Cocked and locked LEO carry

[Mike_Fontenot]

You'd be hard pressed to find a major department--in fact I don't think there is a single major metro division in the US--allowing a 1911, or any single action handgun for street use.

Maybe not a "major", but Longmont, Colorado police dept officers can carry any semi-auto, as long as it's in .45acp. Some (I don't know what percentage) carry 1911's. Their captain carries a .38 snubby (grandfathered).

 

[Mike_Fontenot]

Again went back to my Model 28 and finished my career.
[...]
Since I carry per the LEOSA, I have to qualify yearly.

When you qualify with the 28, can you shoot SA, or do all shots have to be DA? Or does the required number of shots per second necessitate DA?

 

[noonesshowmonkey]

Poor weapons handling, poor marksmanship, poor training, etc. are independent of platform. The brutal truth is that the vast majority of folks carrying around an issue firearm simply don't shoot it that often, much less under stress. And so, as if this was even my argument and not just the way it is in major departments throughout this country, the trend has been towards heavier and heavier trigger pulls, be they DA revolvers 'back in the day', DA/SA or DAO semis, or Glocks (many with NY triggers). It isn't just a Glock thing to have a heavy, non-SA trigger on a duty firearm. It is a Law Enforcement Firearm Policy thing. It has been shown that folks make mistakes, and those mistakes are amplified and made easier with light triggers.

From a departmental policy standpoint, the main body of American Law Enforcement has generally spoken: no 1911s, or any SA-only handguns generally, and most have specific requirements about the trigger pull weights. For example, Chicago PD has the minimum trigger weight at 5 lb (Glock stock weight--anyone surprised?), while the New York Police Department can be thanked for the lovely 8-8.5lb New York trigger.

As samsmix stated, were the only criteria winning a high-noon gunfight on Main Street, Jeff Cooper's ghost would rise up from the grave cradling a Series 70 in 10mm or .38 super and show us all how it was done. Errr, or something.

But this is the real world. And real world LE agencies overwhelmingly choose something other than 1911s, for a ton of very real, very well established, in some cases very loathed, reasons. Though there are plenty of exceptions, especially in larger departments, the 1911 is a rare bird--and for good reasons.

Finally, people that carry firearms for a living rarely have the luxurious choice of platform or caliber. So the argument for or against a particular platform or caliber is, to me, pretty moot. What you are issued is what you train with, and it is up to you to become proficient (or better yet, expert) with whatever is in your duty holster/combat rig.

 

[tipoc]

You'd be hard pressed to find a major department--in fact I don't think there is a single major metro division in the US--allowing a 1911, or any single action handgun for street use.

Interesting to find that SWAT teams around the country use them. LAPD did and still does allow their use. SFPD allows their use. Kimber made a good deal of money selling their SIS gun as I recall used by a LAPD squad. Not every SWAT team uses them and not all members of the teams. But it's there when allowed.

Generally it's not used more widely due to cost, not because it's single action. The initial cost, maintenance and training.

1911's have considerable downside for police departments large and small these days in large numbers. The single action aspect is not one of them any longer. That's why you do see them in police hands but not in large numbers.

tipoc

 

[kraigwy]

Quote:
Originally Posted by kraigwy
Again went back to my Model 28 and finished my career.
[...]
Since I carry per the LEOSA, I have to qualify yearly.

When you qualify with the 28, can you shoot SA, or do all shots have to be DA? Or does the required number of shots per second necessitate DA?

Assuming you met the time guidelines you could shoot either single or double action.

However I do 99%of my revolver shooting double action. When I'm qualifying or shooting a match its all double action.

 

[noonesshowmonkey]

LAPD did and still does allow their use.

Officers must qualify as Expert, and then attend additional training before being certified to carry 1911s on the street. If I am not mistaken, there may be an additional requirement that they have a certain number of years on the job or prior military experience. I'll have to ask my LAPD buddy.

Point is, no, they are in fact not allowed to the general pool of officers. Like patrol rifles, they require an additional interest on the part of the officer, supervisory approval, and additional training. That a SWAT team uses 1911s is completely immaterial to the issue of platoon officers using them.

 

[manta49]

And there are also numerous cases of dozens of rounds being fired from high capacity, striker fired, or DAO only, pistols by police officers with few and in many cases no hits at all.

