Why police used Revolvers while military used 1911's "back in the day"?

[DrLaw]

History two ways.

History during me and history before me.

I was a copper from the 1970's into the 1980's. During that time, the standard for law enforcement was a revolver. In some places, it was still the .38 Special. (Los Angeles comes to mind) and not even the .357. My first department mandated carry of either a Colt or S&W, not a Ruger, as that revolver was still 'unproven' in police circles. They issued a Model 15 S&W. They did that because others did that.

The Illinois State Police had already converted to Model 39 Smith & Wesson's and some of the horror stories were already coming out, especially about how many shots it took to put somebody down. I think the Wisconsin State Police and one other converted to Ruger P85's when they came out, causing a serious shortage of P85's (I got one and paid more for it than I would have had I waited a year). (Feel free to correct me if I am wrong about WSP).

The Illinois State Police experience started to soften the feelings against semi-autos and more departments started to issue them.

Now to the pre-me history. As some have said here, police carried revolvers since there were police. What was not mentioned was that many times, the caliber was .32 or .38 NOT Specials, but the even less powerful .38 S&W or .38 Colt. I worked for one department that still had two very worn .38 Colt Police Positives in the gun safe. In fact, .32's were very common for police use. Again, as somebody else said, the police here were not up against dopers or Moros, or the hulks that we have today. Smaller framed people were the norm and .32's were very sufficient.

However, during the start of the 1920's, the police were up against something that they had not faced in numbers previously, mobile criminals.
Something more powerful was needed to punch through the metal of car doors or break the windows in cars. The .38 Special fit that bill nicely, and even the .38 Super Colt 1911, which, having not been used in wars and not being worn out by the time they got done with training and war use, were still a hot and accurate item.

You have to remember that the police academy is a recent invention in law enforcement. Many cops in smaller towns were given a gun, a badge, and a training officer, who, when they were rookies, were given a gun, a badge and maybe a training officer. The revolver was simple, reliable and very, very easy to train a person to use. Load and pull the trigger. Any dummy could do it. (which is why they were also popular as a war replacement gun)

Well, that's my two cents. Have to get ready for work now.

The Doc is out now.

 

[dom1104]

.38 Revolver = Simple, safe, utterly reliable, and almost anyone could qualify with one with little training.

1911 - Increased firepower, increased training to reach the same level of accuracy & safety, and a major distrust of auto pistols by the guys that made the decisions and signed the checks for new equipment.
The cops didn't need increased firepower, and the budget didn't need all new guns, leather to carry them in, and increased ammo costs in training.

And unlike the military, cops couldn't carry 1911's empty until they needed to shoot somebody. A general knows when the troops are going into battle, issues them ammo, and tells them to lock & load.
A cop never has advance warning until the shooting has already started.

There was always the public perception of cops carrying cocked & locked autos that just plain looked bad to the uninformed civilian!

Were it not for the S&W DA 9mm pistol that allowed hammer-down carry, and later the Beretta, SIG and Glock, most cops would still be carrying revolvers.

rc

How come I always end up agreeing 100% with Rcmodel


Also, doesnt "Simple, safe, utterly reliable, and almost anyone could qualify with one with little training." remind you of another cop gun?

 

[miket]

Glock...

 

[miket]

The military wanted an auto that could be put into action with just one hand so they could standardize issue, parts, and support for aviators and ground forces. By the time the M-9 was adopted, there were at least a dozen different model revolvers in issue requiring a huge inventory of spares and depot support for just revolvers.

Hmmm.... I was never issued an M-9 as a Navy pilot. We all flew with Sigs.

 

[easyg]

Hmmm.... I was never issued an M-9 as a Navy pilot. We all flew with Sigs.

For what it's worth, our med-evac pilots during the Gulf War carried .38 revolvers.

 

[miket]

I was a chopper pilot, too, but missed the first Gulf war. Did OIF/OEF and we were all "issued" Sigs. P226s, I believe. That was in the mid-late 90s. We actually weren't "issued" anything. We checked them out from the armory right before flying and had to return them immediately upon landing after the paperwork was logged.

