I concur with this statement completely.

I had the good fortune to be lectured for a day in GBI special agent class in 1988 by Agent Mireles. I also recall one of the lessons he preached was, ammo, ammo, ammo....all you can carry.

Mr. Moore below is part of the documentation I read a number of years ago and based my statements on. I was not referring to the wounds that killed Matix, but the reason many myself included believe that Matix was taken out of the fight so soon. If my statements were not clear to you or anyone else I apologize, as that was not my intention.

Firearms Tactical Institute
FBI-Miami Shootout

Anderson, W. French, M.D.: Forensic Analysis of the April 11, 1986, FBI Firefight. W. French Anderson, M.D., 1996 (127 pages, paperback)


I. The First Encounter: Platt and Matix Inside the Monte Carlo
Matix’s 1st gunshot wound (right forearm wound E) - Grogan
Matix’s 2nd gunshot wound (right head wound F) - McNeill
Matix’s 3rd gunshot wound (right neck/chest wound B) – McNeill

__________________
Always Stay Strong!

The Miami firefight was a failure of many things, primarily tactics. Shotguns were available, but were tossed in the back seat. Body armor was available- also in the back seat. Many of the sidearms were snub-nose revolvers. One agent lost his glasses in a low-speed collision, and was thus handicapped in shooting. The agents knew they were on a rolling stakeout for heavily armed bank robbers, but failed to have a basic tactical plan. Their lack of rifles was somewhat secondary to their lack of planning. The hero agent who finally ended the firefight used a 12-ga. 870 and a .357 mag. (I believe a 6-round 4".) When you reasonably believe that you will be facing armed suspects, yes, a shotgun and/or rifle is greatly preferable. Unfortunately, it is not always practical to carry with you as an LEO (thought it should be close at hand), hence carrying a handgun at all times. Personally, I would be quite comfortable with a .357 mag- carried a Model 65 for many years. Replacing 6 .357 rounds with a dozen or more 9mm or 40 cal rounds doesn't make a difference if you don't know how to get the gun out, on target, and fire a center-mass round at the first, instant opportunity. That concept is also consistent with the military moving to a 3-round burst, instead of the "spray and pray" of a full-auto. I think too many LEOs count on just having a lot of handgun rounds available, instead of real tactics and shooting ability. IMHO...

__________________
LEO since 1981.

Well said. As a young officer, I had a supervisor who would remind me that a .44 is no better than a .22 if you miss!

__________________
LEO since 1981.

I'm with you 100%. Yes, I'm an old guy who started 29 years ago with a .357. But a well-trained dinosaur who can put his rounds on-target with a revolver is still better in a firefight than a less proficient officer who can crank off 18 misses with a high-cap semi-auto. My current department allows officers to carry their own weapons, but no longer permits revolvers. I've stuck with a double-action, single-stack .45 (Para). Plenty of confidence in the round and my ability to shoot with it. Only holds 7-8 rounds per mag (uses 1911 mags), but swapping them is pretty darn quick.

__________________
LEO since 1981.

As a retired LEO and firearms trainer, I am still somewhat hesitant to jump in here. Initially, I carried a 4 inch Model 28. The agency specified 125 JHP +P 38 specials for duty, practice and qualification. For a lot of officers, magnums would have adversely affected their ability to shoot accurately. I guess I would view accuracy as more important than power. I never felt that I was inadequately armed. We trained and shot frequently.

We then moved to 5903's in the late '80s. Some officers viewed it as a step forward, others thought they were tools of the devil. Again, we trained and shot frequently, I never felt under-armed.

In the 2002, we switched to Sig 229's in 357 Sig. The selection process was rigorous and the choice was based on many factors, all viewed as relevant. The change was viewed positively by every officer I talked to during the conversion.

