Hacker News Reader

Comment by spl757 | Hacker News Reader

There are really two separate claims being made about the P320 and unintentional discharges.

One claim is that the gun can fire when dropped at a certain angle from a certain height. The voluntary "recall" lets you send it back to Sig and they replace some parts. I think the cause was because the trigger itself was bulky enough for a drop to give it enough inertia to fire, but I'm not 100% sure on that.

The other claim is that the P320 can fire without being dropped, and while holstered, seemingly on it's own. That's all I really know about it.

I own a P320, and I consider it an unsafe weapon at this point. I have not had the self-recall fix done and I'll never chamber a round in it again, so I guess it's a paperweight now.

View on HN

A week or so ago the FBI report investigating an incident of unintentional discharge back in 2024 was released via FOIA. This particular case was a police officer who had the firearm in the holster, and by just normal movement it went off. Multiple layers of the striker fire system safety’s failed, and fired the chambered round.

What was particularly beneficial/unique is the P320 was kept in the holster when given to the FBI to investigate, and only removed after their forensic team X-rayed it, giving us pretty solid case study of how it happens

This guy does a great job going through the report: https://youtu.be/LfnhTYeVHHE

Thanks for the link, but I'm not sure what the point of the 50 minute video is. Here's [0] the pdf of the report. It's really not that long.

[0]: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1L7RXrneHlzfjrewMFIeeyc-nel3...

Context can be helpful for laypeople

50 minutes of video can be helpful for ad revenue.

Crazy that Sig Sauer is pushing back on this as lies then. (per featured article)

I don't think that is crazy at all, our whole system incentivizes corporate behavior exactly like this.

From your tone I assume that you would expect Sig to come forward, analyze, discuss and hopefully solve these problems as soon as possible.

But that would be utterly stupid from their point of view. Public opinion cares very little about the details-- anytime you get associated with issues like this is simply bad for your brand/stockpric: downplaying, denying and gaslighting is absolutely the way to go here for the company.

IMO to fix this you would need to strongly increase personal liability specifically for misinformation and delays in cases like this, and we would need to reward good behavior (proactive fixes, honest communication).

But just look at the whole tetraethyl lead debacle: This cost at least a million years of human lifes (!!), after the lead industry denied known problems and purposefully obstructed/discredited critical researchers (e.g. R. Buyers and H. Needleman) for decades. I strongly believe that a number of decisionmakers should have ended up with a dead penalty or lifelone imprisonment, but there were ZERO consequences for anyone involved, and current rethoric around "deregulation" makes it obvious to me that zero lessons were learned.

I agree culture these days is default corrupted and crazy. Still crazy though. I think we need good old fashioned justice.

Eh, SIG is losing a lot of customers for life with the way they are treating this situation.

Well yeah cause they get shot.

It’s crazy if you have good morals and care about your fellow man.

If you want to make boatloads of cash and don’t care about lives, you follow the rules and the same playbook as Remington did when their rifles suffered a similar self-firing phenomenon that killed customers.

Delay, deny, defend yourself and take in as much cash as possible until you are legally boxed in. Hope at that point your profits are greater than your penalties, such that they are just another cost of doing business.

What amazes me are the Sig Sauer fanatics I see online in the gun communities defending them endlessly as if they can do no harm.

Delay, deny, defend is a pretty bold position when your customers are guaranteed armed.

Are you seriously suggesting their customers would commit murder over this? And how would admitting their faults make such an unstable, revenge-bent person not want to kill them?

Normal people don't get bent toward murder until all other options are exhausted. I mean this whole thing seems very rare so probably not, but jesus take some fucking ownership. Bald faced lying is pretty fucking enraging and despicable. I'm not sure what you are so worked up about.

> ...have good morals and care about your fellow man.

Seems opposed to the values of an arms manufacturer.

I’ve yet to see any industry for which it applies.

I'm a recently licensed firearms owner from Canada and as part of the safety training part of the licensing process, I became aware of how unsafe the P320 seemed to be. It really feels like that model needs to be taken off-market, undergo significant redesign, and for Sig's marketing sake, probably re-emerge as some new model like the SP321 where the S stands for "safety" :-)

What I'm not as familiar with is why hasn't Sig done this? It really feels like they've been doing ad-hoc patch design adjustments to a fundamentally unsafe design at this point. But I'm also not very knowledgeable about firearms yet.

It's really sad because, straightforwardly, there's no penalty for just saying PEBKAC. Gun industry has tons of US legislative-granted legal immunity lest they ever accidentally become victim of a legal process that holds them accountable for, say, a mass shooting.

They've been saying it was a political witchunt and avoiding dealing with it. This, hopefully, breaks the dam.

The issue here is a question of whether the product is defective. The various legislation passed to protect firearm manufacturers against nuisance “defective product” lawsuits in the specific case where the product functioned as intended and was used illegally by a violent criminal, do not apply.

This is not a political issue. This is a discussion about whether a product is defective.

> The various legislation [...] do not apply.

