Our focus remains on supporting the family and team during this incredibly difficult time. In moments like these, we are reminded of the strength of our military community and the community we live in, coming together to grieve, honor and care for one another.” Accidental discharge The incident involved a Sig Sauer M18, a military-grade version of the controversial Sig Sauer P320, a popular civilian pistol that law enforcement agencies and gun enthusiasts carry nationwide. The gun is made by New Hampshire-based manufacturer Sig Sauer, which is defending itself against multiple lawsuits alleging that the P320 pistol can go off without the trigger being pulled. The company has denies the claims, saying the weapon is safe, and has prevailed in some cases. Security Forces Combat Arms airmen at all AFGSC bases will conduct 100% inspections of the M18 handguns to identify any immediate safety concerns, according to the news release. At this time, no determination has been made regarding the nature of the discharge, the release said. The incident is currently under investigation by the Air Force Office of Special Investigations (AFOSI) and appropriate base authorities, according to a statement from the base. The Air Force is not releasing additional information at this time, citing the ongoing investigation. In response to the incident, Air Force Global Strike Command (AFGSC) issued a “stand down,” pausing use of the pistol until all bases within the command’s jurisdiction can conduct full inspections of the M18s in their inventories and identify any immediate safety concerns. Sig Sauer posted its condolences on Facebook on Wednesday. “Our hearts are with the service members and families impacted by the recent reported event at the F.E. Warren Air Force Base,” the post reads. “We proactively offered assistance to the U.S. military as they investigate the incident and remain willing to help in furtherance of their ongoing inquiry. We have absolute confidence in the military's ability to conduct a thorough investigation and are working with the Air Force and Army to answer any of their questions.” The company has denied there are any safety issues with these guns in the past, but has not yet commented on the safety of the M18 in relation to this incident. The P320 was adopted by the U.S. military as M17 and M18 pistols, and the M18 is now the official sidearm of all branches of the U.S. military, according to reporting by the Associated Press. In 2019, Sig Sauer announced it had delivered its 100,000th M17 and M18s to the U.S. military. Currently, the stand-down is limited to this one Air Force command, but Army, Navy and Marine Corps officials said they are also reviewing the incident, according to reporting from The Washington Post. Lawsuits Though Sig Sauer has denied there are any safety issues with these weapons in the past, more than 100 plaintiffs across the country have filed suits claiming otherwise. A 2023 investigation by The Washington Post and The Trace found more than 100 people who reported the gun discharged without anyone pulling the trigger. Until New Hampshire state lawmakers granted the company legal protection for product liability, Sig Sauer was facing at least 77 lawsuits over alleged misfires. Philadelphia-based attorney Robert Zimmerman, of Saltz Mongeluzzi Bendesky, represents hundreds of injured Sig Sauer gun owners nationwide. Zimmerman filed several of the lawsuits in New Hampshire because the company is one of the state's major employers. Zimmerman's clients include law enforcement officers and federal agents who have little to no say in what type of firearms they carry. “(This) appears to be another preventable tragedy linked to a dangerously defective, poorly designed Sig Sauer P320 variant that puts its users in grave danger,” Zimmerman said in a statement regarding the incident at F.E. Warren. The firm has recently been asked to represent law enforcement departments planning to discontinue use of the Sig Sauer P320, according to the news release. Those departments face significant, unbudgeted costs because of their decision to no longer use what has been found by two separate juries to be a defectively designed pistol, according to Zimmerman. Sig Sauer allegedly predicted, in internal studies, that death from an unintended discharge of this gun could happen, according to Zimmerman. “Yet (they) promised users, including those who serve and protect our nation, that the gun will not fire unless the user wants it to,” Zimmerman said. “Our more than 100 clients did not want their P320s to unintentionally discharge and injure them.” The company has previously responded to these lawsuits, saying that “lawsuits claiming that the P320 is capable of firing without the trigger being pulled have been dismissed in courtrooms around the country.” Sig Sauer offered a “voluntary upgrade” in 2017 to reduce the weight of the trigger, among other features, according to the Associated Press. Lawyers for the plaintiffs in these cases say the upgrade did not stop unintentional discharges. As a result of the company's newfound legal support in New Hampshire, Zimmerman said the firm has begun filing additional cases in