Local Police Dep. can't carry 1911's?

[Fedaykin]

Thanks a lot for the opinions and the information guys! Now I'll be able to have a conversation with my buddies that are the LEO's I was asking about and I'll have a pretty good idea of what I'm talking about. From what I've read, I think I'd still have to go with my 1911 if I were to carry. Besides if 8 rounds won't do, the thing is still heavy enough to make a nice bludgeoning tool

 

[ClickClickD'oh]

Can this issue be remedied with proper training? Let's assume it can.

How much training?

How many hours of initial training do you think would be required to develop the instinct to swipe off the safety reliably on a 1911 in high stress scenarios?

How many hours of training are required to teach a shooter to pull his finger out of a Glocks trigger guard before holstering it?

Want me to find a YouTube video of someone skipping that step, or a post here on THR? There was one not to long ago.

Any gun is a death trap without proper training. A physical safety isn't any better or any worse. Just go over to the threads on the new Ruger and watch people jump for joy that there is now combat tupperware with a physical safety.

You want ten hours of overtime training a week to learn how to use a physical safety? Would it scare you much to learn that's more than most officers recieve in firearms training all year long?

Here's how it works: The officers who want to be proficient will seek out training and practice on their own and will become proficient. The rest consider their weapon to be another uncomfortable thing they have to haul around and wouldn't really care if you put a Ruger MK1 in their holster. The guys most likely to chose a 1911 are the ones most likely to know how to use it properly.

That being said, the guys who write the list of allowed weapons generally are beaurocrats and not gun savy types. They think C&L is dangerous, no matter how much you attempt to explain firing pin blocks, palm safeties and such.

And yes, there are other advantages of the 1911 over other guns like a Glock. Some people actually like a physcial safety and there are documented instances of a weapon being take from an officer by a BG who couldn't operate it because they didn't know about the safety. Some officers like the grip profile better than most of the double stack weapons.

 

[MASTEROFMALICE]

Not as much as you'd think. We're issued HK and have to sweep the safety off anyway.

How much training?

How many hours of initial training do you think would be required to develop the instinct to swipe off the safety reliably on a 1911 in high stress scenarios?

How long before the error rate - of forgetting to swipe off the safety on a 1911 - is so low that the 1911 is as reliable in the hands of the trainee as DA revolver or Glock?

How many hours a week/month afterwards to maintain that level of performance?

I am really curious about the number of hours. I really don't have a clue.

 

[ClickClickD'oh]

Not as much as you'd think. We're issued HK and have to sweep the safety off anyway.

You just reminded me.

When the Beretta M.92 was the new hot customer in town and being carried by huge departments, no one was bagging on them for having a physical safety, which is very much more inconvenient to operate than the 1911's.

 

[camsdaddy]

Here locally our Sheriff carries a 1911 and the deputies carry 45 Glocks. I dont know if is by their preference or departments. They seem satisfied. I smile when I see him out and about with his 1911 on his side.

 

[SouthpawShootr]

They're not unsafe. The individual officers are unsafe with them. They work very well if you don't develop the habit of putting your finger where it shouldn't go until you're ready to fire. Very few LE agencies allow them for anything less than special operations teams (SWAT and the like). LAPD, I'm sure everybody knows, issues them, but only to SWAT. Most departments are unwilling to invest in the training necessary for these guns. Most of the LEOs out their only shoot their guns for twice year qualifications and that's not enough.

 

[FRT007]

I work for a corrections department that includes probation/parole officers. We qualify once per year - total of 72 rounds. We have mandatory training (tactical scenarios) once per year - 100 rounds. That's it. We offer practice sessions that are voluntary, and many don't attend. Few buy their own ammo and practice off-duty. I know of many agencies that require only annual qualification. Further, the Glock, with a 5.5 pound pull, is a pretty easy trigger to manage. The 1911 is rarely seen in a police holster in these parts.

 

[Mainsail]

I recall a conversation with a knowledgeable gun guy. He pointed out the so-called ‘extra step’ of remembering to disengage the safety, but that wasn’t really the reason departments didn’t allow the 1911. The problem was the legal issue of an officer holding someone at gunpoint and having a negligent discharge. In the revolver days the police were trained not to cock the hammer on their DA revolvers for the same reason; high stress and very light trigger pulls are not a safe combination. It’s one thing to un-holster their weapon, point, and fire it, but they un-holster, point, and not fire much more often.

