Return to Mayberry (Service Revolvers)

[JohnKSa]

I think it's almost a great idea. The problem is that it's only a halfway solution. We need to get back to the days when cops were equipped with billyclubs and whistles--this whole idea of arming cops with firearms has given law enforcement a bad image with the general public.

 

[TomJ]

The militarization of police is one of the reasons for the distancing of the police and other citizenry. How police look to the public IS important.

The main reason for this is political, and I won't go there on this forum.

but the whole point of policing is to serve the needs of community and not the desires of individual officers

The point of policing is to keep the community safe. That is best served by our LEO's having the best available equipment to do so. We shouldn't make that decision based on the looks of what gun or equipment our LEO's carry.

The number of shots fired to stop a bad guy has gone up since revolver days

This is a training issue. It was drummed into me that I'm responsible for every bullet that leaves my barrel. If officers are using spray and pray as a strategy they need better training, not different weapons.

Our LEO's are tasked with the responsibility of standing between us and those who would do us harm. That extends beyond the common criminal and includes terrorists, rioters and mass shooters. There are better choices than revolvers for this and having our LEO's carry guns with fewer rounds and generally take longer to reload is not in our or their best interest. Take this as one person's opinion, but I want them to be as equipped as possible to do this, even if it means they look militarized.

 

[chicharrones]

Kindly note that the French GSGN counter-terror shooters are using revolvers. One perfect shot...

You mean the sniper revolver?

 

[JERRY]

several points were brought up:

1. The equipment that police use/carry must at the very least meet if not exceed that for which criminals use. Failed court practices aside, criminals are illegally carrying firearms that exceed a single stack 1911 and spare magazine capacity. If you find yourself in a fair fight your tactics suck.

2. The appearance (facial hair, tattoos...) are a result of the hiring pool available. Stricter standards mean fewer applicants, which means fewer selected, which means fewer officers working the streets, which means higher response times, which means increased calls holding, which means higher job burn out rates, which means fewer applicants, which means...

3. Citizen's view of police officer actions et al. are based on something police rarely get, and that's hindsight and or the luxury of time.

 

[ThomasT]

The idea of returning to cops using revolvers is a fun, romantic idea but thats never going to happen. That world is gone and the new world needs to be policed with new weapons. If I were a cop today I wouldn't want a revolver and I'm a huge fan of revolvers. I wouldn't want a 9mm either. I would take a Glock 22 in 40S&W. I thought that was the best round ever made for police work.

But you can't go back. Remember even Henry Ford built a model town that was made the way life was before the automobile. He wanted to go back to a time that he probably more than anyone else had helped to destroy. Sorry, it just doesn't work like that.

 

[ThomasT]

2. The appearance (facial hair, tattoos...) are a result of the hiring pool available. Stricter standards mean fewer applicants, which means fewer selected, which means fewer officers working the streets, which means higher response times, which means increased calls holding, which means higher job burn out rates, which means fewer applicants, which means...

Yes and the lowering of standards nets you the kind of cops that responded to the Robbs School shooting in Uvalde. Maybe if just ONE good cop had of responded to that shooting those kids wouldn't have been decimated. Wait! It was just one good cop who ended the shooting while the rest of the crew trimmed their beards and compared their tats.

 

[kBob]

Well no one has been to offensive or hurtful yet.

This is fun.

BTW I first wrote about the militarization of police in 1978. But not what you think.

I wrote about the benefit of Learning from the military. One of my main issues was back then many departments required you to wear low quarters… while carrying your revolver…. and I was pushing for support on at least something like RedWing Brogan boots for ankle support or combat boots and pointing out they dod not have to be worn with trousers bloused.

The down check comments on that boot paper were from the three former and one still active instructor to the effect that such thinking lead to the militarization of police and separating them from the civil population in the minds of the people they serve…. in 1978.

This was not just because I wore brogans as a youth for agricultural work or combat boots my then three years of being a Regular Army Light Weapons Infantryman. In a police and Society class I was looking at what was costing departments and government in general money. one of the most common causes of down time AND medical retirement benifits payments was ankle injuries thanks to working in those damn low quarters!

I also did short papers on things like the then new idea of personal body armor and the importance of wearing it concealed. Second Chance said it well “Attention: you need it like a hole in the head” Today I even see university cops wearing body armor as external clothing.