other states. According to Zimmerman, design choices made by the company have made the gun more prone to accidental discharge without the handler making contact with the trigger. “Some of the changes that we are asking Sig Sauer to do are changes that other gun manufacturers have been doing for years,” Zimmerman said. “So we have continued to request that Sig (Sauer) recall this weapon and redesign it so that it is not injuring the people who are relying on it most for their safety.” Several large multi-plaintiff cases have been filed in New Hampshire’s federal court accuse Sig Sauer of negligence and defective product design and marketing, according to the Associated Press. Zimmerman says the P320 design requires an external mechanical safety, but the feature is optional. The most recent New Hampshire case, representing 22 plaintiffs in 16 states, was filed in March, according to the Associated Press. Sig Sauer’s motions to dismiss the lawsuit or break it up and transfer it to districts where the plaintiffs live was heard Monday. The state's two-month-old law that prohibits product liability claims against Sig Sauer and other gun makers based on the “absence or presence” of the external safety and several other optional features has not been incorporated into the case, according to the Associated Press. Claims can still be filed over manufacturing defects. Not the first Though none of Zimmerman’s current clients are based in Wyoming, state law enforcement has had its own mishaps with Sig Sauer pistols. A new report from Mother Jones and The Trace found the Wyoming Highway Patrol was one of nearly a dozen law enforcement departments across the country to stop issuing SIG Sauer P320 pistols. According to a Wyoming Highway Patrol news release from April, the patrol stopped issuing Sig Sauer P320 pistols to troopers within the past few years following an accidental discharge incident, though no one was injured. The release didn't contain the date of this incident. According to the Highway Patrol news release, the decision to replace the Sig Sauer was primarily due to operational and safety considerations. “Our agency's Professional Standards Section conducted a thorough review and determined a change in equipment was in the best interest of officer safety and the safety of those they serve and interact with,” the news release reads. The agency now utilizes the Glock 45 as the standard-issue sidearm for its sworn personnel. The remaining Sig Sauer P320s were “traded in” through a firearms distributor. |
|
Quoted: This has nothing to do with being "risk adverse". I assume you don't understand ORM. Operational Risk Management. Risk is absolutely taken but it depends on the payoff or mission needs. Take that hill soldier is a thing and always will be but. Carry this gun on a peaceful installation even though it may randomly go off is not worth the risk. The M4 is the defenders' primary weapon so right now they should be carrying their M4 until the M18 shit is figured out. Quoted: Quoted: Every US military installation in the world is reading about this now, not just those who follow gun news. Commands at all levels are talking about it now as their subordinates who have to carry an M17/M18 are asking if it’s safe. With as many risk adverse leaders we have in the .mil nowadays, we may actually see some increased traction on this, only time will tell… https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/207596/IMG_0259_jpeg-3594357.JPG This has nothing to do with being "risk adverse". I assume you don't understand ORM. Operational Risk Management. Risk is absolutely taken but it depends on the payoff or mission needs. Take that hill soldier is a thing and always will be but. Carry this gun on a peaceful installation even though it may randomly go off is not worth the risk. The M4 is the defenders' primary weapon so right now they should be carrying their M4 until the M18 shit is figured out. Understand it very well, more so than most. Leaders have become so adverse to something bad happening on their watch that they’ll do anything to avoid it. This isn’t just my opinion, but the opinion of many senior leaders in the military and critics there of. In this situation it may turn out to be a benefit and we could see some positive movement on correcting the problem. Whether that is through replacement or repairs, I don’t care as I don’t won’t to see anyone else getting hurt. If it turns out there was something other than the gun at fault all of this goes right out the window. If it is truly a fault with the gun, the military would have to act towards a corrective action to avoid it happening again. . |
|
Quoted: If Sig offered either a full refund + tax or a Sig SP2022 in trade I would be satisfied. The problem is Sig probably sold these guns to distributors, who then sold them to retailers. There have been 2 markups along the way. So if they did a full refund of the retail price they would be paying more to get the guns back than they made selling them. I think a recall refund is probably going to be no more than the wholesale price. But even that would still probably bankrupt them. |
|