The primary reasons I like the 229 and the 357 Sig is that it does many things very well. It is a wonderful balance of power, control and ease of operation, even for average shooters. High cap semi's do offer an advantage for dealing with multiple adversaries, provided the officer can shoot. The 357 Sig cartridge is comparitively flat shooting, which can be important in rural settings where distance can be much greater, still offering good power and penetration. As mentioned at the beginning, it does give up bullet weight compared to a standard 357 magnum. It is not perfect, but nothing coming out of a holster ever will be.

All this being said, I love revolvers and have more 357 magnum revolvers in the gun safe than any other type of handgun (8). I would feel comfortable with one in most circumstances. But if I really had to defend myself, taking into account all the things one could come up against, I think there are better choices available in handguns.

Please forgive my ignorance but, what is a BUG ?

I personally believe that if your dept. policy allows it, then carry what you are comfortable with and are efficient with. For many that may be a G 17 9mm and for a few it may be a S&W Model 10.

I carry a S&W Model 28 4" .357 and 12 ga pump on duty and a Colt DS (non shroud) .38 off-duty . It works for me and I feel comfortable. However, I would not fault any LEO who did not feel comfortable with only 6 rounds considering the armament of today's crooks. And also....leave the dump boxes for ceremonial use, they have nor had any business on the street!

Back Up Gun.

"BUG" = Back UP GUN. ( one old term = "hide out")

Usually a derringer, small revolver or small semi auto. Cal.s range from .22 to .45 ACP
Often carried in a ankle holster, back holster, pocket, belly band, etc. ( I wear a KILT alot, & mine is often in a "thigh holster", some times my "sporran")
Use = 2nd gun ( out of ammo in primary, Loss of primary, can not access primary, etc), Deep carry,etc.

The "old adage" = the "fastest reload" is a 2nd gun.

The Proffesor

__________________
RSO- Instr.

I have been helping run the range with a volunteer group that certifies retired law enforcement officers for the national carry permit. A typical class is 24 retired officers ( state patrol , sheriffs departments and municipal police departments ) . We ask them in the lecture portion of the class how many years they were in law enforcement and the total for the class is always around 600 years. About a third of the officers shoot revolvers ... usually 4" S&W . I am continually amazed by the accuracy these officers display shooting the qualification course which is the course used by the largest metropolitan police department in our state. If something happened I would feel well defended if one of these men or women were standing beside me with a revolver in hand. Some of the guys have significant physical problems and in spite of that do extremely well in the qualification. I agree with everyone who says that the crucial issue is accuracy.

__________________
I like Ike.

Thanks for the reply, Proffesor.

BTW, I share your sentiments about a 2nd gun being the fastest reload. I've always felt this way.

As a LEO, I found myself in a close confrontation with an individual who was holding a S&W 44 mag. I had a Sig 228, which was pointed at this individual. I was not alone, I was wearing a ballistic vest, some of the others were not. This was at point blank distance. This occurred a short time after the Miami shootout, with which I was familiar. The individual looked at my gun and said, that's a 9mm, same as they used in Miami, I guarantee I will kill at least two of you. At that moment I thought about the Miami shooting, and I knew he was probably correct, and at that minute I would have given anything to have a shotgun, or at least a larger caliber pistol. Maybe right or maybe wrong, the knowledge of Miami kept me from pulling the trigger. I did not have enough faith in the 9mm killing this individual before he could fire the 44 mag.
I can say without a doubt I would have more faith in the 357, at least in this case. The 357 is a good round, however I believe that today there are better choices, for power and capacity.

All I can say is that my qualification scores and those of many others went way up when my dept transitioned from the 4" K frame .38+p to a Glock 19. I still want a 386NG w/ an action job though :-)).

I missed out on revolvers in law enforcement. I started in 1996, my fist duty weapon was a Beretta 92. I've worked for several agencies over my LE career, but every one has had an issued duty auto that I was required to carry. None of the departments had any older guys still carrying revolvers either, though I worked along side officers from other departments from time to time that were "grandfathered" and were carrying them.

