4 ms·

> In this case, the whole "it want off by itself" claim was a lie. I think we need to await the facts of the case and the judgement. The only public informatio

> In this case, the whole "it want off by itself" claim was a lie. I think we need to await the facts of the case and the judgement. The only public information I've seen strikes me as unusual. The accused airman is being charged with involuntary manslaughter, which coupled with the extensive issues with the P320 brings up more questions than it answers. I could come up with my own conjecture based on that information, but there's enough people doing that already. The fact remains that the P320 malfunctions. There's been countless documented cases, and numerous recorded demonstrations of the issue on YouTube and elsewhere.

_mlbt 1y ago
Even if the Airman’s firearm did fire on its own without them pulling the trigger, it begs the question, why was this loaded handgun pointed at anyone that they didn’t intend to kill. It can be both Sig and this Airman’s fault at the same time.
- runjake 1y ago
  Right. But we don't know any of those details, so it's just conjecture at this point. We shouldn't form opinions based on very limited information.
- mothballed 1y ago
  Try conceal carrying or outside the waistband without ever pointing a loaded handgun at something you don't want to kill. It is pretty much impossible, unless you're using a pretty unusual holster. A waistband holster will pretty much always end up pointing it towards some part of your body at some point, and even a shoulder holster it is pointing at someone else. Carrying a handgun relies on that rule not being followed and instead the holster preventing anyone from pulling the trigger, but if the gun can go off without a trigger pull all bets are off.
  - _mlbt 1y ago
    Holstered guns shouldn't have a round in the chamber. That's also very negligent.
    - mothballed 1y ago
      That's hilarious.
      - _mlbt 1y ago
        I'll admit, that one's just my opinion, since the community is very divided on this and there's no consensus. I feel that the safety versus response time trade off is worth it for me. It could be from my military background, but for me a negligent discharge is one of the worst things I could possibly do with a firearm. I was also raised to never trust a safety and unload my gun when crossing fence lines while hunting.
        mothballed 1y ago
        Fair enough, I can respect the difference in opinion. A couple notes though on the military or hunters ed training safety that might influence their training 1) The safety mechanisms on say a glock are different than on a lot of military rifles soldiers are trained on. An Ar-15/M16 can go off without pulling the trigger if the firing pin gets stuck in the channel. That won't happen with a glock because the safety physically blocks the primer from being struck. Also in theory a free-floating firing pin could maybe somehow get slammed hard enough or slam an abused primer enough to set off some military rifles. 2) Some hunting shotguns or military rifles aren't drop safe. Modern handguns are. 3) A military rifle or hunting rifle generally has the trigger exposed at all times you are carrying it. A CCW handgun, you are not exposing the gun and trigger unless you are about to shoot someone. Now I've never served in the military, other than a rag-tag Kurdish militia. What I would imagine the boot sergeant or whatever they are called do, is tells the soldier they will keep the manual safety on or the weapon unchambered and leave it at that, because explaining the intricacies of a striker-fired pistol vs an M16 to a bunch of barely out of highschoolers from Guam who are already exhausted from sleep deprivation and jarring work-outs would not be terribly productive.
  - bee_rider 1y ago
    I’m not a gun guy. I can accept that sometimes a holstered gun ends up pointing at somebody occasionally. And I can accept that a gun might rarely discharge at random for a while, I mean that’s a design flaw but if it is rare enough I guess it will take a while to be recalled, right? But does it seem a little weird that the two events coincided?
    - jacquesm 1y ago
      That goes for every co-incidence. It's called that for a reason and they are always 'a little weird'. I listen to the Electric Light Orchestra, my neighbors light bulb burns out. It is more than 'a little weird'. It is also a coincidence. And it probably happened more than once.
    - recursivecaveat 1y ago
      Keep in mind you would not have heard of it if the story was "gun goes off somewhere in america, no one harmed, desk now has awkward hole". It's like the anthropic principle of news. You would really have to dig into the base rates to know if the coincidence is suspicious.
    - eurleif 1y ago
      >I can accept that sometimes a holstered gun ends up pointing at somebody occasionally. It's not occasional. If you carry AIWB (appendix inside the waistband, a common position), it's routinely pointing at your own leg (and other anatomy) as you move around. It does strike me as a bit odd to hand a holstered gun to someone while pointing it at them -- as a matter of politeness, if nothing else. But there are other incidents where a P320 is said to have discharged into the leg of someone carrying it in a holster.
1659447091 1y ago
> The fact remains that the P320 malfunctions. This is why I came around to appreciating the California Roster of Handguns regulation. Firearm manufacturers should be held to a higher safety standard. Originally I thought it was ridiculous that my first conceal carry sub-compact Springfield XD-S came in a case with a large sticker across one side saying it was illegal in CA. At which point I learned about the stringent drop, firing and performance test that was required and how manufacturers will make a separate and specific quality and safety upgrades to the model variant legal in CA. After a fair amount of use I understood why the XD-S was not and is still not legal in CA. Mine had a higher-than-I-am-comfortable-with rate of jamming. I'll be buying CA approved firearms from now on. Interesting info about the P320 M18: The P320 M18 has 3 variants: 320CA-9-M18-MS, 320CA-9-M18-MS-10, 320CA-9-M18-MS-CA. The 320CA-9-M18-MS-CA is the only one legal in CA [0] According to Sig Sauer site wording, the CA tested version came after the version issued to the military -- thus I am taking a guess that t was not as rigorously tested as the CA version (and probably has fewer safety or other military specific features that make it less reliable) [0] https://www.oag.ca.gov/firearms/certified-handguns/search?make=150970 https://www.oag.ca.gov/firearms/certified-handguns/search?ma...

