I retired recently after 33 years. I started in 1976 with a mod 19, Colt Python, (mod 66 dept. gun). Then semi autos were allowed and I carried a P220 till being issued a G22.
I personally felt equally comfortable with all of them. I did however shoot a point or two higher with the revolvers.

I am a retired Police Officer and carried a S&W .357 magnum revolver for many years while working in uniform. However, I also carried a Colt Combat Commander in 45 ACP in a shoulder holster as my back-up. Revolvers and semi-autos have their place. This combination worked for me.

You are not going to find many current LEO's that have experience carrying a revolver, so us retired guys is where your will get answers to your question. My last issued revolver was in the 80's (model 66) and the range failure rate became too high to justify keeping them. We had carried them about five years and everything from end shake to various other issues had taken it's toll. I was the dept armorer and believe me, the guns were a mess. Transitioned to Sig 9mm, then to Sig 40 and then to the HK 45. I cant say I ever missed the .357. Just reloading with magazines verses speedloaders is a no brainer and so much easier in timed or stressful situations. I can recall one non fatal shooting with the 357, one non fatal with the 40 and one fatal with the 45. I guess it is just called progress...

"I doubt many of today's patrolmen would be comfortable with any revolver, regardless of caliber."

I am one of the exceptions I think. Beginning with service in the USMC through my 12th year as a civilian LEO, I carried semi-autos in the .45 ACP variety. I worked 8 years of SWAT and relied on a 1911 (along with an AR-15) for the overwhelming majority of that time. About 4 years ago, the nagging feeling of having a pistol jam in a gunfight just would not leave me alone. The final straw for me was when I read about a Houston patrol officer who got off one round before the gun jammed up and he was executed at close range. The question as to whether or not the revolver was a more reliable platform for police type "defensive" work was on my mind regularly. Long story short, I decided that the revolver, properly cleaned and maintained, was more reliable in this setting. For the past three years, I have carried a 627pc 8 shot revolver. It is now equipped with an XSS nightsight, Jordan Trooper grips from Herretts, and fed with Hearthco full moon clips of 125 grain .357 DPX ammo. When on patrol, I carry three 8 round reloads and I definitely do not feel undergunned. I can tell you that I get some stares and comments from other officers as they can't believe I am carrying a revolver in the 21st century. I love to shoot it and with practice I believe you can get almost as fast on the follow-up shots and reloads as you can with autos.

__________________
Semper Fidelis

I carried a S&W 65 at the time of my retirement in 2007, it was my choice over every other handgun. Caliber had no basis in my decision though, as I would have carried any other as long as it was in a stainless S&W K frame.

The reason I carried it was for the speed with which it can be drawn from a snapped duty holster. Anyone who feels a revolver is inferior to an auto for a police duty weapon is dreaming, in my opinion. In fact there are enough negatives for the average police officer that most shouldn't even be allowed to carry an auto.

As I posted earlier on, I often carry a revolver on duty (7 shot S&W 586 L-Comp) and I'm very comfortable with it, I do not feel "undergunned" when I'm carrying it. I also use moonclips and carry 4 spares. In addition my BUG is a revolver.

__________________
Don't kiss smiling dogs!

I am an always armed civilian(with CWP) and a handgun collector/shooter. I may carry a mid-frame 357(Colt or S&W), 1911 45, or Browning HP in 40 or 9. Extra ammo always!!!! And a BUG, Keltec or J-frame. I feel for civilian or LEO you must be able to hit what you are shooting at, therefore I reload and shoot several hundred rounds a month. Very few LEOs or civilians practice enough, Leos should qualify monthly, civilians should practice on a regular basis. Budget constrants? What counts most is seeing tommorow.

Pray and Shoot Daily.
Lee Jones(Celtgun

Good shooting will make up for poor gear, but superior gear will not make up for poor shooting. Jeff Cooper

Just for the info which you probably know. The city of Cleveland started issuing Glock 17s about 2 years ago or so. I have talked to some of them and they like them. The reasons were they could hit well, the pistol works everytime and its user friendly meaning they fit their hands. I like mine for the same reason. Also I love my smith revolvers and practice double action with all of them over 90% of the time. I say learn to persons learn to use them that way too. I wouldnt want to get hit with a .38 or a 9mm even if some consider them light. There a lots of good loadings out there.

