KSera Posted April 12, 2023 Share Posted April 12, 2023 Washington Post had this article yesterday about a handgun model that has had at least 80 people shot by the gun malfunctioning and firing without anyone pulling the trigger (usually sending the bullet through their own body). What floored me was to learn there is no process for a gun manufacturer to have to recall a gun that is malfunctioning like this. Quote Firearms are one of the few products that are exempt from federal consumer product safety regulations. No regulatory body has the power to investigate alleged defects or impose a mandatory recall of guns. Quote The Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) has required recalls of candles whose flames burn too tall, fleece pajamas shown to cut infants and classroom chairs with loose welding. But it has never ordered a recall of a gun because it does not have the authority to do so, even if it explodes in someone’s hand or spontaneously fires a bullet. Expand Gift link: Popular handgun fires without anyone pulling the trigger, victims say 1 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fairfarmhand Posted April 12, 2023 Share Posted April 12, 2023 I saw that article. The legislation makes no sense. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harriet Vane Posted April 12, 2023 Share Posted April 12, 2023 We regulate everything else. We should be regulating something this dangerous. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heartstrings Posted April 12, 2023 Share Posted April 12, 2023 I wonder how much that legislation cost the NRA? 7 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shelydon Posted April 12, 2023 Share Posted April 12, 2023 The firearm that that particular article was about has a voluntary repair that the manufacturer has put out. Any owner of that particular firearm can send it into the manufacturer to have it augmented. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KSera Posted April 12, 2023 Author Share Posted April 12, 2023 11 minutes ago, Shelydon said: The firearm that that particular article was about has a voluntary repair that the manufacturer has put out. Any owner of that particular firearm can send it into the manufacturer to have it augmented. They offered a voluntary repair for a previous design flaw that was causing the guns to fire when dropped. They didn’t notify owners of the gun that this problem existed or require gun shop owners to stop selling them and/or tell buyers about the problem. This fix and change in design then introduced this new problem that is causing the guns to go off spontaneously. And there is no requirement whatsoever that they now do anything about this or notify owners about this. That is stunning to me with something this dangerous. I’ve gotten recall notices for all kinds of much lesser issues with products we own. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shelydon Posted April 12, 2023 Share Posted April 12, 2023 19 minutes ago, KSera said: They offered a voluntary repair for a previous design flaw that was causing the guns to fire when dropped. They didn’t notify owners of the gun that this problem existed or require gun shop owners to stop selling them and/or tell buyers about the problem. This fix and change in design then introduced this new problem that is causing the guns to go off spontaneously. And there is no requirement whatsoever that they now do anything about this or notify owners about this. That is stunning to me with something this dangerous. I’ve gotten recall notices for all kinds of much lesser issues with products we own. How do you know they did not notify owners? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KSera Posted April 12, 2023 Author Share Posted April 12, 2023 31 minutes ago, Shelydon said: How do you know they did not notify owners? Have you read the article? It might answer your questions. The main point is there is nothing to require a malfunctioning firearm to be recalled. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shelydon Posted April 12, 2023 Share Posted April 12, 2023 6 minutes ago, KSera said: Have you read the article? It might answer your questions. The main point is there is nothing to require a malfunctioning firearm to be recalled. I read a different article about the same thing. I personally received a notification from the company, so anything that implies that notifications weren't sent is incorrect. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sneezyone Posted April 12, 2023 Share Posted April 12, 2023 Imagine owning such a weapon and moving out of state or overseas and having no means of receiving such a notice. Ugh. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KSera Posted April 12, 2023 Author Share Posted April 12, 2023 27 minutes ago, Shelydon said: I read a different article about the same thing. I personally received a notification from the company, so anything that implies that notifications weren't sent is incorrect. That's good to hear notices were sent to some people at least. Unfortunately, most of the misfires happened after the weapons were changed as part of the voluntary upgrade program, though. The Washington Post article has some detailed schematics showing how the gun's design makes this able to happen, which might be relevant for you if you own one: Quote Most of the incidents occurred after SIG Sauer changed the internal design of the P320 following reports that the pistol could fire when dropped and launched a voluntary upgrade program allowing gun owners to send their pistols to the company’s New Hampshire factory for modification. Even with notices sent, there's nothing that compels that and gun store owners didn't have to remove the affected weapons from shelves: Quote SIG Sauer did not replace the guns sitting on gun store shelves across the country or require retailers to inform customers of the gun’s potential risks. “If I had known about this gun’s problems, it would not have been the gun I carried,” said George Abrahams, 55, an Army veteran in Philadelphia whose P320 sent a round into his thigh in 2020. He had purchased the gun in 2018 — a year after the upgrade program went into effect — but it had not been upgraded and he was not warned at the gun shop of the firearm’s potential issues. I have to say the statements from the manufacturer have the opposite effect to me than the one I think they intended: Quote “These reports, among others, support three conclusions,” the response reads. “(1) unintentional discharges are not uncommon amongst both law enforcement and civilians, (2) improper or unsafe handling is one of the most common causes of unintentional discharges, and (3) unintentional discharges occur with several types of firearms and are not unique to the P320.” I'm not sure how it is that more guns in the hands of more people is supposed to make people somehow safer given even the gun manufacturer is acknowledging that unintentional discharges are not uncommon. But then again we didn't need to hear that to know more guns make people more unsafe. Those statistics are already out there. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heartstrings Posted April 13, 2023 Share Posted April 13, 2023 Imagine if blenders, chain saws, baby seats or spinach only had to a voluntary recall items if they wanted to, with no penalty or risk of law suit if they just didn’t feel like it. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KSera Posted April 13, 2023 Author Share Posted April 13, 2023 21 minutes ago, Heartstrings said: Imagine if blenders, chain saws, baby seats or spinach only had to a voluntary recall items if they wanted to, with no penalty or risk of law suit if they just didn’t feel like it. Or cars. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.