Why did US LEO's go to semis? Do you want wheelguns back?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Not to get too far OT, but the REAL REAL tragedy of that horrible incident was the fact that the man was shot by special plain-clothes "Street Crimes Unit" (read ANTI-GUN COPS) responding to a call that (GASP!) some black man (FOR SHAME!) had a firearm (SHOCK!).

From the complaint filed against the city:

"47. When the defendants, SEAN CARROLL, EDWARD MCMELLON, RICHARD MURPHY AND KENNETH BOSS, attempted to stop the decedent, AMADOU BAILO DIALLO, they were acting pursuant to a policy, custom and practice of the New York City Police Department which mandated that officers of the Street Crime Unit seize at least one gun per month."

I know there were other issues involved, including the search for a rape suspect, but these guys had been trained and encouraged to treat all citizens as potential criminals and encouraged to respond with overwhelming force at the mere POSSIBILITY of a firearm.
'
 
true enough....

I agree that semis are better at tac reloads. But it still requires two hands
to complete a semi reload one hand to hold the gun, manipulate the mag release, and slide stop. The other to retrieve and insert the spare mag. If you
run your auto dry, as can happen in a stressful sit. or one of you arms
are incapacitated by enemy fire that auto because a whole lot more difficult
to reload. Believe me I'm not bashing autos I have and love several. But the
only thing (with respect to reloads)the semi is better at is tac reloads, and yes you still need two hands to reload an auto.
 
and yes you still need two hands to reload an auto.
Click to expand...

Actually there a few techniques for reloading the semiautomatic handgun with only one hand. None of them are as fast or as sure as reloading with two hands. However if your other wing has a few holes in it, as has been known to happen in a gunfight, the techniques can be a life saver.
 
Not trying to start a war here guys....

but I just thought someone should mention the other side of the coin. The moral of the story is there is no one size fits all, and no hard and fast answer
to everything be it with a wheel gun or auto. And I understand that some
people get offended when it is suggested that in some circumstances
one might do just as well as with either. I'm not an extremist I just tend to
see the middle ground. :D :D :D
 
I am not trying to start a flame war either. I am just saying there is no reason for a revolver to be faster to the first shot. I also don't buy into the notion that a revolver is faster to reload. I shoot a revolver pretty well, but I am still faster with the bottom feeders and I think that's pretty common. No big deal.
 
Concur. Assuming the choice of a suitable weapon (hardware) the really crucial aspect of it all is whether the operator has a suitable mindset. If so, the odds of a successful conclusion are infinitely better.

Now if we could just get that concept implemented on a wholesale basis we might have something. (Probably an alternate reality.)
 
As many other have made allusions to, it is a software issue that can very well win the day. The weapon between your ears can bring you home instead of the mourge. Someone who knows their gear (whatever it may be), regularly puts rounds downrange, and has a good combat mindset can prevail against the baddy that doesn't have that kind of discipline.
 
"and yes you still need two hands to reload an auto."

Absolutely not true. You need to take a good tactical course. We qual 4 times a year and they all involve some degree of one hand only shooting and reloading, including weak hand only shooting and reloading. It's not at all difficult. There are multiple methods to accomplish one hand only reloading.
 
Last edited:
Ahh, any excuse to bash cops right folks? "notoriously bad shots" and looking like SEALs eh? :rolleyes:

First I'd like to meet these notoriously bad shot cops, considering everytime I talk to cops from other agencies they all have to be decent shots to qualify. If you think the uniform styles are what differentiate good cops from bad, you are sorely out of touch with reality.

On the issue of why semi-autos, there are many reasons. Modern semi-autos are every bit as reliable as revolvers. Both have weak points during a struggle, as a the cylinder on a revolver can be bound up just as easily as an auto can be forced out of battery. However, the strong points that cause cops to favor semi-autos, are the same reasons most people that aren't cops choose semi-autos; 1- Faster reloads, 2- higher magazine capacity, 3- the speed and ease of one handed reloads if one hand is out of action. (isp2605 is absolutely correct on that point.)
 
DMF has it right. An officer doesn't qualify, he or she gets taken off the road at best, terminated at worst, with other penalties along the way. Local Sheriff's Dept. has it set up like this:
1. Quarterly Qualification, if fail then
2. Remedial Qualification (day off, no pay), if fail then
3. Remedial Qualification and training (day off, no pay), weapon turned in until qualify, office work and corresponding pay cut until qualify (there is a stipend for being a qualified officer), if fail
4. Remedial Firearms training and qualification, with suspension from work, still in office with pay cut, if fail:
5. Termination from employment.

Kind of motivates you to practice, which is available at open range, three days a week, with free, unlimited training ammunition.

As for my opinion as to why the auto replaced the revolver, most people have the practical reasons listed. Additionally, there is quite a bit of "keeping up the the Jones's" going on out there among administrations. "Hey, they have Glock .40's. We need Glock .40's, too."
 
It's easy to shoot good when no one is shooting back at you. It's even easier to shoot good sitting at the computer.
 
Shooting well is a relative thing and a matter of perception. Fact is, on the sqaure range, we all suck in comparison to Rob Leatham and Todd Jarrett so why even go there?
 
