Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

duxetp t1_iyutns6 wrote

I don’t think this fits the sub. There have been some cases that the firearm did unintentionally discharge especially when dropped.

I’m not sure how this is r/nottheonion material.

32

versusentropy t1_iyw0qrb wrote

dropped is not by itself.

−10

Viral_dump_lover t1_iywch9n wrote

Drop safety is a cornerstone of modern handgun design. Handguns, if holstered, often bump and knock into things as the person moves around.

This is, effectively, the gun going off on its own.

18

sexybimbogf t1_iywtxuy wrote

Sometimes firearms are defective and go off by themselves. This is called "accidental discharge" (as opposed to cases of human error, or "negligent discharge"). In these cases, the firearms are recalled. This is uncommon with modern firearms but absolutely still happens. Not onion-y.

15

[deleted] t1_iyxpnk4 wrote

Also happens more often than people would think with competitions, lot of highly modified guns can have accidental discharges a lot easier than something you'd buy off the shelf at cabelas.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ADGyglYqeoM

Great example as to why you always treat the firearm like its loaded, his finger is nowhere near the trigger.

5

arcxjo t1_iyuqnbg wrote

> The lawsuit, filed Wednesday in U.S. federal court in Concord, New Hampshire, says there have been over 100 incidents of the P320 pistol unintentionally discharging when the user believed they did not pull the trigger.

If your beliefs and the facts on whether you pulled a trigger aren't in alignment, maybe you shouldn't be trusted with a gun.

1

SubstantialFigment t1_iyurb3s wrote

There have been legit recalls for this sort of defect.

39

coyote-1 t1_iywu44h wrote

But not by SIG. They had a “voluntary upgrade” on this, but not a recall. Which they should… but if they did, would make them legally vulnerable in dozens of incidents.

The gun does in fact fire spontaneously. Sig refusing to officially acknowledge this is a travesty, and only possible because of special legislation sponsored and passed by the GOP that holds gun companies legally not responsible for the consequences of their products.

1

[deleted] t1_iyurftu wrote

[deleted]

0

arcxjo t1_iyurrse wrote

Not saying it isn't possible, but a law-talking guy who's suing them putting out a press release isn't a definitive source any more than all the Facebook ads about Roundup are proof it's carcinogenic.

−7

be-like-water-2022 t1_iyus435 wrote

In 2016, the U.S Army adopted the P320 for use in the field, but not before it underwent significant testing. The Army’s drop test revealed that the gun would discharge on impact at certain angles. Clearly, this was a concern that they needed to have addressed. Sig Sauer met the Army’s requests for a modified trigger mechanism to fix the problem — but implemented the change only for military sales.

15

SubstantialFigment t1_iyurzck wrote

Remington did a recall for this very problem for a long gun. It has happened before.

4

arcxjo t1_iyuvww1 wrote

That's irrelevant to proving anything about this particular gun unless they used the same parts.

−6

BirdsbirdsBURDS t1_iyuxv4c wrote

It establishes the fact that it can happen. This lawsuit going forward now is stating that it has happened. That’s literally what we’re looking at. It’s not like there’s just this one woman making this random claim against a random gun. She’s one of many making the claim against the same model. Let them figure it out in court now. But saying they don’t have a case because you can’t believe it or significantly doubt it is pointless unless you’re involved in the case.

5

killerbee2319 t1_iyurt6j wrote

Believe in this instance is a protection against lawsuits wiggle word in case one of the multiple claims is proven to have involved the user doing something. While I generally have a low opinion of police officers and their ability to handle a firearm properly, this many intances, including holstered guns, amongst relatively veteran officers is pretty indicative.

8

Omegalazarus t1_iyyderi wrote

This has been documented on camera. The verbage is purely legalese.

1

Large-Garden4833 t1_iz3ti0w wrote

That’s not the point and you know it. Anyone would question what happened if a gun randomly went off . Don’t be dense

1

arcxjo t1_iz3vgey wrote

And any defense lawyer would question any holes in the plaintiff's story. Don't be dense.

1

CatAvailable3953 t1_iyw3zlz wrote

Exactly

−2

InternMan t1_iyx9c2o wrote

No. Several manufactures have had defects in the trigger system that will allow the gun to discharge when the trigger is not pulled. Adding in drop safeties to make sure the gun won't fire if dropped or knocked is part of designing a firearm.

Remington is one of the bigger cases of this kind of defect, affecting a ton of hunting and competition rifles. This is not new. What is new is that Sig doesn't want to do a recall.

3

[deleted] t1_iyuultg wrote

[removed]

1

AutoModerator t1_iyuulue wrote

Sorry, but your account is too new to post. Your account needs to be either 2 weeks old or have at least 250 combined link and comment karma. Don't modmail us about this, just wait it out or get more karma.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

0

Natural_Luck4501 t1_iyyevf2 wrote

It's onion-y* because firearms don't just go off by themselves. Weird how all the incidents involve people handling the gun prior to it magically going off. "oh I was checking it and it fired" "oh I was putting it in my bag and it fired" not "oh it was in my safe and it fired" hell one even said he was checking the gun for obstruction out of the holster and it fired...

0

GomerSnerd t1_iz2688h wrote

Chief witness for prosecution....Alec Baldwin

0

Killawife t1_iyw8pnv wrote

Guns don't kill people nu-uh, I kill people, with guns.

−1

Ogre_face t1_iyvvq3e wrote

Any reason it's important to note that a woman from Massachusetts is involved?

−4

mason_savoy71 t1_iyw197d wrote

The story is from local Boston news. It's the local angle for them. It's a "hey, there's a lawsuit, and someone around here is part of it" headline. Nothing particularly odd about that. Now if a Boston station went with "Ohio man among those suing gun manufacture" that would be odd.

6