My assertions in 1978 that soft body armor and impact plates be required wear wear met with angered horror by the teaching staff and serving police in my classes (Oddly an EMT asked me for Second chances contact info to buy a vest)

I Wrote about subdued equipment and uniforms (Here in the south east there was still a lot of white, light blue, and light khaki blouses that made one stand out at night.)

This was compared to “battle fatigues” in a bad way by all the teaching staff and most serving police in a very bad light.

Ha! I just noticed that when I type the word “police” I get offered little emoti all of which ar wearing “bus driver” hats, light blue shirts, and gold badges, what the public expects and recognizes and no emoti of a military tricked out dude or dudette.

And yes I even did a paper comparing the capabilities of my Beloved Combat Masterpiece with the then Illinois State Police heresy of the S&W M39 semi auto with the recommendation that the semi auto be adopted. I even Was nearly burned at the stake for suggesting the 1911a1 should be allowed for those that could qualify with such.

Yet still 44 years later I started this thread….. HMMMM.

“Maybe he HAS thought about it”

kBob

 

[GEM]

I think it's almost a great idea. The problem is that it's only a halfway solution. We need to get back to the days when cops were equipped with billyclubs and whistles--this whole idea of arming cops with firearms has given law enforcement a bad image with the general public.

Also, being a fan of 32 caliber revolvers, I suggest that round as Teddy Roosevelt issued Colt New Police 32s to the NYPD. Now mine are SWs in more potent calibers. I do have some old whistles from that period also!

Actually, my 632 with some Buffalo Bore is not to be sneezed at. The boom and flash is impressive.

 

[wcwhitey]

Yes and the lowering of standards nets you the kind of cops that responded to the Robbs School shooting in Uvalde. Maybe if just ONE good cop had of responded to that shooting those kids wouldn't have been decimated. Wait! It was just one good cop who ended the shooting while the rest of the crew trimmed their beards and compared their tats.

There are several factors that lead to unfortunate incidents like Uvalde. Standards yes to a point but anyone under 40 grew up in a zero tolerance era. With a few exceptions probably never threw a punch or received one, otherwise their school record would have kept them from the job in the first place. I have a educated hypothesis that this is one of the reasons for accidental shootings. A fear factor of physical confrontation. Now that is one side but politics and society have second guessed these cops to the point where every decision is questioned, gone are the days of good faith and benefit of the doubt. If you can get past the physical fear there is in Law Enforcement as much greater fear of the institutions they work for.
We see quite a bit said like “they were trained”! A 8 hour classroom course does in no way prepare you for a situation like that. What stopped that attack was a Border Agent who was “highly” trained in such incidents at a Federal Facility geared to the subject. The rest it appears received some few minutes of theory and a whole lot of lecture. But like I have witnessed many many times on paper they “were trained”. Your average well trained soldier will freeze up the first time they face real gun fire, only repetition brings them around. Cops are not soldiers nor do you want them to be. They are men and women who deal with BS situations 99% of the time then all of a sudden things get out of control fast.
It really has become a profession that one cannot really win in most situations. Humans are not robots, Cops have families and mortgages to protect. Bad things are gonna happen, there are times when there is no good choice or clear solution no matter what the text book or guideline says and no training can teach you. You have to be unafraid to take action, even if it’s unorthodox as long as the intention is for good. That is where a good political structure is important. If you want them to protect you citizens have to make sure they are protected from the current political madness.
I mentioned a professional appearance earlier because I am a big believer that omnipresence can deter crime. Looking sharp and being taken seriously can deescalate situations before they get out of hand. Making the need for other tools unnecessary.
This whole post is probably off topic by a bit. I will tie it together by saying that the our societal decay is the very reason that a revolver is not a viable option for todays Patrolman. Mayberry no longer exists although I wish it did.

 

[jstert]

i am a revolver guy but i am a realist too. i also decry militarization (which to my mind includes civil asset forfeiture, semiauto weapons, combat dress) of american civilian police agencies.

i see police patrolmen in singapore and indonesia armed with revolvers. singapore and indonesia impose a “first-strike you’re out,” death penalty on convicted drug traffickers.

here lies the solution in plain view.

