LEO's: How did you department decide on the firearm and ammunition you carry?


PDA






Prosser
August 7, 2011, 09:49 PM
Hi
I'm wondering what the criteria is for handguns and calibers picked by your LEO
departments? What guidelines, research, decision making methods went into your service sidearm?
Are you allowed to carry anything else?
Our local PD had one person pick the caliber, the firearm, and train them at our local range.

That person has the following credentials:
Bomb expert
Swat member
Col. in the National Guard, perhaps to be promoted soon
Licensed Smith and Wesson Gunsmith
and that's just what I know.

He picked Sig Sauer P220's, with Federal Hydra-Shock 230 grain HP's.
He passed on Glocks because of their flat springs, among other things.
Never asked him why he didn't go with a 1911, but, I suspect the first shot DA capability was the reason.

Again, how was the decision process done in your department?

Thank you

If you enjoyed reading about "LEO's: How did you department decide on the firearm and ammunition you carry?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
steveno
August 8, 2011, 03:18 AM
you forgot to mention lowest bidder

MikeNice
August 8, 2011, 08:21 AM
One of the big factors in switching guns was the size of the current Sigs. A lot of the females on the force had trouble drawing, disengaging the safety, and firing without shifting their hand position at least twice. It made for a slower first shot and lower accuracy. So, the department decided to switch to a gun that fit more people.

After looking at several different brands, they chose the Smith & Wesson M&P. The two major factors were the versatility of the back straps and their reputation for dependability. Plus there were some safety features that were demanded by the upper brass. They wanted a magazine disconnect safety, DAO, and manual safety.

The S&W was the only gun that fit the criteria and came in under budget.

They chose the ammo to go with it by downgrading from 180gr Federal HST to 124gr+P HST for their new 9mm. They chose the ammo after studying literally thousands of real world shootings, getting doctors to reexamine over a hundred shootings, and looking at price.

They came to the conclusion that there was no evidence of enough increase in performance to justify the price of .40S&W ammo in the current financial climate. They decided the tests showed the biggest factor for officer survival was training. They can afford more training by switching from .40S&W to 9mm.

Versatility, price, and a reputation for getting the job done is what it took to get the contract.

Prosser
August 8, 2011, 11:25 AM
IIRC, Glocks are almost always the low bidder.;)

That doesn't seem to win out all the time.

MikeNice:

Thanks. That sounds like a fairly well thought out decision by your department.
Who is the they? What positions do they hold, what experience?

highlander 5
August 8, 2011, 11:50 AM
I'm not a Leo but in my city and several around us Glock got the contracts because there was no money involved. When my city went to semi autos Glock came in and made this deal.for every revolver you give us we'll give you a Glock with 2 mags. the oficers had to buy the spare mag. Now this was when everyone was going to 9 mm. Now the revolvers where sold on the used market. Then the 40 S&W "craze" hit town same deal trade 1 9 mm Glock and spare mags for 40 S&W Glocks and spare mags. IIRC Boston did this deal but when Mayor Menino agreed to the deal but forgot to have a no resale in Ma clause put in. One of the local distributors had some very good deals on slightly used 9 mm Glocks and "Mumbles" as he's known locally was having fits about it.

Rexster
August 8, 2011, 11:57 AM
I have no earthly idea; it as if the committee were sworn to secrecy. Cost was not a factor, as we buy our own. The original approved models, when the policy was enacted in 1997, were the SIG P229, Beretta 8040 Cougar, and de-cocker single-stack 3rd-Generation S&W, all forties. Nobody had to buy themselves a new duty pistol; senior officers could keep carrying existing duty handguns. I carried "grandfathered" 1911 pistols until 2002.

I can only speculate that .40 was chosen either as a compromise between large-bore and small-bore factions, or simply following the general trend. The former standard was .357 Magnum, with anyone past their rookie year able to switch to anything from 9mm and .38
on the small end to .45 on the big end, inclusive; auto or revolver.

The 3rd-Gen S&W model changed over time, from a single-stack to a double-stack. Both can still be found in duty rigs.

The Glock G22 was added to the OK list about 2000 or 2001. Once again, there was testing involved, but it seemed to be very secretive.

In 2007, the G23, P226, M&P40, and an XD were added to the list; same secrecy surrounding the selection process.