And i am sure their are plenty of cases were police have fired single stack handguns and hit nothing. Its different in America here police carry the firearm they are issued with.

 

[tipoc]

Point is, no, they are in fact not allowed to the general pool of officers.

I clearly referred to LAPD SWAT and one or more special squads in LAPD, the Special Investigations Squad (S.I.S.) for example, as units allowed to use 1911s. This is the case in a number of law enforcement departments in the U.S. (This mirrors the use of the 1911 in the military by the way.)

I did not say that 1911s are issued as standard service sidearms in LAPD. About that I don't know.

In two posts I said that while we do see law enforcement use of the 1911 it is generally in special detachments like SWAT or SIS and explained why that was the case.

It is an error to say that there are no 1911s in law enforcement in the U.S. as some have done in this thread. There always has been since soon after their introduction. But never in large numbers for the reasons I explained earlier.

On the trigger pull weight: The U.S. Army allowed for a trigger pull weight of from 5 1/2-6 1/2 lbs in the hands of troops and no lighter than 5 pds on reworked guns. This was for guns issued to troops. In reality the pull weight, when it did not fall in that parameter, was most often heavier. (see Poyer "The Model 1911 and Model 1911A1 Military and Commercial Pistols", pg. 6).

The old rule of thumb was that for personal defense and carry between 4-6 pds was, and still is, recommended. Lighter than that was used in bullseye shooting and other competitions.

The significance of the 1911s trigger is not that it's light. 4-6 pds or heavier like 8 is fine and fairly common on carry guns. The significance is that it can, after a short take up, be quite smooth, crisp and brake cleanly and that it has a straight back pull. It wasn't the trigger that kept it out of contention for widespread use as a law enforcement gun. It was never realistically in contention for that use.

tipoc

 

[kraigwy]

I clearly referred to LAPD SWAT and one or more special squads in LAPD, the Special Investigations Squad (S.I.S.) for example,

A note on such units:

Having taught firearms to swat teams, I can assure you they are no better then the street cop when it comes to marksmanship. The same applied to the military, include special units or snipers.

Regardless of your job, you don't go to school, learn to shoot and are good to go and expect to remain proficient. It doesn't work that way.

It takes practice and training to remain proficient. Lots of practice.

If one cares, and practices, takes in local matches. Continues his training and practice, he'll excel regardless if he is a street cop, swat, military, infantry SOs, sniper or what have you.

If he doesn't. If he qualifies once a year, or even twice and year, and that's it. He wont excel.

Its whether one cares about his shooting that counts, not the gun, be it Glock, Colt, or revolver. Its the shooter that makes a difference.

The Weapons & Materials Research Directorate of the Army Research Laboratory published a white paper of these efforts called Sniper Weapon Fire Control Error Budget Analysis

In this report, they compared civilian target shooters with military snipers. This dealt with shooting and not the other aspects of the sniper craft.

The military snipers could not compete with the civilians, simple because they don't put in the effort needed to remain proficient, the civilian shooters did.

Four categories were tested.

Sniper quality Best Worst
Competitive Rifleman Best worse

Best Sniper error .30 Mil Error
Worse Sniper error .80 mil error

Best Civilian Competitior .10 mil error
Worst Civ. Competitior .30

Again, its the interest of the shooter, and the willingness to put the effort in to master his craft.

 

[tipoc]

Kraigway,

The reasons we see a number of SWAT units and others using the 1911 is because their departments gave them the option of choosing their sidearms. I don't think it has anything to do with how they shoot as long as they qualify. The SIS unit I mentioned has the option of choosing their sidearm. Some choose 1911s some Glocks, Sigs, etc.

It's the same reason my local Co. Deputies can be seen carrying cocked and locked 1911's, along with other guns, those that do so have that option. So they choose that gun, some choose other guns.

I'm not sure what that has to do with this thread.

tipoc

 

[noonesshowmonkey]

The issue of individual choice & self selection vs. departmental policy is in fact the core question in this entire thread, beyond the statement 'oh, I happened upon an LEO with a 1911, how quaint!' that started this. Being a shooter is up to the individual, and has nothing to do with the gear.