 

[hk940]

Why did you shoot him 46 times. "I ran out of ammo"

 

[Peakbagger46]

Why did you shoot him 46 times. "I ran out of ammo"

Accuracy by volume lol

 

[.455_Hunter]

Would it be unreasonable to say my preference is for LEO to armed with high-capacity autoloaders, but who conduct themselves like they are armed with a revolver? The emphasis is on draw speed, first round accuracy, controlled firing of doubles/triples, and NOT on how fast you mag dump in the general direction of the target.

 

[UncleEd]

Would it be unreasonable to say my preference is for LEO to armed with high-capacity autoloaders, but who conduct themselves like they are armed with a revolver? The emphasis is on draw speed, first round accuracy, controlled firing of doubles/triples, and NOT on how fast you mag dump in the general direction of the target.

Excellent point.

Did I say excellent point?

OK, excellent point.

And let me add, excellent point.

Maybe police have to think that each
round is the only one they have whether
they carry 6 or 16 in their handguns.

I understand that under stress it's easy
for a "civilian" to say but I believe that's
where training comes in.

If one thing stands out in studying
military firefights, the Army has one
heck of a time to train soldiers to
not just spray, pray and expend all
their ammo.

 

[DeepSouth]

I think some of the differences in opinions are based on how people perceive policing.

I find what I’m trying to say difficult to explain.

I’ll just put it like this, when you talk to some, I’d say many people, about policing you’d think they get into a firefight almost daily. I understand that line of thinking, every encounter has the real potential to go very bad very fast. As a result that’s the main thing they should prepare for, which that line of thinking.

On the other hand, the overwhelming majority of policing is not that, even most violent encounters don’t devolve into a gun fight. Policing is after all nowhere near the top 10 most dangerous jobs in the US. If your primary focus is on the day to day civil interactions you need different skill sets and tools.

It has to be a stressful job having such extremely different interactions and never really knowing which extreme you’re walking into. It’s easy to forget that most interactions are not problematic, I would imagine there is a sense in which the hostile people are easier to deal with as you at least know what you’re dealing with. It’s not a job I’d want, or one I envy.

 

[Slamfire]

High capacity pistols certainly added to the tension in the shooting of Amadou Diallo. Mr Diallo was reaching for his wallet when four plain clothes NYPD fired 41 rounds, and hit him 19 times. https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/amadou-diallo-killed-by-police-new-york-city

The hail of bullets against an unarmed man, by Cops whom Mr Diallo may or may not known were Cops, certainly caused a hail of protest.






Don’t know if shooting the wrong man with revolvers would have made that much of a difference in public opinion. Today, NYC is a mad house, with bullets flying all around the place, from juveniles with high capacity pistols.

 

[JERRY]

Yes and the lowering of standards nets you the kind of cops that responded to the Robbs School shooting in Uvalde. Maybe if just ONE good cop had of responded to that shooting those kids wouldn't have been decimated. Wait! It was just one good cop who ended the shooting while the rest of the crew trimmed their beards and compared their tats.

What do you suggest law enforcement agencies do to attract applicants that are college educated, clean cut, and driven to protect and serve? Surely 45k a year starting out, poor retirement system, no insurance after retirement, political theater et al. ruling over the legal system, and no outcry of public support isn't doing it.

 

[Mike OTDP]

Would it be unreasonable to say my preference is for LEO to armed with high-capacity autoloaders, but who conduct themselves like they are armed with a revolver? The emphasis is on draw speed, first round accuracy, controlled firing of doubles/triples, and NOT on how fast you mag dump in the general direction of the target.

That's the ideal. And perhaps that should be the training. One perfect shot beats a magazine-load of misses.

 

[Mike OTDP]

High capacity pistols certainly added to the tension in the shooting of Amadou Diallo. Mr Diallo was reaching for his wallet when four plain clothes NYPD fired 41 rounds, and hit him 19 times.

I thought it was 47 rounds fired, for six hits. NYPD has a track record of their officers emptying their guns in the general direction of the intended target. Less than one-quarter will hit.

 

[Kleanbore]

Less than one-quarter will hit.

That's not much lower than one sees from any trained shooters in high-stress defensive use of force encounters'

 

[jrmiddleton425]

I commented in another thread that I sometimes think it would be best if uniformed police carried classic looking DA/SA revolvers in .38 Special even today.

Someone sort of dared me to start a thread about it so here it is.

My reasoning will seem stupid to some folks and that’s fine. we are just sitting around the cracker barrel jawing and I am not yet named Emperor to simply will it so, so no threat to Static Woe.

