Lawsuit claims SIG P320 pistol fired without trigger pull

[hpman66]

https://www.unionleader.com/news/courts/nh-mans-lawsuit-claims-sig-sauer-pistol-fired-without-trigger-pull/article_63c8f130-af21-5eb0-b67d-c12943be8493.html
NH man's lawsuit claims SIG Sauer pistol fired without trigger pull
By Paul Feely New Hampshire Union Leader
Jul 6, 2020 Updated Jul 9, 2020

 

[hpman66]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-SBpZBs3foA
Is The SIG P320 UNSAFE?! Lawsuit Detailing Numerous Incidents Says YES!
Guns & Gadgets
Jul 8, 2020

 

[JFB]

I was hesitant about getting a sticker fired.
and I just got a SIG this month!
I have been carrying it with a primed spend case chambered to be sure I was comfortable with holster and all
Now what?

 

[Rick Courtright]

Hi,

I hear the lawyers at SIG drawing up a counter suit to bankrupt this guy for the next three generations lest some of his progeny might inherit the stupid gene..

Rick C

 

[bobski]

my link wont load. whats thisa about?

 

[Ale-8(1)]

Hi,

I hear the lawyers at SIG drawing up a counter suit to bankrupt this guy for the next three generations lest some of his progeny might inherit the stupid gene..

Rick C

Which guy are you talking about, Rick? :shock:

 

[arfmel]

There’s no question that the P320 wasn’t initially entirely drop safe. There have been numerous incidents. Here’s video of a test.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ch7si_VQsGA

As I recall, the P320s supplied to the US Military had a modification made that fixed the problem, but for some time after that the P320s sold to civilians were not modified to correct the issue. I believe that may have changed at this point.

The dude in the story was removing his holster with the pistol still in it, which is a poor practice IMO. I think I’ve read that the holster was a plastic job provided by SIG with the pistol. If that’s the case, it seems to me to increase SIGs culpability in the incident. Of course, the bottom line is that safe gun handling would have prevented this accident.

 

[bobski]

makes ya rethink cocked and locked as carry choice.

 

[JFB]

its stricker, no hammer
like a bolt action rifle with no safety, just pull the trigger

 

[Rick Courtright]

Which guy are you talking about, Rick?

Hi,

For now, the guy who shot himself. But in honor of my grandfather and one of his favorite sayings, "Now let's look at this."

I may change my mind after someone can draw me a picture of how a striker fired pistol can fire without "some kind" of a trigger pull. The operator may not have pulled the trigger himself, but something pulled it. Clothing, holster, something. It's not like SIG is brand new to this style of pistol, so I'm willing to change my mind with more evidence. For example, is there such a thing as a DA/SA striker fired pistol such that the gun can be carried "cocked and locked" like some hammer fired models? And this gun is one of them? Knowledge like that could change the complexion of the case right there. But for now, I find the story's hard to buy.... betcha some out of court settlement with a denial of wrongdoing comes of this. Watch and wait!

Rick C

 

[arfmel]

From Sig-Sauer:

“A Settlement has been reached in a class action lawsuit about SIG Sauer’s P320 pistol. If you own or owned a SIG Sauer P320 pistol, you may be eligible for benefits from the Settlement.

What is the lawsuit about?

A proposed nationwide Settlement has been preliminarily approved in a class action lawsuit involving SIG Sauer’s P320 pistol. The class action lawsuit claims that P320 pistols manufactured before August 8, 2017, were defectively designed because the design allegedly allows the pistol to discharge where the pistol’s slide and barrel are in an unlocked condition due to the absence of a mechanical disconnector. The lawsuit further contends that the value and utility of these firearms have been diminished as a result of these alleged defects. Defendant denies these allegations and any wrongdoing. The Parties agreed to resolve this matter before these issues were decided by the Court.

Who’s Included?

The Settlement provides benefits to all persons who currently own a P320 pistol who fall within one of the following three Categories:


 Category 1: Current P320 Owners who have not previously experienced a Cartridge Failure Event or who did previously experience a Cartridge Failure Event but did not previously return their P320 pistol to Sig Sauer for repair.

 Category 2: Current and former owners of P320 pistols who previously returned their pistol to SIG Sauer after a Cartridge Failure Event and were told that their pistol could not be repaired; and

 Category 3: Current and former owners of P320 pistols who previously returned their pistol to SIG Sauer after a Cartridge Failure Event and were charged for the pistol to be repaired.

What does the Settlement provide?

All Settlement Class Members who continue to own their P320 pistol receive a transferable SIG Sauer Limited Lifetime Warranty against any future Cartridge Failure Events resulting from the use of Appropriate Ammunition. Additionally, Settlement Class Members in Category 1 who previously experienced a Cartridge Failure Event but did not previously return their P320 pistol for repair may have their pistol repaired at no cost to the class member. Settlement Class Members in Category 1 whose P320 pistols have not been upgraded may also participate in SIG Sauer’s Voluntary Upgrade Program at no cost to the class member. Category 2 Settlement Class Members have the option to receive either: (1) a refund of the greater of the original price paid for their P320 (with proof of purchase) or the Manufacturer’s Suggested Retail Price for their specific version, or (2) a new P320 pistol of the same or similar version to the extent permitted by state and local law. Category 3 Settlement Class Members will be refunded any money paid to SIG Sauer to repair their P320 pistol, including any shipping costs incurred.


How can I get Settlement benefits? Submit a Claim Form. Claim Forms can be found at http://www.sigsauer.com/Hartley or by calling 1-888-772-2335.

What are my legal rights?

Even if you do nothing you will be bound by the Court’s decisions. If you want to keep your right to sue the Defendant yourself, you must exclude yourself from the Settlement Class by June 3, 2020. If you do not exclude yourself, you may object to the Settlement by writing to the Court by June 3, 2020.

The Court will hold a hearing on June 25, 2020, to consider whether to approve the Settlement and a request for attorneys’ fees and expenses of up to $850,000, plus a payment of $1,400 to $2,800 for each named Plaintiff. You or your own lawyer may appear at the hearing at your own expense.”

https://www.sigsauer.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/Short-Form-Agreement-Notice.pdf?utm_campaign=Hartley&utm_medium=email&utm_source=Eloqua

 

[Ale-8(1)]

Rick, the way I understand it is that the design of the action includes the "interface" between the sear and the "semi pre-cocked" striker that can in some examples provide such a tiny engagement between the two parts that a vibration from handling or being dropped or just motion of the pistol in a holster of an active person can disengage resulting in an "unexpected" discharge. Now I may not have all the terms correct here, and there's also some concern about the apparent lack of a disconnector or similar component. Whatever the case, I can see that the "semi pre-cocked" arrangement present in most/all striker-fired guns could experience such a discharge for reasons as described. I don't think SIG intentionally put an improperly-designed gun on the market, but having spent over forty years as a designer of some pretty exotic industrial equipment I can see how such a situation could develop. There is always the possibility that even if the design is adequate the old gremlin of manufacturing tolerances could creep into the situation. It happens.

Did the guy cause the discharge inadvertently? I kinda doubt it. Was it the result of stupidity on his part? I doubt it, unless we take his faith in the advertised safety of the 320 as stupidity, in which case there have apparently been quite a number of equally stupid folks.

I'm not taking sides here because I wasn't there and have never played around with a 320 at all. It does appear that SIG dragged its feet in acknowledging the potential problem with the gun, and I cannot forgive that. I won't be surprised to see SIG ultimately lose out in this one. All JMHO.

 

[hpman66]

From Sig-Sauer:

“A Settlement has been reached in a class action lawsuit about SIG Sauer’s P320 pistol. If you own or owned a SIG Sauer P320 pistol, you may be eligible for benefits from the Settlement.

What is the lawsuit about?