Accuracy is one thing, but from some of the incidents where so many rounds are hitting blue sky I have to wonder if the LEO's are using their high caps to lay down de facto suppressing fire.
 
It's easy to shoot good when no one is shooting back at you. It's even easier to shoot good sitting at the computer.
Click to expand...
goodpost.gif

Alot of folks don't think about the real world. I was on the range a few weeks ago, coming out of the holster to do double taps, and failure drills. At 7 and 15 yards everything was in an 8" circle. The guy in the lane next to me offered to "teach me a few things to tighten up my groups." This coming from the guy that was taking 5 to 10 seconds between rounds to shoot his nice tight groups. :rolleyes: His first bit of advice? "you really need to slow down."

At an IDPA match, I was doing quick peeks, slicing the pie, reloading from cover/concealment rather than on the run in the open, etc. Got some more advice that day. :rolleyes: First bit was, "you really need to quit wasting time behind cover." :rolleyes:

The advice people want to give would get me killed in the real world. The folks with that "wonderful advice" are the same ones that criticize the accuracy of people who are actually shooting in a survival situation.

:banghead:
 
The advice people want to give would get me killed in the real world. The folks with that "wonderful advice" are the same ones that criticize the accuracy of people who are actually shooting in a survival situation.
Click to expand...

DMF,

You are tarring with a pretty big brush there, given some of the folks on board here. Ya might want to "tighten up that group". :D
 
carebear, I'm not "tarring with a brush" at all, especially since I talked about people that exhibited certain specific behaviors rather than generalizing about a particular group (which is what the cop bashers do). Anyone that looks at survival shooting from a realistic perspective would know that shooting carboard targets, is not the same as engaging moving targets that are trying to kill you. Advice and criticism not rooted in reality are useless.

My groups are appropriate for the situation and target. ;)
 
Sorry for MY generalization. I was just interpreting
The advice people want to give
Click to expand...
as applying to all individuals.

My Constitutional preoccupation must have colored my reading. :D

No insult intended. :)
 
Several years ago , older Floridians may remember the Palm Bay massacre, some crazy went to the local Winn Dixe.
Don't remeber exactly why but when it was happening more than a few people in Orlando thought it was a terroeist attack.
Several people were killed, including one of the responding officers that was shot in the shin.
As he was trying to fight through what must have been excrutiating pain to reload his issued revolver the gunman walked up and shot him in the head.
The general consensus, among expert and laymen alike, was that he would have been able to reload and adress the threat if he had had a faster reloading auto.
Very shortly after that we noticed many of the dept around here switching to autos
 
In my opinion, I think it depends upon what the individual PO's assignment is.

In my last assignment, I was a plainclothes investigator and was assigned to the criminal intelligence unit (I know, oxymoron!!). I was issued a Glock 22 with three hi-cap LE mags for concealed carry. Now, I'm not knocking Glocks...my particular pistol was reliable and very accurate...but it was huge and difficult to conceal, and in

The agency traded perfectly good 2 1/2" S&W Model 66s in on the Glocks. Now in that assignment, it is my opinion that I would have been very well served by the revolver and it would have been much easier to carry and conceal.

If I was working in uniform today, I still think that I would be very well served with a 686 loaded with .357 mag 125-grain hollowpoints. The autos, as represented by the Glocks, are very nice and they do what they're supposed to do, but I do think that, training notwithstanding, hi-cap pistols tend to encourage a spray and pray mentality. The old grizzled guys with the revolvers that I know tend to be very good at hitting what they're aiming at.

Not saying one is better than the other. I think each officer ought to have a choice and should be encourage to pick what works best for him or her.

Bob
 
I've started doing more and more rapid fire Mozambique style drills with my revolvers. Range about fifteen or twenty feet at most. I've had to un-learn a lot of habits I'd gotten into doing slow fire accuracy shooting and concentrate on getting the bullets on the left side of the upper chest and in the forehead and upper face.
 
. . . hardware is what ever works best for ya.
Click to expand...
Great idea for the private individual carrying for self defense, but not so good for agencies that must equip, train, and maintain for hundreds if not thousands of officers. From a logistics standpoint, in initial training, support in the field, and currency training, it is much better for an organization to have common weapons.

Also, in a fight commonality in weapons can be a lifesaver. If on a warrant, not only do my fellow agents know how to use each other's weapons, but we can share mags because we all have the same gun. While a few people may have a personal preference for a revolver or different auto, from a practical standpoint it is better to have standarization in the weapons.

Just my opinion, I know some feel that it's OK to have people from the same agency running around with a variety of weapons.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

T
  • Locked
LEO Equipment; Lowest Bidder.
2
Replies
37
Views
2K
Leadbutt
Leadbutt
J
  • Locked
FBI report - Attacks on LEOs ???? (Long, long, long)
Replies
8
Views
643
rainbowbob
R
S
  • Locked
new data on LEO shootings
Replies
7
Views
681
Khaotic
K
S
  • Locked
Why we shouldn't own guns
2
Replies
38
Views
3K
seeker_two
S
C
  • Locked
40 reasons why we need gun control
2
Replies
32
Views
4K
GBExpat
GBExpat
Back
Top