I wouldn't feel the least bit uncomfortable carrying a revolver in .357 Magnum (provided it was actually loaded with magnum ammunition) on-duty. However, if I could choose my own duty weapon, as much as I like revolvers, I would choose the most recent generation 4566 TSW with the rail integral to the frame, a decocking lever (no safety), Trijicon Novak Night Sights, and a magazine disconnect. No, its not the most modern or lightweight pistol, nor does it have the near bottomless capacity of many plastic pistols, but its solid, reliable, accurate, and shoots my favorite auto pistol chambering. Its too bad its basically a dead stick.

As it stands, my department is in the process of switching duty weapons. I was just issued a generation 4 Glock 22 on Monday to replace my Beretta 96FS. I know the Glock is a functional weapon, but its just about the opposite of what I want in a duty pistol; plastic, lightweight, and chambered in my least favorite auto pistol cartridge. Oh well.

__________________
Hello Cleveland, Rock and Roll

Long guns: This was a rolling stakeout involving one whole squad and agents from a nearby Resident Agency. There were lots of long guns amongst the many agents on the stakeout. When the shooting went down, fate deemed there be two shotguns available. SSA McNeill decided against using his and used his Model 19 instead, taking one of the guys out of the fight. He later questioned his own judgment in doing this, but he did have a shotgun available.

SA Mireles used his 870, famously wielding it one handed. He shot a Bu-car and the bad guys' feet.

Vests: Almost 25 years after this shooting, the FBI still issues me a vest that wouldn't have stopped Platt's Mini-14 rounds. At any rate, SSA McNeill was shot in the neck and hand, SA Mireles was shot in the arm, SA Hanlon was shot in the groin, and SA Dove was shot in the head. Only SA Grogan was shot in an area that would have been covered by a vest, which wouldn't have stopped the rounds with which he was shot, anyway.

That said, they should have been wearing their vests. Believe me, the FBI makes it abundantly clear that agents now must wear vests on any arrest.

If anything, I think the 4/11/86 shootout contributed greatly to the "rifle-ization" of American law enforcement. I work with young agents now who hang an M4 around their necks for the simplest arrest. I prefer a more low-key approach, especially on knock and talks. Its hard to charm your way into a house when you're standing next to a guy who looks like he fell out of a helicopter on his way to take Fallujah.

__________________
“What you got, ain’t new.”

I kind of get the impression that some of the lessons of Miami are starting to get lost again. I am afraid that means that LE, as a community, is going to have to learn them again and that will probably be from another Miami type incident. The time for long guns in policing is when one is going to a known gun call. I can't tell you how many times I have responded to a gun call of one type or another and been the only officer on the scene with a long gun. There really is no excuse for that, my PD issues a Mini-14 and a 12 gauge to every officer. Folks seem to have forgotten that handguns are for when you don't think you are going to need a gun, long guns are for when you have some warning that you might.

__________________
Hello Cleveland, Rock and Roll

When my first agency switched from the 681 to the Glock 17 I don't recall scores improving significantly. The poor shooters still shot poorly. We also dropped the 50 yard shooting at this time.
One dept. I work for now issues the Glock 21SF and while I feel confident it will do it's job I still don't like it. My other agency issues the Glock 23 but allows us to carry what we want so I carry a revolver.I currently use a 6in. Model 14 loaded with Rem. 158SWCHP(3 Safariland speedloaders) and have every confidence in it. I can shoot this gun faster and with better accuracy than any gun I own other than my Python. I think my ability to put the rounds where they need to go quickly outweights any other factors. I do see a 586 or a GP100 in the future though

Great thread...thanks for all the wisdom.

its very nice to hear everyone take on this subject.

True.

One of those important lessons was that it is incredibly difficult for the average LEO to reload a revolver quickly under stress, while being shot it, after having been shot, and/or while trying to move to cover.

