18+ Content Warning

By clicking Enter, you confirm you are 18 years of age or older and agree to comply with all applicable local, state, and federal laws.

Notice: Any content or member activity - including anything you may buy, sell, transfer, or discuss - must comply with current and upcoming laws.

Members are encouraged to stay informed: California Firearm Laws: 2026 Outlook & 2025 Recap . Responsibility for compliance rests solely with the individual member.

caguns.net

Welcome to CAguns.net!
Join our growing community where you can ask questions, share knowledge, or browse our classifieds section.

Sign up for a free account today and unlock full access! Once registered, you can search, post, and take advantage of exclusive features unavailable to guests.

A note on why more of the site now requires an account: automated scrapers and AI systems have been crawling our forums and classifieds at a scale. Requiring sign-in for those sections is the most effective tool we have. It takes a minute to register, it's free, and it keeps what happens here between actual members.

New to California gun ownership or trying to keep up with the changing laws? Check out our sister site CA2A.com — free courses, plain-English legal updates, and step-by-step guides built for California owners.

Advanced features are available only to registered members. Register today!

  • 📢 Classifieds Update — Effective Monday, September 21

    Starting Monday, the free Classifieds ad limit will be lowered from 3 to 2 active ads.

    Verified accounts will keep their limit of 3. All other account limits stay the same.

    Existing ads are not affected and will remain up until they expire.

    Want to keep 3 listings and add features like removing comments and emojis? Upgrade/Verify your account

    More information here

P320’s allowed (on R/P only) again at Richmond Rod

Status
Not open for further replies.
This is %100 gen 2 of when glocks came out but as @Gawernator said there was no internet or YouTubers to smear it all over.

Back to RRGC, I think it’s stupid they don’t allow 320’s at the action range. I run around there with a 2lb single action gun and so does the other half of guys there and it’s not an issue but +/- 0.0025% is an issue?
I think it’s big brother politics at work there.
 
With no evidence of the actual gun discharging without the trigger being pulled, your arguments are similar to liberals. Blame the gun, not the user.

With your logic, gun violence is true. Guns are the root cause, not the person pulling the trigger.
Using your logic, why is the P320 statistically having more issues with ND’s vs other brands?

There is a very logical answer you’re not thinking about because you want to make it political and not technical. The easy technical answer is the safety mechanism has a design flaw. Many striker fires have a safety tab, gray guns released the modified trigger that can reliably prevent the issue.


Also note, we’ve had a few guys have their gun signade which is a separate issue. I’ve also witnessed it. I also own the P320. IMHO it’s a QA tolerance issue.
 
Last edited:
Using your logic, why is the P320 statistically having more issues with ND’s vs other brands?

There is a very logical answer you’re not thinking about because you want to make it political and not technical. The easy technical answer is the safety mechanism has a design flaw. Many striker fires have a safety tab, gray guns released the modified trigger that can reliably prevent the issue.

Also note, we’ve had a few guys have their gun signade which is a separate issue.
Using your logic, the Sig has had more ND’s then any other firearm. Please prove it’s the firearm and not the user. I’ll wait.

I hear all these closet gunsmiths saying it’s a flawed design, you know the ones on youtube looking for views. Yet no one has proven that the gun goes off without the trigger being depressed. A tabbed trigger would only prove the trigger needs to be depressed.

I’m not making it political, yet the excuse that it’s the firearm, not the user mimics liberals anti rhetoric to the letter.
 
Using your logic, why is the P320 statistically having more issues with ND’s vs other brands?

There is a very logical answer you’re not thinking about because you want to make it political and not technical. The easy technical answer is the safety mechanism has a design flaw. Many striker fires have a safety tab, gray guns released the modified trigger that can reliably prevent the issue.


Also note, we’ve had a few guys have their gun signade which is a separate issue. I’ve also witnessed it. I also own the P320. IMHO it’s a QA tolerance issue.
Realistically you can’t make a root cause analysis like that without empirical data.

That’s speculation.

What’s most likely to be true is probably true though. I would doubt it’s some insidious QA gremlin no one has caught and more likely that people who are stupid enough to shoot themselves are also too proud to admit it, so they blame the hardware.
 
Using your logic, why is the P320 statistically having more issues with ND’s vs other brands?

There is a very logical answer you’re not thinking about because you want to make it political and not technical. The easy technical answer is the safety mechanism has a design flaw. Many striker fires have a safety tab, gray guns released the modified trigger that can reliably prevent the issue.


Also note, we’ve had a few guys have their gun signade which is a separate issue. I’ve also witnessed it. I also own the P320. IMHO it’s a QA tolerance issue.
Sorry, I wanted to finish my reply to your tabbed trigger. I am in agreement with you about the tabbed trigger. What would that solve, the trigger from being depressed, not a UD. So you just proved Sigs response that the p320 can’t go off without the trigger being depressed. Keep your finger off the trigger, the gun won’t go bang.
 
Sorry, I wanted to finish my reply to your tabbed trigger. I am in agreement with you about the tabbed trigger. What would that solve, the trigger from being depressed, not a UD. So you just proved Sigs response that the p320 can’t go off without the trigger being depressed. Keep your finger off the trigger, the gun won’t go bang.
What you just stated shows that the design itself is flawed because it doesn't have a safety mechanism to prevent it like the majority of firearms do. The novelty of the design within the FCU without the safety leads to unintended consequences. There's a reason the P320 with the manual safety does not have this issue. How do you reconcile that?
 
Realistically you can’t make a root cause analysis like that without empirical data.

That’s speculation.

What’s most likely to be true is probably true though. I would doubt it’s some insidious QA gremlin no one has caught and more likely that people who are stupid enough to shoot themselves are also too proud to admit it, so they blame the hardware.
You can still add a tabbed safety to reduce errors, ignoring the issue is also not the answer. This is the issue with quality control because not every unit is going to be defective, but notice there's a pattern. It could be that the trigger is pushed somehow. The P320 already admitted to a design issue in the past, but this time around they are not admitting to it, but there is a known issue with the same system.

This will include an alternate design that reduces the physical weight of the trigger, sear, and striker while additionally adding a mechanical disconnector.
The "upgrade" is the very system in question and an "alternate" design to the original one with the flaw.

People shouldn't be afraid of iterations, especially ones that improve safety of the owner.
 
… yeah by that logic then it’s an old wives tale for the P320 as well. Can you show me any incident or P320 where it’s proven the handgun fired without the trigger pulled? Actually verified, investigated and proven?

Glocks were going off so much they got the infamous term “Glock leg” and many lawsuits. You may be new to firearms but this isn’t anything new.

You must be using some ultra trash AI because if you ask ChatGPT about Glock leg and lawsuits you’ll find so much from the last 40 years
Brah really? All the vids on YT of uncommented discharges all fake news?

Also links to the Glock Leg lawsuits
 
Last edited:
Using your logic, the Sig has had more ND’s then any other firearm. Please prove it’s the firearm and not the user. I’ll wait.

I hear all these closet gunsmiths saying it’s a flawed design, you know the ones on youtube looking for views. Yet no one has proven that the gun goes off without the trigger being depressed. A tabbed trigger would only prove the trigger needs to be depressed.

I’m not making it political, yet the excuse that it’s the firearm, not the user mimics liberals anti rhetoric to the letter.
You say its not political, while saying its political vs a technical issue with multiple video references available by LEO of all people.

From Sig Sauer themselves:


Why is this upgrade happening?​

Through additional testing above and beyond standard American National Standards Institute (ANSI)/Sporting Arms & Ammunition Institute (SAAMI), National Institute of Justice (NIJ), Department of Justice (DOJ), Massachusetts, California, and other global military and law enforcement protocols, we have confirmed that usually after multiple drops, at certain angles and conditions, a potential discharge of the firearm may result when dropped. Although it is a rare occurrence, with very specific conditions, SIG SAUER is offering an upgrade to all of its current P320 owners.
The trigger mechanism is an alternate design.. Dropped can mean a few different things or sudden jarring motion. Again, I own one and have 25k+ rounds across ones I've owned. I don't think it affects my gun, but I think the FCU has some tolerance issues because if you actually own one and worked on it, you'll notice it's not very tight. There's some play.
 
The whole point of the club allowing it at the static range is because people will pick it up from a table. There's no risk of dropping it, which my gun has fallen out of the holster before, not the p320, and I have fallen when running on a stage with the p320. So, this post was mentioning its coming back under some safety protocols that might simulate a drop or jarring motions.
 
With no evidence of the actual gun discharging without the trigger being pulled, your arguments are similar to liberals. Blame the gun, not the user.

With your logic, gun violence is true. Guns are the root cause, not the person pulling the trigger.
YouTube Sig P320 uncommented discharge where multiple vids show someone pressing on the top front of the slide and you hear the sear disengage. Don't tell me this is all to discredit you beloved P320. Just like people who "Vote Blue No Matter Who" you're drinking the same KoolAide except yours is P320 flavored
 
Brah really? All the vids on YT of uncommented discharges all fake news?

Also links to the Glock Leg lawsuits
Here’s a large list of Glock-related lawsuits/cases/issues.


