Would any cop today feel an advantage with a .357 Magnum revolver?

[Super Trucker]

Until I can figure out how to comfortably carry an 870 pump concealed, I guess I'm just stuck with an underpowered handgun.

Problem solved.
You are welcome.

 

[Dude Jones]

Really? If someone tries to assault me with his fists or a knife, I think I have an advantage with my handgun.

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.

 

[pinkymingeo]

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.

 

[Matt C.]

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.

 

[Knightrider03m]

Really? If someone tries to assault me with his fists or a knife, I think I have an advantage with my handgun. If he has a handgun, then we're equally armed. In neither case am I at a disadvantage. I don't see how a handgun "stinks" in self-defense situation.

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.

 

[Knightrider03m]

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

 

[Poohgyrr]

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.

 

[Deputy25]

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 .

 

[gtoppcop]

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!

 

[7shooter]

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.

 

[Chili Vega]

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.

 

[Model 15-4ever]

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...

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.

 

[BE Mike]

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".

 

[safearm]

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.

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.

 

[Gearhead Jim]

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."

 

[Bat Guano]

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.

 

[Forsmithers]

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.

 

[kennyb]

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!

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

 

[Rule 303]

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

 

[celticfisherman]

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.