In 1987, Gary Hart was the presumptive pick to be the Democratic candidate for President, despite the fact he was rumored to be a “serial womanizer” by Washington insiders. That same rumor that dogged him before, including the 1984 campaign.
When reporters asked Hart if he’d ever committed adultery, he not only denied it, he challenged them to prove it.
“Follow me around,” he said, “I don’t care. I’m serious. If anybody wants to put a tail on me, go ahead. They’d be very bored.”
They did, put a tail on him, that is. They weren’t bored. They were rewarded.
The Miami Herald reported on his womanizing, and a now infamous photo of Hart wearing a shirt saying “Monkey Business Crew” with a smiling Donna Rice on his lap surfaced as evidence. Hart’s monkey business was exposed, and his political career was over.
There’s an inherent risk involved in challenging the media and/or the general public to do -or not to do- almost anything. Especially in today’s world of near-instant communications and the insatiable hunger for “meme-worthy” content.
Last week, SIG SAUER issued “The Truth About the P320” an in-your-face response to repeated allegations, lawsuits and reports alleging their immensely-popular P320 pistols, primarily the early models, suffered “uncommanded discharges.”
For a company that has for years been, at best, reluctant to even discuss the issue off the record it was quite a declaration. The opening sentence paragraph set the tone:
“The P320 CANNOT, under any circumstances, discharge without a trigger pull – that is a fact. The allegations against the P320 are nothing more than individuals seeking to profit or avoid personal responsibility.”
From there, the statement went on to say that “anti-gun groups, members of the mainstream media, trial attorneys and other uninformed and agenda-driven parties (my italics) have launched attacks on one of SIG SAUER’s most trusted, most tested, most popular products- the P320 pistol.”
The statement went on to acknowledge that rhetoric was high, but driven “by clickbait farming, engagement having grifters” seeking to “hijack the truth for profit.”
The fiery declaration ended with an admonition to the industry:
Industry, take notice; what’s happening today to SIG SAUER with the anti-gun mob and their lawfare tactics will happen tomorrow at another firearms manufacturer, and then another. Today, for SIG SAUER - it ends.
Uh…maybe not. At least not if the goal was to quiet the whisperers.
Today, the whispers are more akin to shouts, echoing through social channels and the same alternative media that has defended SIG, the P320 and the Second Amendment.
Some, like the “body piercing” patch from Tactical Gear Junkie employ dark humor. The “Breaking News” meme is more biting.
Others, like the “retraction demand” from a plaintiff attorney with a less than stellar courtroom record against SIG, express outrage.
But a third, more concerning response looks at a larger single question, not just the concerns that have surrounded the P320 since its 2017 release. Without expressing an opinion either way, Open Source Defense wonders if overall confidence in SIG SAUER - as a company -hasn’t been damaged by the P320 question and SIG’s insistence that there is not- and has never been - a safety issue, despite a Voluntary Upgrade Program that was emphatically described at the time as “NOT a recall.”
The real issue OSD concludes, is “whether SIG can be taken at its word as a company.”
That question should cause real concern inside SIG’s Newington, New Hampshire, headquarters.
Every day, SIG’s products are being carried by private citizens, police officers, and soldiers worldwide.
SIG’s people have worked long and hard to get the company to where it is today.
But being the “top dog” means more than becoming the de facto standard of excellence to gun owners. It also means becoming the “X-ring” for everyone who take aim at the industry.
Tossing the gauntlet and letting them know you’ll stay silent no more, seems like a proper course of action.
But doing by describing some of your customers as “negligent” or “anti-gun” or “seeking to profit and avoid personal responsibility” or being part of an “anti-gun mob” engaging in “lawfare” means being willing to face scrutiny, ridicule or possible rejection by the individuals and law enforcement agencies who helped make you the company you are today.
As Kelly said in 2004’s The Girl Next Door: “You wanna be president? Let me tell you the first rule of politics; Always know if the juice is worth the squeeze.”
We’ll keep you posted.
— Jim Shepherd