Somewhere along the way, the Beretta 8040 fell off the list, replaced by the 96G, and then it fell off the list, too. Of course, due to nobody having to buy a new pistol against their will, both of these Beretta models can still be found in duty holsters.

My current choice is the P229 DAK. DAK was not officially OK until 2007, but I started carrying DAK in 2004, and made sure to only qual or otherwise practice at the PD range when "cool" supervisors or range officers were on duty. I recently learned that a committee did study and test the DAK before it was approved.

Sorry, I cannot specify my employer, as there are rules about discussing certain things on social media while being identifiable as a member of my agency. There are several thousand of us, and it is a localized agency in SE Texas.

Rexster
August 8, 2011, 12:18 PM
To answer some questions from the OP that I forgot, above, we can carry a very wide range of handguns for back-up and off-the-clock weapons. We are encouraged to carry our duty pistols when off the clock, or a smaller version of our duty pistol. While I usually tote a P229R DAK in the duty rig, when off the clock, I am more likely to conceal an "SAS" version of the P229, or a revolver ranging from a 4" S&W Model 19 down to a 2.25" Ruger SP101.

The minimum cartridge we are to carry is .380 ACP, except that a smaller-bore can act as a back-up weapon to another handgun of .380 or larger.

All handguns must be either semi-auto, or DA revolver. No single-action revolvers, though single-action autos are still OK.

There are special cases for certain assignments and conditions. If I were to become a plainclothes investigator, for example, I could once again wear a 4" sixgun on the clock, as my primary duty handgun.

Loyalist Dave
August 8, 2011, 12:20 PM
Beretta is made in Maryland, and so the lowest bidder won out for a while, when we carried 9mm. The detectives for a while carried S&W compact single-stack 9mm's (iirc) the 3906? Then the department went to Beretta in .40, and then to Glock in .40. I know the upgrade to 40 S&W was due to perceived problems with 9mm hydroshocks (note:..., before folks get into a debate..., I said "perceived"). As for the bullet style, that was probably due to lowest bidder too. I think the switch from the longer Beretta grip to the shorter Glock grip was due to female officers having a tough time shooting Beretta for qualification. I noted the same problem prior to joining the force when the Marine Corps went to the Beretta 92. Around Maryland I have seen Sigs, Berettas, Glocks, Ruger P85's, and H&K P7 M13's carried as issued sidearms.

LD

Lawdawg45
August 8, 2011, 01:00 PM
One of the few perks to being a small town lawman is that we purchased all of our equipment including handguns. I began in the wheel gun era and had the option of a .38/.357 or a .45 acp., but I was able to convince (well trick) my Chief into letting me carry a .45 Colt. Large departments rely heavily on FBI data as far as caliber selection, and maintenance/repair cost weigh heavily on brand selection. The last credible stats I saw said that 65% of departments carried Glocks.:cool:

LD45

JERRY
August 8, 2011, 01:08 PM
cheapest.

Owen
August 8, 2011, 01:14 PM
This should probably be a spin-off thread, but what's wrong with flat springs?

MikeNice
August 8, 2011, 08:39 PM
MikeNice:
Thanks. That sounds like a fairly well thought out decision by your department.
Who is the they? What positions do they hold, what experience?

The majors and chief had the final call. There was a panel of several officers made up of the department armorer, range officers, training officers, and a couple of budget people. The Chief and his assignees sat in on meetings and made sure reports were filed to prove people were working on it.

Everything they come up with was run through an administrative panel. It was a long laborious process. In the end a good choice won out. However, there were compromises made that some officer's were not pleased with. There was a group that pushed hard for a metal gun. Others pushed hard for switching to the PDX-1 round because it is the FBI load. There was even a group that wanted to let officers buy there own gun and reimburse them $400.

I got there as it was all winding down, and I am not commissioned so I don't get a say.

Snowbandit
August 8, 2011, 08:58 PM
Mindlessly following the lead of the state agency. Most of the administrative types I had to deal with don't have enough brains to think for themselves.

wacki
August 8, 2011, 11:09 PM
They chose the ammo after studying literally thousands of real world shootings, getting doctors to reexamine over a hundred shootings,

Large departments rely heavily on FBI data


Is any of the raw data or analysis public? It would be an interesting read for sure.







.

FIVETWOSEVEN
August 8, 2011, 11:13 PM
and H&K P7 M13's carried as issued sidearms.

