6 ms·

This seems to suggest carrying with a chambered round. Is this prudent without an external threat? They can drop the thing, or some kind of impact can yield a

This seems to suggest carrying with a chambered round. Is this prudent without an external threat? They can drop the thing, or some kind of impact can yield a “design problem”. Can’t they just chamber when there’s a need?

colingauvin 1y ago
This is table stakes for a carry pistol. The goal is to deliver a pistol that can be safely carried while chambered. You do not want to have to chamber if you need the gun.
nowandlater 1y ago
Firearms should never discharge unless the trigger has been pulled. It's an absolute bare minimum requirement. But you should always assume it will go off in the direction it's being pointed, even if you haven't pulled the trigger.
- arrowsmith 1y ago
  First law of gun safety: never point a gun at anything you wouldn't want to destroy.
hollywood_court 1y ago
That may be personal preference, but IMHO there’s no reason to conceal carry if you’re going to do it without a round chambered. I’m a huge Sig collector and I’ve been a fan of theirs since the 90s. I’ve carried a Sig daily for 20+ years. I only carried a P320 for a few months until I finally downsized to the P365. But I’ve got to admit that their PR and response to these incidents is not a good look. But I am a bit confused as to what is causing these unintentional discharges. I know they had a problem that was addressed years ago so I’m not sure if the current problem guns are ones that were never sent back for modification or if there is some kind of unrelated problem. Regardless, I’ll still carry a Sig until CZ makes something comparable to a P365. But it’s unlikely that I’ll ever buy a new Sig again.
- tshaddox 1y ago
  > IMHO there’s no reason to conceal carry if you’re going to do it without a round chambered. Why is that your opinion? Surely there's a wide variety of plausible scenarios where carrying a concealed weapon without a round chambered is much better than not carrying a concealed weapon.
  - jeffbee 1y ago
    [flagged]
    - rhcom2 1y ago
      There is definitely thinking among some who CC they're going to be John Wick but "good guy with a gun" is definitely not "totally imaginary". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Active_shooter#/media/File:2000-_Outcomes_of_active_shooter_attacks.svg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Active_shooter#/media/File:200...
      - Filmatic 1y ago
        2.8% is even worse than I’d have guessed. 2.8% of an already rare event is technically non-imaginary, but also definitely rounds down to imaginary. [edit] on top of that, is it even a one-digit percentage of that 2.8% of a rare event in which having a round chambered made any difference? Yet there are people confidently posting as if it’d be absurd to carry without a round chambered. That’s plainly nuts.
        rascul 1y ago
        That's only active shooter events. There are other cases where armed civilians have stopped a crime. I don't have such data readily available, though.
        JKCalhoun 1y ago
        Only an anecdote here: a guy I know claimed to have "defensively" used his gun. When I pressed him, it turned out that he drew his gun on a guy "that looked like a dirtbag" when he was staying at a motel. From his point of view his life would have been threatened (he might not be alive today!) had he not presented his firearm.
ndrwdvvs 1y ago
a reasonably experienced competitive shooter can draw from a holster and put two shots on target in ~1.25-1.5sec. racking a round while drawing would probably put it around 2-2.5sec. that 0.5-1sec advantage could make a pretty big difference.
- evantbyrne 1y ago
  Gun crimes tend to be ambushes rather than something that even remotely resembles a duel.
  - 0x457 1y ago
    So every second counts?
    - evantbyrne 1y ago