Another lesson was that the results on the target/qualification range are not the same as during the gunfight. The offender moves and takes action against you, which the paper/cardboard scoring target does not. One poster here mentioned the high number of shots fired in relation to hits, as evidence of some lack of marksmanship. While this might be true in some cases, the reality is that it is difficult to hit - and instantly incapacitate - a determined offender under the circumstances of a gunfight, esp such as Miami in which there were cover/barriers and concealment and sun glare issues.

The FBI standard of firearms training was and is well above that of the average US LEO, yet the revolver proved to be a poor choice of weapon for the Miami encounter, all things considered. Limited ammunition capacity in the weapon and reloads, difficult to fire rapidly with accuracy, and difficult to reload under stress. Yet as has been noted, even with the limitation of their weapons and circumstances, the murderous offenders were ultimately stopped, at a cost of many agents severely wounded or killed.

Today's offender is better armed, and better trained (yes they practice), and his choice of weapon is not the 6-shot .32 of old, but the high-capacity .40 Glock or similar pistol, in addition to high-capacity semi-auto carbines, and shotguns. The revolver armed LEO is out gunned, fatally.

The high-capacity pistol gives you more chances to hit and incapacitate under street circumstances. Six is often not enough, even for the marksman. The pistol also fires faster, reloads faster (and can be done while moving), and is adequately accurate and powerful for the task.

It is all well and good to talk about "bringing handguns to a rifle fight", but that is not the reality of policing in America. The rifle/carbine/shotgun does not lend itself to the everyday work of policing, and I hope America never becomes a place where it does. The shoulder weapons that are available are useful, but the handgun is the weapon of the now and immediate, and usually the only weapon available when the LEO must deal with the typical reactive - as opposed to planned - threat.

Although I started with a .357 revolver, I would absolutely not choose a revolver as a duty weapon in this day and age. Off-duty, or as a civilian, it could be a wise choice. But not for duty.

The thoughtful contributions and civil tone of this discussion are much appreciated.

Semper fi

If my department told me I could carry any .357 I wanted I would carry my own 4" 627 eight shooter and live happily ever after. Ammo consideration would be equally important too, and I'd expect to be able to use something bonded or unleaded to take advantage of the .357's velocity. Full power .357 is not that bad in my 627.

If I could pick any gun, either auto or revolver, I'd take my 3" 625 .45 ACP. My hit factors on the two six shot stages of last week's USPSA classifier match prove that for those first six shots I can outshoot the majority of Limited, L-10 and Production shooters at the match using my concealed carry revolver and a leather concealment holster. Good hits beat the fast misses both in the match and on the street.

If I had to use a Model 10 I wouldn't complain, but again ammo choice would be very important.

Dave Sinko

I would rather carry 11 or 12 rounds in two revolvers than 14-17 in one auto....especially if you can reach the backup with your weak hand. I carry extra ammo and long guns available too. I am in a plain clothes assignment and have some latitude so that is what I choose. GP100 with an sp101 backup....the LCR looks interesting though.

I have carried three different guns since 1972. Two were Glocks (9mm & 40 S&W) but started with a model 19 S&W and then a Model 66.

To this day, I will take a .357 over any of the calibers out there and certainly over a semi.

We made many mistakes in the past with law enforcement. Adding larger amounts of ammo only created officers that miss more often. The older officers traded accuracy for capacity. Now it takes more shots to hit the target. Years ago we were hitting the target 100% of the time with the revolver. Now it takes 16+ rounds to hit a barn door.

When you have a limited amount of ammo readily available, you make shots count.

Never had a revolver hang up on me and never worried about a magazine going bad.

Do some research on the Newhall Incident, CHP Officer Pence was killed execution style as he attempted to reload his model 28, I'm pretty certain he would have liked something along the lines of a Glock 17 with its huge magazine capacity on that fateful night. Not much can be said for Gore and Frago, bad tactics were their downfall. Officer Allen's revolver only had one round in it after he was mortally wounded, it was picked up by a citizen who witnessed the shoot out, he fired the remaining round at the murderer Davis then had to run for his life due to being out of ammo, the hero citizen probably would have chosen something with a hi-cap mag if he had to do it over again.