Myself I would trust a 357mag any day loved my 4" 66 I had. Wish I still had it. If I had to pick 1 gun for family safety be a 357 or a 40cal just my thoughts though

I entered LE in 1977 and chose to carry my personally owned 28 over the 15 I was offered. We were allowed to carry magnums, and I carried two of the new-fangled speed-loaders on my belt and two more in my unit. Over time, I experimented with other revolvers; 19's, 66's, etc. in various barrel lengths. However, having been raised in a military family, I was well indocrinated in the advantages of the 1911 and the .45 ACP. In 1982, I became the rangemaster, and lobbied heavily for the 1911. I eventually talked the Chief into the transition to autos, but only to double action platforms. Since I developed the program, I was given a lot of say in the structural requirements for the pistol. It had to be American made and steel-framed. The only two such pistols available at that time were the 645 and Colt Double-Eagle. As you might guess, the 645 won out.

Due to the magazine problems that S&W experienced during that time, we later transitioned to Glock 21's. In 1993, I changed to my hometown department, which was still carrying revolvers; 19's and 66's. Took a little getting used to, but eventually I stopped feeling underarmed (although I did carry a Sig P228 and extra mags in my car after being involved in an in-custody death incident that brought a lot of heat for a time).

Today, I carry my issued Glock G17 or G26, depending on my activities. I always carry G17 magazines when I carry the 26. Off-duty, however, it is common for me to carry a 940, 65, PC681, 4516, 4566 or one of my 1911's. The GDHP 124 +P ammo we are issued is what I carry in all of my 9mm guns. I have seen it's effectiveness and don't worry about it's potential for ending a problem. I always carry revolvers, primarilly .357 or .44 mag/special if in the mountains or desert. I always carry plenty of spare ammo, depending on the application, usually in speed loaders or moonclips (940).

The point is, as so many have said, shot placement is most critical. While I can shoot consistently high scores with all of my guns (because I shoot on my own time and dime ALOT), the world is an entirely different place when someone is shooting back at you. There is no such thing as having too many rounds.

__________________
Dave Frost

I owned several .357s during my 25 year law enforcement career, but seldom carried one on duty, much preferring a .44 or .45. I carried a lightweight 1911 that I built in '81 for most of those years.

However, that pistol started having feeding problems in '99 and I laid it aside and started carrying a M625 .45 ACP. The 5" full lug barrel was a mite too heavy, S&W didn't have any Mountain gun barrels, so I swapped on a 3" barrel. My revolver looked like pinky's, exept mine wore Hogue grips. I also had 24 extra rounds in full moon clips in my speedloader pouches.

During department qualifications, I found that I could reload faster than the majority of the officers carrying autoloaders.

I felt well armed.

I'm now working security on a Federal contract and I'm issued a Glock 17. I shoot it OK, but I'd rather carry the M625 .45 ACP Mountain gun that I was finally able to find.

__________________
John 3:16
WAR EAGLE!

My first issue wep was a 4" 686 loaded with Fed 125's. Never felt "undergunned" then and still wouldn't, TOO MANY rely on round count to choose whats a "good" defensive wep and what's not. I plan on getting back into LE in the next yr or so and I'll carry a revolver if allowed.

__________________
Sie vis pacem parabellum

This is a very "interesting" thread and a good read.

When I came on my Department in 1986 the S&W M66 was issue, and we carried Win. 158 gr + P LHP for issue. We then transitioned to the SIG P226 in '89 or '90, we issued the 147 gr subsonic load, and now have SIG P226 DAK and P229 DAK in 40.

In answer to the question, one of my off duty guns I carry is a S&W Model 13 with 3" bbl. Issue ammo is Fed Hydra Shok 38 +P 129 gr, and/or the Remington 158 gr .357 JHP (fun load). I do regularly practice and qualify with this gun and carry a ***** load of speed loaders and speed strips. The advantage I feel I have is I ALWAYS have this gun with me, on and off duty and am very comfortable and confident with it.

The other off duty gun I have recently aquired is a S&W 396 NG which I am now "getting to know" pretty good.

For sudden and short period incidents of extreme violence on a very small scale, it's not the fact that it is a high capacity semi-auto or a high powered revolver that matters.
It's the person who is holding it and how good they are with it in all types of conditions.