 

[highorder]

No, not ONLY Kimber. Far from it. The federal AWB of 1994 (remember that?) also precluded new pistols from being sold with magazines of higher than a capacity of 10 rounds. Manufacturers couldn't make magazines over 10 rounds to sell to the public, either. So, if it was going to be 10 or less, why not make them the BIG rounds? What would you rather have? 10+1 of .380/9mm or 7/8+1 of .45acp? Or even 10+1 of .45acp in some cases with wide body mag wells or extended magazines. Lots of people wanted the .45 caliber and THAT was the main reason for the huge resurgence of the 1911's popularity.

True. The 2004 AWB gave rise to the 1911 platform again, (by neutering the "wondernines") and also steered the industry into the 10+1 pocket gun market. Small. Taurus, Kahr, Bersa, etc.

 

[M2 Carbine]

I was a city Policeman in 1960. We carried 38 revolvers.
While about the same time I bought a NIB 1911A1 from the government ($17.00) I never even thought of wanting to carry the 1911 instead of the 38.


It was a different world then. We almost never pulled our guns. It was said that one Sergeant had never pulled his gun on duty in 20 years. There were few shootings of LEO. It was a fact that someone that injured or killed a LEO would be lucky to live long enough to make it to trial.
I'm white, only 5'7" and I only worked foot patrol in the ghetto neighborhoods. I was never touched but I was threatened once. Long story, but when I finished that never happened again.

In short, the 38 was more than enough to do the job and most Policeman I worked with couldn't shoot worth a darn anyhow.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

most Policeman I worked with couldn't shoot worth a darn anyhow.

That's the key -- the average cop wasn't very proficient or knowledgeable about guns, and neither were the senior decision makers.

 

[falnovice]

Also worth considering is the fact the the wheelgun got the job done.

Relatively light, dependable, comfortable to carry and effective. I've never found any serious data to suggest the 158gr soft-lead 38 Special lacked stopping power. If I recall correctly from the FBI, the average shooting follows the rules of Three; Three yards or less, three shots or less, and its over in three seconds. Also consider that the common mag-well funnel hadn't been invented yet, but the "New York Reload" was alive and well.

Another issue that was mention above is the fact that until twenty or so years ago automatics were really limited to FMJ ball ammo, while a revolver would eat all the soft lead semi-wadcutters you wanted to feed it.

Matter-of-fact a good arguement can be made that stopping power debates really came into their own after the metal patch bullet (FMJ) became the new standard. The British clearly had issue with this before and during the Second Boer War, and looked for solutions. It was clear that the "new" FMJ .303 bullet did not stop like the old lead .303. Similar to our issues with the Moros, though I think it is worth noting that often people get the calibers wrong. The 38 used at the time was the 38 long colt, which is closer to a heavy-bullet .380acp then a solid 38 Special. Compared to the .45 Long Colt throwing a 255gr flat-point solf lead bullet at nearly a 1000fps.

Another factor that I think is rarely mentioned is expectation. I don't know if it was the marketing of the modern hollowpoint or simply an effect of Hollywood but the post 1970's expectation of effectiveness seems to be far too high. People expect the bad guy drop right on the spot when shot, or alternatively be thrown off his feet, prehaps flying through the air. I believe there was a time when LEOs had more reasonable expectations of their weapons.

Also, perhaps worth considering, is the fact that fifty years ago people weren't so seperated from the food chain, and therefore the cycle of life. Far more likely to have seen a chicken thrash after having its head chopped off, or watch a deer bound off a ways after taking a solid heart shot. Handguns aren't death rays, and there was a time when I believe people knew that. Somewhere in the last 20-30 years we seem to have forgotten that.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

Relatively light, dependable, comfortable to carry and effective.

That was the philosophy behind the .38 Special. Smith and Wesson, just before 1900, did a little research. Most cops (especially in the east) espoused the "carry a lot, shoot a little" philosophy. And police in those days carried a mish-mash of small, light revolvers. S&W developed a light revolver with a cartridge more powerful that the typical police cartridge of the day -- one that would do the job in the rare event the officer had to shoot for real.

And it quickly became the defacto standard American police cartridge and held that position for about 80 years.

 

[NavyEngineer]

Cost = Revolvers were on hand. LE used municipal funds and not federal taxpayer dollars so their budgets were tighter. As such, their weapons were used for a much longer time frame and frequent and rapid up grading was not always feasible.

LE weapons are not always in service longer than weapons in the military - the only pistols carried on my first ship (1992-1996) were WWII-vintage 1911A1s, several years after the "official" adoption of the M9. Navy ships still carry M14s, although they have also received some M16A2s in the last 3-4 years. WWII vintage M2HB 50 cals are still in common usage across the services.