^
Speed-Loaders
I believe this incident lead to the CHP being the first police department to officially adopt speedloaders.

Also, accuracy and other tactics have a part in the newhall incident. Giving those guys Glock 17s I don't believe would have changed the outcome

I shot with cops NYPD at Rodman's neck Bronx that with their model 10's that could'nt honestly hit the berm at 25 yards. This was 28 years ago. Still a cop now. Age and revolvers have nothing to do with accuracy.. It's an outright lie to say a revolver with six rounds is more accurate than a 13-17 round semi. Believe whatever you want more rounds DO equal a better percentage of being alive after a gun fight. Less is not better because it comes from a pretty metal and wood intimidating weapon. Lie to yourself all you want and hopefully you will never be in a shootout where your six rounds are gone and you did'nt even know you shot a single one. No skell or perp will approach and shoot you dead while you still have rounds in the gun and are still shooting, hitting or not. Death happens when you fumble with your speed loaders and speed strips, and paper weight is empty.

Let me start by saying more ammo is never a bad thing but that has to take a back seat to hitting your target. I think we are all in agreement with this.

A revolver may or may not be more accurate than an auto, depends on both the guns and ammunition.

If we follow the logic that more is always better to it's natural conclusion we will all end up with belt fed systems.

I see people fumble reloading their autos all the time. I have seen smooth reloads with a wheelgun. Does this prove when system is better than the other, no. It showed one cop had more skill and practiced more than the others.

If you have a choice (and many do not) figure out your needs, pick a system and practice with it.

Problem solved.
You are welcome.

Well that would depend on the person with the knife and how far away he was. At 30 feet you have the advantage much less than that and you could be in deep doo doo with a handgun.

I know the topic specified .357, but as was pointed out earlier, arguably the most effective revolver system is based on the 625. Long ago, IDPA had to change the rules because moonclipped revolvers were eating the 1911's for lunch. I can easily belt carry a 625 with four extra moonclips for a total of 30 rounds, and can fire aimed shots as fast as any semi in a major caliber. A 1911 will beat me to 8 rounds, but I'll be ahead of him at 12. Revolvers with clips give up nothing to semi's, but retain all the advantages.

What he said.

Because handguns don't stop the threat quickly. No matter what size gun you have, you may have to pump about 3-5 rounds into the BG to stop him/her.

__________________
Don't look, reload and shoot!

And as a young person, I wouldn't mine a 6 shot .357 despite the fact that I mostly carry autos.

__________________
Don't look, reload and shoot!

Lots of good thoughts here, and it's good to see. For my two cents, options are good and training is mandatory.

If eights rounds of .45ACP are good, then eight rounds of .357 Magnum can't be bad.




When additional rounds called for, we have options.




Bottom line is reliability, accuracy, and penetration. And training is not an optional thing.

__________________
July 4, 1776 not Jan 30, 1909

I carried a model 66 4 inch on the job for 14 years, loaded with whatever ammo we were issued that year. Never felt under gunned or poorly armed. For the last 5 years I've carried our new Glock 31 at work. Even better .

Gentlemen,

I think that if a given LEO (or security personnel) are good with either platform, go for it.

I have had real-world experience with both. As a Marine Security Guard (Embassy Marine) in the 90s, we were issued S&W Model 19-5 4-inch RB guns loaded with 125 grain +P NYCLAD ammo. I NEVER felt undergunned. We also had Remington 870Ps with us too.

Fast forward to 1998: As a metro-Denver cop, I was afforded the privilege of carrying a Les Baer TR Special 1911. A lot of the Glock kids would make fun of me becuase I only had 25 rounds of 230 grain Hydra-Shock on me. I NEVER felt under gunned. I had a M4 and my personally-owned Vang Comped 870P (w/ 19 rounds of #00 Buck/Slugs on/in the gun.