#1. I believe a Barney Fife gun looks less threatening to the vast majority of common folks. The militarization of police is one of the reasons for the distancing of the police and other citizenry. How police look to the public IS important.

Old Bobby Peale over in England understood the Need of the Citizenry to not feel oppressed by their Government’s military forces, of course he went so far as to have Police armed only with billy clubs and a whistle, and no firearm.

Unfortunately if a cop today was using his billy and began to get the worse of things and whistled for the Hue and Cry the folks that showed up would just as likely join the bad guy as the cop.

Believe it or not Colt made a lot of money selling his 1849 .31 revolvers to pre war American police many of whom belonged to departments that did not allow a policeman to be armed with a fire arm. They liked being able to carry concealed (and against department regs) so much Colt Started his Police line on that frame.

Still the guns were in those days concealed so as to not upset the populace.

But I digress.

By the 20th Century many Police openly carried and up into the late 1980’s what most carried was a revolver.

A semi-auto matic was considered by most to be a military weapon and a weapon of war. Hollywierd even typically gave bad guys autos and good guys revolvers.

To this day there are many that see a revolver as a cop’s gun and a semi auto as a weapon of war and the revolver as a necessary thing and the semi auto as “excessive”.

Now before the LEO’s jump on my case let me say if I knew I was walking out the door now into a fight and had to have something .38 caliberish …. yes, I would personally rather tote my CZ75 than a S&W M15 Revolver…. but the whole point of policing is to serve the needs of community and not the desires of individual officers (whew, here it comes)

#2. The number of shots fired to stop a bad guy has gone up since revolver days…. and more importantly the number of MISSES has gone up. Is having more bullets flying about that missed better for the community?

Traditionally Private citizens in a “gun fight” fire less rounds than police to stop a bad guy and have fewer misses…. and as semi autos have pretty much taken over police work the numbers got worse … oddly more “civilians” (police are civilian, too) are using semi autos but still do not seem to blaze away so much as officer no longer so friendly.

If you study any sort of stressful shooting, whether shooting games or actual “combat” you will likely find that the first and second shots are most likely the ones to go where you wanted. Visit a man on man plate match some time…. sure the hot rodders never miss, but most folks have to go back for a plate, typically number three of four.

Now no one wants to send out a cop with a two shot, but for a century six was plenty.

Watch some of the officer camera films on line, you see bursts of fire with four to six shots as fast as a trigger can be pulled…. and seldom a hit.

We talk a great deal about today’s improved training and “Professionalism” but burst ofsix shots where most miss say an entire car do not look like professionally trained shooters, only shooters using “spray and pray”

Not having a 15 to 19 round magazine fed hand gun might reduce that.

#3 Todays ammunition is MUCH better than Barney’s one round of .38 Special LRN “Widow Maker”. Back when departments started going over to Semiautos most were restricted to FMJ as HP and such of the time were less than reliable with all semi autos. A.38 SPL today loaded with today’s Personal Defense Ammo is not 1Adam-12’s “Widow Maker” loaded .38.

# 4. Training flex ability.
I know “train with what you carry” but any trigger time beats NO trigger time.

Yes there are new electronic training devices but many departments are lucky to have access to older training material now stored. When I was coming along many departments did close range training with things like the Speer Plastic training round for training in such things as being attack during a traffic stop

Machines that projected moving images on a screen and one popped primed cases and the machine saw and registered where shots would have gone.

One could train with reloads that barely left the barrel on say a Hogans alley so one could concentrate on tactics more than say recoil control or sight recovery.

Revolvers gave more training options with less new equipment.

Well there I have said it and await my savaging.

Nope, not going to provide cites, this is a cracker barrel, not the reserve section of the library!

If you wish to provide cites feel free.

please keep personal attacks down to civil in case my kids are looking over my shoulders.

Have fun guys.

-kBob

Your theory would work fine, IF criminals did the same. Law enforcement agencies made the switch to semi-automatic pistols in the 1980s precisely because more than a few unlucky officers ran their revolvers out of ammo, and the criminal with a semi-auto, well...didn't run out of ammo.

 

[The Glockodile]

You mean the sniper revolver?