1. Wasylow v. Glock, Inc. — Massachusetts federal court, 1996.
A plaintiff brought claims against Glock involving alleged defective/negligent design, including lack of a manual safety and magazine disconnect. Glock won summary judgment on the defective/inherently dangerous design claims. This is an early example of courts treating the Glock’s design as not automatically defective merely because it lacked traditional manual-safety features.


2. Rodriguez v. Glock, Inc. — Northern District of Illinois, 1998.
A third party was injured when a Glock discharged during a fight over control of the weapon. The court held liability could not reasonably be placed on Glock under those circumstances. This is another example where the gun’s discharge occurred during human struggle/contact, not a clean “gun fired itself” fact pattern.


3. D.C. Metropolitan Police Glock accidental-discharge litigation — late 1980s through 1990s.
The Washington Post reported that, in the decade after D.C. police adopted the Glock 9mm, there were more than 120 accidental discharges, including at least one unintended citizen death, at least nine unintended citizen woundings, and nineteen officers accidentally shooting themselves or other officers. The Post also reported that at least eight victims or surviving relatives sued the District over injuries from accidental discharges.


4. Firearms Litigation Clearinghouse monitoring roughly 60 pending Glock suits — early 1990s context.
A Washington Post/Pulitzer archive says that by the early 1990s, alleged Glock unintentional-discharge problems were “the talk of the gun world,” and that an advocacy clearinghouse was monitoring about 60 pending lawsuits against Glock around the country. That does not mean Glock lost those cases, but it shows the “Glock leg” controversy is old, not new.


5. Spence v. Glock — 5th Circuit, 2000.
This was a class-action-style economic-loss case by purchasers of certain Glock models manufactured between 1986 and 1997. Plaintiffs alleged design defects causing the guns to jam and/or discharge accidentally, along with failure to warn, fraud, negligence, warranty claims, and negligent misrepresentation. The key point: this was broad consumer/product litigation about alleged defects, not one proven clean “Glock fired with no trigger input” incident.


6. Chavez v. Glock, Inc. — California Court of Appeal, 2012.
Former LAPD officer Enrique Chavez was paralyzed after his 3-year-old son found his loaded Glock 21 under the seat of his truck and fired it. Chavez sued Glock, alleging the Glock 21 was defectively designed because it had a 5.5-pound trigger and lacked a safety mechanism to prevent accidental, unknowing, or inadvertent discharge. The Court of Appeal reinstated the case after the trial court had dismissed it.


7. Chavez trial coverage — 2016.
Courtroom View Network summarized Glock’s defense as arguing the pistol was not defective and that Chavez was responsible because he failed to properly secure the firearm. That framing matters: Glock cases often become fights over design/warnings versus user storage/handling responsibility.


8. Oglesbee v. Glock — 10th Circuit, 2024.
Oglesbee sued Glock alleging products liability, failure to warn, and negligence. This is another modern Glock product-liability case, though not necessarily a “Glock leg” case in the narrow internet sense.


9. Parents v. Glock / Glock 26 toddler shooting lawsuit — 2024.
Parents sued Glock over a Glock 26 after a child unintentionally shot another child. The lawsuit alleges the Glock was designed without safety features that could have prevented the shooting, including lack of manual safety or grip safety and a light trigger pull. This is a modern version of the same old argument: not “the gun fired by itself,” but “the design allows too-easy trigger activation by an untrained or unauthorized person.”


10. Johnson v. Glock — California class action, active by 2026.
This California class action alleges consumer-protection, unfair-business-practices, failure-to-disclose, and false-advertising claims. It is not a personal-injury “Glock leg” case; it appears tied to California consumer claims about Glock pistol design/marketing.


11. Holmes v. Glock — federal class-action complaint, 2026.
A 2026 complaint alleges Glock has faulty and dangerous gun designs. I would treat this as allegation-stage material unless/until there are rulings or findings, but it belongs on the list of modern Glock litigation.


12. Minnesota and New Jersey v. Glock — switch-conversion lawsuits, 2024.
Minnesota and New Jersey sued Glock over the allegation that Glock pistols are too easily converted into illegal machine guns using “Glock switches.” These suits are not about “Glock leg” or accidental discharge, but they are major current lawsuits against Glock. AP and Reuters both reported that the states allege Glock knew its pistols could be converted and failed to redesign them; the gun industry/NSSF side argues Glock is not responsible for illegal third-party switches.


13. Broader municipal/political lawsuits involving Glock or handgun makers.
There have also been public-nuisance and product-liability-style lawsuits against gun manufacturers generally, including Glock in some contexts. New Jersey’s litigation against handgun manufacturers, for example, included defective/negligent design theories against multiple manufacturers. These are more “gun industry liability” cases than classic Glock-leg cases.