Well, except specifically for Sig Sauer on the topic of an external safety in New Hampshire[0]. Which, given that's the thing people have been filing lawsuits in New Hampshire about, is a bit of a political issue, no?

[0] https://www.nhpr.org/nh-news/2025-05-28/sig-sauer-p320-pisto...

The lack of an external safety is not a defect. Many guns, probably a majority of new sales don’t. Anyone buying P320 knows there is no external safety. Sig should be liable for defects, and potentially negligent design, but seems reasonable not to be able to sue them for not including an external safety.

The US military uses the M17 and the M18, two versions of the P320 that have manual safeties.

And most US law enforcement uses Glock pistols, which are also famous for having no external safety. There's a lever integrated into the trigger such that the trigger must be pulled before it can travel backward, and there's a safety internal to the slide that ensures the firing pin cannot travel forward until the trigger has been pulled, but there is no external safety anywhere. Pull the trigger (by any means, finger or otherwise -- tangled up in string, caught on a pointy object like a pen, whatever) and it will fire.

I think the new law preventing the suing of manufacturers for not including external safeties is a good thing.

I also think Sig Sauer are intentionally gas-lighting the public on the safety of the P320/M17/M18 and should withdraw it from the market.

Edit: I have nothing against Sig Sauer in general. I've shot a P228; it's a beautiful weapon, and I would buy one in a heartbeat. You couldn't pay me enough to have a P320.

I do not think that allowing people to sue gun companies for not having an external safety is a good way to accomplish the goal, if the goal is actual safety.

If the consumer protection bureau of a state wants to make an external safety a requirement for pistols sold in the state, I think that is a legitimate use of government authority and is used all the time with other kinds of products. Personally I think such a proposal evinces a complete lack of understanding of modern handguns and I would be opposed to it, but it is a legitimate use of government powers, and is not just a back door way to sue a disfavored company out of existence.

For this particular case I think that discussing external safeties is a distraction. In my opinion a handgun should not discharge under any circumstance where no one and nothing pulled the trigger. As a firearm owner I have that expectation of every firearm I own. I deliberately chose not to buy an Sig 320 because of the large number of reports of accidental drop related discharges; it makes me think that there might be a design defect.

And it still does not help, because the safety only blocks the trigger but not the striker from firing, thus the Air Force incident that started, this topic, became possible.

This is about lots of money, which always is a political issue, especially in the US. The fact-finding discussion is only relevant in court.

To be fair, they're just straight up Wrong, capital-W. Trying to apply a general idea of legislation to a very specific scenario with lots of details and specific legislation. See sibling comment, Zimpenfish.

I've spent my career working with great marketers and I don't think any single one of them would advocate for the approach that Sig Sauer took with that stupid "It Ends Today" campaign. In fact, I'm sure all of them would have recommended the exact opposite.

They should very quickly pivot to a "It [100% Safety] Starts Today" remedial campaign admitting there's a problem, following-up with full transparency about how they plan to reorient their organization to make the situation better, then providing frequent proof of progress towards the safety goal. There's a critical window for them to turn this from a crisis that might sink the US division of the company to one that serves as the basis for why they were compelled to adopt safety-first design processes for their guns.

This is their version of the [1982 Tylenol Crisis](https://www.pbs.org/newshour/health/tylenol-murders-1982) but they've really fumbled the ball so far.

There's no computers nor chairs involved, however.

You ever heard the phrase "chair force"?

It's a shame, because it is a super nice gun to actually shoot.

But at this point, given how Sig has responded (the article has a nice summary), the cover-up is bigger than the crime, almost. The trust is broken at an organizational level.

I don't feel like all manufacturers would respond like this, and it isn't the response I expect from somebody reputable.

Yeah, too bad. It’s actually quite an innovative and cool design. Shoots pretty good for a striker (still a far cry from CZs and 2011s). The ecosystem also started to develop around it (eg 1911 angle grips, high quality holsters, etc.) Sig optics and accessories also got quite good, too.

https://youtube.com/shorts/cOUfurKIjnI

Consider the Canik TP9SF Elite rather than the ubiquitous Glock. My EDC is an TP9 Elite SC. Thousands of rounds through it and support is outstanding. Several advantages and features over big G. Nothing wrong with the Glock 17 G5 or 19 G5.

I don’t know if the Sig P320 has a similar firing pin safety design to the P365, but I optioned to go with Springfield Hellcat vs P365 specifically because the Hellcat has two separate safety catch points on the firing pin assembly, thereby eliminating a single point of failure, while the P365 essentially has one (see photos here https://www.reddit.com/r/gunsmithing/comments/f7dgnl/how_saf...). Glock has also has a redundant “two-catch” internal safety design, and has a well established safety record (hellcat just worked better for my needs; glock was an equally good choice from a safety standpoint). It’s common in the US to carry in “ready” configuration (barrel loaded); IMO if you choose to do this, a single point of failure is unacceptable. It’s why hammer fire (with hammer disengaged requiring initial DA trigger pull to push hammer back) can be safer; you can also cover the hammer with thumb while drawing and feel if the trigger is accidentally engaging, helping to prevent a negligent discharge.