 

[RPCVYemen]

he problem was the legal issue of an officer holding someone at gunpoint and having a negligent discharge. In the revolver days the police were trained not to cock the hammer on their DA revolvers for the same reason; high stress and very light trigger pulls are not a safe combination. It’s one thing to un-holster their weapon, point, and fire it, but they un-holster, point, and not fire much more often.

That's a very good point - I had never thought about that.

Mike

 

[foghornl]

Mentor, Oh PD carries some type of 1911. Not sure which brand, but I have seen them being carried cocked-n- (I Hope!) locked.

 

[Supertac45]

I read that the Tacoma, Washington P.D. had on the average 2 accidental discharges per year prior to going to 1911 in 1996 or 97. Zero since adopting the 1911 department wide. I believe they carried Glocks prior to the 1911. I've never check it out, but I read it someplace. I believe the biggest influence over the selection of a pistol is the cost. A couple of years ago, a Glock 22 in 40 cal went for about $425 to a Department.

 

[76shuvlinoff]

If sweeping the safety off is a potental problem then leave it off and you have a 1911 GLOCK or XD.


and yes I have an XD too

 

[Autolycus]

I prefer DAO myself but occasionally I want an HK USP .45 to mess around with.

 

[Double Naught Spy]

The horrors are not all supposed. If you search youtube, you can find a pretty recent one. I don't have a citation, but I think there was a long THR discussion of this.

Can this issue be remedied with proper training? Let's assume it can.

How much training?

Well if we do away with safeties on pistols because of the horrendous amount of training needed to teach a person to disengage it, then do we do away with safeties on rifles and shotguns? I noticed that there are not a lot of Glock safe action rifles around. I wonder why? I don't see many double action rifles either. Why?

You know, guns don't fire when you don't pull the trigger. How much training does that take to learn to pull the trigger. Gimme a break. It isn't a higher mental function to sweep of the safety or a fine motor skill.

Funny thing about Glocks, I see they are now installing after market safeties on them.

 

[Quoheleth]

Within reason

I think that most police officers should be able to carry what they want within certain parameters. I agree that .38 Spcl/9mm is the minimum - that would be one parameter. If I were in a large metropolitan area (I live near Houston, so I could see this applying here), I would agree also that the Magnums are probably out - the greater potential for excessive penetration (although that can probably be cured with rapid-expanding hollowpoints, but then there is the legal threat of having such ammo).

However, when I was up in East Texas, I wouldn't blame cops for wanting to carry .357 Magnums. They might be miles and miles from backup and need heavier firepower. I know...pack a rifle or shotgun. Lotta good it does a LEO if his AR15 or Mossberg 500 is in his car, 25, 50 or 75 feet away.

Some guns are out. I don't think a SA revolver has much of a place anymore; at least, in semi urban to urban areas. Maybe out west where bigger, heavier calibers (see above) are handy. A Desert Eagle is just asking for trouble for a cop.

If a cop can show proficiency in a reasonable sidearm, let him (or her) pack it. If he wants a 1911 and can handle it through training, so be it. If it's a Glock, more power to you. If it's the M&P, yippie-kay-yae-aye. If its a .357, go John Wayne!

These folks put it on the line for us each day. It's a shame some departments require our finest to carry 2nd best because it's cheap, someone's cousin knows a guy, or someone once heard something that someone said XXX style/brand/caliber isn't good.

My $.02 worth...refunds on request...

Q

 

[TL1234]

I'm going into LE, and even though I love 1911s, I wouldn't carry one for two reasons. First, is the manual safety. Many departments require retention holsters that usually have at least 2 or 3 safeties, and adding one more to the mix on the gun itself just feels like overkill. With good trigger discipline (which everyone should practice, regardless of weapon preference), the safety is just a liability.

Second is capacity. An LEO is certainly more likely to need lots of rounds than your average CCW holder, just because of the nature of the job. I know there are double stack 1911s out there, but they generally aren't that comfortable. Plus, cops are more likely to need to shoot through barriers (windshields) than a CCW holder, so a round with better penetration (and capacity) like .40 would be preferable.

Nothing wrong with 1911s, I just don't think they are as well suited to LE work as other guns.

 

[Norm357]

Second is capacity. An LEO is certainly more likely to need lots of rounds than your average CCW holder, just because of the nature of the job.

More bullflop.

Almost 100% of police gunfights are over with less than 5 rounds fired. Events like the Hollywood shootout are an anomaly, and that could have been solved if the LAPD had issued rifles to its officers.

 

[everallm]

Alas a large reason is budgetary.

