Dear Sig Sauer, from the subjugated denizens of the PRK.

[_TomT_]

Asking a very stupid question here...

As we all know SIG Sauer has been pushing for outside the box thinking(legally in regard to ATF/DOJ) with certain accessories/firearms. What with the SB15 and MPX(failed IIRC), they are able to introduce wants to circumvent federal laws when it comes to firearms and its "features."

Now that SSE is down to its last days, and myself not wanting to dig into credit to buy everything I want, I see myself missing the boat on the P320. Me and along with countless californians, we are one of the largest if not the largest firearms market in the United States.

This is my question, what is stopping SIG Sauer from producing a SAE micro-stamped capable slide and grip /w other safety features such as the LCI/Mag Disconnect solely for the purpose of selling the P320 reciever by itself similar to what is being planned for SAE with AR pistols? I mean since the P320 is 100% modular, what is stopping Sig from creating a model that can only fire 1 shot and unable to be loaded? Wouldn't that get them past the CA SSE clause of, "not modifying a pistol that is originally semi-auto into single shot state," since this particular model P320 or its reciever would be a manual action single shot to begin with? Also is there anything in the SSE clause that say we cannot modify a bolt action firearm into semi-auto?

[beanz2]

Asking a very stupid question here...

As we all know SIG Sauer has been pushing for outside the box thinking(legally in regard to ATF/DOJ) with certain accessories/firearms. What with the SB15 and MPX(failed IIRC), they are able to introduce wants to circumvent federal laws when it comes to firearms and its "features."

Now that SSE is down to its last days, and myself not wanting to dig into credit to buy everything I want, I see myself missing the boat on the P320. Me and along with countless californians, we are one of the largest if not the largest firearms market in the United States.

This is my question, what is stopping SIG Sauer from producing a SAE micro-stamped capable slide and grip /w other safety features such as the LCI/Mag Disconnect solely for the purpose of selling the P320 reciever by itself similar to what is being planned for SAE with AR pistols? I mean since the P320 is 100% modular, what is stopping Sig from creating a model that can only fire 1 shot and unable to be loaded? Wouldn't that get them past the CA SSE clause of, "not modifying a pistol that is originally semi-auto into single shot state," since this particular model P320 or its reciever would be a manual action single shot to begin with? Also is there anything in the SSE clause that say we cannot modify a bolt action firearm into semi-auto?

You mean the SB15 and the SBX, right?

Yes, Sig is on its way to failing Californians by failing to ship out the MPX by the end of 2014. It has been since SHOT 2013 when they first announced the MPX. Now it still remains a vaporware. I can't imagine how long it would take them to make a bolt action or break top handgun with the P320 action. Good idea actually, Tom, but Sig is probably not a company that can perform all that. Recall the 1st generation Sig 556R? The current 556xi Russian?

[_TomT_]

You mean the SB15 and the SBX, right?

Yes, Sig is on its way to failing Californians by failing to ship out the MPX by the end of 2014. It has been since SHOT 2013 when they first announced the MPX. Now it still remains a vaporware. I can't imagine how long it would take them to make a bolt action or break top handgun with the P320 action. Good idea actually, Tom, but Sig is probably not a company that can perform all that. Recall the 1st generation Sig 556R? The current 556xi Russian?

Yes the 556xi Russian was pretty terrible, and the MAC review made it even worst. That being said, SIG also cares about money and being able to push a new pistol into California when other companies cannot should at least interest them. Also the MPX failed because the ATF basically told them no, they wasted a lot of money in the lawsuit themselves and I would blame them for SSE ending here in CA.

[AreWeFree]

Asking a very stupid question here...

As we all know SIG Sauer has been pushing for outside the box thinking(legally in regard to ATF/DOJ) with certain accessories/firearms. What with the SB15 and MPX(failed IIRC), they are able to introduce wants to circumvent federal laws when it comes to firearms and its "features."

Now that SSE is down to its last days, and myself not wanting to dig into credit to buy everything I want, I see myself missing the boat on the P320. Me and along with countless californians, we are one of the largest if not the largest firearms market in the United States.

This is my question, what is stopping SIG Sauer from producing a SAE micro-stamped capable slide and grip /w other safety features such as the LCI/Mag Disconnect solely for the purpose of selling the P320 reciever by itself similar to what is being planned for SAE with AR pistols? I mean since the P320 is 100% modular, what is stopping Sig from creating a model that can only fire 1 shot and unable to be loaded? Wouldn't that get them past the CA SSE clause of, "not modifying a pistol that is originally semi-auto into single shot state," since this particular model P320 or its reciever would be a manual action single shot to begin with? Also is there anything in the SSE clause that say we cannot modify a bolt action firearm into semi-auto?

1. Sig isn't 'circumventing' laws, they are following the law and creating products. Nothing more, nothing less.

2. SSE is over, Sig can not create and sell Single Shot Exempt pistols.

3. Why would Sig invest tons of money to create special CA compliant parts and assembly lines. Is it not CA's overbearing laws that prevent them from catering to our market?

4. Single Action Exemption is for revolvers and has it's own stipulations which must be met.

[Click Boom]

Fk mictostamping, nobody should make it. Because then they would pass a law closing the "fp removal loophole" eventually. No mictostamping, rfid, or any of that crap. Don't feed the anticonstitutional trolls.

[CuddlesTheSheep]

Seriously.. I'd rather not be able to have it then for them to cave in and anyone create a micro-stamper

[cmichini]

Fk mictostamping, nobody should make it. Because then they would pass a law closing the "fp removal loophole" eventually. No mictostamping, rfid, or any of that crap. Don't feed the anticonstitutional trolls.

This.

Don't ask mfgrs to side with the thumbsuckers and actively participate in the *****raping of the Constitution.

[elSquid]

I mean since the P320 is 100% modular, what is stopping Sig from creating a model that can only fire 1 shot and unable to be loaded?

Absolutely nothing.

They could make a simple bolt action 22LR upper, and then bring the resulting pistol to market here in CA.

I'd buy one.

-- Michael

[beanz2]

Yes the 556xi Russian was pretty terrible, and the MAC review made it even worst. That being said, SIG also cares about money and being able to push a new pistol into California when other companies cannot should at least interest them. Also the MPX failed because the ATF basically told them no, they wasted a lot of money in the lawsuit themselves and I would blame them for SSE ending here in CA.

Sig could easily have released the pistol and SBR versions without running afoul of ATF's decision re: their rifle brake vs. suppressor issue. In fact, they are announcing production of the MPX pistols and SBRs (but saying quality control is delaying their shipping) while still delaying the rifle version. Yeah, the MPX will ship in