Cambridge, MA Cop Claims His SIG P320 ‘Went Off’ When He Removed it in a School Bathroom

Tell me if you’ve heard this one before. A cop goes into a bathroom and, for some reason, takes his gun off. A loud bang is heard and the cop then says, ‘OMG! It just went off! I dunno what happened! I swear, I never even touched the trigger!”

It’s a tale as old as time. What makes the latest example more noteworthy are circumstances such as, 1) the cop in this case, who’d been on the Cambridge, Massachusetts police force for 37 years, was in a school bathroom, and 2) he was carrying a SIG SAUER P320 at the time.

Fortunately, no one was injured.

If you read these pages or followed us at that other place, you probably know that SIG has been the subject of a number of lawsuits filed by a lot of people — primarily police officers — who claim that their guns ‘just went off.’ (See our previous coverage of this here, here, here, here and here.)

SIG has amassed a pretty remarkable record of wins in defending these cases, in large part because no one has ever been able to get a P320 pistol to fire “un-commanded.” As even the authors of a Washington Post hit piece from last year that was co-produced by Michael Bloomberg’s anti-gun agitprop operation The Trace were force to concede . . .

Despite the many lawsuits against SIG Sauer and claims of errant discharges, legal teams and police departments have been unable to document the gun’s alleged defective discharges in a controlled setting.

In other words, even the most motivated people, who have a large monetary stake in demonstrating the P320 can fire without a trigger pull, haven’t been able to show that the pistol does what their clients claim it does.

As for the Cambridge, Massachusetts school resource officer who had the negligent discharge, we understand that he’s since been reassigned. And a new Hampshire Public Radio report on the incident included this interesting tidbit . . .

Cambridge Police confirmed this is the fourth time a P320 pistol unexpectedly discharged since the force adopted the gun as its duty weapon in 2018. The department said it is investigating the incident.

Consider this: if the Cambridge police department has experienced four negligent discharges (out of 281 cops) by officers carrying P320s and, after investigation, they concluded the pistols were at fault…don’t you think they would have swapped them out for GLOCKs or M&Ps? They haven’t.

That should tell you everything you need to know about what’s really going on here.

Cambridge, Mass police officers
Courtesy Cambridge Police Department (Facebook)

After news of the Cambridge negligent discharge broke, SIG issued the following statement . . .

“Contrary to prior reporting, claims that the P320 is capable of firing without a trigger pull are without merit and have been soundly rejected as a matter of law by thirteen separate courts, including a unanimous jury verdict in SIG SAUER’s favor. The P320 is trusted by the U.S. Military, law enforcement professionals, and responsible citizens worldwide. SIG SAUER is extremely proud of our outstanding safety record and quality firearms,” said Samantha Piatt, Director, Communications, SIG SAUER, Inc. 

Below, for background on this matter, is a reference list of cases which have either been dismissed or adjudicated in SIG SAUER’s favor involving P320 model firearms. There has never been a final judgment against SIG SAUER in any case involving a claimed unintentional discharge of a P320 model firearm: 

1.     Northrop vs. Sig Sauer, Inc. – DISMISSED / March 2024

2.     Slatowski vs. Sig Sauer, Inc. – DISMISSED / March 2024

3.     Ortiz v. Sig Sauer, Inc.  – DISMISSED / March 2024

4.     White v. Sig Sauer, Inc. – DISMISSED / January 2024

5.     Davis vs. Sig Sauer, Inc. – DISMISSED / January 2024

6.     Jinn vs. Sig Sauer, Inc. – DISMISSED / September 2023

7.     Tyler Herman vs. Sig Sauer, Inc. – DISMISSED / September 2023

8.     Collette vs. Sig Sauer, Inc. – DISMISSED / August 2023

9.     Hilton vs. Sig Sauer, Inc. – DISMISSED / June 2023

10.  Mayes vs. Sig Sauer, Inc. – DISMISSED / March 2023

11.  Guay vs. Sig Sauer, Inc. – Jury Trial verdict in favor of Sig Sauer / July 2022

12.  Schneider v. Sig Sauer, Inc. – DISMISSED / May 2022

13.  Frankenberry vs. Sig Sauer, Inc. – DISMISSED / February 2022


5 Responses

  1. The P320 is the only firearm I’ve ever heard of where the manufacturer recommends to LE agencies that officers should keep the gun unloaded before their shift and then after it. There might actually be a design flaw in the sear instead of lol cops r dum.

    Before someone cries, ,”but the military uses them and doesn’t have that issue!”, the above procedure I described is SOP for them so it wouldn’t.

    It IS possible this gun has an inherent design flaw Sig USA knows about and won’t fix because it would cost more money to redesign and manufacture a new modular FCS than not.

    1. I vote for poor firearms handling and a lack of proper training. Seems the courts and 1 jury tend to agree it’s not a technical issue with the firearm.

      1. It could well be both. Like I said, it’s very suspect that they recommend that procedure to agencies. I’m as interested in the technical opinions of politicians as I am courts and juries.

  2. Sorry, a bit OT, but re the picture: do cops ever wear uniform hats other than on formal occasions? I personally avoid police officers but can’t remember seeing that for 40 years. I won’t ask about neckties, forget about it!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *