First, when did the NJSP start using the "practice ammunition that causes the issues"? Such ammunition is usually done on a bid basis, and it can be annually. Are we "sure" that Sig didn't test their guns with one practice ammunition, and then the NJSP changed vendor? Note, as well, that the Duty ammunition seems to have worked fine.
IF the P229 is at fault, why haven't other agencies using it reported similar issues? Or individuals? As most individuals shoot more than the average officer, wouldn't it have shown up there, as well?
If you read the OP article, the NJSP is saying that Sig shipped them a different version of the model they bid. Supposedly with a different style of extractor. However, the NJSP
DID accept the marked pistols without comment. So, yes, Sekol has a point.
As for Glock, does anyone remember the Model 21 fiasco with LAPD? Or the incredible exploding .40 S&W models? Or, perhaps, the 9mm and .40 S&&W pistols with lights that developed reliability issues. With Glock saying that the lights were "too heavy"? Apparently not.
In the end, it would appear that Glock will get the bid, and that Sig will become another victim of NJ politics. Hmmmmmm..........I wonder what would happen if they tried another practice ammo? Would they sue the manufacturer of the one that was failing, demanding money from them, as well? I'd also expect that we'll hear that Glock offered NJSP a super-cheap deal, from a connected distributor.