Name: Did Sig Sauer just lose by Winning?
Uploaded: 2025-08-07T08:21:40+00:00
Duration: 8 min 35 s
Description: ⚠️ **Disclaimer:** This video is based on public court documents and online commentary. The host is not a lawyer, a doctor, or even particularly bright — as evidenced by the time he chewed through a b

3 months ago

179

Entertainment Firearms gun channel gun reviews Palmetto state armory ar15 lower receiver assembly firearms training jaegerz999 firearm reviews viral shorts

⚠️ **Disclaimer:** This video is based on public court documents and online commentary. The host is not a lawyer, a doctor, or even particularly bright — as evidenced by the time he chewed through a blind cord with scissors *in his hand*. All statements should be viewed as *opinions* or *speculation*. Don't sue anyone based on this video.

🔥 **What do you think?** Did Sig actually win, or is this going to bite them later? Leave a comment and let me know. Don’t forget to **Like, Subscribe, and Hit That Bell Icon** so you don’t miss future deep dives, court case coverage, or surprise ED ads.

Here’s an updated **SEO‑optimized YouTube video description** with added context on
**Did Sig Sauer Just Lose by Winning a Lawsuit? | Jacques Desrosiers v. Sig Sauer P320 Verdict Breakdown**

In this video, we unpack the jaw‑dropping federal lawsuit between former Cambridge, MA police officer **Jacques Desrosiers** and **Sig Sauer Inc.** After Desrosiers’s duty‑issued P320 discharged while tucked in his waistband—without a trigger pull—he suffered serious injuries. And despite winning “on paper,” Sig arguably lost in the jury’s court of public opinion.

The jury unanimously found a **defectively designed P320** caused the injury—but under Massachusetts law, Desrosiers **knew the gun was defective and used it unreasonably**, so he wasn’t awarded damages ([Saltz Mongeluzzi Bendesky P.C.][1]).

🔥 Key Highlights

* Jury: unanimous that the P320 design was faulty and caused injury
* But: no damages awarded because Desrosiers knowingly carried it unsafely (no holster, in waistband) ([Reddit][2])
* This marks the **third federal jury** to declare the P320 defective—but Sig continues to avoid payouts due to shared blame conclusions ([Saltz Mongeluzzi Bendesky P.C.][1])

---

### ⚖️ Lawsuit Background

* Incident: October 10, 2019, Desrosiers tucked the P320 into his waistband (violating policy) expecting to immediately stow it—but it discharged during adjustment, causing massive injury ([Midpage][3]).
* Case: *Desrosiers v. Sig Sauer, Inc.* (District of Massachusetts, Case No. 1:22‑cv‑11674) filed in 2022
* The trial lasted two weeks; experts testified on human factors and firearm design. Sig’s motion to dismiss was denied, preserving the claim that the P320’s inherent design flaw led to the discharge ([Midpage][3], [Reddit][4]).

---

### 🚨 Broader Context

* The P320 has faced **over 100 reported unintentional discharges**, many in law enforcement use cases, including other holstered or drop‑related incidents ([Wikipedia][5]).
* In 2024, a jury awarded **\$2.35 million** in a similar Georgia case. Later, a Philadelphia jury slapped Sig with an **\$11 million verdict** for another holstered discharge incident—all pointing to a recurring design risk and legal pressure to recall or redesign the firearm ([AP News][6]).

### ✅ Why This Matters

* **Camera warning:** This host is not a lawyer—just a guy who chewed through a blind cord while installing a curtain and improvised with scissors
* All commentary is based on publicly available court filings—speculative and *pure opinion*
* This case throws shade on negligent design vs. operator error—where do you draw the line?

Enjoy the video—don’t try this at home, especially with curtain cords or loaded firearms.

\#SigSauer #P320 #GunLawsuit #FirearmSafety #AppendixCarry #GunCommunity #SigSauerP320 #ProductLiability #GunFails #EDAdRead #LegalCommentary #FirearmsNews

Loading 1 comment...