T&E reports by law enforcement agencies for weapons/ammo


PDA






RustyShackelford
August 20, 2006, 04:49 AM
Do any members here know if US law enforcement agenicies are required by US/public law to release reports/records about the T&E and/or R&D of weapons, ammo, etc. I'd like to know if this information is a matter of public record.

I saw a magazine item about the NJ State Police testing the SW99 model and having several problems.

Has anyone ever requested any police/LE reports about weapons-ammo from a law enforcement agency?

Rusty

If you enjoyed reading about "T&E reports by law enforcement agencies for weapons/ammo" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Pilgrim
August 20, 2006, 12:16 PM
I think if you check with people you know in law enforcement, you will find that the 'testing' conducted by a department in the search for a new firearm is not very scientific.

One, the need for a new firearm is created, generally by someone with 'pull' in the department saying the current issue is unreliable, breaking too often, or there is better technology 'out there'. That someone usually already has their opinion on what the ideal new firearm should be.

Two, the word is put out that the department is looking for a new firearm. This results in several vendor samples appearing on the department's doorstep for testing. In many cases, the someone who convinced the chief or Sheriff a new firearm is needed ends up being in charge of the testing.

Three, a group of officers selected by the someone conduct the testing. The someone is careful to include a few 'rankers' to participate to show that the input of the average patrol officer was considered. Generally at least a day is spent at the range, with the evaluators shooting up a bunch of ammo and having a good time away from their regular duties. Eventually a recommendation is formed as to which firearm the department should purchase.

Four, that recommendation is placed before the chief or Sheriff. Then the top brass in the command staff, many who haven't been to the range in years, weigh in with their recommendations. There will be two schools of thought. One, the department should stick with a newer version of the existing issue firearm so that training and transition costs will be kept low. Two, the department needs to step into the 'xx' century and get the latest technology available, etc.

Five, the head of the department makes his decision and goes to the city council or the county supervisors and makes a pitch for a new gun. He makes a strong case the current issue firearm is a piece of junk, fails repeatedly on the range, and the lives of his officers are at stake. The governing body gives in and authorizes the purchase of the new firearm.

Six, somewhere along the way a suggestion is made by the shooters in the department to let the officer decide what he wants to carry. Unless the chief or Sheriff is a shooter himself, this suggestion is quashed as being ridiculous. The reasons are many, but generally it centers on simplicity in training, uniform look of the officers, and granting individual choice may result in the officers all preferring something different from the department's choice in firearms.

Seven, bids are solicited and invariably the vendor offers to take the department's old firearms in trade. Said vendor offers to sell at a reasonable price these trade ins back to individual officers at a very good price. If enough officers choose to buy their old issue firearm, it invariably raises the question with the governing body, "If the old guns were such junk, why are all the officers buying them from the vendor?"

Eight, transition training is conducted at the range, where if the department is good on training, anywhere from one to three days is spent transitioning to the new firearm. In careless departments, the officer fires the qualification course once and 'transition' is completed in less than an hour and fifty rounds expended.

Nine, this cycle repeats itself very 8-10 years.

Pilgrim

isp2605
August 20, 2006, 12:30 PM
There is no law nor are agencies required to post their testing or requirements for their weapon selections. You might be able to get it via a FOIA filing but expect for it to be denied and to file appeals.
I was running our R&D during weapons selection. Ours was quite a bit more involved than what pilgrim described. Took about 18 months of extensive testing in all kinds of weather, all kinds of conditions, by a wide variety of shooters.

ilbob
August 20, 2006, 12:55 PM
There is no law nor are agencies required to post their testing or requirements for their weapon selections. You might be able to get it via a FOIA filing but expect for it to be denied and to file appeals

Why would they care about something as mundane as how they selected a particular firearm?

Group9
August 20, 2006, 03:08 PM
Usually, federal agencies like the FBI publish their testing results.

http://www.seark.net/~jlove/fbitest.htm

isp2605
August 20, 2006, 06:28 PM
Why would they care about something as mundane as how they selected a particualr firearm?

Because we always get some stroke who thinks they know more than anyone else complaining or wanting to sue.

psyopspec
August 20, 2006, 07:24 PM
Rusty, if you want to know more about the NJ state police testing of the SW99, have you thought about asking the NJ state police? A call or an email might get you some feedback - the worst they can do is say no.

Soybomb
August 20, 2006, 08:37 PM
Here's the deal here, someone in New Jersey was allowed to make the requirements that shouldn't have. NJ ordered the SW99 with the DA/SA trigger...but had the decocker removed against S&W's recommendations. This obviously led to a rather odd manual of arms and the problem of having a TDA pistol that can't be carried DA with a loaded chamber. I guess it had second strike because of it, for whatever thats worth.

In short, maybe the modifications they insisted on for the gun made it unreliable, maybe the modifications they insited on were so stupid in practice that someone decided they couldn't complete an order for weapons that operated in that fashion and decided the guns were too unreliable to complete the deal. Either way the NJ SW99 is certainly not a representative sample of any SW99 in production today to me.

RustyShackelford
August 20, 2006, 10:10 PM
Thank you for the interesting posts. I'd also think a person could request information from a law enforcement agency's public affairs office or public information officer without any big hassles.

A large PD in my area just bought new SIGarms P-226 9mm pistols in standard DA/SA mode. The department used the SIGarms P-226 model for about 15 years. Most of the law enforcement here use .40S&W or .45acp pistols(SIGs and Glocks mostly). Some of the PD's patrol officers told the local media they wanted to upgrade to the .40S&W or .357SIG and get the new DAK model SIGs. The PD's chief is a "good old boy" who wants to save the city $$$, :rolleyes:. The PD also got funding for new duty holsters too.

Rusty

If you enjoyed reading about "T&E reports by law enforcement agencies for weapons/ammo" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!