Law enforcement agencies and many gun ranges and training facilities around the country have banned the P320. There seems to be more AD with the P320 while in the holster (not being holstered or drawn) than other comparable pistols. I know of members on other forums who haven't sued SIG and paid their own money to buy a P320 who reported that their anecdotal example was about to fire out of battery.
Here's my conclusion:
#1: I don't like how SIG handled the whole drop safety debacle. I felt like they didn't have any ethics or integrity. They seemed to remind me of how vehicle manufacturers used to knowingly be tight-lipped about serious safety issues because their bottom line was more important than the safety of their customers.
#2: This ties into #1. The upper management including CEO of SIG were involved in (with some being actually convicted of) knowingly violating the law by secretly and sneakily smuggling their firearms (illegal arm sales) to countries that were involved in human rights and other abuses.
Again, this is more proof that if there was a problem with the P320 (not saying there is or isn't), they'd likely put profit above our and our family's well-being. They'd lie, hide, and lie some more about it. I can't support a company like that, but it seems many other gun owners have no qualms about it.
#3: It's a fact that SIG has quietly made changes to several internal components. I've seen where others have posted pictures of post-drop safety manufactured pistols where certain changes have been made with no explanation as to why. This is something most manufacturers also do, but it's cause for alarm under the circumstances of SIG's upper management's reputation. It also adds more questions to if we are really comparing apples to apples between the P320s that allegedly are firing without the trigger being pulled by the carrier vs. the owners who state their examples never had an issue.
#4: The P320 is a cobbled-together Frankenstein design that wasn't built from the ground up to be a striker-fired platform. It was an afterthought to save money on production costs by utilizing parts, grip frames, molds, etc. of an already existing product. They needed something to complete for the Army contract, and they needed it fast.
#5: While the P320 won the military trials, it didn't do so by outperforming the other entrants. It actually performed worse; the testing was stopped prematurely, and SIG basically won because they bid so low for a gun, ammo, and maintenance contract.
#6: I don't need to get down into the weeds about whether it's a safe platform or not because it's a moot point. The fact is there are far too many older, less expensive, well-vetted sticker-fired options on the market with a better track record, both from how the company is managed to the platform's reputation. IMHO, it makes no logical sense, and it's foolish to even roll the dice.
#7: I can't think of a reason why any person of sound mind would go the P320 route when there's a seemingly endless amount of less controversial alternatives. I take that back. The only reasons some L.E. and military still utilize the P320 is because of monetary gains. The only reason most civilians are still buying and carrying the P320 is because the military and L.E. issue them, and because they're resting on SIG's laurels...
. He and a handful of his buddies built themselves a range on a piece of ground one of the guys own just so they could shoot more and improve their skill sets because they all want to go home at the end of the shift.
And making that assessment ( the same assessment several others here, including some LEO and Military, made after seeing at least two of those videos,) sure AF has no relation to what you think qualifies anyone to do anything.
We must be mean-spirited or something.