:eek:

MikeNice
August 8, 2011, 11:20 PM
Wacki, as far as I know it is all public information since most of it came from other departments. If a shooting occurs and a police investigation insues the record of the case usually becomes public record after the matter is settled.

If you know of a particular case or want to do research for scholarly purposes your local police should be able to help. Getting them to not think you are crazy or a sicko is another deal. They might stonewall you just because most of them never deal with non-professional request and find it kind of creepy.

I am not allowed to discuss which particular information was used. I can say they looked at cases. I can very generally mention some of the things I had a chance to read. However, since it was used for internal decision making I can not name a specific case or use real names. That is just the departmental policy.

The internal reports our department issued on the information are not public record. They are sealed up with enough confidentiality contracts and clauses to baffle most lawyers.

9mmepiphany
August 8, 2011, 11:44 PM
:eek:

I'm not sure why you would be surprised that H&K would market the P7 to LE. The reason that H&K modified the original P7 (often referred to as the PSP) into what became the M8 is because of the requirements of the New Jersey State Police. H&K made a big push to try to break into the LE market, when it was pretty much owned by S&W. They were offering the M8 for $352 and the M13 for $378..when the retail price was ~$450

To address the OP:
Our department formed a committee (I think it was 7 members) which was chaired by the Capt of the Training Division. They polled the troops (about 1200) over caliber selection. The recommendation went to the Sheriff and the 7 Chief Deputies.

The issue gun became (replacing the S&W M13) the Sig Sauer 225/226/229. 9mm in the first two and .40 in the latter...our tactical teams were issued the 220 in .45ACP. At the next sidearm rotation, they changed to the 239/226R/229R in either 9mm or .40 for everyone. We had the option of carrying our personally owned Sigs and the option of .45ACP

303tom
August 9, 2011, 01:53 AM
The LEO`s around here would probably say , what ever .40 you are comfortable with.

Prosser
August 9, 2011, 05:45 AM
I forgot to mention my experience in SF. Of all places, San Francisco has had in the past the S&W 57 as an issue gun.:what:

That's the .41 Magnum.

While the issue guns are going to semi autos, don't remember which ones, the guy I hung out with that worked the roughest areas of SF stayed with his .41 Mag, and the department still issued him ammo.

Lawdawg45
August 9, 2011, 06:09 AM
"Is any of the raw data or analysis public? It would be an interesting read for sure."

Wacki, it sure is. It's also very telling that their standard issue is the Glock 19.;)

LD45

Double Naught Spy
August 9, 2011, 09:23 AM
Mindlessly following the lead of the state agency. Most of the administrative types I had to deal with don't have enough brains to think for themselves.

This is a rather cheap shot and not at all appropriate. The logic is fairly sound. If you trust the superior agency to have done due diligence in making their decision and you believe that your needs mimic the needs of the superior agency, plus if you can find out if their decision has been a good one, then is there really a lot to be gained by spending a lot of time and money re-inventing the wheel?

MikeNice's group went to a lot of trouble to reach a really interesting decision on ammo, that they did not see a significant difference in performance such to warrant going with a more expensive caliber.

In the real world, so long as departments can get reliable guns that their officers can use effectively that shoot quality defensive ammo of decent caliber, then the differences in outcomes really are going to be in how the officer handled the situation, not the gun or ammo. The guns and ammo have to be able to be used effectively by the officers and that means the guns have to fit the officers, the ammo must be reliable performers, and recoil must be controllable and there really are a plethora of guns and ammo that will meet those criteria.

Our local department has officers supply their own guns (based on a pretty big list of choices) and if they desire, their own ammo, though the department will also provide ammo. The officer can choose to use it or use ammo from set of approved makes and models. So if the officer thinks that Speer Gold Dot will stop zombies on crack better than what the department will provide for free, he can carry his Gold Dots.

The department ammo decision was made based on letting makers bid for the contract for a multi caliber contract and stipulations were made that rounds of each caliber had to have certain performance characteristics....which were pretty much the standard velocity, penetration, reliability, quality control, and flash characteristics that you would expect. Samples were submitted for testing and verification and the company that did the best overall across calibers that was within budget was selected (though I don't think it was the cheapest, IIRC, but it certainly wasn't the most costly).