Quoted: I can respect this take, and can agree to a certain extent that Sig produces way more good pistols than bad, BUT would only offer that despite the comment in bold being accurate, I find it incredibly interesting that the "uncommanded discharge issue only seems to effect sig 320's and lends credence to the claims that somethings going on. Sig isnt the only gun that has heavy aftermarket support and is commonly modified and I honestly just dont see the issues in those platforms. Its sort of like dog bites, yeah, labs, and german shephards do bite people, but its an order of magnitude more likely that if you here about a dog bite, its probably going to be a pit bull derivative. Quoted: Quoted: If anyone is interested, there's a 320 mega-thread on Sig Talk that's much less emotional and goes into huge technical detail about the fire control system. It's 132 pages long, but the first three pages are devoted to people who support Sig (and the 320) trying to hypothesize how the gun could fire on it's own. Very well worth reading. This is from the current days page. I'm excerpting portions of a post from someone going by DeputyDave, because it's easier than me trying to summarize. I don't own a 320, and have no interest in one, but I am very interested in how much vested argument is swaying the course of this discussion. DD seems to be of a similar mind. "But I will do so again regardless. I'm not defending the P320. Never have. I have stated multiple times that I could care less whether the P320 is dropped tomorrow or around for the next 50 years. I haven't even owned a P320 for about 8 years. What I do defend is logic, common sense and critical thinking. I also point out obvious bias when I see it because it's germane to the topic." "I view firearms like a tool. I can praise a firearm while at the same time blast the same firearm as appropriate. As an example, I like Glock. I teach Glock on an Academy level, in-service and EOT courses. I carried Glock for 20 of my 30 years. And I own several. That doesn't prevent me from discussing the myriad of issues Glocks have had over the years. So I'm not a 'Glocktard' nor am I a Glock-hater. I'm an adult that can look at all aspects of the brand and discuss it without emotion. Same with the P320. I didn't like how Sig handled the drop-safe issue and stated so at the time on multiple forums. At the same time, I find this current 'concern' on the P320 to be baseless. Why? For multiple reasons; - I have read completely biased articles from anti-2A 'journalists' that have omitted facts from their articles - I see completely unvetted and unverified claims from certain YT influencers who have admitted they are simply trying to get clicks/subs and grow their channel for financial gain - I see unsupported comments tossed out like it's factual information - I see a court case go against Sig (that was later reversed) because the trigger didn't have a dingus....that it doesn't need. They didn't prove the gun was faulty, they simply conned a jury into believing it was dangerous because it didn't have a part...that it didn't need - And most importantly, with nearly 4 million P320's sold in a myriad of models I have yet to see any professional demonstrate that an unmodified post-upgrade P320 in serviceable condition is capable of discharging without the trigger being depressed. - And I see some of the top P320 experts (Robert Burke as an example) on the planet explaining, in detail, why a P320 as described above can't discharge without the trigger being depressed - And I have seen Officers caught lying about the details of their ND that were later disciplined and/or terminated Things may change tomorrow in which case I will have new information in which to alter my POV. But as of right now, at this time, with the current information available, no one has ever demonstrated an unmodified post-upgrade P320 in serviceable condition is capable of discharging without the trigger being depressed. And that is the ONLY thing that is pertenant to the discussion." That portion I bolded is still the sticking point for me. It makes the circumstances of this Airman's death highly...suspect, to me. We'll see where the investigation goes. I can respect this take, and can agree to a certain extent that Sig produces way more good pistols than bad, BUT would only offer that despite the comment in bold being accurate, I find it incredibly interesting that the "uncommanded discharge issue only seems to effect sig 320's and lends credence to the claims that somethings going on. Sig isnt the only gun that has heavy aftermarket support and is commonly modified and I honestly just dont see the issues in those platforms. Its sort of like dog bites, yeah, labs, and german shephards do bite people, but its an order of magnitude more likely that if you here about a dog bite, its probably going to be a pit bull derivative. The pit bull analogy is extremely on point. |
|
Quoted: There was a freshman wrestler that popped a boner during a match. He switched schools Quoted: Quoted: "Uncommanded discharge" was my wrasslin name in High School. There was a freshman wrestler that popped a boner during a match. He switched schools As opposed to merely switching teams?