      Can't pull when someone randomly has the drop on you chambered or not. Have to retreat/conceal first anyways. Far more likely to have a tragic accident than ever saving someone. Not long ago someone accidentally shot the neighbor's house right into the bathroom. Accidents happen way more frequently than random crime and should be the top concern for gun owners.
      - gosub100 1y ago
        Then why aren't the police constantly having accidents blowing holes in everything?
        evantbyrne 1y ago
        The police committing accidental/negligent discharges of their service weapons has been a nearly constant source of social unrest in the US... Great example of how people carrying loaded firearms is a public safety hazard.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
nosignono 1y ago
Yes, if you are conceal carrying, having a round chambered is typical. You don't want to have to draw and rack the slide in an emergency. Most modern pistols have multiple internal safeties to prevent firing without a trigger pull. There's something extremely wrong with the Sig 320.
jandrewrogers 1y ago
It makes no difference if there is a round in the chamber unless there is a fundamental design flaw. The P320 is apparently a rare case of this. This is extremely mature technology. People have been churning out defect-free designs for many decades. It is surprising that a company with the engineering experience and pedigree of SIG Sauer would design something with this issue. It would be like if Airbus designed a plane where the wing sometimes fell off mid-flight.
- giantg2 1y ago
  "The P320 is apparently a rare case of this." Not that rare. Gen 1 and 2 Glocks had slam fires (that's right, "Safe Action" Glocks... the irony). The XDS had doubles or slam fires. I'm sure there were others, and now the P320.
  - deelowe 1y ago
    Then gen2 glock is old enough to be considered one the original striker fired pistols. The parent is right. There's no reason to be making these kinds of mistakes these days. They industry has been churning out millions of safe striker fire personal carry firearms for decades now.
    - giantg2 1y ago
      There shouldn't be a reason for these mistakes, but they keep happening. Do a little digging and you'll see. I've already mentioned the XDS and we all know the P320. The FNS had a similar issue too. I'm sure there are more if we dig. So while there are millions of safe striker fired guns, it appears there are also millions of unsafe ones in the past decade or so.
Modified3019 1y ago
It’s a personal taste kind of thing, where there’s decent arguments either way. Proponents of having a loaded chamber value having the firearm immediately ready, because a situation where they actually need to draw on someone/something may not have time or space to use both hands to rack their pistol before someone/something is on them. Those who want an empty chamber consider the increased safety vs potential malfunctions/accidents to outweigh the risks of being less able to respond to a small subset of threats.
aerostable_slug 1y ago
Tactical encounters often progress quickly enough that there's insufficient time to chamber a cartridge before the weapon may need to be fired. The context of who is carrying these pistols in this command may also help: they're issued to the Security Forces guarding strategic nuclear weapons (and their delivery systems). It is the highest priority security mission in the military.
- varjag 1y ago
  One would rather hope those guarding the nukes have rifles…
  - dardeaup 1y ago
    It's not an either/or situation. I'm sure they would have BOTH pistols and rifles.
    - deleted 1y ago
      [deleted]
  - deelowe 1y ago
    A rifle and a pistol serve different purposes. This would likely have both.
chiph 1y ago