 

[ReadyontheRight]

I read through the first dozen or so respones and I did not see this part of the answer:

In 1911, the US military still had cavalry (on horses). It is much easier to reload a 1911 than a revolver on horseback.

And I beleve that someone, somewhere determined that .45acp was the minimum required to take down an enemy's horse.

 

[SharpsDressedMan]

Certain individuals opted to carry the Colt Govt .45 or Colt Super .38 back in the 20's & 30's when going up against the more hardened criminals of the period. The Super because of its reputation to pentrate body armor and vehicles better than the .38 Special, but the revolver had such a following by then that when the "new" .357 came about in 1935, it kept the favor of revolvers high, along with those that just liked the .38 Special because of all the nice guns chambered for it, the accuracy, and the ease of handling. Departments that ISSUED guns probably found it cheaper and easier to train on the revolver.

 

[SSN Vet]

why did police switch over to auto-loaders....

the successful marketing of Gaston Glock....

 

[Drail]

The change happened long before the Glock was introduced. It started about the time Miami Vice first aired. Don Johnson's character had a huge influence on the gun and fashion industries. The TV show S.W.A.T. also influenced police procedures and equipment. Laugh all you want but TV is a very powerful medium in our society.

 

[NMGonzo]

Any meathead can be trained to operate a revolver in 5 minutes.

Auto pistols may require more time.

 

[easyg]

Any meathead can be trained to operate a revolver in 5 minutes.

Auto pistols may require more time.

Autoloaders don't require much more time to teach....maybe 6 minutes.

One thing that I've noticed....
Newbies tend to be much more accurate with an autoloader, much quicker, than they are with a revolver (shooting double-action).

 

[Kleanbore]

The police have become more militarized both in mentality and equipment.

They have more firepower on their belts and in their cars around here than they did some years ago, but don't forget that the armories in a lot of departments also had shotguns (a military favorite), semi-automatic Remington and Winchester rifles, Thompson submachine guns, and Browning Automatic Rifles back in the 1930s.

I also think that thirty years ago M1911's and auto-pistols in general were less reliable than revolvers.

I also have the impression that there have been improvements to the 1911, not necessarily in terms of reliability but in adding accuracy without sacrificing reliability.

The Smith and Wesson Model 39 was pretty reliable, and it came out over 55 years ago. And don't forget the Browning Hi-Power.

 

[ahpd1992]

I can tell you that tactics have really changed the switch. Ive been an LEO for 18 years and basically since the Columbine HS incident the expectations of Law Enforcment have changed. 9/11 further enhanced the idea that LEO's are a domestic soldier in many cases.

In the training scenarios Ive had since and continue to have it is clear that a revolver is not up to the task in an offensive capacity. I say this being a self confessed revolver fanatic, I just cannot reload a revolver as fast as an autoloader. Then there is the whole long pull of the double action, while with practice, lots of it, we can all aspire to be Jerry Mikulek, but reality is I dont shoot enough to get that good. The SWAT guys tell me anytime your reloading you are, even if for only a few seconds, out of the fight. So the less you hafta reload, the less vulnerable you are.

BTW our PD just went to M4 rifles, replacing our MP3 9mm carbines. This is and will continue to be a costly transition, but I see the advantages of this platform and caliber rifle. Yes we are becoming more army like, this is not all bad, many countries do this. Remember America's Law Enforcement model started with what was being done in England. Change comes slowly, but it is necessary. You would be amazed at the logical things we cannot use because "its too military looking" things as simple as cargo pants, bloused are frowned upon by adminstrators.

It should be noted that an entire generation of cops traditionally coming out of military service was lost between Vietnam and the later 80's. Most of the people running police departments were not in the military and have a thinly hidden disdane for the military as thats what the "dumb kids, who couldnt go to college" did after high school. There still remains a bias against the military, as our high schools only teach kids to go to college. Thats the case in the Chicago area anyway, Im sure its much different in areas of the country that have military bases, but thats life in the Peoples Republic of Illinois. My rant is over, I think the OP originally was asking about revolvers in police work, somewhere in there I think I addressed it, but it not it comes down to TACTICS

 

[miket]

why did police switch over to auto-loaders....

the successful marketing of Gaston Glock....

Uh, yeah...