Companies like Glock offer substantial LEO and departmental discounts
As mentioned previously the 1911 platform CAN have higher tweak and maintain costs than other platforms
9mm ammo is about 15% cheaper than .45

 

[jefnvk]

How much does a base 1911 cost.

Now, how much does a base Glock cost .

I think that has quite a bit to do with it.

 

[Checkman]

My department used to allow 1911/Hi-Powers to be carried C&L. But last year we went to issuing Glock 21's. Those officers working before the transition were given the option of the G19 if they didn't want to carry the 21. All hired after the transition get a G21, nothing else.

Why? Economics. Instead of having to keep a large supply of 45, 40, and 9mm we now have 45 and a smaller amount of 9mm. For training it puts us all on the same sheet and logistically it has simplified things tremendously.

Training is a good thing, but most of my fellow officers won't do it on their own time. Its true. The Glock is well suited to law enforcement. The 1911 isn't. FWIW back in the day when I was a young soldier we had to carry the 1911 with the hammer down and no round in the chamber. C&L would have gotten me and my fellow soldiers in a world of trouble.

 

[Grandpa Shooter]

I have been around law enforcement both personally and by acquaintance. For a number of years I assisted with firearms training. IN MY EXPERIENCE I saw far too many officers, trainees, and paper pushers who needed to qualify once a year. They would come out to the public range and fast and furiously attempt to regain skills they had lost over many months of never doing anything more than halfway cleaning their firearm. It was a scary situation watching them trying to get their sidearms out and on target and hit anything. It ws easy to tell which ones were comfortable with their guns and which were uncomfortable if not outright scared of them.

Many of them, the younger ones and many females, admitted to me that they had never been around guns, and that they had been issued one by the department and only given the most rudimentary training. It showed in their handling of the sidearms.

I felt sorry for them, knowing that if they were pushed into a gun battle they would be at great risk. I tried to instill in them the individual responsibility that professionally carrying a firearm required. Their answer was invariably "I don't have time and the police range is never available anyway."

Since the department is responsible for maintaining the firearms they issue, the tendency is to keep it simple and cover your ***. They issue what is the least expensive to maintain, where they get the most manufacturer support, who has the best purchase program and who will upgrade their firearms most frequently. For a number of years it was Glock. In recent years the other manufacturers, who want to compete in the LE market, have become more aggressive in their PR and marketing methods.

There is no easy answer as to why a department allows multiple makes and models of firearms. The one thing I have seen is that the departments want uniformity. Makes for much simpler purchasing and maintenance. And yes, they do have to answer for the cost of running a PD. Right down to the last bullet fired!

I once carelessly said to an officer that watching them trying to shoot was why I carried. He winced and then replied, "And I for one, am glad you do!"

 

[novaDAK]

A C&L 1911 is only dangerous if the user is an idiot

 

[TL1234]

More bullflop.

Almost 100% of police gunfights are over with less than 5 rounds fired. Events like the Hollywood shootout are an anomaly, and that could have been solved if the LAPD had issued rifles to its officers.

I'm well aware of the fact that most police gunfights are over with less than 5 rounds fired, you don't have to be a jerk about it. Nothing wrong with BEING PREPARED. By your logic, we might as well say "Why carry a gun at all when you will likely go your whole life without ever having to use it?"

 

[mpmarty]

Every year our local club hosts the annual Glock match. Glock has set up two divisions with prizes for both; one for leo and one for civilians. Now to begin with, we can assume (I know, makes an A** out of You and Me) that any leo who comes out and pays to shoot in a Glock match is more interested in shooting than the average leo or he/she wouldn't be there. That said, the worst mis handling of pistols we see every year is by leos, they sweep the spectators, drop the things in the dirt, experience NDs and generally cant hit the plates eleven yards away from them. I agree, 1911s are beyond the ability of these leos. I'm not saying all of the leos are this untrained, there have been a few who impressed me with their gun handling skills, but they were few and usually USPSA (IPSC) competitors on their free time. Perhaps we should make the PDs hold off on issuing firearms until and unless the officer demonstrates a willingness to master the tools of his/her trade? Send them out with Tasers and Tear Gas unless they can draw and clean six plates at eleven yards in under six seconds. An average competitor, even one my age (pushing seventy) can do it in less than four seconds on a good day and real pros do it in under three.

 

[ClickClickD'oh]

I agree, 1911s are beyond the ability of these leos.

That's why Those LEOs got issued Glocks.

...unless they can draw and clean six plates at eleven yards in under six seconds.

I'm scared of your LEOs now..

You should handicap next year. The LEOs get their Glocks, you guys get SAA revolvers.