When individual officers are given freedom of choice, all kinds of things end up in holsters, for better or worse. But, large departments have to shoulder the cost of training, qualifying, equipping, maintaining, and defending legally their officers and issue firearms have overwhelmingly spoken on the subject. The result is a trend away from single action handguns and towards DAO, DA/SA, DAK, LEM, NY Glock triggers, etc. It is a trend towards polymer, high capacity handguns. It is a trend that overwhelmingly favors Glocks.

Some have maintained that cost is the main factor, and I have no doubt that this is a major driving issue. Through experience, mistakes, and learning-through-training, departments have learned a ton about how people--ie officers--actually use their firearms. Under stress, they finger the trigger constantly, almost independent of training or experience. A 1911 can be extremely unforgiving in such circumstances.

The sense that the 1911 is the perfect tool for the (any!) job, as justified by it's 100 years of service and personal preference flies in the face of reality. If it were perfect, it would be in widespread use by rank-and-file armed professionals, especially Law Enforcement, who are most likely to fire a shot in self defense. But, this is not the case, and it hasn't been for a long, long time.

But, back to the point. 'A 1911 in an LE holster, how quaint!'

 

[Walt Sherrill]

The OP said he saw a sheriff's deputy carrying cocked and locked.

I suspect that most street cops will have (or have had) to deal with someone trying to get to their weapon in a struggle. If the LEO is trained in weapons retention, and if he or she is using the proper triple retention holster, his or her weapons will probably be secure.

A 1911, it seems to me, with a safety lever that COULD get flicked off in such a struggle, even in the best of retention holsters, might be faced with a a slightly unique and different problem. (If the OP could see that it was cocked & locked, it's likely that it could also be unlocked fairly easily.)

The holster and the grip safety are going to keep the weapon from firing while it's in the holster, and it's unlikely to get pulled out of the retention holsters. But, if the officer later has to draw the weapon and 1) conditions don't allow him to check the weapon first, or 2) he simply doesn't think to check it, but must engage that person or another, things MIGHT go boom when they shouldn't.

The likelihood of any of this happening with a 1911 is probably limited, to be sure, but its even less likely with most other weapons.

 

[Mike_Fontenot]

I read somewhere (don't know if it's really true) that the Texas Rangers have always had (and still have) no restrictions ... carry whatever you want, however you want.

 

[tipoc]

The op did not say "How quaint". He said it was kind of refreshing to see a 1911 in a cops holster.

As I and others pointed out it's not all that rare. But it certainly is not common. It never has been in this country and never will be. But it's not going away.

It's interesting to me that anyone will even contest this issue. The 1911 is and and never has been a preferred side arm of law enforcement in the U.S. Whether it would ever be was settled in the 1980s. As I pointed out earlier at the time the transition from wheelguns to semis was made the 1911 was bypassed. No military uses the 1911 in significant numbers. It's day as a general issue military sidearm had long been over.

But none-the-less folks must regularly come out of the woodwork to blast the old gun as unfit for use as a police or military weapon and pronounce that modern guns have taken over. It concerns them, it gnaws at them. They must work daily to make sure it is dead and stays that way.

Possibly because it sells so well on the global commercial market and especially here in the U.S. Possibly because it is the epitome of old school gunslinging and it just rubs some folks wrong.

See when law enforcement went to semis they went to S&W first gen double stack 9mms. These guns were lighter weight than 1911s, carried more rounds, had decockers, were da/sa and Dept.s found them easier to explain to the public than the "Colt 45", a military weapon. They were widely touted as safer.

The 1911 never had a chance. Oh here and there in small numbers. But it was done before it started. But interestingly, it still is here and again in small numbers as it always has been.

The da/sa guns came to dominant till Glocks showed up. The S&W M&P is currently giving Glock a run for it's money. But Sigs and in some places the Berreta 92 still hold out. Likely they will for some time.

S&W dropped all production of the third gen steel and alloy guns some time back in favor the M&P. It costs much less to produce them.

The action of polymer framed striker fired guns with or without external safeties is not the question. Their low production cost, low maintenance costs and accuracy and reliability make them a game changer. It also makes them "better" for law enforcement.

But for an individual shooter it makes no difference if they put in the time.

It is debatable which is "safer" for large numbers of leos, the Glock or the Sig?