I am back in the Marine Corps. I was recently deployed to Afghanistan and carried a M9 with 30 rounds of 124 grain +P (NATO-spec) 9mm. Not the best round, but I NEVER felt undergunned. I would use it to fight my way to my M4 or some other Marine's M16A4.

Over the last three years, I have come back to the revolver as the mainstay of my defensive armament. I have a Model 21-4, Model 325 TRR, Model 19-5 and a Model 64-3, all custom.

If I was back "on the job", I would prefer to use a revolver. There is ABSOLUTELY nothing wrong or inferior about a .38 Special service-type revolver. I use the Buffalo Bore 125/158 grain JHP/LSWCHP +P (+P+ actually) rounds. I NEVER feel undergunned.

Over the last 20 years, we as a LEO community have substituted capacity for marksmanship. Granted, there are some VERY efficient marksmen out there that carry a Glock/SIG/M&P, etc. I've seen them and came away VERY impressed. However, there are still the new cops who begrudge the fact that they have to be proficient with their personal weapons and fail to realize that their lives are at risk due to their aversion to qualifying. They have NO idea as a group how to operate a revolver or a shotgun. Only the pistol and the AR.

Moral of the story: Beware of the old, salty, overweight, donut-eating, hard-drinking cop who carries a wheelgun. He may just know how to use it. We had a guy like that when I first came on in '98. Officer Dean Fountain (of the Glendale, CO PD) wore a cross-draw Model 66-1 on duty and carried 125 grain Magnums. Heaven help you if you were in 75 yards of him. You'd have a Helluva headache...

Nothing wrong with the tool. It's the operator. The Miami shootout was finished with a wheelgun. SA Ed Mireles, although greivously wounded by a .223 round in his arm shot dead his attackers with his issue Model 13. 'Nuff said!

Gtoppcop .... Interesting post . Thanks.
I also want to comment on the continued civility of this conversation. The intelligent and respectful manner in which most topics are covered on this web site make this a real treasure.

__________________
I like Ike.

Above all it is mindset. It really doesn't matter what I have in my hand. The only thing that can matter is sights and trigger press, repeat as needed. If you don't get rattled and can keep your cool under fire you have a better chance of carrying the day.

I'm afraid that is wishful thinking in this context. What works on the game range is not necessarily equivalent to the field of combat.

For starters, the moon-clip revolver gives up a couple of tactical advantages to the standard design, in addition to utilizing clips that can be bent and cause misfires. No LE agency used moon-clips guns unless they were forced to - despite the design being a about hundred years old at this point - and the military abandoned them for the same reasons as soon the WWI emergency was over, going back over to normal-loading revolvers.

FYI, IDPA changed the rules because moon-clipped revolvers were beating NON moon-clipped revolvers, not 1911s... revolvers don't even compete against pistols in IDPA. A specific category was created for moon-clip revolvers so as not to disadvantage the non moon-clipped variety REVOLVER, not the 1911 or any other pistol for that matter.

As far as your shooting claims, in all due respect they do not comport with reality. In addition to instructing LEOs for the past 20 years, I have competed in both IDPA and IPSC, and won a number of tournaments in several divisions. While a trained moonclipper may out-shoot a noob with a 1911, but that is not a fair comparison. While the moonclip revolver is a viable choice for some purposes, it will not out-shoot or out-reload, or out-anything a 1911 in similar .45 calibre with shooters of equal ability. The 1911 will always be some combination of faster, more accurate and/or faster to reload.

IMHO, bringing IDPA, IPSC and similar shooting events into the discussion takes it pretty far afield from the original OP. These events are games, where tactics are non-existent or a figment of the creator's mind, where the targets neither shoot at you or move or react to you, where speed is taken as holy grail over finite accuracy and judgement, and where the losers come back next week to have another go at it. A LE gunfight is not any of those things. The only similarities are that rounds are fired in each event. While anytime you fire your gun in practice or competition it is a good thing, if that is the extent of one's training the only thing that can be said is that it is better than nothing.