_mlbt 1y ago

Even if the Airman’s firearm did fire on its own without them pulling the trigger, it begs the question, why was this loaded handgun pointed at anyone that they didn’t intend to kill. It can be both Sig and this Airman’s fault at the same time.

runjake 1y ago
Right. But we don't know any of those details, so it's just conjecture at this point. We shouldn't form opinions based on very limited information.
mothballed 1y ago
Try conceal carrying or outside the waistband without ever pointing a loaded handgun at something you don't want to kill. It is pretty much impossible, unless you're using a pretty unusual holster. A waistband holster will pretty much always end up pointing it towards some part of your body at some point, and even a shoulder holster it is pointing at someone else. Carrying a handgun relies on that rule not being followed and instead the holster preventing anyone from pulling the trigger, but if the gun can go off without a trigger pull all bets are off.
- _mlbt 1y ago
  Holstered guns shouldn't have a round in the chamber. That's also very negligent.
  - mothballed 1y ago
    That's hilarious.
    - _mlbt 1y ago
      I'll admit, that one's just my opinion, since the community is very divided on this and there's no consensus. I feel that the safety versus response time trade off is worth it for me. It could be from my military background, but for me a negligent discharge is one of the worst things I could possibly do with a firearm. I was also raised to never trust a safety and unload my gun when crossing fence lines while hunting.
      - mothballed 1y ago
        Fair enough, I can respect the difference in opinion. A couple notes though on the military or hunters ed training safety that might influence their training 1) The safety mechanisms on say a glock are different than on a lot of military rifles soldiers are trained on. An Ar-15/M16 can go off without pulling the trigger if the firing pin gets stuck in the channel. That won't happen with a glock because the safety physically blocks the primer from being struck. Also in theory a free-floating firing pin could maybe somehow get slammed hard enough or slam an abused primer enough to set off some military rifles. 2) Some hunting shotguns or military rifles aren't drop safe. Modern handguns are. 3) A military rifle or hunting rifle generally has the trigger exposed at all times you are carrying it. A CCW handgun, you are not exposing the gun and trigger unless you are about to shoot someone. Now I've never served in the military, other than a rag-tag Kurdish militia. What I would imagine the boot sergeant or whatever they are called do, is tells the soldier they will keep the manual safety on or the weapon unchambered and leave it at that, because explaining the intricacies of a striker-fired pistol vs an M16 to a bunch of barely out of highschoolers from Guam who are already exhausted from sleep deprivation and jarring work-outs would not be terribly productive.
- bee_rider 1y ago
  I’m not a gun guy. I can accept that sometimes a holstered gun ends up pointing at somebody occasionally. And I can accept that a gun might rarely discharge at random for a while, I mean that’s a design flaw but if it is rare enough I guess it will take a while to be recalled, right? But does it seem a little weird that the two events coincided?
  - jacquesm 1y ago
    That goes for every co-incidence. It's called that for a reason and they are always 'a little weird'. I listen to the Electric Light Orchestra, my neighbors light bulb burns out. It is more than 'a little weird'. It is also a coincidence. And it probably happened more than once.
  - recursivecaveat 1y ago
    Keep in mind you would not have heard of it if the story was "gun goes off somewhere in america, no one harmed, desk now has awkward hole". It's like the anthropic principle of news. You would really have to dig into the base rates to know if the coincidence is suspicious.
  - eurleif 1y ago
    >I can accept that sometimes a holstered gun ends up pointing at somebody occasionally. It's not occasional. If you carry AIWB (appendix inside the waistband, a common position), it's routinely pointing at your own leg (and other anatomy) as you move around. It does strike me as a bit odd to hand a holstered gun to someone while pointing it at them -- as a matter of politeness, if nothing else. But there are other incidents where a P320 is said to have discharged into the leg of someone carrying it in a holster.

1659447091 1y ago

> The fact remains that the P320 malfunctions. This is why I came around to appreciating the California Roster of Handguns regulation. Firearm manufacturers should be held to a higher safety standard. Originally I thought it was ridiculous that my first conceal carry sub-compact Springfield XD-S came in a case with a large sticker across one side saying it was illegal in CA. At which point I learned about the stringent drop, firing and performance test that was required and how manufacturers will make a separate and specific quality and safety upgrades to the model variant legal in CA. After a fair amount of use I understood why the XD-S was not and is still not legal in CA. Mine had a higher-than-I-am-comfortable-with rate of jamming. I'll be buying CA approved firearms from now on. Interesting info about the P320 M18: The P320 M18 has 3 variants: 320CA-9-M18-MS, 320CA-9-M18-MS-10, 320CA-9-M18-MS-CA. The 320CA-9-M18-MS-CA is the only one legal in CA [0] According to Sig Sauer site wording, the CA tested version came after the version issued to the military -- thus I am taking a guess that t was not as rigorously tested as the CA version (and probably has fewer safety or other military specific features that make it less reliable) [0] https://www.oag.ca.gov/firearms/certified-handguns/search?make=150970 https://www.oag.ca.gov/firearms/certified-handguns/search?ma...