Sig P320 chosen for OK Highway Patrol

Status
Not open for further replies.
If the pistol weren't so ugly (and CZ's not my main focus) I'd buy one of these. I really enjoy shooting a friend of mines. Great trigger, accurate, pretty darned nice just a dated look.
 
The P320 is outstanding. Its a great pistol all on its own but factor in its modularity platform and it sets a new standard. I have it in a 9mm Subcompact and a 40 Compact and both are a picture of out of the box perfection.
Two LE departments in my area already switched to the P320 back in Feb.

 
If the pistol weren't so ugly (and CZ's not my main focus) I'd buy one of these. I really enjoy shooting a friend of mines. Great trigger, accurate, pretty darned nice just a dated look.
Click to expand...

Im not a fan of it's looks either. But then again, there's Glock...they're even uglier, IMHO. ;)
 
Remember, this is really the gun. Everything else is NOT serial numbered. Let you imagination run wild with combinations of parts, frames, barrels and caliber interchangability and all can be directly shipped to your front door legally.

 
Yeah, I too do not like the look... That extended dust cover on the full size, giving it a squared off look.

My plan is to get one of the new "carry" frames, shorter dust cover/rail but with the full size grip. I have seen other people cut down the dust cover and it looks better that way. I just think a new frame would be a cleaner way to do it.
 
Remember, this is really the gun. Everything else is NOT serial numbered. Let you imagination run wild with combinations of parts, frames, barrels and caliber interchangability and all can be directly shipped to your front door legally.
Click to expand...

Mystro's point brings up an interesting question...
What are the chances that, in the future, a company (or companies) - Magpul, for instance - would make totally different frames, slides, and/or barrels that would accept the fire control module? You would then be able to build your own "P320" that looks nothing like the current model. It could look and feel like anything you wanted.
 
Last edited:
I disagree that the little trigger thingy is the gun. It is not. On its own, it does absolutely nothing in regards to launching a projectile. I suppose it might make a clicking noise and make an interesting paperweight, but it is certainly not a gun.
 
I disagree that the little trigger thingy is the gun. It is not. On its own, it does absolutely nothing in regards to launching a projectile. I suppose it might make a clicking noise and make an interesting paperweight, but it is certainly not a gun.
Click to expand...

I could be incorrect...but, as far as Uncle Sam is concerned, it is.
 
I suppose it might make a clicking noise and make an interesting paperweight, but it is certainly not a gun.
Click to expand...

A lower receiver on an AR can do nothing by itself either, but all that matters is what the law decides.
 
Only the serialized part is considered the gun for legal reasons...


It is this way to simplify things... They require a background check to buy a gun... So that poses questions.

What about removing parts... At what point of parts removal is a gun no longer a gun, and no longer requires a background check. And what about conducting repairs, do the individual parts need a background check...

By stating that the serialized part is the only part to be treated as a firearm, it allows parts replacement/acquisition, repairs and modification without adding burden to the background check system.

Usually this part holds the fire control mechanism, or main action parts. It is therefore a major component and usually not one that can be hacked together easily by most people making it harder to bypass the system.

In the case of an AR, it's the lower that holds the FCG... For a bolt action it is the receiver that holds the barrel and bolt. For the 320, it is the internal frame that houses the slide rails and FCG.



I do like the idea off using the 320 FCG as the base to build other firearms off of.

In theory, you could even make a carbine... Not just a different looking pistol.
 
Last edited:
Interesting seeing agencies go to the 9mm in general. More specifically the Sig 320 now has the chance to be field proven. If it's like most other Sigs, it will be up for the challenge. I own 9mm's and always will but they will never be my first choice.
 
marine6680 Only the serialized part is considered the gun for legal reasons...
Click to expand...
Not exactly, but close.
While the frame or receiver of a firearm must have a serial number, many firearms have the serial number stamped on multiple parts. Putting a serial# on a slide doesn't make it a firearm.

Example: Glocks have the serial# stamped on the frame, slide and barrel.


What about removing parts... At what point of parts removal is a gun no longer a gun, and no longer requires a background check.
Click to expand...
If you disassemble a firearm into it's components it's still a firearm. The only individual part that requires a serial# is the frame or receiver. If you threw away or sold everything except for that frame/receiver you still possess a firearm.





And what about conducting repairs, do the individual parts need a background check...
Click to expand...
Don't be silly.



By stating that the serialized part is the only part to be treated as a firearm, it allows parts replacement/acquisition, repairs and modification without adding burden to the background check system.
Click to expand...
Huh? A firearm is a firearm as defined in Federal law/ATF regulations. The law/regs explicit define that a frame or receiver of a firearm is a firearm.