It is well established beyond argument that the modern auto pistol is superior to the revolver as a fighting tool for police work - no LE agency of any decent size that deals with violent criminals amongst the public on a regular basis selects a revolver anymore. Tales of being well-armed with a revolver in a bygone era of greater individual and societal restraint, without the epidemics drugs and organized violent gangs - who attack in numbers and well-armed - is a moot point. Granddad did great work armed with his .38 M&P and off-duty .32 Hand Ejector - but in that era he did most of his great work with a straight stick of cocobolo and a leather slap. That era is long gone. Also, serving as part of the embassy Marine detachment is a great honor, but the host country is tasked with providing the basic security outside the compound and ensuring the integrity of the embassy, and having a locker full of shotguns and M14s or M16s at hand inside the compound goes a long way towards making the revolver "adequate" for occasional nut case that made it past the first three checkpoints.

The only question is whether the .357 revolver is good enough for LE DUTY work. You might as well ask whether the Colt .36 Navy is good enough. At some time in their respective eras, either one was. A simple look around is all it takes - the consensus of LE today is that it is most definitely not.

No one here is the last authority on the subject, no matter how many credentials they toss out. I put a lot of stock in the words of those who have been in gun fights on the job. Statistics from my last agency showed that the officers won over 98% of their gun fights while revolvers ruled. I'm not privy to the current stats. It would be a good indicator of the success of autos and current training if that stat went up. There were dangerous armed criminals and gangs in days gone by, just like they are today. Some of the dangerous criminals in the '20's and '30's regularly practiced and trained with their firearms.

Semi-autos have been around for a very long time, and have been used by many European agencies far preceding the semi-auto fever in the U.S. Gun salesmen started convincing officers that high capacity autos were the way to go and convincing departments to trade-in their revolvers. There was a lot of money made during that time. Police unions jumped on the bandwagon, pressuring agencies to go with hi-cap autos. 9mm's were the hot item and this was before the ammo manufacturers had come up with the quality of ammo that is available today. Once the 9mm's were in the hands of many officers, the feds, who lagged behind, came up with a more potent round, the .40 S&W. Police officers now wanted the more powerful cartridge. More money was made by the salesmen.

In my experience it wasn't common for many agencies to train officers to draw from the holster and reload while being timed until around the early 80's. Time restraints were quite liberal. In the mid 80's time restraints decreased and emphasis was placed on good tactics. All these things were good IMHO.

When the training emphasis shifted from accuracy to speed in the 90's, many new officers weren't able to take advantage of the hi-cap autos they were issued, as they didn't have the foundation of good marksmanship skills.

To sum up, I think the average flat-bellied officer is well-equipped with a semi-auto due to the quality of ammo finally catching up. Training has improved for the most part, especially where reloading and tactics are concerned, but lacks in teaching the fundamentals of marksmanship. Again, I would NOT feel under-gunned with a .357 wheel gun with 18 rounds of ammo available, because like Dirty Harry said, "I hit what I aim at".

I too trained a lot of new law enforcement officers; running a police academy for over 10 years. To coin an old adage, "It's not the tool, it's the craftsman that uses it." I carried a Model 15 as my issued revolver starting in 1978. I later carried a personally owned gun, first a Ruger Security Six and later a Colt Python that I bought from one of our detectives. I was required to carry W-W 158 grain LSWCHP+P and I never felt "out-gunned." As I transitioned departments, and later was the Chief of a department, I followed the trend of LE to go to the semi-auto pistol, yet I frequently carried a revolver (once a 625 in .45 Colt) and as Chief, approved revolvers as duty weapons. At my last department, I was required to carry a Glock 21, but was also issued a 642 as a BUG.
I have observed over the years that most of the new applicants to the LE career have very little experience with firearms, particularly handguns. It is far easier to teach untrained individuals to practical proficiency on handguns with simple manual-of-arms, i.e., Glock (or DAO revolvers) than it is to train them to a similar level of expertise on DA/SA revolvers and semi-autos, as well as SA autos. This is the main reason that LE agencies have chosen the semi-auto, as well as advantageous marketing, over the revolver.
The .357 Magnum is as capable as performing as a duty round today as it was 30 years ago, especially if it is used in a hadgun of sufficient size and weight to manage recoil. Using the full power round in a K-frame gun was a disaster, as even the most proficient officers did not enjoy shooting it for extended periods.
There are but a few recorded incidents where LE ran out ammunition before the gunfight was over, but these include both semi-autos and revolvers. However, those few incidents don't relegate the revolver to ancient history. I would feel totally prepared for whatever harm would come my way by wearing a modern design 6, 7, or 8 shot .357 Magnum revolver with two speedloaders on my duty belt.