It depends on your job in the USAF. I was a security augmentee[0] and we did not chamber a round. But the Airman who died likely protected missile silos, which are "no-lone zones" and they would be carrying with a round in the chamber. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-person_rule https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-person_rule The P320 is known to have accidental discharges for civilian owners (honestly - don't buy one). But Sig Sauer has stated that the M18 military version did not have those problems. We will need to wait on the results of the investigation to find out. [0] An extra duty typically assigned to junior enlisted - we only armed up during exercises. Which brings back a story - we were waiting on the trucks to take us to our posts, and the room was full of Airmen armed with M16s and M60 machine guns. And we were all watching Justin Wilson cooking up some delicious Cajun food on the TV.
- giantg2 1y ago
  "But Sig Sauer has stated that the M18 military version did not have those problems." More lies and misdirection on Sig's part. The only mechanical difference is really the manual safety (which works on the trigger and not on the striker), and if we're being generous the second would be the spanner screw. They should have the upgraded FCU, but in the civilian world there are still reports of the issue even after the upgrade.
homefree 1y ago
In most cases with CCW if you were to actually need to use the weapon you would not have time to chamber a round. Even if you did have time (maybe you should run away?), doing so would draw attention to yourself (and might be fatal). The standard advice is to have one chambered or work to getting yourself comfortable with that over time.
smithkl42 1y ago
This is not military, but it's widely advocated in the concealed carry community that you should carry with one in the chamber. The argument is that with modern pistol designs and the right precautions, it's generally safe; and that many scenarios where you might need to defend yourself need all the possible speed you can get. Having to stroke your firearm to load it can easily add 2 seconds to your draw. That said, given all the stories I've read, I can't imagine carrying a P320 with one in the chamber.
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
paulddraper 1y ago
Answer: maybe. Depends how responsive you want to be.
esseph 1y ago
Always carry chambered. 1. When you need it you won't remember to chamber due to stress 2. stress causes fine motor skill distortion 3. Only draw when you are prepared to fire (or you end up dealing with Brandishing laws)
- 8note 1y ago
  a better alternative would be to not carry. if the stress is gonna mess with your fine motor control, youre probably gonna accidentally shoot a bystander anyways, because you happened to have been laid off earlier in the day. the stree messes with your memory, so the barista looks like a threat. the stress messes with your fine motor skill, so you hit the guy waiting for his coffee. and of course, you gotta shoot the rest so theres no witnesses to have you charged for not actually doing self defence
  - deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
  - kbelder 1y ago
    Yeah, happens all the time.
  - Der_Einzige 1y ago
    don't forget shooting yourself at the end so you don't have to feel bad about shooting others!
the__alchemist 1y ago
There are policies that vary by branch. The USAF, for example, carries the Beretta M9 pistol (Not sure when they switched to Sig? Must be recent) with the safety off, and in double-action mode. So, round chambered, and a single (hard) trigger pull (Or a manual cock + light pull) will fire the round. Dropping it should not fire it. I had to carry one in my vest in case of emergencies, and I never felt comfortable being one trigger pull from bang, while it's pointed at my waist for extended periods. Also, the double-action pull sucks, and it's harder to aim straight when putting so much muscle into the pull IMO. Had to have the finger on it in a certain way to get leverage. (The single-action pull after doesn't have this issue) So, I would accept the weapon from the equipment guys, insert the mag, send the slide forward, put it on fire since that's what you're supposed to do... then put it back on safe.
bugsMarathon88 1y ago
Can't you just put a seatbelt on right before a collision? A gun carried without one in the chamber is just a totem for emotional coddling, nothing more.

colingauvin 1y ago

This is table stakes for a carry pistol. The goal is to deliver a pistol that can be safely carried while chambered. You do not want to have to chamber if you need the gun.

nowandlater 1y ago

Firearms should never discharge unless the trigger has been pulled. It's an absolute bare minimum requirement. But you should always assume it will go off in the direction it's being pointed, even if you haven't pulled the trigger.

arrowsmith 1y ago
First law of gun safety: never point a gun at anything you wouldn't want to destroy.

hollywood_court 1y ago

That may be personal preference, but IMHO there’s no reason to conceal carry if you’re going to do it without a round chambered. I’m a huge Sig collector and I’ve been a fan of theirs since the 90s. I’ve carried a Sig daily for 20+ years. I only carried a P320 for a few months until I finally downsized to the P365. But I’ve got to admit that their PR and response to these incidents is not a good look. But I am a bit confused as to what is causing these unintentional discharges. I know they had a problem that was addressed years ago so I’m not sure if the current problem guns are ones that were never sent back for modification or if there is some kind of unrelated problem. Regardless, I’ll still carry a Sig until CZ makes something comparable to a P365. But it’s unlikely that I’ll ever buy a new Sig again.

tshaddox 1y ago
> IMHO there’s no reason to conceal carry if you’re going to do it without a round chambered. Why is that your opinion? Surely there's a wide variety of plausible scenarios where carrying a concealed weapon without a round chambered is much better than not carrying a concealed weapon.
- jeffbee 1y ago
  [flagged]
  - rhcom2 1y ago
    There is definitely thinking among some who CC they're going to be John Wick but "good guy with a gun" is definitely not "totally imaginary". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Active_shooter#/media/File:2000-_Outcomes_of_active_shooter_attacks.svg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Active_shooter#/media/File:200...
    - Filmatic 1y ago
      2.8% is even worse than I’d have guessed. 2.8% of an already rare event is technically non-imaginary, but also definitely rounds down to imaginary. [edit] on top of that, is it even a one-digit percentage of that 2.8% of a rare event in which having a round chambered made any difference? Yet there are people confidently posting as if it’d be absurd to carry without a round chambered. That’s plainly nuts.
      - rascul 1y ago
        That's only active shooter events. There are other cases where armed civilians have stopped a crime. I don't have such data readily available, though.
        JKCalhoun 1y ago
        Only an anecdote here: a guy I know claimed to have "defensively" used his gun. When I pressed him, it turned out that he drew his gun on a guy "that looked like a dirtbag" when he was staying at a motel. From his point of view his life would have been threatened (he might not be alive today!) had he not presented his firearm.

ndrwdvvs 1y ago

a reasonably experienced competitive shooter can draw from a holster and put two shots on target in ~1.25-1.5sec. racking a round while drawing would probably put it around 2-2.5sec. that 0.5-1sec advantage could make a pretty big difference.

evantbyrne 1y ago
Gun crimes tend to be ambushes rather than something that even remotely resembles a duel.
- 0x457 1y ago
  So every second counts?
  - evantbyrne 1y ago
    Can't pull when someone randomly has the drop on you chambered or not. Have to retreat/conceal first anyways. Far more likely to have a tragic accident than ever saving someone. Not long ago someone accidentally shot the neighbor's house right into the bathroom. Accidents happen way more frequently than random crime and should be the top concern for gun owners.
    - gosub100 1y ago
      Then why aren't the police constantly having accidents blowing holes in everything?
      - evantbyrne 1y ago
        The police committing accidental/negligent discharges of their service weapons has been a nearly constant source of social unrest in the US... Great example of how people carrying loaded firearms is a public safety hazard.
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]

nosignono 1y ago

Yes, if you are conceal carrying, having a round chambered is typical. You don't want to have to draw and rack the slide in an emergency. Most modern pistols have multiple internal safeties to prevent firing without a trigger pull. There's something extremely wrong with the Sig 320.

jandrewrogers 1y ago

It makes no difference if there is a round in the chamber unless there is a fundamental design flaw. The P320 is apparently a rare case of this. This is extremely mature technology. People have been churning out defect-free designs for many decades. It is surprising that a company with the engineering experience and pedigree of SIG Sauer would design something with this issue. It would be like if Airbus designed a plane where the wing sometimes fell off mid-flight.

giantg2 1y ago
"The P320 is apparently a rare case of this." Not that rare. Gen 1 and 2 Glocks had slam fires (that's right, "Safe Action" Glocks... the irony). The XDS had doubles or slam fires. I'm sure there were others, and now the P320.
- deelowe 1y ago
  Then gen2 glock is old enough to be considered one the original striker fired pistols. The parent is right. There's no reason to be making these kinds of mistakes these days. They industry has been churning out millions of safe striker fire personal carry firearms for decades now.
  - giantg2 1y ago
    There shouldn't be a reason for these mistakes, but they keep happening. Do a little digging and you'll see. I've already mentioned the XDS and we all know the P320. The FNS had a similar issue too. I'm sure there are more if we dig. So while there are millions of safe striker fired guns, it appears there are also millions of unsafe ones in the past decade or so.

Modified3019 1y ago

It’s a personal taste kind of thing, where there’s decent arguments either way. Proponents of having a loaded chamber value having the firearm immediately ready, because a situation where they actually need to draw on someone/something may not have time or space to use both hands to rack their pistol before someone/something is on them. Those who want an empty chamber consider the increased safety vs potential malfunctions/accidents to outweigh the risks of being less able to respond to a small subset of threats.

aerostable_slug 1y ago

Tactical encounters often progress quickly enough that there's insufficient time to chamber a cartridge before the weapon may need to be fired. The context of who is carrying these pistols in this command may also help: they're issued to the Security Forces guarding strategic nuclear weapons (and their delivery systems). It is the highest priority security mission in the military.

varjag 1y ago
One would rather hope those guarding the nukes have rifles…
- dardeaup 1y ago
  It's not an either/or situation. I'm sure they would have BOTH pistols and rifles.
  - deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
- deelowe 1y ago
  A rifle and a pistol serve different purposes. This would likely have both.

chiph 1y ago

It depends on your job in the USAF. I was a security augmentee[0] and we did not chamber a round. But the Airman who died likely protected missile silos, which are "no-lone zones" and they would be carrying with a round in the chamber. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-person_rule https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-person_rule The P320 is known to have accidental discharges for civilian owners (honestly - don't buy one). But Sig Sauer has stated that the M18 military version did not have those problems. We will need to wait on the results of the investigation to find out. [0] An extra duty typically assigned to junior enlisted - we only armed up during exercises. Which brings back a story - we were waiting on the trucks to take us to our posts, and the room was full of Airmen armed with M16s and M60 machine guns. And we were all watching Justin Wilson cooking up some delicious Cajun food on the TV.

giantg2 1y ago
"But Sig Sauer has stated that the M18 military version did not have those problems." More lies and misdirection on Sig's part. The only mechanical difference is really the manual safety (which works on the trigger and not on the striker), and if we're being generous the second would be the spanner screw. They should have the upgraded FCU, but in the civilian world there are still reports of the issue even after the upgrade.

homefree 1y ago

In most cases with CCW if you were to actually need to use the weapon you would not have time to chamber a round. Even if you did have time (maybe you should run away?), doing so would draw attention to yourself (and might be fatal). The standard advice is to have one chambered or work to getting yourself comfortable with that over time.

smithkl42 1y ago

This is not military, but it's widely advocated in the concealed carry community that you should carry with one in the chamber. The argument is that with modern pistol designs and the right precautions, it's generally safe; and that many scenarios where you might need to defend yourself need all the possible speed you can get. Having to stroke your firearm to load it can easily add 2 seconds to your draw. That said, given all the stories I've read, I can't imagine carrying a P320 with one in the chamber.

deleted 1y ago

[deleted]

paulddraper 1y ago

Answer: maybe. Depends how responsive you want to be.

esseph 1y ago

Always carry chambered. 1. When you need it you won't remember to chamber due to stress 2. stress causes fine motor skill distortion 3. Only draw when you are prepared to fire (or you end up dealing with Brandishing laws)

8note 1y ago
a better alternative would be to not carry. if the stress is gonna mess with your fine motor control, youre probably gonna accidentally shoot a bystander anyways, because you happened to have been laid off earlier in the day. the stree messes with your memory, so the barista looks like a threat. the stress messes with your fine motor skill, so you hit the guy waiting for his coffee. and of course, you gotta shoot the rest so theres no witnesses to have you charged for not actually doing self defence
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
- kbelder 1y ago
  Yeah, happens all the time.
- Der_Einzige 1y ago
  don't forget shooting yourself at the end so you don't have to feel bad about shooting others!

the__alchemist 1y ago

There are policies that vary by branch. The USAF, for example, carries the Beretta M9 pistol (Not sure when they switched to Sig? Must be recent) with the safety off, and in double-action mode. So, round chambered, and a single (hard) trigger pull (Or a manual cock + light pull) will fire the round. Dropping it should not fire it. I had to carry one in my vest in case of emergencies, and I never felt comfortable being one trigger pull from bang, while it's pointed at my waist for extended periods. Also, the double-action pull sucks, and it's harder to aim straight when putting so much muscle into the pull IMO. Had to have the finger on it in a certain way to get leverage. (The single-action pull after doesn't have this issue) So, I would accept the weapon from the equipment guys, insert the mag, send the slide forward, put it on fire since that's what you're supposed to do... then put it back on safe.

bugsMarathon88 1y ago

Can't you just put a seatbelt on right before a collision? A gun carried without one in the chamber is just a totem for emotional coddling, nothing more.