Thread: Just some random thoughts

My personal opinion is that since the officers are used to drawing and firing Glocks, it would be MUCH more logical to get Glocks in .45 ACP....muscle memory and all that ya know.

I would also question why the sheriff / department feels its necessary to go to a .45 ACP over a .40......I mean, I HIGHLY DOUBT that two subjects not being stopped had anything to do with the caliber of the round. It is much more likely that the subjects were on something (such as PCP) which made them feel 'superhuman' and less likely to feel the pain AND/OR poor shot placement by the officers who fired. I mean, in all honesty, and I say this with total respect to law enforcement as that is my chosen career field, most LEOs are NOT as proficient with their duty weapons as they should be. The vast majority go their entire career without firing their weapon in a combat situation and an equally alarming number do not practice with their duty weapons like they should.

Is it possible that some dealer somewhere gave them a better deal on a bulk order of Sig 1911s than they could have gotten on a bulk order of Glocks?? I highly doubt this, but I suppose anything is possible. All in all, if it were my department, I would have stuck with the Glocks.

Despite the fact that I love 1911 type pistols and prefer .45 ACP to .40 S&W, the switch makes no sense to me.

I think the Glock is an almost perfect platform for policemen, because it is so simple to operate, accurate, and probably more reliable than any other pistol. Also, the terminal effects from being shot with a .40 S&W is so near to that of a .45 ACP as to be negligible, in my opinion.

If they were switching to the G-30 or a full sized .45 model in the Glock, it would make a little more sense. Obviously, there is another reason for buying the Sigs, and the reasons given are just an excuse to justify the purchase.

Originally Posted by Bisley

. . . Obviously, there is another reason for buying the Sigs, and the reasons given are just an excuse to justify the purchase.

I would think it is one of three reasons for the Sheriff's decision.
1. He got a kickback from the Sig distributor.
2. He owns a Sig in .45 ACP, and he "really, really likes it".
3. He always believed Glocks were just "fugging ugly", with the sex appeal of a dishwasher.

The "didn't stop the folks" was just an excuse.
Or, does the .45 ACP actually "do a better stop".

If it was my responsibilty as sheriff to decide, I'd set up a scientific test.
1. First, shoot a couple of DUI suspects with double-tap .40 S&W rounds to each body mass.
2. Next , round up a couple more DUI's, and repeat with .45 ACP.

Measure the time in seconds or minutes it took each "suspect" to hit the ground and achieve a prone position.
Lowest time total gets the contract.

Inform the media that the Sheriff's Department is on the job, and just prevented a mass jail break.

OK, all you LEO's and better than average citizens, since you are interested in guns,
THIS IS A JOKE.

A joke?
It seemed to me to be a well-thought-out scientific experiment that could be accomplished at very low cost.
Of course, to adhere to true scientific rigor, the same guy would have to do all of the shooting.
Maybe there should also be a control experiment, using only blanks.

Originally Posted by Thanatos

My personal opinion is that since the officers are used to drawing and firing Glocks, it would be MUCH more logical to get Glocks in .45 ACP....muscle memory and all that ya know.

I would also question why the sheriff / department feels its necessary to go to a .45 ACP over a .40......I mean, I HIGHLY DOUBT that two subjects not being stopped had anything to do with the caliber of the round. It is much more likely that the subjects were on something (such as PCP) which made them feel 'superhuman' and less likely to feel the pain AND/OR poor shot placement by the officers who fired. I mean, in all honesty, and I say this with total respect to law enforcement as that is my chosen career field, most LEOs are NOT as proficient with their duty weapons as they should be. The vast majority go their entire career without firing their weapon in a combat situation and an equally alarming number do not practice with their duty weapons like they should.

Is it possible that some dealer somewhere gave them a better deal on a bulk order of Sig 1911s than they could have gotten on a bulk order of Glocks?? I highly doubt this, but I suppose anything is possible. All in all, if it were my department, I would have stuck with the Glocks.

Originally Posted by Bisley

Despite the fact that I love 1911 type pistols and prefer .45 ACP to .40 S&W, the switch makes no sense to me.

I think the Glock is an almost perfect platform for policemen, because it is so simple to operate, accurate, and probably more reliable than any other pistol. Also, the terminal effects from being shot with a .40 S&W is so near to that of a .45 ACP as to be negligible, in my opinion.

If they were switching to the G-30 or a full sized .45 model in the Glock, it would make a little more sense. Obviously, there is another reason for buying the Sigs, and the reasons given are just an excuse to justify the purchase.

I agree with these two opinions. Heck, except for the additional ammo costs, they could have gone with a Glock in .45GAP, and had the exact same frame size/feel as the .40s (although the slide is a bit thicker, and this would have required new holsters).

I would be upset if my department did that. I like our department policy personally. They do not issue any firearms. It is the responsibility of the officers to purchase and qualify with the handgun of their choice. There are some limitations, but very few that anyone would ever care about. The only downside to this that I can see is it costs the officer more money (but I would prefer to own what I carry). The other "negatives" would be on the department side (carrying multiple calibers, etc).

Originally Posted by BeefyBeefo

I would be upset if my department did that. I like our department policy personally. They do not issue any firearms. It is the responsibility of the officers to purchase and qualify with the handgun of their choice. There are some limitations, but very few that anyone would ever care about. The only downside to this that I can see is it costs the officer more money (but I would prefer to own what I carry). The other "negatives" would be on the department side (carrying multiple calibers, etc).

What... no Hi-Points?

If you dont put the shot in the right place , it will not matter what caliber you are using . A shot in the right place from a 9mm will do the same job as a .40 or .45 . Where do you draw the line why not just arm them with a RPG . I have read abought police departments in america changing there glock .45s to 9mm becuase of case failures.

Originally Posted by manta

Where do you draw the line why not just arm them with a RPG .

Good idea. Thanks.

Originally Posted by Bisley

Good idea. Thanks.

No problem, glad to help.

Originally Posted by zhurdan

What... no Hi-Points?

That would be one of those "exceptions".

Taurus is also another one.

Originally Posted by manta

If you dont put the shot in the right place , it will not matter what caliber you are using . A shot in the right place from a 9mm will do the same job as a .40 or .45 . Where do you draw the line why not just arm them with a RPG . I have read abought police departments in america changing there glock .45s to 9mm because of case failures.

Roger that on calibers. I bought a Glock 27 in .40 without doing my homework! Just assumed that since so many LEO's are using that round it had to be "better". Well, now I find myself missing my G26 9mm because I shot it much better than I do the .40 right out of the box. I am not recoil sensitive, but the muzzle flip on the 27 with hot defensive rounds makes shot number two on target noticeably slower than the 9mm for me. I looked into converting the .40 to 9mm, and learned real quick on this site that I really don't want to do that (thank you DJNiner). So...(sigh), I will probably ditch the 27 and get another 26. The $$$ pain will be yet another lesson in look before you leap! Good news is my Beretta 92 and the 26 will share ammo and save me a few bucks there. Yep, a .22 through the tear duct trumps a .45 to the shoulder, or so I've heard.
Eli