"Just my two cents, but firepower and magazine capacity will never replace the actual ability to hit the target. In most "shootouts" you read where the police or bad guy will fire dozens of shots with only one or two hits. One hit with a .38 special round nose beats 17 misses with a .40 hollow point any time."
Enough already with that silly myth. Where did you read that? One hit with a rolled up newspaper, or a spitball obviously beats 17 misses of hollow point. Please enough already with that nonsense. If someone ran out ammo with a 17 round mag he clearly would have run out of a six shot revolver that much sooner. At least with more rounds you could hold the skell off til the cavalry arrived. Sorry, just that ignorance that someone can put themselves in a cop shoot out and perpetuate that it was the semi's fault no one was hit. On top of that " they read somewhere ". Where did you read that ? If you like revolvers fine, good for you. Don't guess what would help in a shoot out unless you were there.

This is a really good thread and quite a lot of information to consider.

Double-action revolvers are simple guns much less prone to malfunctions (be them mechanical or shooter-induced) than bottom-feeders. I'm sure the term "limp-wrist-malfunction" was unknown to many instructors back when most everyone was carrying wheel-guns. Wheelies are typically not ammunition-sensitive (providing someone hasn't foolishly played around too much with the action). Not having to worry about damaged magazines is also another big plus.

For those of us who carry revolvers as BUG's, potential ammunition sharing is a big plus. If I carried a .357 wheel-gun on duty, my BUG would likely be a .357 J-frame of some sort. The new Ruger LCR would be high on the list as well.

In addition to the old favorites, the new full-size S&W 7 and 8 shot .357 revolvers (particularly in the lightweight alloys) would make fine duty guns.

Someone here already made the comment that the first (few) shots in a gunfight are often the most critical, but the 15th usually isn't. That is definitely food for thought. Extra ammunition is certainly not a bad thing, but if you lug it around every day only to miss with it when it counts, you're not doing yourself any favors. Weather you have 6 shots or 20 shots at your immediate disposal, accurate fire delivered in a timely manner is the ultimate goal, right?

I've always been issued a semi-auto of some sort for duty. Given my own choice (which I currently do not enjoy) I'd carry one of several semi-auto's for duty; 1911's being at the top of the list. However, I would definitely prefer a wheel-gun over a semi-auto of questionable reliability or low power. Whatever you carry, learn it well.

Lousy marksmanship is not a myth, nor does magazine capacity compensate for it in any situation other than suppressive fire, in which case blanks would probably serve just as well.

I'm from the day when LEO related good stuff started with a 4 - I drove a 440 Plymouth with a 4 barrel carb and carried a 41 mag. 1 shot put down many deer that had tangled with an auto, one dog that wanted to eat me and 1 Chevy being driven by a felon. As the years passed and the self loader became the standard, the revolver was never missed - but I really missed the Plymouth!

As a LEO from 74-86, I carried a .45 and a .357. Off duty, the .45 only. While working uniformed patrol, a 66 was carried with 125 Federals. Didn't feel a bit under armed. Also kept an 870 in the front seat. The Illinois State Police were carrying the 9mm with several loads. I kept the Federals.
CraigJ

I have been a cop for 24 years and a firearms instructor for 15years. I started my career shooting .38 round nose ammo in a M19. A few years later we were issued .357 125gr sjhp ammo and it was a confidence booster. In 1991 I was issued a Glock 9mm, but I wanted to keep carrying my .357 magnum due to my own ability with the revolver and for the ballistic efficency of the .357 over the 9mm. I also loathed the idea of having a plastic gun. But over time I felt comfortable with the gun. In 1995 Glock had their trade in program and we traded up to the .40 and it was a great improvement ballistically over the 9mm round. By that time I was also a firearms instructor for my agency and I saw the overall scores also went up, when we went from 9's to 40's, so go figure. In 2008 my current agency was in need of a weapon upgrade and after a thorough test and evaluation process of the new Glock .45GAP vs. the 45 auto, we went with the Glock 21SF in .45 auto because the "majority" of shooters we used for the tests had all performed much better with that particular round and gun. Would I "now" feel undergunned with a 6 shot .357 compared to my current .45 with (3) 13 round mags of 230gr. Speer Gold Dots? YES. But I will always trust a 5 shot 640 in .357 as my backup gun.