For anyone interested, here is a video showing Glock internal safety mechanisms: (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Fg2tlV1oqVM).

A mechanical description of Sig P365 internal safety in comparison to Glock: (top comment from https://www.reddit.com/r/SigSauer/comments/c5ddz5/can_someon...).

Video comparing P320 to Glock internal safeties: (https://youtu.be/dLm23zJGSL0) Note: it does appear that P320 has a more robust internal safety design than the P365.

I think the first claim is cover for the 2nd. if they admit there are uncommanded discharges, their reputation is decimated and they will lose an entire batch of lawsuits. If they dont do anything, guns will keep uncommanded-discharging until there is overwhelming evidence (I think we're at that point already)

Use to really enjoy shooting SIG, they felt well made, reliable, hell the military was adopting them over the 1911... Nothing led me to get rid of it, but I just found Glock to make a better handgun all around. Either way, much prefer single action revolves for their safety, accuracy, and reloading.

> I have not had the self-recall fix done

Why? Also, isn't that only an issue in early P320s? (at least according to Sig)

> and I'll never chamber a round in it again

Isn't this good enough for most uses? Heck, a long time ago I was trained to only chamber after unholstering AND entering a situation requiring quick response. The extra round not being worth the risk. 17 instead of 17+1 for the 9mm P320, right?

Honestly, this all smells like an overblown hysteria campaign to pump American brands. I would like to see the accidental discharge rate per units in use. This is one of the most popular handguns.

> Honestly, this all smells like an overblown hysteria campaign to pump American brands.

Sig Sauer, Inc is an American company, and M17/M18 are manufactured solely in US. Afaik the design is also from US.

> Sig Sauer, Inc is an American company

It appears to be the American half of a German-owned transnational company: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SIG_Sauer

The German company and American company are clearly related, given the German company is alleged to have manufactured and shipped firearms to the American company with falsified end-user certificates, which the American company then resold to Colombia in violation of German law: https://www.nhpr.org/post/ceo-nh-gun-maker-facing-five-years...

From that angle, we can also argue that losing a door or a plane or two during flights is not a big issue for Boeing and people in general, because it's the only problem known with these planes, and it happens pretty rarely, no?

Heck, even if we believe Boeing, it's the pilots' problem who are not retrained for the new plane which doesn't need training.

Honestly, also this Boeing thing smells like an overblown hysteria campaign to pump American planes.

Too many examples of the discharge happening in YouTube and Sig gaslighting the public about it and blaming liberals made it even worse. The gun had a recall after fighting the public and then there were still problems. I hear the issue may be tolerance differences between part versions that can lead to the safety failures when mixed together.

The brand damage has been significant, but for the most part isolated to this pistol. Now, if another Sig model has a similar issue in the future and a similar response comes from Sig, the loss in trust will be immense and potentially unrecoverable.

As far as not keeping a round in the chamber, yeah, some people still do that, though that method has fallen into disfavor amongst the CCW types. But even when not ready to fire, there is a lot of time when that pistol could be loaded and go off, I.E. holding the pistol at low ready. Pistol on the bench facing down range as you check something or take a pause, unloading and reloading etc.

Pistols are already incredibly easy to accidentally hurt oneself and others that adding in this variable is just intolerable for most I think.

The gun community wants that gun to work reliably, that means it must fire when intended to fire, and only then.

> to pump American brands

Sig is an American company, owned by a German holding corp, but still significantly more American than any other pistol mfg being considered, Glock or Beretta.

I've had one since before the military adopted it. I've been carrying it for years daily. It has never once went off on its own. I run with it, jump with it, have carried it in a small cross body bag. It has never just fired by itself. I have over 5k rounds through it.

The only time my gun has went off was when I pulled the trigger. Has your gun ever went off without pulling the trigger?

Most of the videos I see on YouTube are people who were fiddling with the gun, in some kind of physical altercation, or carry some sort of back on the side they carry. I didn't get the fix from Sig either.

> I've had one since before the military adopted it. I've been carrying it for years daily. It has never once went off on its own. I run with it, jump with it, have carried it in a small cross body bag. It has never just fired by itself.

I mean, that’s quite literally survivorship bias…

I think it's crazy to use anecdotal evidence to decide to continue to use a gun with a small chance of accidental discharge.

Dont all guns have a small chance of accidental discharge? Improper handling and ignoring the firearm safety rules is not something I regularly do.

No, mine has never discharged without intention. I have had it for years and have put thousands of rounds through it. I keep it clean and maintained properly, and the only issue I've ever had with it is some jamming when using crappy FMJ range ammo.

All that being said, I'm not trying to say there is definitely an issue with the P320, but there is enough out there to give me some doubt. Perhaps there will be a fix at some point, but until then it's just not worth it to me.

This also isn't happening with other guns. If you google any other gun brand and the words unintentional discharge, you will still only get results for the P320.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com