1911 for LEO use? Who carries one?
- Thread starter shooter1201
- Start date
IMHO, a couple of reasons. First, because most police are too young to have carried, or maybe even seen, the USGI issue .45's.
After lugging one around for a few years, I wasn't all that fond of them, either.
Now they're more familiar with the modern variants, which are more accurate and have a lot of "modern" features available, like safeties that work with the hammer down, firing pin blocks, and even (gasp!) double stack mags and double action triggers. So any technical objection to the M1911 can be met with these new models. And there's a new appreciation for the logic of a grip safety.
Finally, because the 10 round mag law started pushing civilians and crooks back to larger calibers. Even though the ban didn't apply to them, some police may have started feeling outgunned, which helped the growth in popularity of the .40S&W, as an example.
After lugging one around for a few years, I wasn't all that fond of them, either.
Now they're more familiar with the modern variants, which are more accurate and have a lot of "modern" features available, like safeties that work with the hammer down, firing pin blocks, and even (gasp!) double stack mags and double action triggers. So any technical objection to the M1911 can be met with these new models. And there's a new appreciation for the logic of a grip safety.
Finally, because the 10 round mag law started pushing civilians and crooks back to larger calibers. Even though the ban didn't apply to them, some police may have started feeling outgunned, which helped the growth in popularity of the .40S&W, as an example.
more than I thought
Someone started a thread like this over on the 1911 Forum or maybe it was gunsmith.com, don't recall which. One poster had a list of several agencies that carried 1911's. I remember that it was more than a few. I will try to find it (I kept a hard copy to use...someday) and post it or a link.
I am fully behind the guys who wonder why a Glock WITHOUT a safety is safer than a 1911 with a manual AND grip safety. I guess the visibility of the cocked hammer must be the thing that freaks out administrators.
Once again, those who ride do not decide...
Carrying a DA/SA and making the best of it...
Someone started a thread like this over on the 1911 Forum or maybe it was gunsmith.com, don't recall which. One poster had a list of several agencies that carried 1911's. I remember that it was more than a few. I will try to find it (I kept a hard copy to use...someday) and post it or a link.
I am fully behind the guys who wonder why a Glock WITHOUT a safety is safer than a 1911 with a manual AND grip safety. I guess the visibility of the cocked hammer must be the thing that freaks out administrators.
Once again, those who ride do not decide...
Carrying a DA/SA and making the best of it...
Pat, have you been to the doctor for your tunnel vision problems?
END
I have owned and carried more types of guns than most. I have carried sigs, beretta's, HK,s 1911's and even a revovler. The Glock is the best design by far and its better not because of price but ratherr quality. Price is a bonus.
PAT
END
I have owned and carried more types of guns than most. I have carried sigs, beretta's, HK,s 1911's and even a revovler. The Glock is the best design by far and its better not because of price but ratherr quality. Price is a bonus.
PAT
sundance43.5
New member
Yea, Glocks are better than Rugers or Sigma, but that ain't saying much....
Saying something is better than a Ruger IS saying a lot.
Do you own a Ruger?
Saying something is better than a Ruger IS saying a lot.
Do you own a Ruger?
VVG
A new appreciation of the grip safety would be kind of ironic. John Browning was never a fan of it, he only put it in because it was an Army Ordnance requirement. His 1910 design didn't have one, and the 1935 doesn't have one. The only reason the Army required it was for the calvary.
Now I must ask, how does somebody calling himself 355sigfan end up being such a Glock fan? To the point of saying it is better than the SIG, H&K, etc.?
Just curious.
A new appreciation of the grip safety would be kind of ironic. John Browning was never a fan of it, he only put it in because it was an Army Ordnance requirement. His 1910 design didn't have one, and the 1935 doesn't have one. The only reason the Army required it was for the calvary.
Now I must ask, how does somebody calling himself 355sigfan end up being such a Glock fan? To the point of saying it is better than the SIG, H&K, etc.?
Just curious.
croyance
Well an honest answer to your question was I learned how good glocks are in combat style shooting. Once I mastered the trigger I found that they can be shot faster and more accurately than most other designs (excluding perhaps the 1911 and HKP7). I used to be a huge sig fan. I still respect them as the best of the DA SA type pistols. But Timers and target scores don't lie and if you have to fire accurately and quickly understress the glock is great. I have carried the HK USP in 45, Beretta, Walther p99 and a myrad of other guns but the glock holds me now. The 1911 is not faster for me than the glock and I don't like the reliability or lack there of I have gotten from some of the 1911's I have owned.
PAT
Well an honest answer to your question was I learned how good glocks are in combat style shooting. Once I mastered the trigger I found that they can be shot faster and more accurately than most other designs (excluding perhaps the 1911 and HKP7). I used to be a huge sig fan. I still respect them as the best of the DA SA type pistols. But Timers and target scores don't lie and if you have to fire accurately and quickly understress the glock is great. I have carried the HK USP in 45, Beretta, Walther p99 and a myrad of other guns but the glock holds me now. The 1911 is not faster for me than the glock and I don't like the reliability or lack there of I have gotten from some of the 1911's I have owned.
PAT
READ: Game where no-one is shooting back at you with real ammunition.
Just a few strategically placed questions:
How many years WAS the run-of-the-mill GI issued 1911 used in ACTUAL combat?
Which brand and model of sidearm replaced the GI issued 1911 for use in ACTUAL combat? (noting that some branches of service have retained many 1911's, still).
Which brands and models of sidearm are selected by the elite forces of same said military for use in ACTUAL combat to supplement their longarms?
If you find yourself in a "combat" situation, ie; a firefight and all you have is a sidearm, someone or something has failed or made a tactical blunder or a series of them.
Combat is combat.
Games are games.
What is best for someone is not always best for someone else.
Anyone that claims that there is one brand or model of sidearm that is best for everyone is either a logistics/procurement or a mall ninja type. And even the logistics types in most instances are smart enough to make exceptions.
Side note:
Smart police departments got rid of the Ford Mustang interceptors due to instability problems at speed and horrific maintenance costs and replaced them with Camaros. How many police officers have already been either killed or burned severely due to fuel tank ruptures nationwide in Crown Victorias? Three that I know of in my state alone. How many more before those departments make the smart move to Caprices?
I see a lot of Dodge Neons, Ford Focuses, and Chevy Cavaliers on the road. Not as many Yugos, Acuras or BMW's.
Seems that when you see a lot of something in use on the road, or anywhere else for that matter, it tends to mean there is a cost/effectivity issue at play. Especially when it comes to fleet sales or police departments issuing sidearms for their officers. It is purely dollars and sense.
"Best" as defined by departments with budgetary constraints can be defined by the paragraph above.
"Best" as defined by better funded departments or with policies that permit the officers to select and qualify with their own self-supplied sidearms would be a much better definition, IMHO.
Those that make the counter claim that "if cost were the issue, most departments would issue less expensive firearms" are attempting to deny the dollars and sense argument.
Or at least the sense part.