In the case of an AR, it's the lower that holds the FCG... For a bolt action it is the receiver that holds the barrel and bolt. For the 320, it is the internal frame that houses the slide rails and FCG.
Click to expand...
The part of a firearm that ATF defines as "the firearm" is not defined as you have written.... it's not codified or set in stone. Often it is a Technical Branch ruling. On some firearms (like the FAL) the upper receiver is considered "the firearm" unlike the AR. Many believe that the lower receiver on the AR was designated as "the firearm" because it offered more flat surfaces for markings.


ATF definitions
http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=15f7740bfa2629813a727958b785a493&mc=true&node=sp27.3.478.b&rgn=div6
Firearm. Any weapon, including a starter gun, which will or is designed to or may readily be converted to expel a projectile by the action of an explosive; the frame or receiver of any such weapon; any firearm muffler or firearm silencer; or any destructive device; but the term shall not include an antique firearm. In the case of a licensed collector, the term shall mean only curios and relics.

Firearm frame or receiver. That part of a firearm which provides housing for the hammer, bolt or breechblock, and firing mechanism, and which is usually threaded at its forward portion to receive the barrel.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
But, while the particulars of what was said may have been a little imprecise, the gist of what marine6680 conveyed about the P320 and an AR is correct. Am I wrong?
 
Also those questions where rhetorical... They were to make a point... They were not serious.

It seems you completely missed my point.

My point was... At what point is it a gun, and at what point is it parts... This is something that must be defined...

Say you have an AR... You want to replace the barrel or stock.. . You can do so easily, as those parts are not considered the "gun"... You do not need a background check to buy a new barrel or stock.

Say a part breaks in the bolt.. You can buy a replacement part easily, as that part is not the" gun".

Also, that such a definition must exist due to criminal law... Without a definition of "what is a gun" a person could have a gun part (say an AR bolt) in their pocket... Get stopped and searched by the police, and could be arrested for "having an illegally concealed firearm". You need the definition to point to, something you can use to ensure the law is followed, and that ambiguity can not creep in (as much as possible) and cause stupid situations like the one I described.



This in contrast to some countries, where on an AR, the upper or barrel is also serialized, and is considered part of the gun, meaning upper swaps are a no go without going through the paperwork that country requires. Some countries have limits on how many you can own, and an upper would still count as a firearm against that limit even though it had no lower and could not function. If you bought the upper and lower separately, it would count as two firearms due to having two different serial numbers.


Yes some firearms makers put the serial number in multiple places, (seems it mostly European makers, who do more business in countries that require such marking) but in US law, it has guidelines on what parts constitute the firearm and are therefore suitable for serializing as the "firearm"... It has to be a main frame/receiver part that holds the action or FCG. So you couldn't mark the barrel and claim that is the "gun".

What I wrote was shorthand for that complicated idea... Where I left out extraneous info in order to prevent confusion. So by "serialized part", I meant "the only serialized part that matters for purposes of the law".
 
Last edited:
jmhyer said:
Mystro's point brings up an interesting question...
What are the chances that, in the future, a company (or companies) - Magpul, for instance - would make totally different frames, slides, and/or barrels that would accept the fire control module? You would then be able to build your own "P320" that looks nothing like the current model. It could look and feel like anything you wanted.
Click to expand...

I think this is a very real possibility in the civilian market if it starts to gain widespread usage in the LE market (which I think it will, as there is the potential for real savings on upkeep and repair). The modular design as it is now really doesn't have much benefit to civilians (unless they're limited by law to a fixed number of firearms), but once LE starts using it, then designing and selling aftermarket accessories starts to look better.

Unlike the AR, though, it'll be some time before the patent expires. If Sig can afford it, I think it's a good strategy to sell to LE at a loss for a few years to capture market share (and vendor lock-in) before their competitors horn in on the modular handgun game.
 
My reply was originally prompted by the poster who did not accept the internal frame as the "gun".


It was an effort to explain why you can't just point to a gun and say "that's a gun".

Why is it a gun? Because it can be made to readily fire by simply supplying the proper ammunition?

What if I remove the hammer... It can no longer be made to fire readily... Is it still a "gun"?

If so, how many parts do I need to remove until it isn't a gun?

Half? No, it's still a gun? Well what about the other half of the parts, are they a gun too? The same gun? A different gun?

In a world without background checks or laws/crimes involving guns, then it wouldn't matter, as no ramifications would exist surrounding the object we choose or don't choose to call a gun.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top