I seem to see that people here are forgetting the basic rule of carrying a gun all the time as a LEO...looking cool. Rugers, from what I've heard from a few LEO academy trainers, are by far the #1 choice for recruits to bring to their respective academies. Why? They're cheap, reliable, and combat, if not target, accurate right out of the box.
If you're a new recruit and not sure if you'll make the grade to become a cop then you'll go with a good, solid Ruger for $400 rather than making the big-bucks drop on a gucci go-faster Sig or something similar since you don't get the LEO discount yet. The Rugers work great in training but then all the other guys at your agency have all the cool guns so you sell the Ruger for almost what you paid for it and use the money to get your Glock, Sig, whatever.
This is why LEOs don't tend to use Rugers in reality...
Ruger's are nothing more than glorified hi-points. Alsymmers is correct, Ruger's LE presence or actually lack there of speaks for itself. If it is such an excellent machine(s) where are they? American LEA's whether you like it or not do set the standard, and as such they've spoken resoundingly against the product's from Prescott. If they were anywhere near as good as claimed they would dominate the market. Glock, S&W, Sig, ect..ect.. dominate these markets for good reason, they win in most instances each LEA's playoff's against one another and this in almost every single case also INCLUDES PRICEPOINT competition. Ruger pistol's always win on pricepoint consideration's, ALWAY'S! Why then are they not purchased and then issued? Because there not competitive in the arena of quality...
