Police handguns.

M

manta49

New member
Maybe i am wrong but while reading this forum i have noticed the police in America seem to change their handguns on a regular basis. Where in other countries UK for example they would keep their for 20 years or until they wear out. And they mostly stick to the caliber. If true what is reason for this.
Here they use glock pistols and they would obviously replace worn out weapons but for all the shooting most police do during training this would take a lifetime.

As for keeping up to date is there much difference between a 10 year old glock and a new one.
 
Last edited:
they all want the latest and greatest equipment, I think that staying up on things like that is a good thing, no reasons to be using something thats 10 years old and the time you have to use it, and it not work for ya... its all bout being safe and keeping our officers/brothers safe while on the beat...
 
Another post that makes my point.


Today, 04:02 PM #5

mk70ss
Senior Member


Join Date: January 12, 2008
Location: Mass
Posts: 319 1994-2003 We were issued Beretta 92F's.

2003-2007 We went to the Beretta 96 in .40 S&W

2007-2010 Sig Sauer 229 in .40 S&W

2010-Present We have S&W M&P .40
 
Our police generally carry the cheapest possible guns that meet the requirements of the agency... Glock was the leader but now I understand ther brands are starting to be very competitive in this arena.

Its not that most of the police carry guns are considered the best of anything but just cheap and reliable....

People often think what our police carry must be the best when actually most of its pretty low end with few frills or extras....
 
BGutzman, the bean counters will have their say.

Bear in mind though, that fewer frills and extras also can often mean "fewer parts that might break."

Cheap, simple, and reliable aren't bad traits for defensive weapons. Especially the "reliable" part.

Even bean counters sometimes get it right... Despite themselves.
 
The police here do upgrade when necessary. As attached photos show old and new.
 

Attachments

  • _47629387_000039422-1.jpg
    _47629387_000039422-1.jpg
    70.2 KB · Views: 208
  • _47629114_007000546-1.jpg
    _47629114_007000546-1.jpg
    71.2 KB · Views: 204
I wouldn't doubt most if not all European country's law enforcement agencies purchase their weapons for their officers. Here in the US, many agencies still allow or make their officers purchase their own weapons. Since I'm in one of the agencies that doesn't purchase weapons, I have carried a total of 9 duty weapons in my almost 21 years. I have changed mostly because I get bored but other reasons have been the allowing of other weapons manufacturers and calibers. I got rid of my H&K USP .40 because I really didn't like the trigger.
Also, agencies increasingly have to worry about liability so I'm sure that maybe one other reason they are switching weapons after a while.
 
You dont suppose it has anything to do with the manufacturers offering incentives and deals on a regular basis to switch over to their guns, do you?
 
I wouldn't doubt most if not all European country's law enforcement agencies purchase their weapons for their officers. Here in the US, many agencies still allow or make their officers purchase their own weapons.
Click to expand...
True, but I think an equally important factor may be the fact that the USA simply has more police agencies.

Although I'm not familiar with Northern Ireland, many European countries and other Western countries such as Canada have a powerful national police force and local police forces in cities, but that's basically it, and the latter is sometimes equipped by the former.

An area in the USA might have a local city police force, county police forces (often more than one- for instance, a sheriff's department AND a constabulary), a state police force, and then the federal FBI, which, unlike many European central agencies, is mostly an investigative service. Add numerous federal special investigative or protective services (Secret Service, ATF, TSA, etc.), the odd state-level special investigative service independent of the regular state police, and special private forces such as railroad police (who carry sidearms and have full arrest powers in many US states), and you're talking a LOT of different cops. :) FWIW for various historical reasons, the USA was a relative latecomer to the idea of powerful centralized police authority; many of the state and federal-level forces were superimposed over local police in the early 20th century, but did not replace them, leading to a bewildering array of agencies.

Since these agencies are often run under different government umbrellas with different sources of funding, there's a better chance that some will be replacing sidearms at any given time, and that some will replace them more frequently than others. Keep in mind that gunmakers like to tout these programs in their press releases to boost their stock prices, and politicians like to tout these programs in their press releases to show how they're being "tough on crime" and "protecting the citizens", so there's lots of publicity when it happens. ;)
 
The past several years , many small to mid-size police departments get federal grants that they must either use or lose. So they often buy new guns. They buy new guns with grant money , and sell the old ones and use that money for , whatever.
 
Here are a few of my thoughts and they may or may not be true.

