revolvers for LEO's?

I'm pleased to see such support for the revolver.I only ever carried revolvers myself
and wouldn't like to have an auto--I don't
trust them even though I have a couple of good ones.
Perhaps it might be different for special
services but for ordinary cops the revolver
gets my vote.
 
Times, they do change. I am no longer associated with law enforcement, but I still shoot and train with LEO's and I shoot their courses of fire from time to time. Through the years I have worked with many PPC shooters who needed a coach and wanted to move up a class. I have also worked with several LEOs who needed help to qualify when their jobs were at stake.

At one time, our Game and Fish, Highway Patrol and most municipal agencies all packed K-Frame Smiths (usually 4 inch 66's) with a few N-Frames and an occasional Python thrown in. Since that time, all state agencies and the municipal and county agencies where I live have gone to the semi-auto. The county and municipal guys have gone to Glocks and the state guys shoot Berettas.

I have had many auto vs. revolver conversations with older trainers who, just like me, love revolvers, cherish the wood and steel of the 1911 style pistol and abhor anything made of polymer or chambered in 9mm or .40 caliber. Still most of these trainers admit that it is easier, less expensive and quicker to get a new shooter "qualified" with a Glock than with a revolver. They also tell me the average scores within their agencies actually raised at distances under 25 yards when they switched to pistols. However, the scores at 25 yards and beyond fell dramatically.

My personal belief is that anyone (LEO or not) who takes a serious approach to their firearms training can become competent with either a revolver or a pistol in a short time. Those who don't take a serious approach will be marginal no matter what they carry.

Furthermore, any trainer who is worth a damn will be well versed with both the revolver and the pistol and he will do what it takes to see his students be successful. All too often I see firearms trainers who are "stuck" with "newbies in fatigues" who are all packing "plastic" pistols. The jaded attitude and resistance to change exhibited by the trainer is all too apparent to the trainees and nothing good ever comes from that.
 
Hey Futo,

I was shooting my back up (2" 640) on the dept range and one of our new female rookies asked, "A revolver, huh?" I answered "Yup" and she replied (swear to God) "I heard of them."!!!!

She's a pretty good shooter, but man, did I feel old. We shoot Glocks, but I'd still feel well armed with my old K-frame.

It's not the gun...
 
How does one fire "2.8 rounds", anyway? LOL ;) ROTF

------------------
Be mentally deliberate but muscularly fast. Aim for just above the belt buckle Wyatt Earp
"It is error alone that needs government support; truth can stand by itself." Tom Jefferson
If you have to shoot a man, shoot him in the guts, it may not kill him... sometimes they die slow, but it'll paralyze his brain and arm and the fight is all but over Wild Bill Hickok
Remember: When you attempt to rationalize two inconsistent positions, you risk drowning as your own sewage backs up.
45 ACP: Give 'em a new navel! BigG
 
You shoot 2.8 times the same way you have
1.8 kids. Doncha know nuttin?

------------------
Specialists in the use and training of lethal force.
 
Auto-loader misfire:
1) Rack slide
2) Attempt to fire (Yes/No)
3) Magazine jam (Yes/No)
4) Drop mag, insert new mag
5) Etc.

Revolver misfire:
1) Pull trigger again
2) End

------------------
"...and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one."
Luke 22:36
"An armed society is a polite society."
Robert Heinlein
 
As for the semi auto clearing....what do you think the thug will do at 10 feet or so while you screw around with all of that? Also with a revolver we had two failures in two years. One the cylinder was bound by a backed out primer. Couldn't pull the trigger. In the other case the cylinder came off when it was released from a screw that fell out.
Wish it was that easy.

------------------
Specialists in the use and training of lethal force.
 
...which just proves that any analogy will break down if pushed far enough. Never even thought of primers backing out or parts falling off...

------------------
"...and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one."
Luke 22:36
"An armed society is a polite society."
Robert Heinlein
 
Local Cheif was shooting qualify about 4yrs ago with a Colt Python. After 2nd rd the cylinder started binding and he was using both fingers to continue shooting. To his credit he kept firing until he finished that string. He had to push the cylinder out against a board. Maybe a backup is a good idea??
 
A well trained Officer with a quality, well maintained revolver is still a force to be reckoned with. Theres not much better in a revolver, than a Smith & Wesson 625 .45acp with full moon clips with your choice of high performance .45acp.

------------------
SUPPORT YOUR LOCAL POLICE, KEEP THEM INDEPENDENT.
 
Erik,

Up until a few years ago the average police gunfight was at distances of under 7 yards with 2-3 rounds fired. That may have changed in the last few years due to the HIGH volume of rounds LEO's sometimes let loose these days in some gunfights.

I think LE would be better off with revolvers but at the same time they could also do alright with single stack auto's that only hold 8 rounds or so. I say this because it helps to keep them away from the "spray and pray" problem.

I do think tactically auto's have advantages over revolvers but due to the LITTLE amount of training most LEO's get a revolver would in many cases be better..........
 
As a LEO (and gun nut/armorer) I can tell you that I prefer an auto for duty. For those of you who believe that a revolver is more reliable, I have several good autos that I have never had a failure with....and I have an excellent revolver that I HAVE had failures with (factory ammo--Federal). It's the maintenance, stoopid!
Second, If Law Enforcement was properly funded, then we would have better officers and better training. Unfortunately, the general public would like to have a few extra heated indoor swimming pools....go figure.
There are more reasons for the semi than just high capacity. Simplicity of use (a la Glock), weight (remember all the extra gear for a modern cop!), practical accuracy/ergonomics (point shooting versus some goofy olympic pose), cost of maintainance (YOU try computing the cost of parts for a S&W revolver versus a glock, remembering frequency of maintainance and time stripping down the weapon), ease of maintainance(lint in a revolver's mechanism versus a semi).
 