So our local folks did not go with what the State had done before them because the State's needs were much more narrow than what our local department needed (one or two types of gun in one or two calibers versus more than 10 models of guns and a half a dozen calibers).

lead slinger
August 9, 2011, 09:51 AM
i have herad form a local gunsmith that the two citys by me one usees kimber and the other has sigs

9mmepiphany
August 9, 2011, 11:50 AM
I forgot to mention my experience in SF. Of all places, San Francisco has had in the past the S&W 57 as an issue gun.:what:
It was actually the m-58 - the M&P model

armoredman
August 9, 2011, 02:40 PM
6000+ department, lowest bidder, so we have Glock 19s and 17s.

Edit to add, not street cops, so it wasn't quite that important as it is for regular LEOs.

Plan2Live
August 9, 2011, 07:26 PM
What does IIRC stand for? Or YMMV?

I'm frequently tickled by the tendency to us initials; OP, POS, IWB, DOA, DRT, PDQ, etc. rather than just spell it out. Sometimes it just comes across as OMG, or LOL and somtimes just ROTFL. Don't assume everyone knows the secret handshake.

Cop Bob
August 9, 2011, 07:36 PM
When I joined, it was any revolver, caliber 38 or larger for cadets. We were given a presentation and recommendations by the training staff, and two letters, one for a duty weapon, and one for an off-duty weapon.. When I came through, the pistols that were "Pushed" were the M-19, the M-66, the M-586 and the M-686 Smiths for Duty Weapons, and J and K frames for off duty.. Once you had a year on the street, or got off probation, you could switch to a Semi-Auto. The most popular at the time was the 1911's...

Later, it was decided that we would start training cadets with Semi-Auto's and the Beretta 96 was one of the guns pushed, along with Sigs, and a list of about 4 others that, memory escapes me on... All were 40's..

Then and now, all officer were responsible for the selection and purchase of their own weapons, from an approved list.. The caliber and ammo restrictions were 38 Special or larger, 9mm acceptable, off duty, same, however .380's were allowed for off duty and plainclothes assignments.. Officers were not permitted to carry calibers smaller than 9mm for a primary weapon, however some put .32's and sme 25's on thier gun carry cards as back up weapons, as boot, or pocket pistols..

Ammunition was also the responsibility of the individual officer, recommendations were made. All of it hollow points. Factory ammunition was recommended, FMJ was never recommended. In the early days, hand loads were permitted as well.. Now it is frowned upon..

Over the years I have seen our guys carry everything from Detective Specials, to 44 Wildeys... Now, Sigs, Glocks, Beretta's, and Springfields, as well as a smattering of 1911's are the most common..

LeonCarr
August 9, 2011, 07:41 PM
Personally owned firearms, has to be .38 or larger in revolvers, 9mm or larger in autos. No "junk" guns. I have watched our firearms instructor shoot our qualification course with a 6 inch S&W Model 629 .44 Magnum :).

Rexster
August 9, 2011, 08:07 PM
What does IIRC stand for? Or YMMV?

I'm frequently tickled by the tendency to us initials; OP, POS, IWB, DOA, DRT, PDQ, etc. rather than just spell it out. Sometimes it just comes across as OMG, or LOL and somtimes just ROTFL. Don't assume everyone knows the secret handshake.
IIRC = if I recall correctly.

YMMV is an o-l-d one, pre-dating the Internet! It means "your mileage may vary," and derives from a disclaimer added to vehicle ads.

Why not type it all? CTS is not fun. (CTS = Carpal Tunnel Syndrome)

Double Naught Spy
August 9, 2011, 09:58 PM
What does IIRC stand for? Or YMMV?

I'm frequently tickled by the tendency to us initials; OP, POS, IWB, DOA, DRT, PDQ, etc. rather than just spell it out. Sometimes it just comes across as OMG, or LOL and somtimes just ROTFL. Don't assume everyone knows the secret handshake.

What secret? Sorry, I didn't know your Google was broken. Let me Google that for you...
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=IIRC+acronym
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=YMMV+acronym

armoredman
August 9, 2011, 10:09 PM
If I remember Correctly
Your Mileage May Vary.

Prosser
August 9, 2011, 10:09 PM
Leoncarr:
It's too bad that using a .44 Magnum doesn't happen more often. Seems to me Skelton and Keith thought the .44 or .41 were excellent choices.

MikeNice
August 9, 2011, 10:17 PM
What does IIRC stand for? Or YMMV?