Look at how much more equipment an officer is carrying on his or her belt these days. There was a time when they did not have pepper spray and tazers to haul around. Therefore, I am sure they are anxious to upgrade to lighter but still potent hand guns.

I at times buy things from a distributor to police forces. Some of the things they have as trade-in are non-law enforcement weapons or confiscated weapons. These items along with their old weapons probably allow law enforcement agencies to bargain (along with mfg. incentives) for pretty good deals on new equipment. I wonder if most agencies have various pools of funding that can not be transferred; therefore what they acquire as trade-ins must be used for equipment vs. used for payroll as an example. I do not know this to be the case. I know it used to be the case in the Federal Govt.

I also bet improvements in technology both with the guns and the munitions have justified upgrades. I believe another poster already mentioned upgraded weapons. Then there is the lighter while effective new technology mentioned in my earlier statement.
 
The police in the UK aren't allowed to actually shoot their guns, so their equipment doesn't necessarily have to work - it just has to look the part. As long as their weapons are relatively shiny and not missing any external parts, they'll occupy a holster as well as the newest firearms available.
 
Police departments are government agencies. They spend every nickel you give them. I have no problems with upgrading from old equipment but some departments change weapons every 3-5 years. IMHO it's a bit wasteful to do it with such frequency. I think it would be wise for department leaders to opt for a durable weapon that will last many years, issue a NIB one to an officer on their first day and have them keep it for the long haul bearing unusual circumstances. If a proper weapon is selected, any slight variations between newer purchased models because they will still use the same magazines. (For example if some officers have Gen III and other have Gen IV Glocks.) Just my thoughts on the matter.
 
Maybe i am wrong but while reading this forum i have noticed the police in America seem to change their handguns on a regular basis. Where in other countries UK for example they would keep their for 20 years or until they wear out.
Click to expand...

Prosperity.

america has had a bloated sense of entitlement in a lot of ways, especially tax funded areas. My city replaces cars every 3 years, but resale value is good. there is always a small community that needs used patrol cars.

25 or so years ago, our department used a deer rifle as a sniper weapon. Now, it's a tactical rifle. They own some top grade AR rifles, and full autos.

When a department issues new weapons every 5-10 years, there may be plenty of reasons given, but two are probably more important than any others.

First, the administrators feel a need to spend money. Second, the department rank and file may demand the newest and best, and the administration may feel that it's a good place to spend a few hundred dollars a year, buying better equipment that will keep the rank and file safer and happier.
 
I agree with many of the reasons already mentioned and I'm sure each one applies to a municipality somewhere, and in some municipalities more than one applies. But nobody has mentioned government contracts yet. A manufacturer can lobby for a municipality's business or (more likely) grease the right palms and they enter into a contract for X number of years. When that contract ends and other companies bid on a new one a change in manufacturers = change in weapons.

I know it's not like this everywhere, but lets remember that politicians are involved in this process. So, to some extent, dishonesty is inevitable.
 
In my experience my Department(s) we have had the same firearm for over ten years. The battle to get a new one involves the city council and possible grants and usually a concession from the Union (our Union purchased the P226 years ago and donated them to the PD, couple of years ago we tried to get new guns and asked the Union to buy the leather gear.) We are currently switching to a striker fired poly gun due to cost and ease of use/training. The cost of leather gear is a big factor. Police guns are sometimes rarely fired (other departments,) but in our case they are in dire need of replacement. Usually, as in the case of S&W M&P, a company will offer an even swap for the initial purchase so the cost to the PD is leather & bullets. Then you have an armorer school or two and the individual officers will have to purchase off duty holster and spare (SHTF) magazines for their cruiser bags.
 
In 32 years,my Dept. issued us 4 different guns.Two S&W .38 spl revolvers,then two Glocks,first a 9mm and then a .40 cal.Some of the older guys now have been carrying the .40 cal Glock for twenty years now.
 
We were issued Glock 35's about 10 years ago.

It came time to replace all the night sights, springs, magazines etc. The guns were certainly not worn out, but, some were getting a little dogeared.

When you figure the cost of all the things needed to keep them going, it was easier to replace them. I think a major LE distributor bought all our guns for around $300 apiece and, replaced them with new Glock 22's. The department payed about $100 apiece for the new guns. Officers were able to buy back thier old gun, from the distributor, for around $320 as I recall and they put the rest on the shelf for around $350.

Win win all around. Department got new guns for a fraction of the cost of new guns and, less than replacing the nightsights, springs and magazines. Distributor made a little money for thier troubles, Officers got to buy thier old guns at a good price.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top