Nyterunner?
Where do you Patrol?
No flame
But?
A S&W/Taurus 629 38/357 is a whole lot easier to teach a neophyte, proper form and technique than an auto .40 or .45?
Which IMHO,, should be what LEOs right out of the academy should carry for a "Probationary term".The incident in Riverside Ca, come's to mind , when 4 new officers unloaded 41 rounds into a stationary vehicle at 1 suspect after "startling her awake"by hammering at the window of said vehicle, trying to break in,,"she did have a weapon on her lap"
Now I ask you?
Why in Gods name would you confront a obviously confined, unconscious, armed suspect?

A bad judgement call? !IMHO


[This message has been edited by PEA SHOOTER (edited February 05, 2000).]
 
Nyterunner:

Not that this means much, but I agree with you. In my other post I stated:

"I have had many auto vs. revolver conversations with older trainers who, just like me, love revolvers, cherish the wood and steel of the 1911 style pistol and abhor anything made of polymer or chambered in 9mm or .40 caliber. Still most of these trainers admit that it is easier, less expensive and quicker to get a new shooter "qualified" with a Glock than with a revolver. They also tell me the average scores within their agencies actually raised at distances under 25 yards when they switched to pistols. However, the scores at 25 yards and beyond fell dramatically".

No one took issue with my statement. I wonder why? I am guessing because it is based on the fact that it is easier to teach someone to shoot a G22 than it is to teach them to shoot a Smith 19 double action.
 
Guys, what we all seem to be forgetting is that it isn't the tool, but the craftsman. We have a duty to teach a trainee not just HOW to draw and fire accurately, but WHEN to draw and fire accurately. 41rounds? Excessive? Yes. But, has anyone checked their training records? Were they PROPERLY trained in how to handle a high-stress situation.
We are falling into the same trap used by gun control advocates. We are blaming the tools when we should be re-examining training and selection.
 
I did find that most semiautos are better sealed against lint and also that, should a malfunction arise, pistols are easier to clear. OTOH, revolvers do not require rock-steady grip to function. Guess I am undecided.

I feel it is easier to teach to fire a revolver but harder to teach to reload one under stress.
 
When they say it is easier to train with a Glock than a revolver there is a simple reason for it. THEY LIKE GLOCKS. The reality isn't there. St. Paul Police just TODAY had an officer shoot himself with his Glock 17. Washington DC had a incredible AD rate with thier Glocks. 1 in 7 shots they fired was an AD. Yup, we can talk about "training" until the cows come home, but we are dealing with PEOPLE and many of them don't like guns, don't want to learn about them, and a semiauto has a serious educational disadvantage with those types. A SA is NOT for everyone. And in this day and age it is for a lot less than we would like to think.
Seems strange folks want to JAM and FORCE ONE GUN down the departments throats. I'm glad they don't issue shoes. The officers would all be handed size 11's. We need to have the depts issue or allow the BEST gun for the INDIVIDUAL. No logical reason not to and don't even try the "ease of maintaining" argument. Making the armorer's job easier is a hell of a price to pay for the inability to get the job done in the street.

------------------
Specialists in the use and training of lethal force.
 
Depending on the agency, the kind of people it hires, and the quality of its training, it is still a distinct minority of officers who can and should use semiautos. Weapon selection ought to be a matter of common sense--or so you hope. I have run qualifications with a mix of preferred weapons with no real problems, and usually an officer will shoot best with a weapon he personally likes. There is a point of no return with this; otherwise you would have officers trying to carry broomhandle Mausers and Colt Single Actions. The ammo logistics can get involved, too. Nonetheless, we had no problem with .357 revolvers, 9mm Glocks, and .45 SIGs. As a general rule everyone had a preference and we worked along with them on it. Since they had a certain financial and ego investment, they usually had a pretty fair attitude and did well. Compared with an agency selecting 'the finest weapon in the world' through another set of redundant tests and forcing everyone to love it, I prefer a certain amount of individuality. As far as I am personally concerned, it takes a very good semiauto and a very conscientious shooter to displace a revolver for practical work. Just my opinion.

------------------
 
Well pluspinc I just talked to the training officer for the SO about this topic this afternoon. He hates Glocks with an unrivaled passion. When he gets off duty the Glock comes off and he packs a 2 1/2 inch 19 or a Colt. He still maintains that it is easier to get a new recruit to "qualify" with a Glock than the old model 66. My buddy with the Highway Patrol (now retired) and an instructor at the Academy also maintains it is easier to get a new recruit to "qualify" with a Glock than a DA revolver. I tried Glocks and have gone back to 1911 style pistols, but in my experience it is easier to get a new shooter on target with a Glock than with a DA revolver. Is it easier to teach someone to reload with a speedloader or a magazine? Is it easier to hit the 8 ring on a B17 at 15 yards double action with a 4 inch revolver or with a G22 safe action? Obviously your mind is made up and nothing I can say or do will ever change that. I will admit, it might be easier to train a new shooter to be safe and competent in gun handling with a revolver, but it is easier to get them "qualified" with a Glock. And, unfortunately qualifying is the bottom line.

I still stand by my previous comments anyway. Anyone who takes a serious approach to their training can become competent with either weapon.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top