Why does Law Enforcement not like the .45?

Status
Not open for further replies.
johnelmore wrote:
The .45 was designed with stopping power in mind.
Click to expand...

Yes. It was designed as a military round, not a police round.

And while we do train and equip our police to effectively employ deadly force when it is called for, the mission of a police force is to maintain order within the civil society, not to simply kill people.

When choosing a sidearm, the people leading the various police departments must balance a number of competing considerations, including: Lethality, Weight, Capacity, Accuracy, and Cost.

There are clearly agencies that do find the 45 to be the cartridge appropriate to their needs, but many others weigh the same considerations and choose other cartridges.
 
Me personally, I don't mind the compromises that the 40 brings for a service pistol, especially if that pistol is designed to handle 40 well. Cost of ammo definitely doesn't help 45.

Current range ammo price (ammoseek, new brass cased) 9mm: 16-17cents 40: 19-20cents 45: 23-24cents

I picked up a couple of sub compact 9mm's this past summer with the stupid low prices.
 
I think something to remember is those current ammo prices are nuts. A few years ago and those prices were almost unthinkable for factory ammo. Many of these departments made those choices when ammo prices weren't what they are now. How long those prices will last also remains to be seen.
 
The fact remains that costs, including training, are a big factor in what a department will buy. Police forces are made up of people and most are not gun people. Most have to be trained to shoot and most are more affected by recoil than those of us who have been shooting for most of our lives. The 9mm is a good choice for most of the people and has very few disadvantages over larger calibers even for good shooters. Most departments want a single caliber that will fit most of its personnel with the fewest downsides.
While I, personally, don't believe that the 9mm is the "most effective" round for defensive purposes it remains the most popular police and military round across the globe.
 
Honestly I dont buy this small stature thing. Shouldnt an officer be large enough to handle a fight, push a car, carry a person, etc.

I dont think they should find smaller pistols, but larger officers.
 
Honestly I dont buy this small stature thing. Shouldnt an officer be large enough to handle a fight, push a car, carry a person, etc.
Click to expand...

When I was a youth, in order to be in the State Police, you had to be 6 feet tall. (or more)

Things like that haven't been allowed as regulations for decades, because it is considered discrimination.

Now, a 5'2" 115lb cop (either sex) might be able to kick my butt but unless they can press about twice their body weight, if I'm lucky enough to fall on them, they're done...:rolleyes:

Do remember that what the police use isn't the best thing there is for everyone, and sometimes its not even the best thing for the police. It's just what they have to use.
 
I think a lot of credible points other than the stature of the officers have been brought up, not the least of which is what great advantage is gained in going to 45ACP?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
44 AMP said:
When I was a youth, in order to be in the State Police, you had to be 6 feet tall. (or more)
Click to expand...

Requiring 6 ft in height is a bit of a stretch and would weed out some very solid troopers. Perhaps 5'9" is a more realistic minimum as long as that person can defeat some challenging physical tasks that are the same for EVERYONE regardless of size or gender.

I don't think a person who is 5'2" and 115 lbs has ANY business being a State Trooper.
 
Most of the staties in our state are close to 6', probably at least 5'10". That said I know an instructor who is 5'9' and weighs 150 lb. that drops people like a sack of potatoes using jaw and limb control. Height isn't the only factor, but you can't deny height does help with intimidation for most people. All this said, I know short guys that shoot 45ACP just fine.
 
More than physical stature, large or small without a desire to learn techniques as best they can ( physical or firearms) the person becomes a liability and often the cause of injury to others. In the past more demands could be made on the individual than today with all the protective (employee support) requirements in place. A great deal of effort is placed upon the agency to prove an individual is not properly trained and force corrective action, especially in a larger organization where more than one of these individuals have infiltrated the ranks.
Placing a firearm in the hand of an individual who finds it to be too large in the grip, too heavy and too much recoil is self defeating. There must be a medium that works for everyone and the 9mm has filled that void quite effectively for many years.
So what I am suggesting for LE is:
1. Get rid of the slugs
2. Provide equipment all officers can, through training, become proficient with.
3. Do not let Training lapse for any individual, do not allow for future slugs.
 
An instructor I like was once an instructor for a large PD. He was often responsible for evaluating officers and at a number of times in his career encountered officers that he was sure did not have the composure for the job. In many of those instances he had to defend his decision in civil court because it was argued his decision was the result of some bias or another.
 
Honestly I dont buy this small stature thing. Shouldnt an officer be large enough to handle a fight, push a car, carry a person, etc.?
I dont think they should find smaller pistols, but larger officers.
Click to expand...

In theory, yes.

But that was waaay back in the day when the typical officer getting hired was a large white or black male, typically with a military background, and likely an athletic one too, having been a high school or college ball player, wrestler, etc. Possibly these individuals came from a family with hunting experience and, when young, were familiarized with the three basic firearms: shotguns, rifles, and handguns.

Over at least the last three decades, however, police recruitment policies have preferenced the hiring of women and males of - shall we say - "small stature." :rolleyes: Many had no previous firearms experience, nor hunting, and less had military service. Police work was just another job possibility on their employment checklist.

