The Wheelgun is Alive and Well

[Buford57]

When we transitioned to auto loaders everyone expected range scores to go up, they remained about the same. Some of the smaller women had a very difficult time with the blocky grip of the Glocks, but in my agency it was one size fits all.

My department authorized 9mm autos for patrol a few months after I pulled the pin. I was in Investigations Division and we had been authorized 9s for years. For my last qualification I shot with the last group of the day, consisting of several younger patrol officers. As we scored our targets one of the patrolmen, assuming I was shooting my 39-2, drew attention to my score (which was somewhere in the high 90s) and announced "once we get our 9mms we'll all be able to shoot scores like Buford".

I wish I had a picture of the look on his face when I pulled back my jacket and showed him the Colt Lawman .357 snub I'd pulled out of mothballs for my last few months.

Ergonomics helps improve accuracy. I've never seen any evidence of capacity doing so.

Does anyone know how many rounds the LAX officers needed to take down the shooter yesterday? More than 6 each?

 

[shouldazagged]

Perhaps I'm a dinosaur.

No more a dinosaur than I am, certainly. I no longer own any pistols, and only a couple of revolvers. But I'm not now and never have worked in law enforcement. The people I know who are often love revolvers but feel more confident with more rounds in the gun. Since they know what they are up against, I can appreciate that.

The part that troubles me is hearing that many police departments don't have sufficient funds or facilities to allow frequent live-fire training to refine their skills with their high-cap autoloaders. That's unfair to the officers and the people they protect.

 

[Muley Gil]

When I retired in 2001, I was carrying a S&W M625 3", in .45 ACP. I had four full moon clips in my old double speedloader pouch; 2 clips with the bullets point down and 2 on top point up. There was another officer also carrying a M625 in ACP and a few carrying .38 and .357 revolvers. My department had about 125 shown officers at the time.

Since then, I've been issued Beretta M9s and Glocks in my employment, with no other options.

 

[mkk41]

Unfortunately , most Police Chiefs seem to become more politician than LEO. Bet the Philly police chief Ramsey blamed all of society ills on guns , huh?

 

[rwsmith]

It seems military and law enforcement....

It seems a person's effectiveness in the field is measured by how many pounds of gear they carry.

And as far as the militarization goes, I believe there is a secret desire of every male in this country to be part of special forces.

 

[KLYDE]

Department went to the 9mm Sig in the early 90's. Per contract we purchase new guns every 10 years. After the nine we went to the .40. A couple of years ago that was replaced by the .45 ACP model 220. Both the 9 and .40 were high capacity. The single stack 220 has a mag capacity of 8. Many of the youngsters gripe about how we are "going backwards" and might as well be carrying revolvers. I don't know about them but I feel just as secure packing 8 rds of .45 ACP as I did with 12 rds of 9mm. Maybe more so.

 

[Jaymo]

The youngsters are also part of the generation that thinks a Glock has a good trigger pull.

 

[Donn]

Revolvers. An elegant weapon for a more civilized age.

 

[qrachel]

To Proctect and Serve . . .

To all you great guys for "protecting and serving," thank you from the bottom of my heart. You are part of what makes us a great people!

Take good care,

Rachel

P.S. I can definitely get the discussion between wheel guns and shovel loaders. Love my 357 686+ AND my Kobra Carry . . . I'd be comfortable with either, but think it would come down to weight and personal preference - top brass exercising their prerogatives not with standing. However, I tend to have the 686 handy at home; (point and squeeze) is very comforting to an old gal.

 

[44 special Dave]

The wheelgun is alive and well.....yep on this forum and other enthusiasts web sites.

Objectivity is not practiced here and it doesn't need to be.

I have owned only 4 semis amongst a LOT of revolvers and definitely prefer revolvers. These days its 45 acp/ar revolvers for me.

But that's me not being objective.

look at the current trends; revolvers are somewhat alive in the CCW market. Light easy to conceal, etc.

Shoot a more traditional revolver at the range and people look at you like "what's that?"

You look at the shooting world at large which includes everybody that has a handgun for whatever reason and the revolver is waning.

Most gun shops have 90% semis to 10% revolvers. Ok maybe 80/20 if you count the CCW type guns.

While I prefer revolvers I just laugh sometimes how "out of step" I am with the rest of the world.

Opinions are like........everyone has one.

Dave

 

[jrod]

We still carry Model 64 S&W's. But we are very slowly ( and I mean slowly ) transitioning to Glock 22's.

 

[loc n load]

Revolvers & auto's

Believe me, Jaymo, that makes two of us!

Not many of us left that qualified with revolvers as our primary duty weapon in the Academy!

Even if the game has changed, I do indeed long for the days...

