In California, most Police Depart. that were formerly issued .40 Caliber or .357 Sig have transitioned to 9mm. WHY? (There are 10 Million ?
People in Metro Los Angeles, and 108 Municipal Agencies in the County---So if I encounter a LEO, I ask. Let's just say my physical appearance is NOT threatening, so they always tell me.) Is this true in the rest of the country as well? This happened in the 1960's in California as well. A lot of agencies (like Calif. High. Patrol-biggest State Police in the Nation) bought .357 Magnums...then 2-3 years later, they STOPPED issuing the Magnum ammo, and began using hot, high velocity .38 Specials for their Magnums. The reason given was monthly qualifications. NOBODY actually shot for qualification with magnums. They used 148 grain powder puff wadcutters in .38 that the department recycled through a reloading service. They found out that non gun culture cops (which is a thing in Los Angeles) were taken aback in a gunfight using full house .357 loads, if they had trained on light load .38's. So you had Police Depart. like Palos Verdes (very rich, almost non existent crime) that issued .44 MAGNUMS to their officers...but only let them use .44 Specials. My MUCH older brother, who is literally old enough to be my father said that when he went through the LA County Sheriffs Academy, when they were qualifying for night shooting, they would wait for the guy from Palos Verdes to fire, which would light up the entire range, and then fire at the target.
- George PattonLv 71 month ago
It's far from a California thing.... The FBI switched back to 9 from .40 and most other agencies began following suit, for most of the same reasons, just like what happened when the FBI went to .40 in the first place. The first 18 years or so at my agency we were issued a Glock 22 and 27 in .40. Though about 10 years in we had to retire our worn out guns, but replaced them with new 22's and 27's. Two years ago we switched to the Glock 17 and 43 in 9mm. The biggest problem I think with the .40 is that with the exception of the HK USP all the .40 pistols on the market were designed as 9mm guns, then had .40's crammed into them. The frame on the Glock 17 and 22 is absolutely identical. The ejector is only slightly different. The only main difference in the slide is the size of the hole the barrel sticks out of. .40 causes excessive wear on these guns when shot a lot. It's the main reason why Glock went to the 3 pin configuration, and has now gone back to 2 pin in the Gen 5 9mm guns. The .40 guns were literally cracking before they added the extra reinforcement. The 9's didn't need the 3rd pin, but since the frames are identical they weren't going to make special ones just for the .40's.
.40 also costs a good bit more. When you're buying a box or 2 a year of premium ammo to put in your carry gun, and maybe a few boxes of range ammo, a few bucks a box isn't a big deal. But when you're an agency, like mine, that's having to buy over 50,000 rounds of duty ammo every year and approximately 500,000 rounds of practice ammo every year for everybody that adds up.
The main reason the FBI switched from 9mm to begin with was they focused on the wrong thing from one gunfight and came to some misguided conclusions. They looked at a single 9mm bullet, that was a fatal shot, but stopped just short of the suspect's heart after entering his torso sideways through his arm and deemed the 9mm to be inferior. A) This was never true and B) Modern bullet design makes it even more of a moot point.
So basically, the 9 is easier on your guns, so they last longer. It's cheaper. It's not as powerful but it's just as effective in a real world situation. You can carry more rounds in the magazine. And it recoils less so it's easier for most people to shoot. My scores have actually dropped slightly since we switched to the 9's, but that's more because I'm still not used to the new sights we also switched to, and I'm still shooting in the mid to high 90's on our course. So, why not switch? And police guns that get shot all the time wear out after a few years, especially when they're .40's. If you have to buy up a bunch of new guns anyway, perfect time to make the switch.Source(s): 20+ years in law enforcement
- Anonymous1 month ago
Nice try. You fail. Run along now, and stop playing with mommy's computer.
- RichardLv 61 month ago
I hadn't heard of any police agencies issuing .40 S&W or .357 SIG. That said, the mass transition from .38 SPL to 9mmP began when cops decided that they needed to carry more ammo in case they got in extended shootouts. That was in the mid-1980s.
- Anonymous1 month ago
Where I live a few LEO and Wildlife carry .357 Sig semi auto's usually Sig P226 or P229.
- How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
- JOHN BLv 61 month ago
In my estimation and observation @ the sheriffs range: Police, and trainees, are generally not gun people.
They are taught from the ground up in handling, loading, firing accuracy etc.
The old adage KISS (keep it simple, stupid) is applicable in this case.
- GlacierwolfLv 71 month ago
Most police departments transitioned to 9mm to save money.
My small town local police department used to require officers to supply their own pistol. Town supplied ammo. The ammo locker looked like a damn gun store with every imaginable caliber officers had carried over the years.
Today they make 9mm revolvers - not just automatics. 9mm is the way to go.
- 1 month ago
Sounds more like a load of crap you're trying to sell. I don't see much truth in it. You've been watching too many Clint Eastwood Movies if you expect people to buy the crap your saying.
- daniel gLv 71 month ago
To my know, .357 never was a police issue, just the +P .38 SPL. Never saw a .40 issued but the 9 MM Luger is now much the standard as with the military.
Looks like there will be a migration to 10MM though.
About '82 department policy change permitted officers to carry approved weapons of individual choice, so some did carry such as .357 and .40.
Yea, my younger brother was a Torrance police officer, and close friend Lt. W. Shelton, division commander LASO. PV and Rolling Hills was an old stomping ground of mine, live throughout SoBay area 20 years.
I abandoned Cal in '89 so don't care what police carry. Where I live now, 9MM is the police issue.
As for qualifying, if you are accurate with the low power wadcutter, you are just as accurate with the stronger loads and cheaper given a strict budget.
- RickLv 71 month ago
You need to train with what you use, so if you are only training with 9mm equivalent loads it is easier to simplify and just use a 9mm.
- JustinLv 71 month ago
The reasons are likely to be legal.
It sounds like the departments shifted from a 'deterrence' strategy, (large caliber weapons meant to intimidate and rarely ever be used), to one of practicality as even the 'low crime' areas faced the reality of actually having to use their service weapons. 9mm are more accurate and easier to handle, they do less bodily damage when employed to disable rather than kill, (lawsuits), and they have a sufficient intimidation factor in just being firearms with deadly accuracy when used for that purpose.
Most of the officers still carry a shot gun also as backup fire power for situations where the 9mm just isn't effective. Anything beyond that probably requires special operators anyway. Dirty Harry just isn't as scary as he used to be, or criminals are just too dumb or stoned to be afraid. They also tend to have good lawyers.