I'm frequently tickled by the tendency to us initials; OP, POS, IWB, DOA, DRT, PDQ, etc. rather than just spell it out. Sometimes it just comes across as OMG, or LOL and somtimes just ROTFL. Don't assume everyone knows the secret handshake.
You should read the thread A THR Primer on Courtesy and Basic Abreviations. It is right at the top of general discussion.

There is some pretty good information in there that clears up a lot of issues. I know it helped me a lot when I started here.

Bobson
August 9, 2011, 10:20 PM
Edit: I should probably read page two before addressing a question on page one. And evidently, so should a few others. :P

What does BC stand for, when referring to bullets? Seems to be on a lot of ballistic charts. Bullet casing?

orionengnr
August 9, 2011, 10:21 PM
i have herad (sic) form (sic) a local gunsmith that the two citys (sic) by me one usees (sic) kimber and the other has sigs __________________
it's only money


Hmmmm...obviously money doesn't buy language (or typing) skills...

Prosser
August 9, 2011, 11:04 PM
Not to try and get my thread on track, but this isn't about abbreviations. Start your own thread if you want to learn how to google, and learn what is common knowledge in most forums.

I don't really care if it's first draft information. I don't proof my writing like it's a law review article in this forum, nor do i expect others to do the same.

The thread is about how the decisions are made to determine what firearms and ammunition are carried by leo or government agencies.

I for one would like to know why 10mm and .45 super aren't a bit more popular, and why we continue to chase the .45 colt's 150 year old ballistics.

If leo is going to use cheap rounds, why aren't they using guns that allow multiple hits, like a selector switch on a m-16?

Plan2Live
August 10, 2011, 07:19 AM
Actually, my prefered search engine is Yahoo, but thanks for the suggestion to search elsewhere other than getting clarification from a relevent location. Perhaps we can suggest everyone perform an internet search before asking questions here. TTFN

MikeNice
August 10, 2011, 08:11 AM
I for one would like to know why 10mm and .45 super aren't a bit more popular,

The size of the round and the recoil has kept 10mm out of contention. A lot of smaller stuatured people have problems with the grip size because of the longer round. The recoil was also a concern. Some officers just never could master it. Others it took a long while. The amount of time and money spent on training someone to become effective with a 10mm would be too costly.

If leo is going to use cheap rounds, why aren't they using guns that allow multiple hits, like a selector switch on a m-16?

I don't get your meaning. 180gr or 124gr+P Federal HST rounds are not cheap. They are less powerfull than an M-16 but they are much easier to carry and use at social distances.

Depending on who's numbers you read. only one in four bullets fired in a LEO shooting hit the intended person. Switching to select fire or auto isn't going to help that. Automatic fire is usually used for suppression. It is rarely used to engage with accuracy in mind. If anything it would make problems worse.

LeonCarr
August 10, 2011, 10:03 AM
Mr. Prosser,

When LEOs carried the N-Frame Smiths (.357, .41, .44, .45LC), notice that you never heard anything about "Stopping Power Issues".

:)

Just my .02,
LeonCarr

scaatylobo
August 10, 2011, 10:43 AM
Bottom line was THE bottom line.

The 'bean counters' were the ones that made the final decision.

And that means lowest bidder.

So we got stuck with a badly made and now discontinued pistol.

That was in the past,and now we have a better option,but still its the bean counters that make the call - too bad.

highlander 5
August 10, 2011, 11:00 AM
That's because in those days LEOs had only 6 shots and they learned to make them count.
Not fill the air with lead and hope for the best.

thedrewcifur
August 10, 2011, 11:24 AM
i am about to sign up to be a reserve westerville police officer and they carry HK USP in 9x19, .40 S&W, or .45ACP. since they are providing the ammo i'll go with .45.

slicksleeve
August 10, 2011, 11:24 AM
For my department, it is the Glock 22. It replaced the Smith and Wesson 5906, which replaced some model of Smith and Wesson revolver. All this came about before my time though. I recall a Major telling us at the academy that he was on selection team, and he preferred the Sig, as it was in his opinion "A much better weapon than the Glock, but sometimes we don't get what we want."

whalerman
August 10, 2011, 11:41 AM
Liability and cost. They chose a weapon that was inexpensive to provide to all the officers and was defensible in court. We ended up with Glocks. And being in NY we have the NY plus trigger, in other words it's not very good. But lawyers like it. On the plus side uniformity with training is a very good thing. I don't understand how some departments provide good training with everyone armed differently. Pick what you want, but stay with one thing. How do you design courses of fire with double action revolvers next to glocks next to 1911's? Unsafe.

