Air Force pauses M18 pistol use after airman’s death at Wyoming base

The US Air Force Global Strike Command interrupted the use of a handgun after the death of a security forces plane in a Wyoming base.

The use of the M18 pistol, a variant of another firearm which was the target of prosecution on the allegations of involuntary discharge, was interrupted on Monday “until further notice” after “the tragic incident” on Sunday at the base of Fe Warren Air Force in Cheyenne, command said in a press release. The security forces fight the airmen with all the bases of command “will perform 100% inspections of the handgun M18 to identify immediate security problems,” he said.

The name of the aviator in active service, which was assigned to the 90th squadron of the security forces, 90th missile wing at the base, and the details of what happened was not published. The missile wing said it was an isolated incident and that there was no threat to the base or the community. Security forces specialists protect the basics of the Air Force.

The pistol is made by the manufacturer based in New Hampshire, Sig Sauer, who defends himself against several proceedings alleging that his linked pistol, the P320 pistol, can be triggered without the trigger being fired. Sig Sauer denies affirmations, saying that the P320 is sure and that the problem is a user’s error. He prevailed in some cases.

The P320 was adopted by the US military as M17 and M18 pistols, and the M18 is now the official garnish of all branches of the US military, said Sig Sauer on its website. In 2019, Sig Sauer announced that it had delivered its 100,000th M17 and M18 to the US military.

The break is so far limited to the Global Strike Command, which includes more than 33,700 aviators and civilians. The rest of the Air Force and the other armed services have announced no order to avoid using the pistols.

“Our hearts are with members of the service and families affected by the recent event reported at the base of the Air Force Warren,” said Sig Sauer on a statement published on Facebook on Wednesday.

The Air Force of Special Investigations Office is in charge of the survey. The declaration of the command indicates that he is collaborating with the Air Force security forces center and the air force security forces “to carry out an in -depth examination of the M18 and to develop appropriate corrective measures”. Sig Sauer said he had proposed to help.

The P320 was introduced in 2014. Sig Sauer offered a “voluntary upgrade” in 2017 to reduce the weight of the trigger, among other features. The lawyers of the people who pursued the army shooter, many of whom are agents responsible for the application of laws, say that the upgrade has not stopped involuntary discharges.

Earlier this year, Sig Sauer called on a ban on P320, M17 and M18 pistols by the Washington Criminal Justice Training Commission, arguing that it seems to be based on inaccurate and incomplete information. The commission prohibited weapons after a recruit said that its P320 had been released while it was drawing it, even if its finger was not on the trigger.

And this month, Sig Sauer announced that the Michigan State police adopt the M18 as the main rush weapon.

Several major multi-plaign cases have been deposited since 2022 in front of the New Hampshire Federal Court, representing nearly 80 people who accuse Sig Sauer negligence and design and marketing of defective products. This is added to the proceedings brought in other states, including one in Pennsylvania last year, alleging an unjustified death.

They say that the P320 design requires external mechanical security, optional functionality. The most recent case in New Hampshire, representing 22 complainants in 16 states, was filed in March. A judge heard the arguments on Monday on SIG Sauer requests to reject the trial or break it and transfer it to the districts where the complainants live.

There was also a discussion on a 2 -month law in New Hampshire, created in response to prosecution, which prohibits complaints from product responsibility against Sig Sauer and other firearms manufacturers according to “the absence or presence” of external security and several other optional characteristics. Complaints can always be filed on manufacturing defects. The law has not yet been incorporated into the case.