Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Air Force unit suspends use of Sig Sauer pistol after shooting death of airman

nhpr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 445 posts

Re: Air Force unit suspends use of Sig Sauer pistol after shooting death of airman

#61

Post by giantg2 »

darkteflon wrote: post #53

Lots of informative comments in the thread about how carrying with a chambered round reduces the time and complexity to getting a shot off. I have limited knowledge of guns. I understood that they had a physical safety switch that had to be manipulated before the firearm could be used. Is that the case? If so, is the safety left off when people are carrying with a round chambered? Or have I misunderstood the purpose…

Most newer handguns don't have manual safeties. The ones that do should be carried with it on. If you carry with it off, you won't have the muscle memory to switch it off in the event it is accidentally engaged. Basically, if it has the safety, you should be doing the motion for disengaging it regardless of it's starting position. Some people still choose to carry with it off. You get into all sorts of odd stuff the more you look into it, such as MARSOC rubber-banding their 1911 grip safeties.

Some additional context here https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44675889

Re: Air Force unit suspends use of Sig Sauer pistol after shooting death of airman

#62

Post by giantg2 »

sparrish wrote: post #37

Not only does Sig deny that a problem exists, it denies these incidents are happening. I'll never buy another Sig. They've burned bridges IMHO.

Add to that they have issued a voluntary trigger system, but not a recall. Meaning they won't admit the problem (required for a recall) but acknowledge a need for a change. Even with the upgraded FCU (which all the military guns should have) there are still reports of this issue occurring.

Re: Air Force unit suspends use of Sig Sauer pistol after shooting death of airman

#63

Post by rascul »

Filmatic wrote: post #34
rhcom2 wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is definitely thinking among some who CC they're going to be John Wick but "good guy with a gun" is definitely not "totally imaginary". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Active_shooter#/media/File:200...

2.8% is even worse than I’d have guessed. 2.8% of an already rare event is technically non-imaginary, but also definitely rounds down to imaginary. [edit] on top of that, is it even a one-digit percentage of that 2.8% of a rare event in which having a round chambered made any difference? Yet there are people confidently posting as if it’d be absurd to carry without a round chambered. That’s plainly nuts.

That's only active shooter events. There are other cases where armed civilians have stopped a crime. I don't have such data readily available, though.

Re: Air Force unit suspends use of Sig Sauer pistol after shooting death of airman

#64

Post by giantg2 »

kstrauser wrote: post #44
giantg2 wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would it be crazy when they're completely separate systems?

All I know about this situation is what I've read in these comments just now. I don't have a dog in this hunt. But I think the surprise is that a company who makes something considered highly reliable would make a similar item that the Air Force claims is killing their airmen. It'd be like Toyota making another pickup, the Bellevue, that likes to randomly explode. Sure, things happen, but Toyota ? Huh, that would be…

Ford made the Pinto. The Volt or Bolt from GM had battery fires. I believe Tesla has had multiple safety and quality issues come up.

Re: Air Force unit suspends use of Sig Sauer pistol after shooting death of airman

#65

Post by tshaddox »

katmannthree wrote: post #22
tshaddox wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> IMHO there’s no reason to conceal carry if you’re going to do it without a round chambered. Why is that your opinion? Surely there's a wide variety of plausible scenarios where carrying a concealed weapon without a round chambered is much better than not carrying a concealed weapon.

Because if you're going to carry, you should choose something that's safe to carry with a round chambered (i.e. not a Sig P320). There are countless videos showing real-world examples of defensive handgun use. One common thread is that there's virtually no time between when you realize you're going to need your sidearm and when you need it. The extra second it takes to rack the slide and chamber a round can be the di…

> One common thread is that there's virtually no time between when you realize you're going to need your sidearm and when you need it.

I would be surprised if this is true for the majority of situations. I'm sure there are situations where you have very little time, but also many situations where the additional time it would take to chamber a round is negligible.

Re: Air Force unit suspends use of Sig Sauer pistol after shooting death of airman

#66

Post by arrowsmith »

nowandlater wrote: post #7
jleyank wrote: post #2

This seems to suggest carrying with a chambered round. Is this prudent without an external threat? They can drop the thing, or some kind of impact can yield a “design problem”. Can’t they just chamber when there’s a need?

Firearms should never discharge unless the trigger has been pulled. It's an absolute bare minimum requirement. But you should always assume it will go off in the direction it's being pointed, even if you haven't pulled the trigger.

First law of gun safety: never point a gun at anything you wouldn't want to destroy.

Re: Air Force unit suspends use of Sig Sauer pistol after shooting death of airman

#68

Post by OneMorePerson »

homefree wrote: post #41
nosignono wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This wasn't a case of an idiot, except perhaps placing the muzzle in a direction that a human would be present. The gun was in the holster, and the entire holster was removed from the belt and placed on a desk. There's nothing in that course of action that would allow a finger or anything to get into the trigger well. The gun should absolutely not have gone off.

If it was in the holster, most people don't teach that the muzzle direction rule applies (since in the holster it's supposed to be inert). A lot of carry methods have the muzzle pointing at things you would not want it pointing at when unholstered.

Yeah agreed. If people taught this than thigh holsters would be out (muzzle direction when sitting down), so would shoulder holsters. Pretty reasonable to expect a gun to not go off randomly, especially when reliable drop safety mechanisms have been around for a long time.

Re: Air Force unit suspends use of Sig Sauer pistol after shooting death of airman

#69

Post by giantg2 »

colingauvin wrote: post #9

I have a 320C that I purchased in 2018 and have shot less than 100 rounds out of. I tried to sell it recently and was offered by two gun stores, less than $200. MSRP was around $500. Very annoyed with Sig over this. Their statements have been no help either, talk about Streisand effect.

That's a normal price drop for most modern plastic guns when trying to sell them to a store. They will offer $200 and sell it for $350 next to the brand new ones at $475.

Re: Air Force unit suspends use of Sig Sauer pistol after shooting death of airman

#70

Post by giantg2 »

chiph wrote: post #38
jleyank wrote: post #2

This seems to suggest carrying with a chambered round. Is this prudent without an external threat? They can drop the thing, or some kind of impact can yield a “design problem”. Can’t they just chamber when there’s a need?

It depends on your job in the USAF. I was a security augmentee[0] and we did not chamber a round. But the Airman who died likely protected missile silos, which are "no-lone zones" and they would be carrying with a round in the chamber. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-person_rule The P320 is known to have accidental discharges for civilian owners (honestly - don't buy one). But Sig Sauer has stated that the M18 mili…

"But Sig Sauer has stated that the M18 military version did not have those problems."

More lies and misdirection on Sig's part. The only mechanical difference is really the manual safety (which works on the trigger and not on the striker), and if we're being generous the second would be the spanner screw. They should have the upgraded FCU, but in the civilian world there are still reports of the issue even after the upgrade.

Post reply on HN