|
|
Quoted: The problem is Sig probably sold these guns to distributors, who then sold them to retailers. There have been 2 markups along the way. So if they did a full refund of the retail price they would be paying more to get the guns back than they made selling them. I think a recall refund is probably going to be no more than the wholesale price. But even that would still probably bankrupt them. Quoted: Quoted: If Sig offered either a full refund + tax or a Sig SP2022 in trade I would be satisfied. The problem is Sig probably sold these guns to distributors, who then sold them to retailers. There have been 2 markups along the way. So if they did a full refund of the retail price they would be paying more to get the guns back than they made selling them. I think a recall refund is probably going to be no more than the wholesale price. But even that would still probably bankrupt them. You're probably right, I was just wishful thinking out loud. |
|
I just checked a couple Sig FB groups I'm in. There's still a bunch of guys talking about improper handling, Glock leg...kind of a head scratcher. Also more than one bragging about still carrying theirs, even aiwb. That I really don't get. That Gray Guns guy is still arguing about them too. |
|
Quoted: I just checked a couple Sig FB groups I'm in. There's still a bunch of guys talking about improper handling, Glock leg...kind of a head scratcher. Also more than one bragging about still carrying theirs, even aiwb. That I really don't get. That Gray Guns guy is still arguing about them too. Do we have any concrete numbers on how many of these incidents have involved LEO vs "civilians"? Not trying to be argumentative, genuinely curious |
|
Quoted: Every US military installation in the world is reading about this now, not just those who follow gun news. Commands at all levels are talking about it now as their subordinates who have to carry an M17/M18 are asking if it’s safe. With as many risk adverse leaders we have in the .mil nowadays, we may actually see some increased traction on this, only time will tell… https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/207596/IMG_0259_jpeg-3594357.JPG Front page, too. |
|
Quoted: The problem is Sig probably sold these guns to distributors, who then sold them to retailers. There have been 2 markups along the way. So if they did a full refund of the retail price they would be paying more to get the guns back than they made selling them. I think a recall refund is probably going to be no more than the wholesale price. But even that would still probably bankrupt them. Quoted: Quoted: If Sig offered either a full refund + tax or a Sig SP2022 in trade I would be satisfied. The problem is Sig probably sold these guns to distributors, who then sold them to retailers. There have been 2 markups along the way. So if they did a full refund of the retail price they would be paying more to get the guns back than they made selling them. I think a recall refund is probably going to be no more than the wholesale price. But even that would still probably bankrupt them. The fact that you guys would take any product SIG makes in exchange is crazy. |
|
Quoted: Do we have any concrete numbers on how many of these incidents have involved LEO vs "civilians"? Not trying to be argumentative, genuinely curious Quoted: Quoted: I just checked a couple Sig FB groups I'm in. There's still a bunch of guys talking about improper handling, Glock leg...kind of a head scratcher. Also more than one bragging about still carrying theirs, even aiwb. That I really don't get. That Gray Guns guy is still arguing about them too. Do we have any concrete numbers on how many of these incidents have involved LEO vs "civilians"? Not trying to be argumentative, genuinely curious Most of the Sigcidents have been police or military. I think 2 civilian deaths have been claimed 320 UDs. |
|
Quoted: Most of the Sigcidents have been police or military. I think 2 civilian deaths have been claimed 320 UDs. Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I just checked a couple Sig FB groups I'm in. There's still a bunch of guys talking about improper handling, Glock leg...kind of a head scratcher. Also more than one bragging about still carrying theirs, even aiwb. That I really don't get. That Gray Guns guy is still arguing about them too. Do we have any concrete numbers on how many of these incidents have involved LEO vs "civilians"? Not trying to be argumentative, genuinely curious Most of the Sigcidents have been police or military. I think 2 civilian deaths have been claimed 320 UDs. Next question. Would that be assumed to be because there are vastly more LEOs and .mil personnel carrying them? |
