Originally Posted by LVSteve

I watched this video. Look at how much junk that officer is carrying on her right side and how it is moving about and bumping against her. That has to be all over the butt of her gun, and if the holster retention isn't up to it, there's no telling how that gun is moving. Add in the small amount the trigger must be moved for this weapon to fire, and I can see this happening.

Is it the fault of Sig or the company making the holster? Is carrying all that stuff on her strong side "unsafe handling"? Only numerous court cases will tell.

Originally Posted by Paul in Nevada

Something is obviously in the holster with the gun. When he bends down that foreign object pulls the trigger. I have watched dozens of similar
videos involving Glocks going back 30 years.
In my personal and unqualified opinion, LEO shouldn't be carrying striker fired guns without a safety anyway. They would be far safer with DA/SA or DAO pistols. That was the trend for a few years until Glock's incredibly successful marketing campaign converted everyone.
P320's don't fire unless you pull the trigger. This is consistent across all of these accounts. This particular video is one of the clearest examples of an ND I have seen so far.

Originally Posted by CRT2

From SigSauer:
QUOTE
NEWINGTON, N.H., (July 31, 2023): SIG SAUER has the following statement relative to a reported unintentional discharge from an officer at the Montville, CT Police Department on Monday, July 24, 2023:
“We have seen the news reporting of the incident involving a P320 discharge at the Montville (CT) Police Department. We area confident, as is the case in all instances, that when the factors and evidence are reviewed this will be proven to be an unintentional discharge as a result of inadvertent contact with the trigger, and that the pistol did not fire without a trigger pull.
In reviewing the video footage of this incident currently available, it appears that the involved firearm was not fully seated in its holster and the holster retention hood was not fully closed over the pistol at the time of discharge (images below). This improperly holstered condition would have left the firearm’s trigger exposed and vulnerable to actuation. Even if properly holstered, the features of the involved holster allow for foreign object intrusion and interaction with the trigger, as has been seen in other incidents.
We regret that the involved agency jumped to conclusions regarding the cause of this discharge without first carefully examining the footage of the incident and providing SIG SAUER with an opportunity to assist in the examination of the involved firearm.



The P320 model firearm is used effectively and safely every day, by both civilians and armed professionals. Despite years of litigation and extensive discovery, no one has ever been able to replicate a condition under which the P320 could discharge without a trigger pull, and experts who have attempted to assert such a claim have been rep

Originally Posted by LVSteve

Seems I was right. Gun not properly in holster.

Originally Posted by LVSteve

Seems I was right. Gun not properly in holster.

Originally Posted by kbm6893

Already been debunked. The retention hood that is supposedly down is a tourniquet that is carried on the front of the holster. Sig is looking at a grainy photo and just making things up at this point. I have that exact holster for my Glock and M&P.

Full Breakdown of Montville PD's SIG P320 Incident and Response to SIG's Recent Statement - YouTube

Originally Posted by LVSteve

Interesting video. The carrying of tourniquet holder on a gun holster would never have occurred to me as I'm not in LE. It's pretty clear that Sig are talking rubbish about the retention strap having misidentified the strap for the tourniquet holder.

That said, the gun still looks high in the holster to me, even with the retention strap in the correct place. The stills in that video from other sources of the 320 in that holster show a bunch of clearance between the backplate of the gun and the inside of the strap. Yes, it will prevent your gun falling out, but I doubt it holds the gun all the way in the holster ensuring the trigger is covered. How does that work with your Glock and M&P?

I also noticed in the comments section for the video that several contributors claimed that this particular Safariland holster does not cover the trigger too well for the 320. Can you comment on that?

It strikes me that the Sig 320 (non-safety) design is vulnerable to any shortfall in holster design.

Originally Posted by Neumann

The manual safety is an option for other versions of the P320, as is a locking tab on the trigger, similar to that of a Glock pistol.

Originally Posted by petepeterson

I'm assuming this is with all of the variations of the 320 series? Is there documentation of the Compacts or Subcompacts going off? I know that sounds stupid, but it seems to me that the military should have a few of these "incidents" on record, as well.

I have a 320 Compact in the safe, chamber loaded. So far, no boom!

What's everyone's guess on the final outcome of this?

Originally Posted by LVSteve

Don't all the military guns have a thumb safety?