Now the history.


Glock appears in the early 1980s as a new kind of duty pistol: polymer frame, striker-fired, no traditional thumb safety, and its “Safe Action” system. Glock itself says the pistol was born in the early 1980s for the Austrian military and that its polymer frame and Safe Action system changed the pistol market.


The controversy really develops when police agencies start moving from revolvers and traditional DA/SA pistols to striker-fired semiautos. A revolver or DA/SA first shot usually had a heavier/longer trigger pull. A Glock’s trigger was shorter and lighter than many officers were used to, and it had no external manual safety to “save” sloppy trigger discipline. Police Magazine describes the broader transition beginning in the mid-1980s, when American agencies moved en masse from revolvers to semiautomatic pistols.


That is the soil “Glock leg” grew out of. Officers and civilians carried a pistol with a consistent trigger pull and no thumb safety. If a finger, jacket toggle, drawstring, shirt tail, holster edge, retention strap, or foreign object entered the trigger guard during holstering, the gun could fire. The bullet often went into the shooter’s leg, hip, butt, foot, or nearby bystander. Hence “Glock leg.”


The D.C. police experience became one of the famous examples. The Washington Post reported in 1998 that D.C. police had more than 120 accidental Glock discharges in the decade after adoption, with citizens and officers injured or killed and lawsuits following. The Post’s framing was heavily about training and transition problems: sophisticated new semiautos placed into the hands of undertrained officers.
 
YouTube Sig P320 uncommented discharge where multiple vids show someone pressing on the top front of the slide and you hear the sear disengage. Don't tell me this is all to discredit you beloved P320. Just like people who "Vote Blue No Matter Who" you're drinking the same KoolAide except yours is P320 flavored
You’re talking about where they press the trigger with a screw? That works on striker fired guns. The same exact thing happens with a Glock 19 lol. That’s just clickbait for the normies
 
Here’s a large list of Glock-related lawsuits/cases/issues.
The Post’s framing was heavily about training and transition problems: sophisticated new semiautos placed into the hands of undertrained officers.
There's some AI slop in there with many of the example that have nothing to do with glock leg. Its really an old habit of old techniques where people would put their finger on the trigger almost at all times. I see it a lot in the older guys who come to get trained on modern techniques. They have a very hard time keeping their finger off the trigger. There was also an issue with serpa holsters. Firearms are inherently dangerous especially when they move or replace safety features.

That said, please stay on topic and open up another one if you'd like so this doesn't drift too far from the P320.
 
There's some AI slop in there with many of the example that have nothing to do with glock leg. Its really an old habit of old techniques where people would put their finger on the trigger almost at all times. I see it a lot in the older guys who come to get trained on modern techniques. They have a very hard time keeping their finger off the trigger. There was also an issue with serpa holsters. Firearms are inherently dangerous especially when they move or replace safety features.

That said, please stay on topic and open up another one if you'd like so this doesn't drift too far from the P320.
Right which is exactly the point. The Glock wasn’t the issue it was the user. We are just seeing the same thing happen to Sig that happened to Glock. That’s why it’s directly related to the p320. Nobody has proven a Glock or an Sig can fire without a trigger pull in any lawsuit. They always fail
 
The real truth is most likely that the p320 just has less margin for error exposing smaller mistakes due to no trigger safety. If there was a flaw it would be able to be proven in court. However, we have never seen any evidence of this proven.
 
This lawsuit does not contain a proven flaw:

"The case centered on the pistol’s lack of an external safety — described as a "tabbed" trigger in court documents — and whether the company adequately discloses the risk of unintentional discharges the gun allegedly poses."

Just like the lawsuit against Glock
 
This lawsuit does not contain a proven flaw:

"The case centered on the pistol’s lack of an external safety — described as a "tabbed" trigger in court documents — and whether the company adequately discloses the risk of unintentional discharges the gun allegedly poses."

Just like the lawsuit against Glock decades earlier that you deleted
the judge explicitly allowed the core jury verdict to stand, ruling that the finding of a firearm design defect remains full and final
The flaw is in user design. Removing the main safety is the design flaw, this is why gray guns came out with after market. This IS the remedy.

The key difference is glock moves the safety to a tab from a lever, P320 removes it entirely. The manual safety or the Gray Guns tabbed trigger would ND the issue today.
 

The flaw is in user design. Removing the main safety is the design flaw, this is why gray guns came out with after market. This IS the remedy.

The key difference is glock moves the safety to a tab from a lever, P320 removes it entirely. The manual safety or the Gray Guns tabbed trigger would ND the issue today.
I can see that argument. I do like the M18 having a physical safety for that reason.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom