I qualified today

[Gun 4 Fun]

First, I would like to express my sincere gratitude to ALL LEO's, and military personel everywhere for their service to our great country! THANK YOU!

In a time when things are tough everywhere, a department trying to save money isn't anything new.

It does make me wonder how they will feel about saving money on ammo, if even one officer is wounded or killed in the line of duty due to having inferior ammo in his gun.

Save money elswhere for crying out loud!

 

[David Sinko]

Unfortunately I have a different vest and my trauma plate pocket is not big enough to swallow my 3" 625. I may have to change that though.

A female mental patient once punched me in the chest but not hard enough to break her hand when she hit the SP-101 I was carrying there at the time. I was always concerned that if a bullet hit my backup gun the bullet would come apart and/or deflect up into my face. I don't know if this has ever happened to anybody or not, but the advantages of having a second gun in this position seem to outweigh the risk of that happening.

Dave Sinko

 

[bub75]

Originally posted by Wyatt Earp:
bub, I have to be blunt, but your department's firearms and ammo policy flat out sucks.

They are stuck in the 70s.

I agree, that 125 grain .38 Special sucks and I would not carry it either. Would they even consider Remington's R38S12 lead semi wadcutter HP +P? Tell them at least the FBI used to issue it.

That would be my bare minimum.

Wyatt, you are exactly right. That is their problem. I have heard, several times, that "if it was good enough in 19XX, it's good enough now". It sucks, but both the Chief and head instructor have this attitude, so there it is. They don't care what any other Agency does, they start off by saying "well, we're not X Agency, we do what we want to do".

Gun4fun, as for saving money through cutting firearms expenses, this is EXACTLY what they do. For example, the State of OH mandates that each PD will qualify at least once per year. The operative phrase here is "at least". In years past, we have gone out twice per year; State qualifications in the spring, tactical exercises in the fall. About three years ago, the Chief said that we needed to cut money, so we will only go out once per year and shoot the State course only. He also said that we will stop furnishing practice ammo to anyone who wants it and will only issue ammo for the one qualification course per year As expected, qualification scores dropped like a rock and are, frankly, dismal. You have to keep in mind, most cops aren't gun guys; the gun is only part of the uniform and, if ammo isn't furnished, they won't practice. Hell, even when we DID furnish practice ammo, most didn't take advantage of it because they weren't paid to go out and practice. The attitude is, why should we pay for it or give up our time? Crappy attitude, but there it is. We normally also replace duty ammo during the state qualification course; you shoot up what you have and get issued new after you are done. Now, we are only replacing ammo every other year. Believe me, that ammo looks GRUNGY after two years of hot/cold cycles, moisture and dust! Bottom line, EVERYONE seems to have the attitude that we have never had a shooting, so we never will, so why waste money on training and new ammo? I console myself with the fact that I try to make it a point to get out to the range myself at least once per month, weather and days off permitting. I'll readily admit that I'm not the best shot I've ever seen, but I can more than hold my own and plan on keeping it that way. After all, if you REALLY need your sidearm, you REALLY need it RIGHT NOW and there is no time for misses or malfunctions. If only I could get my admin and fellow Officers to see it like that!

Very sorry for the off-topic rant. Its just that I'm fed up with it and, when I get started, I can't stop.

Bub

 

[Gun 4 Fun]

I hear ya! I just went through a citizens academy course with my local PD. They have a really nice underground 25 yard range to use and qualify on. I was happy to learn that they are required to qualify regularly, and they get all the ammo they need to practice. Heck, we got to shoot (class of 28) all kinds of weapons and ammo. I really feel for cops that want to stay sharp and ready. A lot of our local cops pull double duty as SRT officers, and a lot of them are actually gun guys. Too bad it isn't like that everywhere.

If cops have to carry a gun as part of the uniform, they should be required to qualify monthly in my opinion. It worries me that one of them might miss in a shootout and get hit themselves or worse, hit the wrong person. That just seems like too much liability for a department to take on, simply due to the relatively small cost of ammo when bought in bulk buys. Especially when one considers all the lawsuits files now days.

I am for the cops, and anything they can do to make it better for themselves, I'm all for.

 

[Wyatt Earp]

Originally posted by Gun 4 Fun:
It worries me that one of them might miss in a shootout and get hit themselves or worse, hit the wrong person. That just seems like too much liability for a department to take on,.

A member in this forum is both an attorney and a peace officer, and I'm pretty sure he will say the same exact thing.

Inferior firearms, ammunition, and training increase department liability.

 

[jaegan]

Originally posted by bub75:

Wyatt, you are exactly right. That is their problem. I have heard, several times, that "if it was good enough in 19XX, it's good enough now". It sucks, but both the Chief and head instructor have this attitude, so there it is. They don't care what any other Agency does, they start off by saying "well, we're not X Agency, we do what we want to do".

Bub

All too common, but hang in there, eventually they will retire/leave and things can change. We just retired a couple of the top brass at my department, and it's amazing to those of us who have been here a few years how many changes we are getting approved that had been denied with no consideration at all for years.