__________________
Fir Na Dli

I busted a gut laughing at this one!!!! Classic!!!!

__________________
One gun is never enough...

Win 45 Mag!!

I have been mixing revolvers with semi autos, at work, for several years now. I've used this one for a couple of years, recently. Before that it was a Mountain Gun in 45 Colt. I'm happy with several Glocks and 1911s for duty, just as well as any suitable revolver. With the introduction of the 8 shot 357, Smith & Wesson raised the bar for "tactical" revolver use. Most 1911s carry 7 or 8 +1 in 45 ACP and I believe this 8 shooter is on an even footing, for the first 8. After that the shooter's skill in reloading (either revolver or 1911 auto) comes into the mix. With the high caps, obviously, reloading skill comes on after many more rounds. Then there's always the worry over semi autos malfunctioning......

Is 8 in the gun enough? We're all legally responsible for each round fired, so up to 8 should work in 99% of legal shootings. What lurks around in the back of my mind though, is the other 1%. Also the area being worked is a real factor. In the County where I'm employed, you can start out in the city and end up out in the boonies, during any shift. And of course with the border being "secured" by our fearless leaders in Washington, there is a strong probability of working one of the busiest smuggling corridors, any time. No matter which handgun carried, there's always a long gun in the work truck, to back up the pistol or revolver of the day.

__________________
Tom
"Panem et Circenses"

Nice set up Thomasinaz. I carried a 357 Python as a Deputy sheriff in the 80's most of the time and did not feel undergunned. Today is in a different criminal era and century.
There were a few Border Patrolmen who did well with 357's and 1911's. Col. Askens come to mind. The difference is their shootouts were with folks who had similar firearms. Today one might be facing a gold plated AK47. As much as I love my 19 and 3.5" 27 I think my 12 round Sig 40 would give more comfort due to the potential of facing more than one or two heavily armed folks.

I put 30 years in law enforcement in Southern California. During that time I carried a .38, a 9mm, a 45acp, and a .357. I felt very safe with the .357, partially due to its power, and partially due to my confidence in my shooting ability. I'm retired now and mainly still carry a 686 2 1/2 inch with full factory loads. Its a great round!

I carry a 625-8 in .45 acp and the Hornady Critical Defense loads and 4 moonclips loaded with the .45 acp rounds. After test firing yjese rounds,Hornady has come to be my favorite bullet. rz625-8 Amd I carry my 5 inch for security work in a nylon holster made by Python.

I am in my twenties and would rather carry a revolver than an auto, anyday!!!! I was an 0311 who carried the 249 SAW and had to use the Beretta 92!! How many times does one tap-rack-bang an auto? It happens eventually, and it is possible for it to happen on the 1st round. I would rather have a 44 magnum with 200 grain 44 spl hollow points or a 357 magnum with 158 gr xtp hollow points anyday, with a Mossberg close by!!!!!! Don't disrespect guys with more experience than you or me! They usually have done more with less, and are no less "high-speed" than you!!!

I started out with a ,357mag as a duty gun, been carrying a 9mm for over 20 years now though.

If I had to carry a 6 or 7 shot L frame nowadays I wouldn't lose much sleep over it, but,,,,

My Glock 17 with 127gr +P+ Winchester has nearly the horsepower of the .357mag 125gr Federal we used to issue for our revolvers, and I have 20 rounds IN the gun instead of 18 rounds on my whole belt, all with less recoil and, frankly speaking, more reliability.

No, I wouldn't change by choice.

Sir, FWIW, my "high speed" days are long past. Back when I was a young 0311, we still had steel pots and jeeps.

I stand by what I said. You can probably find a few young bucks in patrol cars today who'd prefer a revolver to a hi-cap auto, but not many. The guys who do prefer revolvers are mainly old dudes like me, and older.

Hope this helps, and Semper Fi.

Ron H.

__________________
Wishin' don't make it so.

More reliability with an auto? That conflicts totally with my experience. In over 40 years of shooting handguns, I have never had a revolver malfunction. I can remember numerous malfunctions with autos.