In 1948 the U.S. Army wanted to drop the 1911. It hung around. In 1986 they did drop the 1911. It's still hanging around in the holsters of Marines. In 50 years it will still be seen in the holsters of individual odd ball leos from Texas to New Hampshire. We can bet on it. How Quaint!

tipoc

 

[TunnelRat]

The sense that the 1911 is the perfect tool for the (any!) job, as justified by it's 100 years of service and personal preference flies in the face of reality. If it were perfect, it would be in widespread use by rank-and-file armed professionals, especially Law Enforcement, who are most likely to fire a shot in self defense. But, this is not the case, and it hasn't been for a long, long time.

I did a search on this thread, and no one claimed that the 1911 was the perfect tool. You seem really defensive about this and I don't get why.

There's really no reason for fanboyism or haterism to enter into this and I think this thread took a pretty hard left turn from where the OP intended.

 

[jmstr]

onegoodrshot said:The deputy's in Az have to shoot a perfect score when they qualify to carry a 1911.

Just curious: do they have to shoot a perfect score on any other firearm? And, if not, why not?

 

[noonesshowmonkey]

I did a search on this thread, and no one claimed that the 1911 was the perfect tool. You seem really defensive about this and I don't get why.

No one in this thread made such claims. But at the same time the reasons why departments trend towards heavier, longer triggers and away from single-action firearms have been undermined and impugned; the pre-eminent SA-only firearm, and thus the seat of such judgments, is JM Browning's classic.

The thread was about seeing a 1911 in an LEO holster. Folks pointed out seeing it here and there, but not too often. That's because departments generally don't allow them.

That observation, based on actual policies, and the reasons for said policies, was said to be wrong, or just less right than I made it appear. Then, the counter arguments that were made flied in the face of reason & reality. Thus, a hard left turn. If I am defensive of anything at all, I am defensive of actual policy, as it stands, here in the real world. Those policies didn't just appear out of no where, for no reason, or stay that way for decades. Anyone who follows policy will tell you: the policy book is 9 inches thick (har har) because each page is someone's screw up.

I couldn't care less about someone's opinion of the 1911. I don't own one, and likely won't, as I am not a collector. I'd rather spend that money shooting. Of the 1911s I have fired, a few ran well, a few didn't. I could go either way on it. My firearm choices are informed by things other than preference.

Armed professionals use almost exclusively what they are issued, and they are almost never issued 1911s, especially in LE. I guess this validates the OP's surprise.

 

[TunnelRat]

But at the same time the reasons why departments trend towards heavier, longer triggers and away from single-action firearms

I can see where you'd say longer, but all the Glocks I have pretty consistently pull at 5.5 lb. Unless a custom 1911, or limited production, most of the off the rack 1911s I see at gun stores pull at basically the same weight, and a lot of times slightly higher.

I couldn't care less about someone's opinion of the 1911. I don't own one, and likely won't, as I am not a collector. I'd rather spend that money shooting. Of the 1911s I have fired, a few ran well, a few didn't. I could go either way on it. My firearm choices are informed by things other than preference.

All of this is about you personally. Frankly it doesn't matter to this discussion and takes away from the objectivity you were trying to use earlier. I don't see why someone has to be a collector to own a 1911, nor does he/she necessarily have to choose between shooting or owning a 1911. These are sort of bizarre and rather opinionated statements about your self conceived notion of the people that own 1911s. Your last sentence is really unusual.

preference - a greater liking for one alternative over another or others

nothing about the definition of preference implies that it can't be an informed decision or based on logic. You seem to be insinuating that someone can't like 1911s if he/she is informed.

Edit - Apology that last sentence reads too much into what you said. I read the above quote as a statement that only a collector or less serious shooter would own a 1911, when you could just as likely have said that because you recognize that you have a limited budget and would rather spend that money elsewhere. The dangers of text without tone.

 

[noonesshowmonkey]

I am insinuating that if you are issued a handgun, it is unlikely to be a 1911... because 1911s are rarely issued.

This is a tautology. Use your dictionary on that word.

 

[TunnelRat]

I would, but there are a number of definitions.

Edit: Ah I see the one you mean. Not the forms of logic, rhetoric, or inference, but the unnecessary use of what are in reality redundant words, i.e. fatal murder. So saying specifically an issued handgun is not a 1911 is a tautology because by definition 1911s are no longer issued.

You probably will think I'm just being snide, but that's actually an interesting word to know so thanks.