Prosser
August 10, 2011, 04:32 PM
Having large hands, one thing has been made really clear: custom grips and equipment are vital to accuracy.

MikeNice: thanks for the explanation. I'll turn that over and say that for every little person, there is a big person that needs larger grips to shoot well. Why do I get stuck with a tiny grip?

I don't get the recoil argument, either. You can tailor recoil with bullet weight and powder charge.

If you have little people that can't handle recoil, load, 135 grain NOS JHP, at minimum pressure, 28k psi, is still going 1372 fps using Autocomp. That's only 8.7 grains of powder. Recoil Energy of 7 foot pounds, and Recoil Velocity of 15 fps.
That gives you essentially a .357 Magnum medium load, with a .41 caliber bullet, at 1400 fps, with the recoil of a 9mm, in a 2 pound gun.
Others that can shoot heavier loads should be provided with them.

As for Glocks: The ONLY glock I ever shot well was the 34, tricked out as a race gun. It had a 3 pound trigger, was accurate, recoiled very little, and I would carry it anytime. At a certain point fear of litigation needs to be turned around when someone is issued a gun that they cannot shoot well because of poor design, and they get killed because of it.

"Mr. Prosser,

When LEOs carried the N-Frame Smiths (.357, .41, .44, .45LC), notice that you never heard anything about "Stopping Power Issues".



Just my .02,
LeonCarr
___________"

I agree. Sometimes newer is NOT better. I also can't help but think that looking at the gapping holes in an N frame has a seriously sobering experience on bad guys. Perhaps another category of didn't have to shoot is perhaps as important as what is
reported.

I know of one officer that was carrying a .41 Magnum and decided the bad guy was too well covered by a car and was too good with the .454 Casull he carried to take on that day. Saved two lives I think.

Rexster
August 10, 2011, 06:45 PM
Liability and cost. They chose a weapon that was inexpensive to provide to all the officers and was defensible in court. We ended up with Glocks. And being in NY we have the NY plus trigger, in other words it's not very good. But lawyers like it. On the plus side uniformity with training is a very good thing. I don't understand how some departments provide good training with everyone armed differently. Pick what you want, but stay with one thing. How do you design courses of fire with double action revolvers next to glocks next to 1911's? Unsafe.
Unsafe? The principles of handling firearms safely are largely the same. Our guys carrying grandfathered 1911s seem no less safe than the officers carrying DA weapons. Indeed, the 1911 guys are often the more "gunny" officers, more Cooper-esque in their gun-handlng habits, and therefore more in tune with the Cooper version of the rules of firearms safety.

For a while, there were so many ND incidents with Glocks, that Glock nearly
became the first and only brand to be banned, by name, by my employer, for
any carry, on or off the clock. The incidents seemed to level off after a while,
though the popularity of the Glock still means most ND incidents happen with
Glocks.

Courses of fire? My PD's qual course still mandates that each reloading device be loaded with six rounds. For better or worse, this is true. On the street, officers still tend to empty their autos at bad guys, not stopping at six rounds.

In other ways, the revolver guys/gals have to work HARD to stay up with the auto guys/gals. Speed-loading skills must be very well-developed, as the reload times have been cut since the old days. The slackers and shirkers
switched to Glocks long ago, or retired. The DA/SA shooters have to have their
DA-to-SA skills down at, too, as they are expected to de-cock every time the
target turns away, which most of the time is after every two shots.

I can still do well in the qual shooting a sixgun, though I did not "grandfather" a revolver in 1997, so cannot carry a sixgun as a primary duty handgun, unless I become a plainclothes investigator; a deeply-buried phrase in the policy indicates I might be able to switch back to certain 4" S&W DA revolvers. I do still qual with revolvers in the "off-duty" and back-up category, which mean I can shoot a non-timed course involving two distances at a stationary target, but I occasionally opt to fire the timed turning-target duty pistol qual
as a training exercise. We are a big PD, and to keep everyone qual'ed, our
range runs three shifts, five days/nights a week.

theSHADOEknows
August 10, 2011, 07:47 PM
I'm not a LEO, but my local PD has carried Glock 17s as long as I can remember. About 5 months ago, S&W came in and offered to replace all those Glocks with M&P's, in the caliber of each individual officer's choice, for the cost of a new duty holster from Smith.