I was issued a revolver in 73 when I first went "on the job", I carried revolvers until 1988 when I was issued a S&W high cap 9mm.....I instructed revolvers for LE until 95....then strictly pistols until 2008 when I hung up my spurs.....I was also a tactical operator from 1987 -2008....my first love was S&W K frames, especially the magnums.....but having carried and shot both platforms extensively, I spent the last twenty years doing a lot of high speed force on force training using pistols & smg's....in my world, multiple assailants existed, folk's who had high cap pistols, AK's, AR's and illegal fully auto's.....MacGuffin is most correct, the world for law enforcement changed in almost every aspect during my 34 years as a LEO, I was there in the midst of it and saw it happen.... I can stay in the fight much longer with a high cap pistol, than I can a revolver with speed loaders - and I am proficient with that set up.....from an instructor's viewpoint, both the pistol and the revolver have their pro's and con's when it comes to instructing officer's and citizens. Now that I am retired, I have "rediscovered" my K & N frames....always had my J frames.

 

[DR505]

MacGuffin is most correct, the world for law enforcement changed, I was there in the midst of it and saw it happen.... I can stay in the fight much longer with a high cap pistol, then I can a revolver with speed loaders - and I am proficient with that set up.....

That is the reason I always have my M4 handy with extra magazines. The world didn't really change, it just decided to pay us a visit.

 

[shouldazagged]

Shoot a more traditional revolver at the range and people look at you like "what's that?"

I've heard a young person refer to a Model 15 as "one of those old cowboy guns".

And I imagine you, like me, have heard disparaging remarks in gun stores about your appreciation of revolvers.

Fortunately the only two stores where I've bought guns in the last 15 or 20 years are staffed by people who would never try to dissuade a customer from buying "one of those old cowboy guns".

As for the alleged secret desire of every male to be involved in special forces, here's one exception. I'm going on 112 years old, and prefer to make love, not war.

 

[DR505]

As for the alleged secret desire of every male to be involved in special forces, here's one exception. I'm going on 112 years old, and prefer to make love, not war.

You crazy kids!

 

[mscampbell2734]

Would I carry a revolver if I had a choice? No I would not.

After 19 years and a couple of social encounters on the job I would not. While I'm not saying every day is going to end up being the North Hollywood shootout, the fact is today more so then ever before having more ammo IS better.

I know the arguments about shot placement, reliability and ergonomics will go on forever, but in the end being able to carry more ammo and reload quicker IS better.

Remember, police officers carry holstered handguns as SELF DEFENSE weapons. As several have pointed out the shotgun and M4 are the go to tools if you know AHEAD of time your going to a hot call or situation. But when the situation comes to you and all you have is what's on your belt more is better.

And yes, I started with a revolver. Smith 15 out of the Orange County CA Sheriff Department. Went to LAPD and was issued the Beratta M9, transitioned to the Smith 4505, later Glock 22, now carry a Springfield 1911.

 

[44 special Dave]

To all the law enforcement folks out there: you certainly know what works best in your current environment. Salute you all for putting yourselves in harms way!

Semi autos are nearly a "must" for uniformed carry and a lot of undercover work. The world is a dangerous place.

The revolver works well in civilian situations that we "need to get out of"

I chuckle at the "I feel under gunned with 15 in the mag by the bed stand" Who's invading your house? Any way I digress.

The revolver is alive and well for civilian CCW folks and most home defense situations. The "wheelgun" is only really alive and well on forums around the internet.

There was a stat years ago; "in civilian confrontations an average of less than 3 rounds were expended between both parties".

A properly maintained, trained with revolver, works for me in those cases.

LEOs need to be ready for what is likely to be for them an "out gunned" situation.

I lived in Detroit until I was 22 yrs old, and was 14 during the 1967 riots. I started high school the fall after the riots. It was a scary time. Yet my family felt well armed with revolvers and a home shotgun and MI carbine.

One of my twin boys currently is a supervisor at a 24/7 homeless shelter in "the heart" of Detroit. It's a challenging place to be.

The police he talks to are armed with semi autos and all manner of back up guns. From semis to ankle holstered revolvers.

Objectively the world HAS changed, and I have been left behind.

Dave

 

[CoMF]

I'm not a sworn LEO, and I won't pretend to understand what it's like to be in their shoes, but before I'd dismiss the adherents of autoloaders as "special forces wannabes," I would first ask how many officers with poor accuracy are really "gun people" and how often they practice with their sidearms.

I've owned both autoloaders and revolvers and practiced enough with both to shoot them reasonably effectively. Though I've essentially given up on the former for the forseeable future, I would not feel at a disadvantage if I were forced to use, say, a Glock or a BHP, but more so because I know both are reliable and dependable pistols right out of the box as opposed to their capacity.

But why force individual officers to carry n autoloading sidearm if they have repeatedly demonstrated competence with a .38 or .357 revolver and feel that it perfectly suits their needs based on their own personal experience and risk assessments?

As for me, while I fault no one for carrying a Glock or other autoloading pistol with capacities well exceeding 5 or 6 rounds, I personally have determined that based on my own personal risk assessments, something like a G19 or even a G26 is "too much gun" for my own needs.

 

[SgtLumpy]

... I would first ask how many officers with poor accuracy are really "gun people" and how often they practice with their sidearms.

From my experience, the overwhelming majority of LEOs are NOT gun people. Most shoot less per year than just about any hobbiest. Many departments require quals of 50 rounds, once per year. And a huge amount of LEOs do only that. They may not even clean their gun from the qualify shoot they did last year.


Sgt Lumpy

 

[wescus]

I would wear my old 4" mod. 66 to work in the morning if they would let me... I've never felt under-gunned with my a revolver, after all how often do you really have to kill six people before you get a chance to reload? I had a discussion just last week at the state academy with a gentleman I have great respect for when talking gun skills (he's a multiple time world champion shooter). He swears that beginning in about '85 the cadet's began requiring much more training (and expense)until the point that the whole academy program had to be 'dumbed down' just to get them through it. Enter the semi-auto 'spray and pray' mentality... Most of us 'old guys' were required to qualify out to 60 yards. Nowadays when I move them back to 25 yards I hear moaning and groaning up and down the line because they know that they are not going to be able to keep that 'perfect' score going they had at 5 and 10 yards... Maybe I'm just getting too old...

 

[gtmtnbiker98]

From my experience, the overwhelming majority of LEOs are NOT gun people. Most shoot less per year than just about any hobbiest. Many departments require quals of 50 rounds, once per year. And a huge amount of LEOs do only that. They may not even clean their gun from the qualify shoot they did last year.


Sgt Lumpy

You must have heard of my department.

 

[CoMF]

From my experience, the overwhelming majority of LEOs are NOT gun people. Most shoot less per year than just about any hobbiest. Many departments require quals of 50 rounds, once per year. And a huge amount of LEOs do only that. They may not even clean their gun from the qualify shoot they did last year.

That's unfortunate, but it does go a long way towards unveiling the true underlying "problem."

 

[LaVistaBill]

Well, I seem to have created quite a lot of good pros and cons with this thread. Some of you have good solid arguments on one side or the other and have given me some things to think about. I started in LE in 1976 and in those days there were a few departments and individual LEO's playing with autoloaders, mostly 1911's, but the revolver ruled the day. Most outfits I was in fired the old FBI PPC course that went from 7 to 50 yards; eventually in 1988 I landed in a Federal outfit whose maximum range at qualifications was 25 yards. Revolvers were phased out in the mid-1990's in my agency and we first went to a S&W 9mm, then later to a Glock 9mm and finally to an HK .40 caliber. As an agency firearms instructor I noted the qualification scores went up when we went from the Smith 9mm to the Glock 9mm and back down somewhat with the HK .40 caliber. The qualification course also went from a maximum 25 yards to a maximum of 15 yards, with only 6 rounds fired from the 15 yard barricade. I've definitely noted marksmanship expectations going way down since "back in the day." Hence a good reason for a lot of the "spray and pray" that we see in LE shooting incidents these days. Recently I took a trip down memory lane and shot our 30-round combat qualification course with an old S&W M&P .38 Special from circa 1948-49. While I scored a possible 150/150, reloading was very slow as I was out of practice. Would I carry a revolver today? I think that answer would have to be based on my threat level. Were I still on the Southwest Border, I think not, but given my present assignment, my dream gun is a S&W Model 12 Airweight in a nylon duty belt, so the whole things weighs about half what I'm carrying around now! Be safe compadres!!!

 

[DR505]

Most of us 'old guys' were required to qualify out to 60 yards. Nowadays when I move them back to 25 yards I hear moaning and groaning up and down the line because they know that they are not going to be able to keep that 'perfect' score going they had at 5 and 10 yards... Maybe I'm just getting too old...

Very good point. When we still ran revolver qualifications we started at the 50 yard line and moved in. You could not afford to miss more than a round or two at any distance and still qualify. Now we start from the 3 yard line and shoot at the 5, 7, 15, and 25 yard lines. If you make enough hits early on, you can skip the 25 yard stage completely and still qualify. The ammunition budget per officer has not changed since 1998, so we get far fewer rounds per officer each year for training. Ammo prices never seem to go down. The first thing the administrators look to cut at the academy is firearms range time in order to put in some PC-oriented stuff.

 

[gnappi]

I'm a LEO instructor and my students have the weirdest ideas on the "Need" for automatics.

#1 High capacity

Fact is that most lethal confrontations happen in 2.2 rounds, coincidentally the same number of children (at least was) in the American family

#2 Shoot faster.

The facts are that the revolver is clearly faster, Ed McGivern proved that L-O-N-G ago.

#3 You NEED the higher capacity

Well, I've never shot anyone but I don't think I'll die because I reload my times 8 one time during a firefight or 32 round IPSC or IDPA match

Just the opposite may be true. When a fellow officer is out of his 15 round mags I may be the only one left with ammo... I carry spare speedloaders I wouldn't call that under gunned in a SHF ( **** hits the fan) confrontation.

 

[texmex]

Here are the minimum requirements for qualification in Texas. 15 yards is the maximum distance required for a handgun. 15 yards for a shotgun. Notice that if you raise the minimum passing score to 90, the patrol rifle maximum distance required is reduced to TEN YARDS!
Since my AR is full auto (safe, semi, 3 shot burst), the maximum required distance is again TEN YARDS. Good thing I have a Trijicon optic.

(c) The minimum standards for the annual firearms proficiency course of fire shall be:
(1) handguns - a minimum of 50 rounds, including at least five rounds of ammunition, fired at ranges from point-blank to at least 15 yards with at least 20 rounds at or beyond seven yards, including at least one timed reload;
(2) shotguns - a minimum of five rounds of ammunition fired at a range of at least 15 yards;
(3) precision rifles - a minimum of 20 rounds of ammunition fired at a range of at least 100 yards; however, an agency may, in its discretion, allow a range of less than 100 yards but not less than 50 yards if the minimum passing percentage is raised to 90;
(4) patrol rifles - a minimum of 30 rounds of ammunition fired at a range of at least 50 yards, including at least one timed reload; however, an agency may, in its discretion, allow a range of less than 50 yards but not less than 10 yards if the minimum passing percentage is raised to 90;
(5) fully automatic weapons - a minimum of 30 rounds of ammunition fired at ranges from seven to at least 10 yards, including at least one timed reload, with at least 25 rounds fired in full automatic (short bursts of two or three rounds), and at least five rounds fired semi-automatic, if possible with the weapon.
(d) The minimum passing percentage shall be 70 for each firearm.

 

[wescus]

Well, we all know how valuable and important 'Diversity' and 'Race Relations' training is in a dangerous confrontation nowadays... You ought to be able to use your 'verbal Judo' to get you out of a bad situation... Without this important training you might actually be forced to shoot somebody and out the department and administrators in an uncomfortable position... Come on dude, get ON THE TEAM!!!

Very good point. When we still ran revolver qualifications we started at the 50 yard line and moved in. You could not afford to miss more than a round or two at any distance and still qualify. Now we start from the 3 yard line and shoot at the 5, 7, 15, and 25 yard lines. If you make enough hits early on, you can skip the 25 yard stage completely and still qualify. The ammunition budget per officer has not changed since 1998, so we get far fewer rounds per officer each year for training. Ammo prices never seem to go down. The first thing the administrators look to cut at the academy is firearms range time in order to put in some PC-oriented stuff.

 

[Stephanie B]

The first thing the administrators look to cut at the academy is firearms range time in order to put in some PC-oriented stuff.

Seems to me that most cops spend a lot more time dealing with people than they do shooting them.

BWTFDIK....

 

[DR505]

Seems to me that most cops spend a lot more time dealing with people than they do shooting them.

BWTFDIK....

Obviously not a whole lot...

Cutting firearms training time to add "Ethics" training is a waste. You don't show up to a police academy to have them teach you ethics...by then you either have them or you don't; the classroom won't do you a bit of good.

Range time is incredibly important, especially when many of the new recruits have no idea which end of the barrel the bullet exits when they show up at the academy. The limited training currently given barely teaches the basics; it sure doesn't teach one how to survive a gunfight.

Bottom line is that you will likely never have to shoot someone, but if that day does come, you BETTER be able to make the right decision, fast. Going home at the end of the day is the most important thing.

 

[Ranger514]

Once basic marksmanship has been covered, I think continued Simmunitions and Airsoft scenario training is absolutely necessary to sharpen and maintain skills. Shooting paper tacked to a frame doesn't teach you to think about your approach or escape route, develop a plan for use of cover, employ verbal commands, observe a suspect's non-verbal body language, or deal with the physiological and psychological effects of a huge adrenalin spike. The possible use of lethal force demands more than target shooting skills. Paper doesn't shoot back.