In a recent civil court ruling on a ND by a Sig P320 by a Massachusetts Police officer (Desrosiers v. Sig Sauer Inc) a jury found that:

>sig had defectively designed the p320
>defective design is what caused injury
>sig knew about the defect and failed to warn about it
>the failure of this warning is not what led to the injury
>the defendants voluntary and unreasonable use of the p320 despite knowing it was defective and dangerous is what led to his injury

Despite the fact that Sig effectively "won" this case, because they won't have to reward damages to the defendant, they've really kind of lost in a sense because this makes the P320 a legal liability not only to Sig (because other jury's may still find them financially liable in future cases) but now it's an established precedent that it is a legal liability to anybody who:

>sells/uses the p320
>allows the use of the p320 in their establishment or comapny

Across the board several tactical training schools, police departments, and security companies are banning the use of the P320 out of fear of legal liability for injuries caused by it going off when it isn't supposed to. I'm sure there are already many gun stores out there who already have, or are considering pulling them from the shelves out of fear of being held legally liable for selling a product they know is defective. The cascading effects of this are going to be absolutely devastating not only for Sig Sauer, but the gun industry as a whole. Imagine somebody bought a P320 from a gun store, and it eventually goes off injuring somebody. Sig's lawyers may point out this case and say, "Why is it only our fault? Why shouldn't the gun store or the gun owner be held liable for damages? Here's this case from Massachusetts where we weren't held financially liable". It doesn't matter if they're morally or legally correct here, because this will be decided by a jury of average Americans. Gun stores may face financial devastation and bankruptcy from lawsuits.