If I was back in LE today...give me a .357 SIG...there are no bad rounds... Even the 147s are going 1200 fps. My daily carry gun since 1980 has been a Commander in .38 Super...124 at 1350...115 at 1450...and 100 grain PowR'Ball at 1530...all clocked from my gun....just about identical to the SIG.
That's actually more or less what the Marshall and Sannow data says as well.
In their last book:
.357 Mag JHP loads ranged from a low of 82% to high of 96% for one shot stops.
.357 Sig ranged from 85% to 92%
9mm Luger JHPs ranged from 78% to 91%
.40 S&W JHPs ranged from 83% to 94%
10mm JHPs ranged from 81% to 90%
.41 Mag JHPs ranged from 80% to 90%
.44 Mag JHPs range from 87% to 92%
In short, with .357 Sig or .357 Mag, it's hard to find a bad load, and nothing really does significantly better than a good load in either of those cartridges.
All of the above cartridges get the job done, even 9mm Luget if you select a decent load.
The other major problem with LE selection of guns and ammo has to do with training and qualification. Training has always been geared to qualification...not street survival. Training should be geared for survival shooting 90+% of which takes place within 10 yards. I will guaranty you that if qualifications were geared more toward reality instead of being based on target scores there would be far fewer officers failing qualification and a higher percentage of hits on the street.
But as long as the tail wags the dog, training is going nowhere...
Bob
I agree with you that 90% of self defense shoots will be at 10 yards or less. In fact, I'll argue 5 yards or less. The FBI found 75% of all agent involved shoots involved ranges of 3 yards or less.
We may disagree a bit on how to train officers for that threat.
Yes, if we have very limited time and rounds to fire to achieve some sort of "proficiency" then the bulk of that inadequate amount of time should be spent at the 1-5 yard lines.
However, if we're serious about training officers to be truly proficient, then we need to bring in some longer range shooting to help ingrain proper grip, sight alignment, and trigger control. If the target is not far enough out to show qualitative differences related to poor grip, poor sight alignment and poor trigger control, it's hard to correct those things.
With that approach you train officers to draw, bring the pistol up to the officers line of sight looking at the target and place he front blade on target. The officer then pauses to verify the rear sight is aligned with the front sight, make any needed correction and then maintain the sight alignment until the shot is released.
Over time, the officer develops muscle memory in the hand and arm to the point that the sights will always be aligned when the front sight comes on target (at least close enough for government work). At that point the focus can transferred to speed in getting the front sight on target, with any remaining pause used to determine if the need to shoot still exists. For example, if the officer has already delivered 2-3 shots center of mass and is transitioning to the head for a failure to stop shot. If the assailant goes down during the transition to the head shot, and the head isn't where its supposed to be, there's no need to deliver the shot, and no need to skip a round through the neighborhood.
The end result is an officer who can shoot with both speed and accuracy at 5 yards or 50 yards. Back stop that with some close in retention shooting training and practice and you have an officer who will shoot effectively from close contact to 50 yards.
The problem is that an officer will never get to that point if he or she is only firing 50-100 rounds twice a year.
