If you were an LEO...

I am and no.

I love revolvers. I shoot competitions with revolvers. In the case presented though my life depends on a firearm. Not like a concealed carrier either. Being LEO is different. I would be carrying a high capacity semi auto and extra magazines.

Not likely as a primary or secondary I guess at least not "on the clock".

ColtPythonElite said:

I am and no.

Click to expand...

Same here. Absolutely not. It used to be that the old guy's who originally qualified on them were grandfathered in but that is no longer allowed.

Maybe as a backup to the backup gun, but not otherwise unless for some special duty or if that was what the agency required.

I went to the Texas around 2008 and spoke with an officer who was "minding" the Alamo. He was carrying a Ruger Speed Six or variant. I inquired whether he was comfortable enough with it over a semi. He turned a slight but very sure grin and said quite confidently, "I'm pretty good with this".

I was hired in 2012 with the Virginia DOC and we were still shooting a S&W model 64 38 special. They shot very well and were reliable beyond expectations. Department moved to Glock 23 the next year. With that being said I feel more comfortable with the Glock, but I do miss rapid fire and reload drills at range withe the 38.

I would definitely train with a revolver to keep the skill set up, but as a primary? No..

I did back in the 80's and switched from a S&W 686 357 to a Sig P220 45. The biggest advantage was faster reloading and the ability to cover while reloading. I only picked up 2 additional rounds. But I gave up distance. We qualified at 50 yds with the revolvers vs 25 with the automatics. I never felt out gunned with a revolver I just knew I was more venerable during reloading. Whatever I carried was considered secondary to my 870 for known threat calls.

No, I wouldn't. I would be carrying high capacity sem-auto's.

I carry a revolver daily but as a private citizen I have no obligation to run toward the gunfire. As a LEO you are going to have to deal with many bad situations and the bad guys are usually very well armed. Carrying a revolver with it's limited ammo capacity and slower reloading you would be at a distinct disadvantage which could cost lives. Just my thoughts on the matter. There is a very good reason why many in the field carry 17+1 and 3x 17 round magazines.

I could probably do it in my small, low crime town, but I wouldn't. I want more capacity if I have a duty to go towards trouble as a cop does.

As much as I love revolvers, for law enforcement work, I would definitely go with a semi-auto if given a choice.

I voted yes. But only as a BUG.

My vote, yes. I have 50 years experience with S&W revolvers and they recently built the ultimate Police Revolver in my opinion, the Model 22-4. This revolver is built on the "N" frame and has a 4" tapered barrel. The cylinder is chambered for the 45 ACP cartridge. In a decent holster, with a speedloader pouch, you would have a good set-up. I carried a similar rig when I was wearing a badge.

Here is a photo of my old rig (Bianchi 5BH) with my old revolver, a converted S&W M28-2 and what could easily be a Go-toCourt rig with the M22-4.

Kevin

Were I the town marshal in some sub-500-person town, maybe. I'm better with them overall than with autoloaders, having carried them throughout most of my time on the job.

But, in today's law enforcement environment in virtually any more-populated area, no. I'd certainly like to, but the fact that it would be more prudent to carry more firepower is simply an undeniable necessary evil to the job now.

I started police work in the late 70's when revolver was the only option. I moved to higher capacity semi-autos when that option became available to me. I currently work where I could carry a revolver, but my choice is a S&W M&P 9.

I own and love lots of revolvers, but the only ones that see any carry are a couple of j frames, primarily used as back-up.

In the day I would loved to carry my S&W 25-5 in 45 lc. Now the need to face criminals with much better weapons means an LEO needs to be armed as as good or better. No, I would carry a high capacity auto loader with several mags on my belt.

as a back up gun yes, not as a primary.

I keep seeing posts about well armed criminals. The guys in my area must be bums. They traditionally have cheap revolvers or cheap autos.

Besides, tactics play into how a situation will unwind. Me alone, against 12? Bad idea, no matter what you are carrying.

Kevin

I am tempted to say yes. I can shoot my Model 19 (which I carried as a LEO moons ago) better than any LE type auto pistol. But today, with BG's toting Glocks and high-cap "modern sporting rifles", I guess I would opt for whichever autoloader the department issued.

Jim

I also love revolvers. And yes, good quality revolvers, "go bang everytime you pull the trigger." But good quality semi-autos go bang 999 times out of 1000, and usually have even less malfunctions than that.

So, given that a hi cap semi-auto holds three times the ammo a revo does, you have to ask yourself, "What would take more time? Clearing a very unlikely semi-auto malfunction, or reloading a revolver...TWICE?"

So I would choose a hi cap semi-auto. But I still like old Smith and Wesson revolvers (from WW2 to the late 1970's) more than probably more than any other guns. Why? I don't have a good answer to that, other than...I'm weird, maybe?

Nope.

As much as I like wheelguns, I would want the handgun that I was carrying during working hours to offer more firepower.

Closest I got to being LEO is armed security. Was armed with a S&W .38. I fought tooth and nail to be one of those "special" guards and get issued a G19. Although I detest Glock I would have preferred it over the 6 shooter. Had I stayed on at the job I would have sprung for a backup gun anyway. I just didn't stick around long enough.