I would only handload some very special pewticles for that one - nodes, harmonics, wave functions and all

 

[Mike OTDP]

...I also did short papers on things like the then new idea of personal body armor and the importance of wearing it concealed. Second Chance said it well “Attention: you need it like a hole in the head” Today I even see university cops wearing body armor as external clothing.

I'm torn on the subject. I think part of the issue is that a modern LEO is loaded down with a lot of kit that wasn't there 50 years ago. Officer 1972 had a revolver, about 12 reload rounds, a pair of cuffs, a flashlight, and perhaps a baton. Officer 2022 has a self-loading pistol, 30+ reload rounds, a Taser or OC spray (maybe both), a flashlight, possibly a light on his sidearm, a body cam, and a radio. Even without armor, I can see loading most of that rig onto some sort of load-bearing vest...and if you do, there's no reason not to stuff body armor onto it.

On the other hand, there's also a tendency to wear the full battle rig when it's not needed. The traditional Anglo-American concept of law enforcement was that law and order were a bottom-up affair. The public was the first line, the police were the capture-and-arrest team. I think this has shifted to a top-down mentality, especially at the top levels of urban law enforcement - that law and order are imposed from above, not grown from below. And that mindset gets reflected in the wearing of gear when it's not needed, to intimidate.

I have to wonder what the reaction would be to an equipment vest that was not obviously armor plate. Yes, we'll use kevlar and ballistic nylon...but not a plate carrier.

 

[ThomasT]

What do you suggest law enforcement agencies do to attract applicants that are college educated, clean cut, and driven to protect and serve? Surely 45k a year starting out, poor retirement system, no insurance after retirement, political theater et al. ruling over the legal system, and no outcry of public support isn't doing it.

My BIL is about to retire from the fire dept. He will get nearly a $500,000 payout when he does. Plus 90% of his normal pay and health insurance. The same package is offed to that same cities cops. At least thats what he has told me. My mother worked for the Sheriffs dept for 18 years and gets around $2,000 per month retirement and then with SS and what she gets from my fathers investments she gets around $4,000 a month. She is doing fine. I am not sure what her insurance is but it works for her.

But I do think that the cops should have a competitive retirement and health benefits. We give that to politicians and half of them have never done a damn thing for me. I can say that the police in the city I live in (Burleson Tx) do a top notch job of making this city safe. And if you call one they are there quick. I see women running and walking at all hours of the day and night in full safety. So I truly hope they have a good retirement package. The few I have dealt with have been total professionals.

I really thought public support for LE and the FD had went way up after 911. I have even joked that if I have a fire I am calling the Hero Department. These public servants were all referred as "Hero's" after 911. Stuff like Uvalde and George Floyd then crap like Ruby Ridge and Waco haven't endeared LE to the public. And looking like "Call Of Duty" characters hasn't helped. Thats on them.

Edit to add: I said 50% of the politicians have never done a thing for me. I would like to change that to 99%. And I'm not really sure what the 1% have done for me.

 

[wcwhitey]

High capacity pistols certainly added to the tension in the shooting of Amadou Diallo. Mr Diallo was reaching for his wallet when four plain

That's not much lower than one sees from any trained shooters in high-stress defensive use of force encounters'

Exactly @Kleanbore and here are some accurate stats. Most of what gets bandied about is a 2008 Rand Study that has proven incorrect several times. The most recent numbers I can find are from 2017/18. Also note that the level of shots were in the hundreds for a city of 8 million people. Not exactly a spray and pray environment. Some things are just gun store BS.


“Inspector Kevin Maloney, who headed up the NYPD unit that oversees police-involved shootings, told the New York Daily News in December 2017 that the NYPD fired a record low number of rounds that year. The department’s hit ratio also exceeded those in the 2008 Rand study in 2017.

NYPD cops fired 170 shots and hit their targets 75 times, for a hit ratio of 44 percent for the year, as of Dec. 21, 2017. In 2016, police landed 107 of a total 304 shots fired, a hit ratio of roughly 35 percent. Again, Watts said the hit rate was less than 30 percent.”

Consider that this is from multiple distances and scenarios it’s really not too bad. Police just don’t shoot at contact distance. LA numbers are not far off this. I can get into quite a few mitigating circumstances regarding the Diallo shooting having lived through that circus but I don’t think it would change too many minds. Don’t believe all you hear folks. Police shooting incidents in the US have dropped quite a bit from the Crack Days of the 90’s and early 2000’s.