Is there any evidence showing that Alex Pretti's handgun discharged during his arrest? What do experts in firearms think?

1. What the videos actually show — a gun taken from Pretti, not a verified misfire

Multiple bystander videos, analyzed by outlets including The New York Times and others, show agents wresting Pretti to the pavement and at least one agent extracting a handgun from his waistband shortly before shots are fired, but none of the publicly released footage or mainstream reconstructions has produced incontrovertible visual proof that Pretti’s pistol discharged prior to the agents’ shots ^{[2] [5] [1]}.

2. Official statements and early investigatory posture — no public forensic confirmation

Federal summaries and later official reporting to Congress, as compiled in news coverage and encyclopedic summaries, note that investigators have not confirmed an accidental discharge preceded the first shot; Customs and Border Protection’s later report did not establish that a negligent discharge occurred before agents opened fire, and prosecutors and investigators have so far not released ballistic or residue findings that would settle whether Pretti’s pistol fired ^{[3] [1]}.

3. The P320’s contested safety record — why the hypothesis gained traction

The pistol identified in reporting as Pretti’s model, widely reported as a Sig Sauer P320 variant, has been the subject of controversy and litigation over alleged unintentional discharges, making it a focal point for speculation; some gun‑rights lawyers and commentators publicly proposed that a negligent discharge by that firearm could have triggered the agents’ reaction, while Sig Sauer and other authorities emphasize upgrades and say such accidental firings are rare — a technical background that explains why armchair analyses proliferated quickly even absent case-specific forensic proof ^{[6] [4] [7]}.

4. Expert analysis and skepticism — contested readings of frame‑by‑frame reviews

Firearms analysts and tactical experts diverge: a number of internet sleuths and some commentators interpret slowed, grainy frames as consistent with a slide movement or a scuff on the pavement that could be a spent projectile, while other experienced firearms examiners quoted by outlets say it is “extremely unlikely” a gun would fire on its own under those visible conditions and that forensic tests — residue, casings, and trajectory reconstructions — are required to establish any discharge; military and law‑enforcement analysts caution explicitly that, without those forensic findings, claims the P320 “went off” remain speculation rather than established fact ^{[4] [8] [1]}.

5. The investigative and political context — why the question matters and remains unresolved

The shooting has prompted legal and political responses, including a Justice Department civil‑rights investigation, and has drawn sharp partisan debate with advocacy groups on both sides demanding full transparency; in this context, advocates for gun owners and some legal analysts have seized on the P320 controversy to argue for alternative narratives while other journalists and experts insist the evidentiary record released so far does not support a conclusion that Pretti’s handgun discharged before agents fired ^{[9] [10] [11]}.

6. Bottom line — current evidence and what experts say is needed

At present there is no publicly released forensic confirmation that Alex Pretti’s handgun discharged during the arrest; experts who have reviewed the footage urge restraint in drawing firm conclusions and uniformly call for ballistic, residue, shell‑case, and reconstruction reports — the kinds of evidence law enforcement agencies normally produce to validate or refute claims of an accidental discharge — before declaring whether a negligent firing occurred ^{[1] [3] [4]}.