I have seen a revolver malfunction...at the range. My friend was shooting factory ammo through his Ruger Security Six, when he had a squib which pushed the bullet half way into the forcing cone, leaving half in the cylinder.
His shooting day was over.

Well, I have to take it back in my case, then, as well. I've seen one--and one only--revolver malfunction and it was a stuck bullet in the barrel of an old Colt single action. I personally would call that an ammo malfunction, not a revolver malfunction, as I would your friend's incident. His day wouldn't have been any less 'over' if he'd been shooting an auto...the bullet would still be in the barrel.

I do not have enough fingers and toes to count all the fail-to-feed, fail-to-eject and stovepipes I've had. That doesn't even count the ones I've seen happen to other people.

A great stopper-round in a reliable platform is nothing to sneeze at.

I would patrol with either a semi or a revolver, but I like the "for sure" part about revolvers. If carrying a semi, I ALWAYS want a revolver backup gun, not necessarily vise versa.

__________________
NRA Life Member

I'm not a cop, but once I was an Infantryman in Iraq........I always daydreamed about having a .44 Mag as a sidearm, but if I was pressed into service again, I would prefer a .357 revolver as my sidearm, if given the option to carry a personal sidearm.

Odds are, if my rifle failed or I ran out of rounds, and I was for some reason alone and had none of my guys around me, any situation requiring a handgun would be close, quick and dirty. A .357 would penetrate most any soft body armor, and if not, a .357 to a trauma plate would take someone out of the fight for a while. I'm not sure if I would choose a .357 revolver as a primary weapon with nothing else, but as a sidearm to a rifle, it would be my first choice. At very close range, I know I'm not gonna miss, and I'll take 1 or 2 hard-hitters on target rather then 5 or 6 9mm's. Even a .357 in a non-vital area like an arm or leg, is gonna take most of that part with it, and thus take the guy out of the fight no matter what drug he's on, when he's missing a chunk of thigh or blood is pouring out of a massive abdominal wound he's not gonna want to play anymore.

There's a lot to be said for carrying a 6-shot slugger of a handgun, especially with very hot .357 HP's. Whatever they hit, tends to go down and stay down.

Besides, I've seen what a .357 Magnum revolver can do, watching my son play Call of Duty. Man, what a round!

__________________
NRA Life Member

Respectfully sir, if you have never had a revolver quit on you then you have been lucky.

Yes, in my experience the Glock 9mms are more reliable than the model 66s we used to issue, same-same for the 5906s we issued after we transitioned to pistols from revolvers.

My experience base is not just from personally owned guns, but from watching a program involving 325 or so shooters over the course of 23+ years.

Back in the day it was common for guys running a qual to have to stop in the middle because the wheelgun wouldn't go bang. A common issue was to get powder grains under the extractor star, as an example, or to cath a rim of the casing under the extractor star during a reload (a real show stopped there), and for the guns to choke for various other reasons.

When we transitioned to the Glock I watched about 3/4 of a million rounds go down range, we had very, very few stoppages, almost all due to new shooter learning curve issues, and absolutely none when shooting up our duty ammo during quals over a three+ year period since.
That never happened when we had wheelguns.

I also find that the pistols are far more solid when dirty or abused. Get sand or dirt in a revolver, or drop it on the concrete, and it's probably going to need an armorer to fix it, our S&W and Glock 9mms commonly sluff this treatment off without choking.

There is a reason why every single military in the world issues pistols and not revolvers, and it has nothing to do with capacity.

Now, I love my wheelguns as much as the next guy, still carry my Security Six or 681 to the woods, and carry my 642 or 638 daily, but for a primary fighting handgun give me a pistol any day.

Respectfully, none of this is true.

The .357 is no more likely to get through soft armor than any other high velocity pistol round, and less so than many 9mm and .357Sig bullets in my testing.

The .357mag is no more likely to drop a bad guy than a good 9mm or .45 load, fact of life. If hitting a bad guy on armor you have accomplished the equivalent of a somewhere between a paint ball hit and a good healthy punch, and they will likely ignore the hit, it is a pistol round, it is not the Hammer of Thor.

I am aware of total failures to stop involving center mass hits with the legendary 125gr .357mag loading from 4" duty guns, both locally in our OISs and elsewhere.

I like the .357mag round, and I have seen it's use here to very good effect, but false expectations of the capability of one's gear can get one hurt.