|
Quoted: A 1:1 P320 for P226 exchange would actually be pretty excellent Quoted: Quoted:The fact that you guys would take any product SIG makes in exchange is crazy. Yes, because a company that has cut corners in materials and QC in one product would definitely never do that with any of their other products, offering full customer assistance should there be any problems, not gaslighting and and denials like with that other one product. I swear, it's like battered wife syndrome. |
|
Quoted:Yes, because a company that has cut corners in materials and QC in one product would definitely never do that with any of their other products, offering full customer assistance should there be any problems, not gaslighting and and denials like with that other one product. I swear, it's like battered wife syndrome. |
|
Quoted: You're ignoring all of those questions and going right to the gun went off by itself. Were you ever in the military and ever witness a ridiculously stupid over reaction to something bad happening? Like removing all vacuum cleaners from submarines because someone thought that is what caused the Miami fire. You're right, we don't know the answers to those questions. But we should and we probably eventually will. ETA: My more prudent reaction would have been to cease carrying a round in the chamber, as others have suggested, until the investigation is complete. Not dead lining all M18s. Quoted: Quoted: How was the room set up? How many people were in there with him? Did he have a desk across from his? Were there desks to either side? Maybe it's just complacency, and maybe he had a meaningful reason. We don't know. The actual problem is the firearm discharging while holstered. The orientation of the holster when the discharge happened is merely a circumstance that contributed to a tragic outcome. You're ignoring all of those questions and going right to the gun went off by itself. Were you ever in the military and ever witness a ridiculously stupid over reaction to something bad happening? Like removing all vacuum cleaners from submarines because someone thought that is what caused the Miami fire. You're right, we don't know the answers to those questions. But we should and we probably eventually will. ETA: My more prudent reaction would have been to cease carrying a round in the chamber, as others have suggested, until the investigation is complete. Not dead lining all M18s. Yeah I'm going to wait for the full investigation on this. Years ago there was a sailor who killed himself during pistol qualification with an M9 (I think it was in Hampton Roads). The story I heard was the gun going off startled him and he fumbled it 180deg and shot himself in the chest. One of the recommendations from the initial investigation was to make them qualify wearing body armor.... |
 Testing two P320's for Uncommanded Discharge: One PASS, one FAIL  Attempting to reproduce the FBI's Aug. 2024 P320 Sear Movement Test  Why Are Sig P320s Going Off On Their Own  How can a P320s fire un-commanded? AKA P320 fires while in its holster? Videos are interesting. New video uploaded today showing gun firing by rocking slide;  SIG P320 Un Commanded Discharge and its Repeatable I just tried his testing protocol on my 320 and I could not get it to fire. Mine was purchased about a year and an half ago (I think his gun is a few years older or more (he mentioned when he bought his in another video). |
|
Quoted: New video uploaded today showing gun firing by rocking slide;  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jOMQOtOQoPkYou mean like what might happen to a gun in a holster? |
|
Quoted: You mean like what might happen to a gun in a holster? Quoted: Quoted: New video uploaded today showing gun firing by rocking slide; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jOMQOtOQoPkYou mean like what might happen to a gun in a holster? Yes. I was cop so the movement he showed is a minimum of what a gun would go through in a holster during an 8-hour shift. I tried his test with my 320 and could not get it to fire, but I believe that the design and parts quality control is the cause of some of these guns going off. |