A proposed nationwide Settlement has been preliminarily approved in a class action lawsuit involving SIG Sauer’s P320 pistol. The class action lawsuit claims that P320 pistols manufactured before August 8, 2017, were defectively designed because the design allegedly allows the pistol to discharge where the pistol’s slide and barrel are in an unlocked condition due to the absence of a mechanical disconnector. The lawsuit further contends that the value and utility of these firearms have been diminished as a result of these alleged defects. Defendant denies these allegations and any wrongdoing. The Parties agreed to resolve this matter before these issues were decided by the Court.

https://www.sigsauer.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/Short-Form-Agreement-Notice.pdf?utm_campaign=Hartley&utm_medium=email&utm_source=Eloqua

The above was a settlement from a previous lawsuit:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.military.com/daily-news/2020/03/19/sig-sauer-settle-lawsuit-over-alleged-safety-glitch-p320-pistol.html/amp

 

[Rick Courtright]

Rick, the way I understand it is that the design of the action includes the "interface" between the sear and the "semi pre-cocked" striker that can in some examples provide such a tiny engagement between the two parts that a vibration from handling or being dropped or just motion of the pistol in a holster of an active person can disengage resulting in an "unexpected" discharge.

Hi,

Well, in light of additional info about the design as I mentioned before, and the nature of the entire case, I stand corrected. I agree with you, Ale on the subject of foot dragging. Most of the situations like this I can recall revolved around the idea of "Stop, don't pass go, don't collect $200" until the owner's contacted the manufacturer to arrange some kind of inspection, repair, or replacement for his/her firearm.

SIG has an upgrade program for the "problem" guns. Here's what they do and how it works before and after:

https://www.sigsauer.com/support/p320-voluntary-upgrade/#video

Notice how carefully all the text on that page has been worded. Looks like they want to make sure we'll never really know what went on with the OP's gun...

Just personal opinion, but it looks like the upgraded model was designed by an engineer, the non-upgrade was what was left after the bean counters did their "Let's save 3 cents of manufacturing cost" thing.

Rick C

 

[blume357]

I have no expertise on this but have the feeling that the problem was the first P320s would go off 'on their own' if they were hit hard on one specific side at 27.22349 ft lbs per inch and the gun was held at a 42.3 degree angle on a axis of 92.46........

but I have to admit that I am a Sig fan and own a P320 and have never been able to recreate this.... I have been able to shoot a perfect score on a very hard test with one but also prefer to not carry a striker fired pistol... just me but they are fun at the range but not my cup of tea out in the real world.... I'm old school and prefer SA/DA.

 

[Ale-8(1)]

Rick, the way I understand it is that the design of the action includes the "interface" between the sear and the "semi pre-cocked" striker that can in some examples provide such a tiny engagement between the two parts that a vibration from handling or being dropped or just motion of the pistol in a holster of an active person can disengage resulting in an "unexpected" discharge.

Hi,

Well, in light of additional info about the design as I mentioned before, and the nature of the entire case, I stand corrected. I agree with you, Ale on the subject of foot dragging. Most of the situations like this I can recall revolved around the idea of "Stop, don't pass go, don't collect $200" until the owner's contacted the manufacturer to arrange some kind of inspection, repair, or replacement for his/her firearm.


Rick C

Rick, I've been following this situation for quite a while, and initially it was one of the "yes it does/no it doesn't" situations depending on who you read. HPMAN66's first link is rather the usual media coverage with little detail and a certain "slant" to its coverage. His second link presents so much detail information from a guy who usually is right on the mark that it's pretty much the "true story" as far as I'm concerned. I'm just glad I hadn't bought a 320.

And yeah, "lawyerspeak" is all over the place here. :roll: :roll: :roll:

Also, in reviewing the link you provided I find it encouraging that SIG has apparently given this some serious thought . . . finally. Guess we'll see how it all works out. :wink:

 

[hpman66]

Another one? :shock: :?


https://www.wisn.com/article/mpd-gun-manufacturer-linked-to-lawsuits-over-unintended-shootings/33329957
MPD gun manufacturer linked to lawsuits over unintended shootings
Derrick Rose Anchor/Investigative Reporter
Hillary Mintz, WISN 12 News Reporter
Updated: 11:13 AM CDT Jul 16, 2020