Clearly has nothing to do with the fact that it was a revolver... no part of the revolver failed to function, and no part of the revolver contributed to the squib load... an ammo failure, which would have had the same result in a semi-auto.

__________________
LEO since 1981.

Respectfully....I'm gonna have to see it with my own eyes.

My 40+ years of being around every type of handgun imaginable in virtually every condition has led me to exactly the opposite conclusion.

I've already seen PLENTY of semiauto malfunctions. If I live another 40 years, the revolvers couldn't possibly catch up.

I have been working on the job in So. Fla for 17 yrs. I currently carry a 40 cal (mod 35) Glock as a duty weapon. This is a fine weapon/ammo combo and is hard to beat. I personally like revolvers and I would not feel at all endangered if I had to carry one on duty. An 8 shot 357 with full moon clips would make me even more relaxed! One advantage of the revolver that is frequently over looked is its reliability. Even if you pull the trigger and do not get a "bang," pull it again and you most certainly will. The same cannot be said of a semi auto. I suppose if I were in an area with more gang activity I would definitely side with the higher capacity semi auto.

My chief in the early eighties was a dyed in the wool revolver man. I was in charge of firearms training and set up a week long handgun school with a big name outside instructor. Several on our department lobbied for autos but the chief would not even consider it.

We started the school with our 686s and the big name instructor insisted we only shoot our duty load of the 125 grain Remington magnum load. We were shooting several hundred rounds per day and by the end of the second day everybody, including our champion revolver shooting chief was having problems handling the magnum load. He decided on the third day to authorize auto pistols and went out and bought himself a Smith 645. Many of us already had various 1911s so the instructor graciously started over with auto pistols (I think an Alaskan black bear hunt might have influenced him).

Bottom line, when given a choice of a 45 auto or the 357 90% of the officers chose to purchase their own 45 auto for duty use. All but a handful of the remaining revolver guys started carrying the FBI 158 grain 38 special load instead of the 125 grain magnums.

Magnums are not fun to shoot for most people. You can shoot the 45, 40, or 9mm all day long but you have to be pretty tough to shoot a full house 357 for a couple of hundred rounds a day. I have no doubt that there are a few people out there who love the recoil, flash, and muzzle blast of the 357 but the average cop does not fall into this category. The 357 is a powerful handgun round but there are better choices for the average shooter or cop.

anyone ever hear of moon clips ? the only problem is that smith doesnt make them for the five shot j frame - but an eight shot moon clip for a 357 - as the ad says - priceless

I used to have a 940 that I thought would make a good BUG, one of the issues was the moon clips.
These are easy to bend, and even a little bit of bend will tie up the gun badly.

I think the clips are fine for range work, but I don't trust them to be durable enough for constant carry.

the new pro series 442/642 are five shot moon clipped j frames

I must admit I ignored this thread for a number of days, not wanting to get into the usual argument. Slow day today so I just read through all 15 pages and have two points to make.

In 1981 I became my department's chief firearms instructor and was charged with completely revamping our approach to firearms training (two negligent discharges showed up the poor training we then had). As part of that I interviewed a bunch of cops all over the country who had been in gunfights. To a man they all said they now carried a larger caliber and more ammo as a result of being in the fights. No one said "six is enough".

My department of ~400 armed personnel was about 60% semi-autos (45 ACP 1911s) and 40% 357 Mag (issue gun was the M-66 & Rem 125g Mag ammo). During both training exercises and qualification I saw enough gun related malfunctions with revolvers to loose all the romanticism associated with the "six-gun". As stated earlier, dirt can bring the fine mechanism of a revolver to a halt. I once did a one day training exercise in which I personally witnessed a Colt Government Model shoot over 700 rounds of cast bullet "Ball" reloads without a single malfunction and zero matinence. No revolver we had would do that.

I love Smith revolvers but carry semi-autos.

