Taurus Firearm Forum banner

1 - 20 of 23 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,505 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Who here among us have had their revolvers go completely inopperable? I can safely say that after many rounds that none of my wheelguns have ever needed a part replaced like some of my autos have, and I count my glock among those autos. But even considering my "junk revolvers" I don't think I have ever had one fail to fire. So with this proven track record of reliability, why aren't departments allowing officers to go back to revolvers?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,043 Posts
Ace said:
So with this proven track record of reliability, why aren't departments allowing officers to go back to revolvers?
Since most perps today don't carry revolvers as they did 25 years ago. Believe me, most LEO's these days don't wanna feel out-gunned.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
33 Posts
firepower, less recoil for faster follow-up shots. not as much training (less training required to slap in a fresh mag rather than cylinder operation and speedloader application)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
118 Posts
Considering that most police never fire their guns in the line of duty, it is not about being out gunned or less recoil, or faster follow-up shots. Some guy sitting at a desk somewhere decides what guns the dept will use. After that, it is cheaper for the dept to maintain all of the said guns if they are all the same.

There are a lot of private security firms that still use revolvers. Every one that I have seen working armor car duty used a revolver. All of the casino security in Vegas used them as well. There is still lots of use for the old technology
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
15,931 Posts
There are cases and situations that I would rather have a revolver than my semi auto. My son, who is a former LEO loves his Glock, but for his carry uses a 357 revolver, "not in my memory what make but it is not a Taurus".

It does come down to can you hit what your shooting at, where you hit that target, and does the weapon of choice enable you to stop what ever is there.

From other threads, I know that a 32 can be deadly, as deadly as any of the other calibers. I have known people who swear by .25's, for a carry gun.

If you remember the Calif bank robbery, local officers at the time were severely undergunned and they had semi auto's. So neither a shotgun,revolver or a semi auto was the answer in that case, they needed the assault rifle type of weapon which LA did add to the cars after that one.

Yep, the guys behind the desk decide what is financially viable at the time, and the street officer has to live or die by it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,505 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
Honestly though are you really that outgunned with a wheelgun? I don't think so. Statistically most gunfights in this country end in the first three rounds, unless I'm allowed to pack a SAW with a 300 round belt, accuracy will win over volume. I do believe perception plays a big factor in a department sidearm which is why they switched over to autos. LEO's must maintain the image of authority which is why most aren't allowed to carry "antiquated" arms in their holsters.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
15,931 Posts
I personally think that revolvers are great! :) For some of us more accurate! :rolleyes:

(reminder practice more with semi auto)

I seem to remember, that the reason most departments changed originally to what ever semi auto they went with, was because the BG's had moved to them, and PD's felt they were not able to keep up using revolvers. Reloading after 5 or 6, (even if most fights were over with less rounds fired) was another reason. But if you look at some fights by LE, (their just like us, they get excited) there were a heck of a lot more misses than hits, whether it was revolver or semi auto.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
33 Posts
For older LEOs (or retired like me), revolvers were all I ever carried. Some guys carried autos, usually 1911s, off duty, but most of us carried a Smith Model 36 or snub 19,10,15. Consequently, while I own a Sig P239,.40, I carry a .357/ 38 spl revolver most all the time. Believe me when I say that a .357 will not let you down if the SHTF.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,505 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
Well I can't say for everyone but I think as I get older I'm leaning towards wheelguns more and more. My range session today consisted of a 1911, a glock 30 and my m44. I shot my .44 more than either two, but the caveat was that my 1911 went down. Wasn't the guns fault mind you because I am in the middle of a barrel swap so I knew that their might be issues with feeding, and while the glock cycled just fine I was able to get better accuarcy out of the .44, even in double action. So while I only ran two or three mags of .45 for two guns I ran an entire box of .44. out of one gun. I was hoping that maybe since wheelguns are enjoying a certain renisance, that departments would allow them for carry again. Especially if they have a seven or eight shot cylinder like some .357's do. Just my humble .02.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,043 Posts
Unfortunately Ace, most major metropolitan police agencies along with state police departments will never go back to revolvers as a duty firearm. I can't speak for the smaller towns which have their own view.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
15,931 Posts
Yeah, to keep enough ammo for extended use, Speed Loaders would take up a lot more room on a duty belt, than 2 extra mags, which each would have sometimes twice to 3 times as many rounds as what you could get for revolver, and they take up less space on the belt.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
69 Posts
The biggest vulnerability of revolvers is the cylinder and the somewhat complex, delicate, low-leverage mechanism that it takes to rotate it. Under ideal conditions a revolver may be more reliable. Under the worst conditions - no cleaning, being knocked around, dropped in the sand, dropped on the concrete - a reliable auto design will come out on top, IMO.