YMMV, but if it were me, I couldn't pass up a shiny new Smith for next to nothin!

MikeNice
August 10, 2011, 09:11 PM
MikeNice: thanks for the explanation. I'll turn that over and say that for every little person, there is a big person that needs larger grips to shoot well. Why do I get stuck with a tiny grip?


That is why our department went with the customizable M&P.

If you have little people that can't handle recoil. . .
No department is going to load their own bullets. First it is cheaper to buy them than to pay somebody to load different loads, test them, inventory it, and track their distribution to the correct officers.

Second, their is a liability issue. Somebody will sue because the bullet was "customized for maxium carnage" or something similar. It also opens up a horrible PR nightmare. The press loves to tear apart cops that use their guns. A cop using a "custom" load would be in for a world of hurt in public opinion.

whalerman
August 11, 2011, 10:23 AM
Rexter, I understand what you are saying. I don't disagree with you regarding your assertions about 1911 people in particular. Arguments can be made for arming officers with all types of weapons. But when you are on a firing line with dozens of trainees, it's not advantageous to have some pulling speedloaders, others working 6 round mags and others equipped with hi-capacity mags. Most departments, in the interest of safety, want to see things happen in a uniform manner. Too much chaos for the lawyers. But I understand that there could be advantages to your view as well.

Rexter, you must have a lot of fun with all those different types of weapons on your training lines. Here in NY, we only are blessed with many different types of lawyers.

Prosser
August 11, 2011, 04:35 PM
At a certain point, the greater good, protecting human life, rates over simplicity of instruction and political correctness.

Likewise, at a certain point, the ability to protect individual lives is going to rate over political correctness.

Judges and attorneys are not idiots. The argument can be presented and won that the officer's lives are at stake, and firearms must be matched to their individual attributes for them to shoot the firearms correctly. Likewise their ammunition. I'm sitting here thinking of how much fun it would be to bring in a S&W 500 and have some 100 pound girl try to aim it, and, likewise, a 360PD
with a 16 pound trigger...

bpsig
August 11, 2011, 11:07 PM
WHEN I STARTED THE POLICY STATED 38 SPECIAL MINIMUM. BALL AMMO. BUT WAS BEING REVISED. WE HAD FIRST GEN GLOCK 40'S /17'S . 645 S&W COLT 1911. 686/ PYTHONS. THEN NEW IDEAS WE HAD EARLY 40'S SENT BACK 6-7 TIMES FOR UPGRADES. fINALLY GOT NEW ONES AND SPECIAL OKAY FOR 9MM OR 45. I UNDERSTAND THEY ARE FLEXIBLE NOW. 40 OR 357 SIG GLOCK OR 229/226.
NEW DEPT ISSUE IS 226 9MM SUBSONICS. SINCE HAVE STOCKPILE FROM WHEN HAD SUPPRESSED MP-5'S. AND CHEAPEST AMMO FOR QUAL NO TRAINING EVER.
ONLY ONE VENDOR ALLOWED WHEN POINTED OUT OTHER WAS CHEAPER AND COULD GET BETTER AMMO. ANSWER WAS WHATS WRONG WITH CHEAP ?

FIVETWOSEVEN
August 12, 2011, 02:18 AM
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_REkgXByDyuU/SVkpo5Z24wI/AAAAAAAACD4/_AHcj8jnLB8/s400/caps-lock-no-tnecessary-all-the-time.jpg

JR133
December 3, 2011, 08:03 PM
Our department had the firearms instructors pick three gun to test. We had several different shooters shoot them. From our best to our worst. We also had the bigger shooters and the smaller shooter shoot them. We had everyone vote and the instructors and Chief pick the one gun.

We also took in to consideration all of the after market gear we could get for the guns. ie. Holster, Lights and lasers.

As far as ammo, we had Federal come out and test several different grains and brands. Our test showed that one of the best ammo tested was the Federal 180 gr. HST. We did the drywall, windshield, Ballistics gel, steel, ect..

The gun we went with was the Sig 229 R.

Bovice
December 3, 2011, 08:16 PM
From MikeNice:
One of the big factors in switching guns was the size of the current Sigs. A lot of the females on the force had trouble drawing, disengaging the safety, and firing without shifting their hand position at least twice.

What safety is there to disengage on a typical SIG handgun?

orionengnr
December 3, 2011, 11:27 PM
Judges and attorneys are not idiots.
Would that I had any evidence to support that theory...
In my 55 years on this planet, I have found almost nothing to help me believe that this is true.

