P320 Misfire Lawsuit Goes to Jury

[admin]

The P320 discharge lawsuit debate has been brewing on forums and at gun counters for years — now it's in front of a federal jury in Maine, and the arguments from both sides are worth paying attention to if you carry or work with this platform.

"Dave will tell you that he prays, literally prays, that his work limitations won't end in a disaster for himself or for someone he needs to protect."

That's the human cost underneath all the legal maneuvering. A deputy who can no longer run reliably in the field — that's not a theoretical product liability argument, that's a guy who has to wonder every shift whether his gear failed him.

"Sig is pointing fingers in every direction at once — the holster manufacturer, the sheriff's department (four hours of training, no manual safety policy, chamber-loaded mandate), and Cole himself for letting a jacket zipper near the trigger guard."

Four hours of training for a duty gun — that's a department problem regardless of how this verdict lands. But the zipper argument is where it gets slippery for Sig, because if your design is that vulnerable to incidental contact near the trigger guard, that's a conversation worth having honestly.

"Roughly 93% of P320s sold cannot accept the manual thumb safety Sig offers as an option."

That stat cuts right through the "just add a safety" defense. If the solution isn't physically available to most of the guns already in circulation, it's not really a solution — it's a footnote.

The drop-fire history from the military contract is the thread I'd want to pull on if I were on that jury. Whether it's admissible or not will likely determine more about this outcome than any zipper.

Have you ever had a holster or gear interaction that made you reconsider how you carry or what you carry it in — and did it change anything about your setup?

---

Read the full article in The Handbook → | By Steve Duskett