While this may cause the gods of diversity to smile, it has also resulted in the "wuddle hands" syndrome in which said recruits are simply unsuited to qualifying and training with energetic cartridges, like the 10mm AUTO or the .45acp. The .40 is just a downloaded 10mm stuffed into a 9mm-sized pistol, but that combination results in "snappy" recoil, and police firearms trainers have long heard complaints about it from the troops, especially the female officers.

Hence, we see the resurgence of law enforcement's interest in the 9mm.
 
Last edited:
Plenty of officers are still male. Are there women too? Sure. The stature of the officer still doesn't change any of the other benefits of 9mm, nor change the lack of a dramatic difference in effectiveness of say 45ACP vs. 9mm. We can bemoan diversity all we want but none of that actually addresses the point that even for big and tall officers the 9mm still makes sense.

As for 10mm, while I can appreciate the cartridge it stemmed out of an incident where the "solution" wasn't a more powerful handgun, but not trying to pit bank robbers known to be aggressive, skilled, and in possession of long guns when you are almost entirely armed with pistols and your agents with the majority of your firepower aren't immediately present. In short, decision making and training were the real issues, but no one wants to insult the dead.
 
Last edited:
In short decision making and training were the real issues, but no one wants to insult the dead.
Click to expand...

Kind of, but there are times in law enforcement when you don't have the liberty of waiting for the tactical team. Anyone contemplating law enforcement should understand that there is a real risk of you having to face long odds. An officer in a po-dunk town in NC stopped an active shooter armed with a shotgun in a Resthome a few years ago. Cop was shot but lived. He had nothing but a pistol, and my understanding was he had to engage at 20+ yards. He was the only cop on duty, no swat team to call. He dropped the guy (who also lived). He did what he had to do in a not so great situation.

OTOH, your points are valid. There is a time and place to back off and the Miami incident may have been one of them.

With all that being said, almost all of the agencies in my area use 45. I've not noticed any great difficulties in having everyone qualify, even "slight stature" officers and females. My agency also exceeds the state mandated minimum score for our minimum qualification. We may have a couple guys that struggle and need some one on one time and a chance to requalify. I don't believe 9mm would changer that, theyre just not into firearms as a hobby. Not knocking 9mm or saying it has no advantages, I've just always felt that the recoil argument isn't any kind of game changer between 9mm and 45.
 
Things can always go sideways, but on rare occasions you get to make choices. IMO the stop didn't need to be made at that exact moment and time. Forcing a traffic stop is also not the same as being thrown into an active shooter scenario. That's not to say I always make the right choice, far from it. The closest I come to that world on a "regular basis" is force on force and even then, when I know at least on some level that it's not real, I still have had my screw ups. My point is that I think the FBI went looking for a hardware solution to a software problem.
 
Last edited:
I've seen a few people mention it but I feel like there's still not enough emphasis on cost.

Cops are already under paid, if you take more money out of the budget for ammo cost compromises are made elsewhere.
 
interest

I think there was a growth in interest in the .45acp in the years following the FBI Miami shootout, which was seen by many as a 9mm failure, though there is much more to the story. The FBI came up with the 10mm, that morphed into the .40 S&W. But more than a few agencies reconsidered the .45 while the 10/.40 was in its early stages.

My agency adopted a rather open attitude and allowed for 9mm, .40 or .45acp(SIG) pistols, to my knowledge, it still does. The office types and most borderline shooters stayed with the 9mm. High speed low drag types went with the .40, and most the old school patrol guys went .45 acp.

I knew of at least one county deputy that carried a 1911, and several local PD Swat types carried the same. Wayne Co SO (TN) issued Glock 21's and I think still does.

When Bamaboy recently landed his LE job with the local 70 officer PD, he intended to purchase and carry a Glock 21, and was told that although other calibers had been previously approved, his duty gun as well as all others, would be 9mm. The PD was following FBI leads and going 9mm.......but senior firearms staff acknowledged that the change for the PD was largely based on cost. So......

I kept the Glock 21 I'd bought him as an academy graduation gift and bought him a Glock 17.
 
Hey Bama where were you when I first went to work for the PD? I had to buy my own Model 19 4” ($82.57) and actually got to see if it worked a couple of weeks later shooting at pop cans while on day shift. The second night I worked was on graveyard, the PD was locked, phones turned over to the SO and I was told someone would relieve me at 8 am.
Today that department has 150 sworn and issues G 22 or 23.
 
The .45 was designed with stopping power in mind. It was designed to stop a determined highly motivated attacker who might be on drugs. Additionally, its lower speed makes ricochets in close quarters less likely.
Click to expand...

No. The 45 ACP was designed to replicate the performance and replace the Black Powder 45 Colt carried by the US Calvary. It was designed to drop the enemies horse, thus putting them afoot and at a tactical disadvantage on the battlefield. The 1911 was designed for the role at the same time.
 
Where did one get the ricochets less likely statement from? I've actually seen someone hit by a ricochet from a close up 45 ACP coming back off a tire. Standing right next to me.

We need a precise linkage to that.

Back to the general issue, the Glock 21 is just too big to comfortable fit my 5'6" body frame small hands. I never liked it. I shoot a 1911 just fine and dandy. Recoil doesn't bother me. But for the same size gun to have many more rounds - that makes sense to me in today's world.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top