Certainly, reading newspapers, watching TV, spending time on the 'net has done nothing to sway my opinion...actually, my experience leads me to believe the exact opposite.

Let me clarify...not idiots. More accurately, idealistic zealots, which is far worse...an idiot will only get it wrong half of the time. :rolleyes:

SharpsDressedMan
December 4, 2011, 12:00 AM
I have worked for several agencies, but the one that was the most fun was a small town in NW Colorado. At the time, they had four officers. The chief and the other two officers were packing S&W 19, S&W 28, and S&W 15 respectively. Since we pretty much operated alone, and all I had at the time was a Colt Government Series 70 .45, I asked the chief it it would be alright if I carried that. He said I'd have to supply my own carry and practice ammo, and that worked for me. Not too much later, one of my co-workers, a former Army MP, was packing a Colt Commander. Before that officer joined me packing an auto, though, the other officer was initially miffed at me, and told me that he thought I should be carrying a .38. I asked him why, and he stated that, in the event of a firefight, we could exchange ammo if one of us "ran out". I chuckled, and told him that if he missed 18 times and I rolled on the scene, he should just keep behind cover, and I'd handle it.....that I wasn't going to give any of MY rounds to someone who missed 18 times, and that if he planned on shooting more than that, he should pack more ammo. That officer left a year or so later, and the new guy also packed a .45. We three officers kicked in that year in a four way split with the chief's wife, and bought the chief a brand new Colt '70 Government Model .45 (about $65 apiece at the time). The department supplied .45 ammo for practice and duty after that, so we thought it was a very wise "investment". :D

MikeNice
December 4, 2011, 12:07 AM
What safety is there to disengage on a typical SIG handgun?

I was wrong with my statement. I misunderstood the wording from our armorer. They were having trouble disengaging from the retention holster while drawing and getting their hand in position to shoot. The grip was too large for them to draw with their hand in the firing position.

They would have to grab it one way to disengage the strap over the rear, shift position to maintain proper angle to disengage from the holster, then shift in to a firing grip.

cor_man257
December 5, 2011, 05:14 PM
I don't get your meaning. 180gr or 124gr+P Federal HST rounds are not cheap. They are less powerfull than an M-16 but they are much easier to carry and use at social distances.

Social Distances... Sorry that one really had me goin. Thinking about putting it in the signature.

Prosser
December 5, 2011, 08:32 PM
"In my 55 years on this planet, I have found almost nothing to help me believe that this is true.

Certainly, reading newspapers, watching TV, spending time on the 'net has done nothing to sway my opinion...actually, my experience leads me to believe the exact opposite.

Let me clarify...not idiots. More accurately, idealistic zealots, which is far worse...an idiot will only get it wrong half of the time.
orionengnr"

First year torts class. EVERY CASE reported in the local newspapers turned out to have huge, slanted, bias towards the liberal folks that buy their newspapers.
Everytime we took positions in class on anything, it turned out to be wrong, since the newspapers take no time to verify facts. They win by getting the story out quick, then posting factual retractions in mini type, on the 3rd to last page. I have little doubt that this situation has been accelerated by the internet. Now guys are booked, charged, tried, convicted and sentenced in less then a day on the internet. Joe Paterno was fired after 35 years for reporting something to proper authorities, in less then a day, on what I suspect will turn out to be a mentally unstable person's quest for 15 minutes of fame, and now, fortune.

Now, idealistic zealots? I think you kind of have to be to get through law school, on to the bench, and, I think you can add unbalanced, and undeveloped, due the obsession required to get through law school. Most humans aren't wired for that kind of obsessive addiction, for that period of time.

The good news is some of those zealots actually believe in the Constitution they are sworn to uphold. However, worse are the ones that believe it should be as they read it, after starting with their preconceived prejudices.

Certainly one of the inherent problems with the judicial system is when you are constantly trying murder cases, it's hard to believe that it's the people doing the crime, and not blame the tools. Also, one becomes concerned when you see the kind of people that exist in that/this world, and the stark
reality that the only thing keeping you alive, from them killing you, is superior force, position, or luck.

Only the best can believe, and protect the Second Amendment, knowing that it increases the likelyhood of their own demise.

If you enjoyed reading about "LEO's: How did you department decide on the firearm and ammunition you carry?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!