Dave

__________________
RSVN '69-'71
PCSD (Ret)

Dave, T
After 9/11 became the Training Sgt in MN NYPD. Anyway, I started receiving and had to collect data on Cops in my Command range qualifications. We had both the Glock 9MM, ( Some Sig's and Smith Auto's ) and older Smith model 10's/64's and Chief's/Centennials. In the 4 years I held that spot, never ever had a report ( and there were thousands, sometimes seemed like more ) of a Glock not functioning. There were many reports of Smith Cylinders not turning/opening and frozen triggers. Rugers Security Six had their issues also, but were so few it was hard to keep Data on them. I too Love revolvers, There is something to be said for the way a metal and wood revolver feels in the hand. However, when time for business, and no nonsense Life or Death situation, in my humble opinion, Glock is the one firearm I count on. Still on patrol in another State, and only carry a Glock. Starting my 29th year.

The main problem I have is forcing the same pistol on everyone, and then not being able to train as needed - the disagreement is in how much training is needed... That seems to be a universal issue. Interesting in how real life can effect what is or isn't important. Hard for me to argue with what works, and we've had some shoots, and non shoots, where things worked out.. So, sometimes I just don't know... Life is not boring.

__________________
July 4, 1776 not Jan 30, 1909

id feel totally secure in packing a ol 27-2 3.5 357mag again in uniform not a problem, i think if the s***t hit the fan ird make a mad dash for my c.a.r.-15 .

but since 90 percent of cops refuse to keep thre guns clean anyway revolvers are a way to go, there more reliable the autos i think and with 6 shots which is only 2 less than my colt gold cup throw on 2 speedloaders amd im good.

i think and have seen since we went to autos more people are "spraing" targets than getting on there sites and making there shots count just an observation form a 24yr vet... but then what do i know gettin ready to pack a blue 27-2 31/2 off duty again cant wait... loaded with full house mags totally secure....

I have read the posts in this thread with a great deal of interest, and after donning a flame suit, will through in my two cents. I learned to shoot with my Dad's old duty gun, a S&W m15, and have a love for the K and L frame revolvers. In the course of my law enforcement career I have carried a S&W m15, Beretta 92FS, Glock 22, and now a H&K p2000. There are no logical reasons for a modern law enforcement agency to even consider a revolver as standard issue for a uniformed officer when compared to the plethora of modern semi autos.

When you consider logistics the semi auto beats the revolver every time. The revolver contains more and smaller parts than a modern semi auto. The revolver needs more tools and spare parts to effect armorer level repairs than a semi auto. The revolver needs a more intense training class for armorer level repairs than a semi auto. The revolver may not be as easily modified to fit an individuals hand as the recent generation semi autos.

When you consider the tactical needs of a modern agency, the revolver falls short again. The .40 s&w ammo issued by my agency is a 155 gr JHP traveling at approximately 1200 fps. To get the equivalent energy from a 357 magnum would require a full power 158 gr load with an corresponding difference in recoil, muzzle flash, and muzzle blast. You also would only see a typical duty load of 18 rounds with a revolver (Six in the cylinder with two speedloaders.) vs 36 to 45 rounds with a 40 cal semi auto. The semi auto also has the edge in tactical situations such as one hand reloading, weak hand reloading, immediate action drills, and so on.

In short given the current state of law enforcement training and budgets, the continued rise in the use of long arms by criminal organizations, and the increased training and practice carried out by criminal organizations, the law enforcement officer in today's environment would be considerably disadvantaged with a revolver as a duty sidearm.

As a post script, my father was a street cop for 21 years, starting in a time when blackjacks, beavertails, and officer presence enforced the law and your back up was calling in on a Gamewell box. He was involved in a number of on the job shootings, and at the first opportunity switched to a S&W 659 when semi autos were authorized for duty carry.

penates; This post isn't about Office issue handguns or the "tactical needs of an agency". It's about if an individual Deputy/Officer feels well armed with a revolver. Some do, some don't.....I think this is based on indivdual experience, training, and a willingness to practice shooting and operating the duty handgun proficiently. What works best for each of us, indivdually, is based on that.

I've seen way too many Officers on the qualification course, who struggle to get a barely passing score with semi-autos. When they're asked when they shot last, it's ususally "last year's qual" when they posted another lousy score. When the few guys come out to qualify with revolvers they usually shoot above average scores, becasue they shoot and practice with them. I don't think revolvers should be forced onto most cops because most cops won't put the time into staying proficient with the revolver. But for those individual Officers who do put the time into operating the revolver proficiently, it is a viable option.

__________________
Tom
"Panem et Circenses"