New Hampshire Grants Legal Shield to Gunmakers Amid SIG Sauer P320 Controversy

In a significant legislative move, New Hampshire has enacted a law that limits the liability of firearm manufacturers in the state (SIG of course) and dealers concerning certain design features. The legislation, known as House Bill 381 (HB 381), comes in the wake of numerous lawsuits against SIG Sauer over its P320 pistol, which plaintiffs allege can fire without the trigger being pulled.

We can debate the legitimacy of those claims some other time but I do think we need to bring some light to the power that SIG has to drive the state legislature to pass a law about as fast as any law can be drafted passed and signed.

🔒 Understanding HB 381

HB 381 amends New Hampshire's product liability statutes to prevent lawsuits against firearm manufacturers and dealers based solely on the absence or presence of specific design features, provided the firearm functions as intended and complies with existing laws.

The law specifically mentions that manufacturers cannot be sued for including or failing to include:

• A magazine disconnect mechanism
• A loaded chamber indicator
• Authorized user recognition technology (smart gun tech)
• An external mechanical safety, including a hinged, pivoting, or tabbed trigger safety

However, the law does not grant blanket immunity. Manufacturers and dealers can still be held liable if a firearm contains an actual manufacturing defect or fails to operate as warranted.

⚖️ The SIG Sauer P320 Lawsuits

Since its release in 2017, the SIG Sauer P320 has been the subject of numerous lawsuits alleging that the pistol can discharge without the trigger being pulled. Plaintiffs, including law enforcement officers and civilians, claim injuries resulting from unintentional discharges, often while the firearm was holstered.

So far I've seen 3 videos that very clearly show a SIG P320 firing inside of a holster without a direct human action on the gun/trigger. I'm no expert but I'm certainly concerned enough to be paying attention to the lawsuits and the reports from users.

At least some of these lawsuits argue that the lack of certain safety features—such as an external manual safety or a tabbed trigger safety—contributes to these incidents. SIG Sauer has responded by maintaining that the P320 is safe and meets all applicable safety standards. The company attributes incidents to improper handling or foreign objects interfering with the trigger mechanism.

🗣️ Industry Influence and Legislative Response

During legislative hearings, SIG Sauer representatives advocated for HB 381, emphasizing the need to protect the company from what they described as unfounded lawsuits that could threaten jobs and economic stability in New Hampshire.

“We want to bring this amendment to you to show what out-of-state plaintiffs’ attorneys are doing, attacking in-state businesses. And we ask for your support and help.”

Supporters of the bill, including Senator Bill Gannon, highlighted SIG Sauer’s role as a major employer and the importance of shielding local businesses from excessive legal risk.

Senator Bill Gannon: “They want to stay in New Hampshire, and they're asking us to help fight against false defective claims.” -Image Courtesy of the Manchester Ink Link

The bill’s passage was notably swift and lacked the usual avenues for public input. According to reporting from NHPR and WBUR, HB 381 was introduced and passed through the legislature in less than a week, with the final vote occurring just days after the bill's language was finalized.

There was no public hearing or forum held where citizens, experts, or those directly affected by the reported gun's defects could offer testimony or submit comments. Critics argue that this expedited process was designed to avoid public scrutiny, particularly given the ongoing lawsuits involving SIG Sauer’s P320. One lawmaker even acknowledged the timing, noting, “We moved quickly on this one.”

📌 Implications and Reactions

The enactment of HB 381 has added more fuel to already very loud debate in the firearm community about the P320. Proponents argue the law protects manufacturers from frivolous lawsuits targeting design choices not mandated by law. Opponents contend it may hinder accountability and justice for individuals harmed by firearms lacking common safety features.

When I first heard about this law and read a few news reports, I was concerned that the NH government had somehow tried to hand SIG blanket immunity. Reading the details, that doesn't seem to be the case and each of us can decide how concerning the actual law is.

One piece of advice… if you are a gun manufacturer and plan to bring a new gun to the market in the near future I suggest you add a tabbed trigger safety 🙂

For more information on HB 381 and its legislative history, visit the New Hampshire General Court's official site.