Real police shootings usually involve some combination of multiple bad guys and things that make it difficult to get hits- darkness, moving targets, cover, etc.

For those reasons, high capacity can be a real advantage. Not a "spray and pray" attitude, just dealing with a difficult situation.

I used to laught at this, but after studying/instructing police shooting for many years, i came to appreciate the saying
"Quantity has its own quality."

Other than military, I spent all my LEO time (22 yrs) in plainclothes, doing instruction as well. Carried a real melange of handguns but wound up using a workhorse Security Six 4" .357 with 125 grainers and speedloaders. Still have the gun which is on its second barrel. Shot it a lot and it is still as familiar and reliable as the sunrise. Only other gun I liked as well was a LW Commander .45 that I had to give up.

I occasionally had a M37 around as a BUG, and now my J frame is a 442. Access to a long gun is a fine thing, and I personally like my M4gery with a 1.5X ACOG.

Just another dinosaur.

My first issued sidearm in 1993 was a M-65 4" with +P .38's. It was darn accurate and I still want one for my collection. But, in today's world of policing... walking around with a total of 18 rounds on your belt is NOT a comforting feeling. After a few months on the job with the M-65 I chose to upgrade my pistol for a 6906. Most of the guys on my dept. carried the 6906 with three 15 shot magazines (two in the pouch and one with the grip adapter inserted in the pistol).

Imagine your comfort level going from 18 rounds of .38 to 46 rounds of 9mm? Not to mention that I went from hard to see fixed sights, especially at night, up to a set of night sights!

Today I am carrying an M&P40C, still have the night sights, still have the option of carrying 46 rounds of .40 on the duty belt or 21 with the compact magazines (one in the pistol and one spare). It's kind of like the best of both worlds.

In the city where I police many of the bad guys are armed with cheap stuff like Hi-Points and SKS and AK47's. Thankfully they seem to shoot each other more than they shoot at us. But if and when they do take a shot at us I don't think a single officer would prefer the wheel gun with 18 rounds over the Hi-cap autoloaders that replaced them.

And that's my .02 worth.

i totally agree with this post...and a BIG welcome to the forum!

__________________
SWCA#2208
KK4EMO

Spent 34 years in LE. Carried a revolver, S&W 19, 36, 66s and 29 four inch for 14 years. Then transitioned to Semi Auto.
Never felt undergunned with a Revolver. That said, if I know I'm going to a gun battle, I'm carrying a Semi Auto Pistol among other guns.

Rule 303

Seems like while reading thru the long dissertations put forth here against the wheel gun we forget one thing.

It was said early on. IF YOU KNOW THE ASSAILANT IS ARMED YOU ARE A FOOL TO GO IN WITH JUST A HANDGUN!!! 2 issues here. 1 is the training received. 2 is the false idea that capacity is going to save you.

We spend all this time and money equipping officers with fancy semi's and all this stuff but never give them the training to be competent when it comes to making the decision on needing their rifle. Lots of arguments have been made and I like them saying that officers should be armed with 870's and lever guns still. Why? They are inherently accurate fool proof guns.

The wheel gun is still the best choice for a shooter. And like someone else said if you can't handle it with 6. More than likely 15 ain't gonna do you any good.