I have experienced cylinder binding due to high primers and spent cases pushing back and jamming the cylinder - If you try to force the cylinder to turn with a strong trigger pull you can bend or break something. I saw a magazine article years ago that showed how a dime can put a pocket carried revolver out of action. A couple of grains of sand in the wrong place can do it too. The cylinder has to turn before you can get the first shot off.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
497 Posts
MrTuffPaws said:
Some guy sitting at a desk somewhere decides what guns the dept will use. After that, it is cheaper for the dept to maintain all of the said guns if they are all the same.
That's not necessarily true, at least in my experience. My alma mater PD selected a committee of officers to select issue guns when we began issuing guns. The officers were selected from uniform patrol, detectives, SWAT, admin, CSI, narcotics, community policing, firearms instructors, etc. We really put a lot of effort into it, and did some exhausting T & E.

We decided on SigArms, in either 9mm or .40 S&W, depending on the individual officer's preference. We also allowed officers to select models, such as smaller framed guns for investigations, etc. A lot of agencies are coming around in this regard and if you've priced Sigs lately, they are definately not on the low end of the price range.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
15,931 Posts
Pioneer, your department apparently did it the right way. Not everyone get input that way. However, from the economics of it, Departments get a pretty good break if they do a consistent buy with options for replacements etc. That is good, as long as they do not push one model down everyones throat.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
384 Posts
OK, I’m not an LEO just a simple civilian but it seems to me there has to be a certain fear factor in favor of the officers choice of weapon. What I mean is, unless you’re packing a .500mag 10” barreled Raging Bull or maybe a S&W 460XVR, revolvers just don’t seem to have the same amount of intimidation as say a Glock 40SW or a Sig .357. I realize a snubbie .357 is a very dangerous adversary if on the wrong end of the barrel but it must appear less awe inspiring to a potential BG.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
15,931 Posts
You want something that looks like it could kill you with just its breath, unload a JUDGE and take a look at what that huge barrel and cylinder look like staring at you like a cannon.

Ok, so a snubby does not look dangerous,

HUH! I wonder what you been smoking, any gun from a 22 up to the .500 is dangerous, now most of these BG's don't really give a D, what your carrying,

they only remember you pointed it at them, and if they did not respond appropriately they heard it bark and bite.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
384 Posts
Robby, As i mentioned, I'm a civilian...now. However I have been on both sides of a weapon back in 71'. Yes, one side is more preferable than the other.....and I don't smoke, just for the record. The comment was an observation. If intimidation is not a factor why don't SWAT teams wear pink instead of black? If intimidation isn't a factor why are LEO taught to scream at their adversaries instead of asking them in a kindly voice? So using your senerio why don't LEO's carry 22's if all the BG's show the same fear towards that caliber as they would a 40SW?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
15,931 Posts
rainman said:
Robby, As i mentioned, I'm a civilian...now. However I have been on both sides of a weapon back in 71'. Yes, one side is more preferable than the other.....and I don't smoke, just for the record. The comment was an observation. If intimidation is not a factor why don't SWAT teams wear pink instead of black? If intimidation isn't a factor why are LEO taught to scream at their adversaries instead of asking them in a kindly voice? So using your senerio why don't LEO's carry 22's if all the BG's show the same fear towards that caliber as they would a 40SW?
Ok, so I was not meaning to pick on your statement! Of course intimidation is a factor, even in the civilian world. Mainly, I was saying that BG's obviously do not give a darn about us, or the law, and do not care what the law is carrying. 22 was an understatement.

It is just what you said.
"If intimidation isn't a factor why are LEO taught to scream at their adversaries instead of asking them in a kindly voice?"

So the BG does or does not respond depending on the gun, but on the fact that the officers show a willingness to take action that is definitive and final unless the BG does what they say.

I also hope, I am never put in the position of having to use my guns, or have someone try to use his on me as you were. But I am mentally prepared to take physical action in a threat situation.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
384 Posts
On the contrary Robby, I welcomed your comments. I asked a question and you responded with a reasonable answer. In my opinion that’s what these forums are all about. I was just curious if there was a psychological aspect regarding an intimidation factor that LEO’s considered when selecting a side arm.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
15,931 Posts
Well lets hope some former and or current LEO will respond about that part of it.

rainman said:
I was just curious if there was a psychological aspect regarding an intimidation factor that LEO’s considered when selecting a side arm.
 
1 - 20 of 23 Posts
Top